Uhdtv

[Zephyr]

http://hothardware.com/News/Got-HDTV-Get-Ready-For-UHDTV/

http://hothardware.com:8081/images/ultra-hdtv.gif


UHD will come in two resolution levels: 7680 x 4320 pixels (8K) and 3840 x 2160 pixels (4K) and provide four to 16 times the resolution of Blu-ray or 1080p high-def. And "22.2 multichannel three-dimensional sound."

Wow I want to watch transformers on that set. :eek:

[Hakkola]

Ultra HDTV requires 300Mb/second transmissions using a compressed image at 24 FPS, while 60 FPS will require a new compression system to meet with realistic household fiber-optic connections.


That is insane.

[mushi_mushi]

I haven't read about the subject in a while, but my take on this is its not really feasible/profitable/useful. From what I remember 35mm film can resolve the equivalent of what you are talking about (4k/8k). The other thing to consider is that anything at that resolution recorded on an opical/magnetic device takes a ton of space. I think they actually demoed this technology in Japan and something like 30minutes or an hour of material required terabytes of space. The cost of the bandwidth/storage required to make such a device work are astronomical.

Like I stated I think IMAX uses something of this sort, ultra high resolution material, this comes in handy when you have a very big screen, ie 50 meters wide. For average joe and the consumer market I think bluray is more than enough to deliver the best capable viewing experience. Resolutions greater than 1080p will yield little if any impact on real world viewing.

Many people who convert bluray movies/download HD rips will be hard pressed to notice the difference between 720p and 1080p. This of course depends largely on the screen size and viewing distance, but for anyone with ~50inch tv they will look very similar. Feel free to correct some of the things ive said as im going strictly based on the stuff I read years ago.

[Vagabond142]

Not really much use to us consumers until we develop screens that are triple current resolution and storage media able to hold the data needed. Right now the consumer market is JUST getting into the affordable terabyte range... maybe when we can get 120 terabyte drives for $80 will this level of resolution be useful. And even the biggest screens are still locked to 1080p for tvs and 2560x1600 for computer LCD's.

[Mar]

I remember when I was using a 200 megabyte hard drive in my computer and a gigabyte hard drive was unfathomable. Now we're using terabytes, it won't be long before we start getting into petabyte and ecobyte drives. Technology is advancing at an exponential rate.

[GoChris]

I want my yottabyte drive, then I can store movies at these resolutions.

[Xtrema]

Didn't some one say human eye has a equivalent of 560Mps?

8K is only 33Mps.

Anyway, I can see doctor doing remote operation with this kind of resolution without relying on zooms.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Great for giant theaters, but as far as the human eye being able to notice better than 1080P in a home environment, your screen would have to be pretty massive.

[signature7]

By realneil on Nov 3, 2009

Ultra High Definition?

So you can see a pimple 'wink' on someone's ass at 300 meters?



:rofl:

[8Ball]

Way too many new acronyms;

2160P is the shorthand name for a video mode planned to appear in future HDTV products. It has a resolution of 3840x2160 (16:9). The number 2160 stands for 2,160 lines of vertical display resolution, while the letter p stands for progressive scan or non-interlaced. In a progressive image the lines of resolution of the image go from the top of the screen to the bottom.

2160p is also called Quad HD and Quad HDTV since it displays four times the number of pixels of the highest HDTV standard resolution, 1080p (a standard which is also known as Full HD. Quad Full High Definition (QFHD) is the next step in high-resolution display technology, and won't start shipping until 2010. The only planned higher definition format for television is Ultra High Definition Video.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_High_Definition_Video