CMO's Quad Full High Def Display

Status
Not open for further replies.

sacre

Distinguished
Jul 13, 2006
379
0
18,780
0
This is stupid. The price of the players would be rediculous for the fact at a resolution like that you would need a player that can transfer 40+mbps. If not more.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I will definitely get one!
...... in the next ten years ...... :D
 

samprasfan

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2008
9
0
18,510
0
It says right in the article that it takes 4 DVI inputs, it's the same as if you were outputting a display onto four HDTVs. Instead, it has one quad HD screen that works as 4. Learn to read.
 
G

Guest

Guest
That's too funny. Look at the picture close up. The violin strings are nothing but jaggies from end to end and the text in the bottom right hand corner is pixelated. This reminds me of the good ol' days of EGA with 16 colors.
 

hawler

Distinguished
Nov 9, 2007
57
0
18,630
0
Actually if you click on the picture once it looks jaggie. thats because it's being shrunk from its actually resolution and browsers suck at shrinking pictures and maintaining good quality. See that little magnifying glass with a plus in it? click on the picture and it will go back to is original size with much better quality
 

plbyrd

Distinguished
Jun 10, 2008
60
0
18,630
0
This is just a first step down the road to 300dpi computer screens (today's screens are typically adjusted for 96dpi), which are essential for future software interface paradigms. The reason that Microsoft has moved to a 3D desktop environment with Vista's Aero is in preparation for 300dpi monitors which are not as far off as you'd initially think. Scalable 3D interfaces just get better and better with more resolution and 3D uses much less memory to describe an image at these massive resolutions as 2D requires.
 

Luscious

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2006
525
0
18,980
0
Absolutely nothing new to read here folks - Mitsubishi already had a 3840x2160 quad HD monitor available a year ago (56P-QF60LCU). The price at that time was around $50,000 if I remember right.

The problem with the technology, other than requiring a brute-force PC with 4 HD video outputs to harness the resolution, is that you can only display static images. 1080p video will not look any better at all. On the other hand, if you're into serious CG, CAD or digital artwork, this monitor will make your jaw drop to the floor and your eyes bug out.

Not to disappoint movie fans though, film does have a native resolution of 4096x4096, which means QHD video IS possible.

So, if you think you are rich and can blow 50K on this monitor, how about you invest another few million with your other rich friends into the technology to convert 35mm film into QHD video, and while you're at it, invest another few hundred million to develop the storage/playback technology.

It will probably be at least another 15-25 years before we see QHD video broadcasts, due to the sheer bandwidth requirements (250MB/s uncompressed), so you can forget about that QHD TV as well.
 

mdharrington

Distinguished
Jun 15, 2008
7
0
18,510
0
well,luscious
converting 35mm film to 4k has been done for like 10 years, by way of arri laser scan and others.

and there are several video cameras doing native 4k right now....Red, Dalsa ect...
4k storage and playback has been around for about....10 years(maybe a little less) i could name about 5 products right now

and next year red ray comes out from red (red.com)
with 4k playback from standard dvd's using proprietary wavelet encoding

there have been sony 4k projectors out for years btw as well....

your comments would seem pessemistic..... if you made them 10 years ago....
 

Luscious

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2006
525
0
18,980
0
md:
You seriously don't want to use wikipedia as a credible source now do you? Not if you work in the industry. Show me a high-resolution device that was available 10 years ago other than film? D-VHS, Digital-S, DTheater - all 1080P based, not 4K. Now unless you can prove me otherwise, there is no device in existence that can output native 3840x2160 digital video at 30 frames/sec, simply because no such video codec/format exists. If you go back 10 years, there may have been hardware to convert film frames to 8MP TIFF images, but no where near the processing power to handle the 250MB/sec bandwidth for a fluid video stream. U320 SCSI arrived only in 2002, and required some serious hardware to even approach 250MB/s thoughput. A raid farm of U320 drives needed to process just one feature-length 3840x2160 stream would set you back $3500 today, and would have been a hell of a lot more expensive back then. Only recently have graphics cards become available that can process such high resolutions and possibly maintain 24/30 FPS.

There was no such consumer (or professional) device 10 years ago as there is yet to be a consumer device today or even in the next 5-10 years.

Film projectors are nothing new, but you are obviously confusing film with digital video and consumer devices versus professional editing equipment. You may be a millionaire, but your money sure won't buy you any brains.
 

mdharrington

Distinguished
Jun 15, 2008
7
0
18,510
0
cineform.com
4k playback through adobe premiere
i have it on my laptop

dvs clipster 4k uncompressed playback for the last 5 years
iridas frame cycler

here's a system been in use for years http://www.quvis.com/?Action=Products&SubAction=4K

4k playback.....i watched 4 videos at nab on a 4k projector, and 1 at red in california....in the last 2 months....

the only reason i give you wikipedia is so you can read over and see where the world really is

if you don't beleive me fine....go on making stuff up, i'm sure a lot of people out there would believe you
i could post links for at least 10 4k playback devices, but if you check out wikipedia you could find them yourself
 

mdharrington

Distinguished
Jun 15, 2008
7
0
18,510
0
sorry i'm being a bit of an ass

sometimes i turn into a snob when it comes to this stuff

the point is this stuff is here and ready (4k) the general public just isn't aware because it's trickled down from the ultra high end video market
apologies luscious....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY