1440p

[nails]

Originally Posted by Sean4000

But there has to be a cap on how much the brain can intake at one time. 4K is a lot of pixels.

*nails plugs HDMI into 4k's brain.

[me_inside]

Originally Posted by Calgaryman24

I have heard this resolution thrown around abit and that it will make an appearance in around 2009 sometime. Will this be the next big thing and will it be really pricey?

I do remember reading in a game magazine that the PS3 is capable of this resolution with a firmware update.

[WickyWoo]

I do remember reading in a game magazine that the PS3 is capable of this resolution with a firmware update.

I don't think you'll see it used, unless it's on some small game or something because of RAM limitations

[bageleaterkkjji]

Originally Posted by Sean4000

But there has to be a cap on how much the brain can intake at one time. 4K is a lot of pixels.

how many pixels is real life? more than 4k lol im pretty sure my brain can outdo in terms of picture quality and quantity of any tv or cameras pixels

[Sean4000]

Originally Posted by nails

*nails plugs HDMI into 4k's brain.

Show me how deep the rabbit hole goes Can I learn kung fu too?

[djheadd]

Hi everyone...
Here is some info about NexGen video resolution:
4K is 4520 X 2540 RAW video and yes, it is called Ultra High Definition. Studios have already access to cameras able to shot with this PQ and software support for NLE such as Final Cut. Just remember something: we live in a world where new technology is around the corner, the best example COMPUTERS, we have a whole new scenario every 6 months.
If you want to know a little bit more about 4K... take a look at this: www.red.com

Best,
DJ Headd

[zoon_ii]

Originally Posted by bageleaterkkjji

how many pixels is real life? more than 4k lol im pretty sure my brain can outdo in terms of picture quality and quantity of any tv or cameras pixels

that's just what i was thinking. I know that reality is way beyond 4k. i want the resolution to be so good that it look like real friggin life. in fact. i want the pixels to be so small, that you can't see them. that's the point. to feel like you're there where they're shooting the movie. to suspend disbeliefe. that's the whole point. so...bring on the 4k. i can't wait to grow old

[NutsAboutPS3]

I think if the average person reads about a newer technology coming in 2009, it will just even further deter them from buying into a current HD format. What is really needed is reassurance that current formats will have at least a 10 year lifespan.

I struggle to see how picture quality can be improved by going beyond 1920x1080 when current releases don't appear to truly use that resolution, by which I mean if you compare a static frame from a Blu-ray movie to a digital photograph at the same resolution, the digital photograph is much better quality. Perhaps they can make better cameras to film future movies in a way that can capture more resolution, but most current movies seem to be more limited by source quality than the 1920x1080 resolution. Even current high end HD video cameras have very small sensors compared to a full 35mm frame still camera, and will never deliver the same image quality that you'd get from a full 35mm frame camera image downsampled to 1920x1080.

Edit: Actually, just followed the link to the details on the RED camera posted above, and that seems to have a sensor with half the area of a full 35mm frame still camera, so I expect that to be able to give an almost perfect 1920x1080 image. It doesn't say if it uses a bayer array sensor or not, I'm guessing it does, so although it can capture 4520 X 2540 it probably doesn't have much more than 1920x1080 of "real" resolution.

[bageleaterkkjji]

how big is a movie before its compressed

[Stundra]

Screens get bigger and bigger. Bigger screens need more pixels.
1080p is ok if you have a screen below 50". Above 50" 4K is definetely necessary to get a real HD feeling.
My personal 4K experiences are: 4K looks great on 60" but not very impressive on a 108" display.

As current movies are mostly shot in 2K. 4K is nothing to worry about in 2009.

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by Stundra

1080p is ok if you have a screen below 50". Above 50" 4K is definetely necessary to get a real HD feeling.

/rolls eyes. I'm sure this is true if you are a foot away from the TV. Maybe you should actually watch from a proper viewing distance?

[Stundra]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

/rolls eyes. I'm sure this is true if you are a foot away from the TV. Maybe you should actually watch from a proper viewing distance?

More than 10 ft @ 52". Best viewing distance for 1080p is 3 times the screen height.

[UTVOL06]

Originally Posted by sardaukar1977

Holodeck....hmm, the possibilities, the possibilities, MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

I'll take one of those.

just imagine watching a movie with actors in 3d right in front of you.

The only problem I see with Holographic technology is if they can get a less transparent looking image with the same amount of detail as 1080p.

Back to 1440p your not gonna see this hit TV for quite some time. The first place this resolution will hit is computer LCd monitors and used for Graphic design and photo editing first then it will slowly trickle down to hardcore PC gamers with games taking advantage of this resolution. Most highend LCD displays right now only go to 1920x1200res.

[Rup_Muk]

Originally Posted by sardaukar1977

Holodeck....hmm, the possibilities, the possibilities, MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

LOL. Holographs... Gives a whole new meaning to pr0n dictating adoption of a format.

Rup.

[Pictor]

I recall some of the same arguments used against 1080p when it was being thrown around back in the fall of 1998 and spring of 1999. Here we are in 2006 and 2007 with 1080p in the home. Sure it will take a little time but it will be the next wave and an incentive to buy new products that support the new format. Today we're happy with 1080p on 42"-56" TVs. Wait until you see 1440p on a 65" TV and most of us will be looking to upgrade.

Back in 1998 my 480p/1080i TV was the coolest thing since sliced bread and I couldn't imagine anything better. Now I have a second 720p/1080i capable TV but I'll be upgrading to 1080p within the next 6 months. 1440p here I come

[shatta]

Originally Posted by 95pgtproject

I heard the ps6 is 1400000p

trueee,,, and another thing....a suit that vibrates so u feel when u get shoot...so be prepared when ur playin COD10--War on Mars

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by Stundra

More than 10 ft @ 52". Best viewing distance for 1080p is 3 times the screen height.

How you can post this, and yet claim that 50" is a magical border between 1080p being fine and not good enough is beyond me.

[tron3]

"1080P is enough." Ugh, now I soiled myself with a red camp fanboy-ism.

The 4K resolution for home use is WAY too expensive. Maybe we will start to see it in 20 years, because no matter how impossible it seems, all technology eventually comes down in price.

Besides, that resolution is considered the practical limit of film. It's still a damn good resolution for the mere sake it works well on those giant movie theater screens. Ever see 480 projected really big? The more distance you have, the better.

The current crop of analog TV signals is said to be reallocated for military, and local government use. That is a pretty broad band of VHF. HD broadcasts on UHF.... yeah, those channels that always came in fuzzy on your TV is the new digital standard.

VHF is the better broadcast frequency. Why? Lower frequencies pass through solid objects better. That is why you often get some kind of reception almost no matter where you are. UHF has a tendancy to bounce more. Being a "digital broadcast" has nothing to do with it. It is still an analog wave, a much longer one, the decoder in your TV does the rest.

Maybe with the restructuring of the air waves in 2009, this will free up space to allow 1440i broadcasts. Prepare to rerun your tuner!

[Pictor]

There are also merits to higher frequency. Lower frequency will be easily blocked by things in many buildings. A simple "old school" example is to use a hand held CB radio and compare it to one of the little FRS or GMRS radios from inside a car. The CB will hardly get past the hood of your car unless you have an external antenna while the little UHF radio will easily penetrate the car to get the signal out. The long frequency of the CB radio will get trapped inside the car as the body of the car acts like a Faraday cage while the narrow frequency will easily pass though. The same thing happens in some buildings with metal structure.

Due to bandwidth limitations, I don't think we'll see any form of 1440 soon or ever. Where we may one day see 1440 will be in IPTV or HDM such as BD.

[sean10mm]

Originally Posted by Sean4000

But there has to be a cap on how much the brain can intake at one time. 4K is a lot of pixels.

4k is about 11.5 megapixels.

Each human eye is effectively about 125 megapixels. Each eye has about 125,000,000 photoreceptors that can respond to single photons.

There is still a lot of room for improvement.