We'll probably have TVs that literally are entire walls of our homes, like in Fahrenheit 451.
1080P: What comes after it?
- Thread starter ReadyAndWilling
- Start date
We'll probably have TVs that literally are entire walls of our homes, like in Fahrenheit 451.
High frame rate. Hardware is already up to the task of displaying the higher frame rates; it's just the content that is stuck at 24 or 30 fps. Peter Jackson shot the Hobbit trilogy at 48 fps, and James Cameron is going to use 48 fps for the Avatar sequels, so I imagine a home video standard for HFR movies is coming in a few years.
Really? I don't think that is going to impress anyone but the most avid technophile. Personally, I'd like an AI that could do a MST3K channel overlay when I need cheering up. That would be a real Turing test.
Not nearly so sophisticated, but one can purchase "static decals" of the iconic theater "shadow-rama" you can slap onto the bottom of your screen. MST3K.com sells them for 2 bucks apiece and are 16 inches wide.
(You'll have to supply your own "riffs", however.)
Sincerely,
Bill
Well sure you can see it in Best Buy. You're standing 1ft away from the screen. Trying standing at your normal tv watching distance and see if you can tell the difference. Oh and make sure both TVs are properly calibrated too while you're at it.
ReadyAndWilling
Fleet Captain
So after 1080P we get 4K which is 2440P?
ReadyAndWilling
Fleet Captain
Alright, thanks! I'm looking at the link now.
Will it be possible to get 2160p on current blu-ray discs?
Will it be possible to get 2160p on current blu-ray discs?
ReadyAndWilling
Fleet Captain
If they want to release 2160p for Star Trek TNG would they need to re-master it again like they did for 1080p?
Thanks!
Thanks!
What would be the point? There isn't much more meaningful detail to be seen. Just more grain, and maybe you could catch the occasional extra visual detail about how a particular prop or set was put together, but nothing that would be worth the cost for normal consumers.
4K TVs are still in the $4000 range. ESPN is now showing 4K content, but the first season of TNG would probably cost about $400 on 4K.
I was looking at 4K TV's yesterday at Best Buy. To sell these units at approx $4,000 they display National Geographic specials with close ups on flowers, looped. Of course the image is absolutely crystal clear. The problem of course with this sales technique is to any informed person is virtually no TV show is made with that level of image quality, and most of us don't watch NatGeo specials on nature preserves most of the time.
The marketroids are desperate to find something to part us from our cash given the failure of so-called 3D to do so.
3D was destined IMO to be a failure because most people don't want to have to wear special glasses to watch television. Wake me up when holographic TVS start to show up on store shelves. Until then, super flat smart TV's are somewhat appealing but I'm not going to pay top $ for one of them.
This is my pet peeve about it. I don't mind wearing the glasses, but the darkening of my already reasonably dark Plasma (standard for this technology) means I can only get a good immersive effect at night with all the lights off.
Also I hate that most 3D looks fake, like these huge digital dioramas, and not like a true stereoscopic effect.
So what do they expect when they treat 3D as a gimmick instead of a viable alternative? They will get a fad that's already dying down.
Not to mention 3D blu rays tend to be anywhere from 1/3 to twice as expensive as their non 3D versions. That's fucking gouging IMO. I've had to limit what movies I want in 3D because I'm not made out of money.
The only way I know right now that they can do a "glasses-less" 3D effect right now is to use focused lights like lasers to mathematically digitize depth in a picture. I can't see that being scaled down right now to a flat screen HD TV without it costing like $100 grand a piece.
ReadyAndWilling
Fleet Captain
Why is it so expensive to put a TV show on 4K???
Similar threads
