Slashdot Mirror
Enter The 2160p HDTV
Dr. Eggman writes "The Consumer Electronics Show is kicking it in high gear as Westinghouse shows off its 2160p or "Quad" HDTV. While enthusiasts pine for new 1080p monitors Westinghouse has stated that the Quad HDTVs, like the 52" on display, "does not really target the consumer market, but high-end industrial applications.""
High end industrial pr0n?
I see nothing wrong with five meals a day
Just in time for me to junk my HD CRT TV.
I shall make a case for my living room viewing to be a "high end industrial application" :-)
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
What can one use to feed this beast ? Where to find very-very-HD contents ? (And what about the huge bandwidth and the huge storage needed ?).
-- Rastignac was here.
I assume medical diagnosing, business presentations,
and the one 20-something intern that plugs in his game system to play some video games.
In Soviet Russia, dots slash you!
"[D]oes not really target the consumer market, but high-end industrial applications." Translation: "It's damn expensive right now, and we can't produce enough of them at consumer prices to make a profit."
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Who are you talking about and what are you asking?
This article is about a HD set, and I have no problems plugging my DVI into my set's HDMI port and getting the modelines and having Xorg do things automagically. I watch HD content delivered over the air no problems.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Yah.
right.
Who wants to predict howlong it will take for those old fashion 1080P sets to become outdated, and that you really must have one of tese new 2160p sets if you want to even THINK of keeping up with the jonses.
As a quick note. I am actualy finaly ditching the first, and only, TV I ever had (making it around 14 yrs old now I think), a 20" CRT that had some sorta funky colour burns on the sides...
I am replacing it with:
My boss' old 20" CRT that works!
Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
There was a lot made of the early specs of the PS3, one of them being it was capable of driving not one - but two 1080p displays in tandem. The potential of this being used in real-life led to it being dropped (so the story goes). If the PS3 was truely capable of driving two 1080p's wouldn't it be possible to drive a single 2160?
I recall that many early 30 inch progessive display cards used two cards in tandem to spit the screen into two vertical halves. If the PS3 video system has the omph, could it be similarly done?
Don't know how BIG the display would have to be to be ideal either. I recall that 1080p is barely perceptible with anything under 37-40 inches. I can only imagine the optimal size you'd need to see the advantages of Quad HDTV.
I just have one question. So whats the difference between a 37" monitor that can do 1080p and a tv? It doesnt have a tv tunner and thats it?
1280x1024 (1.3 MPix)
1920x1200 (2.2 MPix)
2560x1600 (4 Mpix)
3840x2160 (8 MPix) => would be nice for our current 8Mpix Nikon photowork
See, from the photographer's point of view any current consumer LCD is inferior (safe to rare Mac/Dell 30" 2560x1600 displays), but this Westinghouse offering would be really nice.
Well, time to ditch the old TV. Man, the market changes too quickly!
[%] Cingular Ringtones
Will I be able to display what I want on it in that resolution or just DRMed junk? Let's talk business here, I don't care for displays that decide for me what they want to display.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
TV tuner and probably 5.1 audio or something like that.
;)
The only thing I wonder about is why would I exchange my 21" 1600x1200 CRT monitor for this 37" device with 1080 lines. It has 90% only of the resolution and pixels about 1.5x as big. It only looks good for watching movies, and only for people that have the computer too far from the bed
(For movie watching I'd take a good DLP projector -- the picture is far bigger for a comparable price tag.)
Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes
... and bring us HDR dammit!
This is only 3840 x 2160 pixels, which is shy of the 4096x2304 pixels needed for the in-camera recording modes in RED ONE www.red.com, and quite a way below what is needed for the full sensor 4520x2540.
Given the RED is the only thing on the horizon that has the resolution to feed this screen, why stop a few pixels short with your design??
-- oldthinkers unbellyfeel ingsoc
Looks like everyone will need to buy Red cameras to get the resolution needed.
Can I bum a sig?
Sorry, just getting in there, before the rabid Sony haters do...
Try getting a decent quality signal (besides a game powered by a ridiculous graphics card) to power this! ROR... think I'll stick with my current set.
Awesome, some great new technology that will still have zero impact on current HD set prices. Glad to hear about it.
This only happens, what, once a week now?
But whatever the object, you must keep him praying to it. To the thing he has made, not to the person that has made him.
Cable HDTV is 1080i so is satellite. Standard dvd's will upconvert to 1080i. Blue Ray and HD DVD's will go 1080p but even if you have the players you have to buy new dvd's. I can see industrial applications or computer monitor (or gaming) applications but the rest (the big push to 1080p and above) to me is marketing hype. Am I missing something?
Isn't this just a bigger sheet of LCD? I don't know much about this stuff, but the px/square inch are fewer than the 30" Dell which maxes out at 2560x1600
I know this is anathema to the Slashdot crowd, but I wonder if one could use this to watch four sporting events at once like sports bars do with big projection screens. There's enough HD feeds on most systems to make this look pretty nice. ESPN, ESPNHD, the various broadcast networks, FSNHD, NFL Network HD, INHD special events, etc. Just switch the audio feed around as needed.
Also would be cool when they do ESPN Full Circle where you get the same game but with different camera priorities on ESPNHD, ESPN2HD, ESPNEWS, and ESPNU. That's a sports geek's dream! Talk about sensory overload.
That's like...WAY more p's!
This isn't news at all, and it's not a HDTV thing. Broadcasters have been doing this for ages. Do you think they broadcast the standard definition channels @ D1 (DVD resolution)? More often than not, it isn't!
From the various providers I've tried before, the PPV events and such premium channels are @ 704x480 usually (cropped D1), most of the other stuff (~80% of broadcasts or so) is at 640x480 or 544x480 (depending on the provider), and some is below that (like the legislative networks stuff) which is sometimes 480x480 (SVCD resolution), or even sometimes 352x480. And the bitrates aren't very high (again, except the premium channels), and can get quite blocky at times. Sometimes I find it plain unbearable to watch, even on a conventional TV. Stretch that blocky low resolution stuff over a HDTV and it's beyond ugly.
They're doing it to save bandwidth. Coax, or satellite transponders only have so much of it. And what [blind] consumers seemingly don't want video quality, they just want their stupid local backyard news, so they have to fit a dozen stations of each major network on there (with 99% identical content). There's easily between 50 and 100 redundant channels on my current plan. Talk about a waste of bandwidth. I can only think how good TV would look if they were using it for that instead... But then again, I guess we can't really blame them, they're only giving people what they want (even if it's short sighted).
At least they're getting with the times and trying to use more efficient modulation, and seemingly H.264 adoption is starting to happen (mpeg2 is just wasteful, needs WAY too much bandwidth to look good)
I wish there were some available OTA feeds here in Canada (besides the CBC ones around Montreal, I haven't heard of any)
They make statements like this in order to position themselves at the high end of the consumer market. After all, the overmonied folks in the high end of the consumer market invariably fancy themselves "above the consumer market".
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
The Westinghouse monitor is also, unfortunately, just a little too low for digital mastering/cinema applications. With the current paradigm being "master at 4K distribute at 2K" the monitor does not have the resolution for the mastering phase (4K = 4096x2160). That doesn't even begin to talk about the pixel bit depth, color space, gamma, etc. Also when the paradigm changes to "master at 4K distribute at 4K", then the film industry will really want 4K monitors for proofing.
Since it is very close to the required resolution perhaps the original manufacturer could be induced to increase the resolution slightly. Then perhaps Westinghouse could use closely spaced LED backlights that are individually driven so that the display could produce high dynamic range (HDR) images (very high contrast ratios). Add the appropriate color/gamma controls to match the digital cinema color space standard and NOW you've got a display!
Then again with all this I'm sure it will be NOT CHEAP.
An architect could easily fill up a 2k by 2K image with a building plan.
Oil geologists look at seismic data 10K by 10K by 10K samples.
Astronomers have had 100 megapixel images for some time.
I totally don't know what that means. But I want it!
Javascript, cookies, flash, and ActiveX must be enabled in order to view this sig.
2008 - Quantum Computing breakthrough
2010 - Virtual Reality nears reality
2012 - Mulit-TB personal storage
2013 - 3D Displays begin to go mainstream
2015 - Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft ready 4th gen consoles
2016 - Duke Nukem Forever FINALLY released, but still only VGA resolution
2017 -
I could have also put down for each year that
When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
Does it REALLY make a difference over 1080p? I mean you really CAN over-sharpen things!
:-) :-)
1080p ought to be enough for anybody?
Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
:(){
(CES, Las Vegas, Jan 2006)
What is great about 2160p is that it allows for perfect upscaling of 720p and 1080p content.
Let me just point out that 3840x2160 is a brilliant resolution, because 2160/720 = 3 and 2160/1080 = 2. Of course, since this is Slashdot, I'm sure you've all realized this already, but it does mean that you can upscale HD content without distorting the image. A 1080p monitor does not show 720p as well as a 720p monitor does, because the upscaling will result in some lines being shown twice and some only being shown once (none of this is true for CRTs, though, only LCD and plasma monitors).
The application in this screenshot appears to be GeoProbe. So according to the PDF, it does indeed work with Linux;)
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
IBM T221 have been doing it for years, and it does 3840x2400. BTW the screens are made by IDTech.
...I bet dollars to doughnut holes the damn place would have the aspect ratios screwed up -- the perennial squish-o-vision.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
It turns out that this would make a perfect digital drafting table. The height is just over that of a D sized architectural print (25.5" tall, Arch D is 36x24), which allows for a title bar and icon row at the top, plus flyouts/menus on the side in the extra 9" on the side. MAke this completely flat with a senstised surface for a mouse or stylus, and it would be a very cool item for an Architect. Bonus points for writing a driver interface to match pixel density to drawing scale for 1:1 scale editing (yes, we still create paper copies in the arch world). Of course, they'll need a bigger size for the E size, but that's just a matter of scale. *drool*
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?