Slashdot Mirror
Dell Demos 5K Display
An anonymous reader writes: Even though 4k displays are just making their way into consumer affordability, manufacturers are already pushing beyond. Dell has previewed a computer monitor it calls a "5k" display. The resolution is 5120x2880, stuffing 14,745,600 pixels on a 27" screen. For comparison, that's more than seven times the amount of pixels in a 1920x1080 display. Pixel density is 218 PPI, roughly the same as a 15" Retina MacBook Pro. ExtremeTech suggests, "As far as we're aware, no one is actually making 5120×2880 panels, especially not at 27 inches diagonal – so what we're probably looking at is two 2560x2880 panels squished together as a 'tiled display.'" Unfortunately, it's pricy, expected to cost around $2,500. But hopefully it will help drive 4k display prices even further toward mainstream availability.
when will we finally get hihger than 1920*1080 resolution monitors at a decent price ????
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Because that ought to be enough for anybody! :D
Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
Sincerely, Guy who watched 0% of content in HD 5 years ago, and watches 95% of content in HD now.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
How about they focus on getting 4k working decently first. Saturates DisplayPort and cuts in and out in major graphics cards, and screen tearing with dual HDMI. I'm sure Dual DisplayPort at 5k will fix it all....
I have a 35" 4K TV that I use as a display for my main computer. I now wish I had spent the extra money to get a 50".
On the 35" the text is too small to read comfortably for any length of time, I don't see how reading on a 27" is going to work unless you increase your font size which reduces the benefits of the higher resolution.
For viewing pictures/diagrams you will get a sharper display, and for some people the AA fonts will be seen as another plus but I think a larger display is needed to get the full value of the resolution.
PS. If it counts, I am 57. I don't need glasses but I know I can't see details like I did in my twenties.
ECP
HD content, for video, is a lot of data for minimal increased information. Increasing pixel density provides no additional information if added pixels are below the threshold of perception.
Given the option, I'll watch HD over SD, but I can follow all the action on SD.
Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.
I was actually kidding/trolling anyway. I haven't inserted a disc into a device to watch or listen to something in many many years.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
*slow clap* because anecdotal evidence
I hate to break it to you (actually no, I enjoy it) but Blu-Ray is a dead format, Sony won the physical media war just in time for digital media to enter the scene
http://www.zdnet.com/whatever-...
Want an eye opener? Ok!
Blu-Ray sales (ending June 29th)
http://www.the-numbers.com/wee...
Biggest seller? Frozen with 7 million units
DVD sales (ending June 29th)
http://www.the-numbers.com/wee...
Biggest seller? Transformers with 16 million units, oh and there are more big numbers in that list adding up to an overwhelming difference in per unit sales
Maybe it's just a slow month you say? Here are the numbers for 2013:
http://www.the-numbers.com/hom...
http://www.the-numbers.com/hom...
Same story. DVD is still consistently moving more units, much to my surprise, I honestly thought it would be closer.
All this format war / pissing match conversation is pointless anyway because the day of the disc is done and digital sales will continue to increase.
http://bgr.com/2014/01/08/digi...
Turns out a stream from Netflix is good enough for most people, packaged media is dead meat
Personally speaking, I prefer the BluRay copy of "Breaking Bad" then a not quite always HD stream... then again I have a record collection, so what does that say about me
Kids who grew up listening to 128kbps also claim to prefer it. Better is still better. I'll watch SD content if I want to see people where I can't quite discern their full expression because I can't see their pupils in distant shots, or a general lack of all detail.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
I saw a "Good Guys" circular from the late 1980s yesterday and they had a Motorola "car phone" for sale in there for $1200. IIRC, it must have been a bag phone because I remember they said it was portable from car-car in the ad.
That's like $2500 in today's purchasing power-- can you imagine $2500 these days for an analog-only mobile phone? And what do you suppose calls were back then, 50 cents or more per minute, closer $1/minute in contemporary purchasing power?
About the only thing good about those bag phones was they had more transmit power.
"Fuck it. Boys, we're going to 6K!"
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Do you have eagle eyes or sit close to the screen? (Yes, and no, in my case.)
Can you see the scan lines and pixels of a normal, good-quality display from a distance greater than the diagonal size of the monitor itself? (I do.)
Have you ever set shell windows to 6 or 8 point fonts so they don't clutter up your screen(s), yet still find them legible? (Also yes for me.)
Are you looking to reduce the WALL OF DISPLAY effect without losing precious real estate? (I have three monitors totaling 6.5 MPix, and wouldn't mind at all if I could reduce that to two [I'd still want a video display for watching across the room] or just one [if the scaling works well enough to do said video]).
If you sound anything like me, then yeah, you probably want this. If you're one of the types that runs a display at something other than its native resolution ALL THE TIME, because everything is too tiny for you, then you almost certainly do NOT want this.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
I saw my first 4K display, 32", the other day, running native 4K content off it's internal hard drive.
The difference between it and the same 4K display beside it, up converting off a Blu-ray player was stark, and the difference between even the up converted 4K Blu-ray images and the 1080p displays running off the same Blu-ray source was absolutely obvious and clear.
I wanted to play with the settings on 4K Blu-ray display and the 1080p displays to see if they had been deliberately crippled to make the 4K native look better, but this particular store had everything locked down.
"Unheard of means only it's undreamed of yet,
Impossible means not yet done." ~~ Julia Ecklar
> Personally speaking, I prefer the BluRay copy of "Breaking Bad" then a not quite always HD stream... then again I have a record collection, so what does that say about me
Even a DVD copy of Breaking Bad will probably be better than streaming it. Streaming quality can go to crap pretty quickly. Plus you have to "download" a stream any time you watch one. This is wasteful, consumes your data cap, and again exposes you to the problem of quality degredation.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
http://www.theonion.com/articl...
"What part of this don't you understand? If two blades is good, and three blades is better, obviously five blades would make us the best fucking razor that ever existed. Comprende? We didn't claw our way to the top of the razor game by clinging to the two-blade industry standard. We got here by taking chances. Well, five blades is the biggest chance of all."
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
The original argument though was that the additional information in a real 4K stream would not be apparent...
It is. No upscaling is not going to magically add detail, but if you have a real 4k source you'll be able to see it even on kind of small monitors.
The real question is, where are you going to get 4k sources from...
For desktop use though 4K seems really nice.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
^ This, thank you...
I see comment after comment from people who are talking out of their back ends, or perhaps their eyes suck...
We saw the exact same comments about 720p vs. 1080p almost 10 years ago, that you couldn't tell the difference.
Stupid is as stupid does I suppose...
True 4k is amazing, it blows 1080p out of the water. I've seen a similar display as you did, but this was on a 70" 1080p next to a 70" 4k display, from about 8 feet away, in a store.
Wow, once you've seen the difference, it is smack dab obvious how much of an improvement 4k really is. You don't have to look at the signs, just watch the video playing.
Now the issue is content... Since we've all now replaced much of our VHS and DVD content for 1080p Blu-Ray, I think few fewer people are going to be willing to do that again.
As much as I like it, I won't spend all that money yet again.
So... If they REALLY want 4k to take off, they need to offer a reasonable upgrade option, perhaps $2 per movie, to get the 4k version.
If I could take my stack of Blu-Ray discs into Walmart or Best Buy and trade them all in for $2 each for 4K versions, I'd probably go buy a 4K TV this Christmas.
$5 each? Meh, that is pushing it, maybe make it $5 each, but $2-3 each if you do 50 or 100 or more or something.
As far as digital copies, such as my now extensive library with Vudu and Amazon, those need upgrade options as well, also for a low price.
Take care of the customer and we'll throw money at you. Try to charge stupid high prices and we'll just not bother.
Not likely any time soon. The DK2 has a 1080p display, but due to the extreme field of view this looks more like an old 800x600 display with a screen door effect to boot and chromatic aberration. The CV1 is expected to use a 1440p display, which is a nice step up, but still might not be enough to reduce that screen door effect.
Reading delicate text and fonts in a no-go with a Rift. Everything needs to be scaled up to deal with the low pixel / degree of view factor. Colours wash out slightly as well I think, but that might just be subjective.
If you live in a hot climate you're not going to want to be wearing the Rift unless you have some nice air conditioning. Things can get sweaty or foggy in there.
I think we can expect to see some improvement in display density, and more accurate adjustments for the chromatic aberrations and other artefacts over the next few years. I wouldn't expect to be replacing my desktop display any time soon with a VR display.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
I like my pron in sd so it doesn't get too gross.
Problem is, there is no ideal ppi, there's an ideal ppr (pixels per radian) which varies with screen-to-eye distance. so 1080p is ok across the room, but not right in your face. GP is lying, a monitor would have to be pretty huge for 8k to not be ok...
For example, the average person needs to be less than 4 feet away from a 32" tv in order to see any benefit from 4k resolution over 1080p resolution
32" is pretty small for modern displays, which is why most people can easily discern 4k differences at a couch distance.
When you are talking about computer monitors of course, you are way closer than 4 feet, so you can discern 4K difference in quality even on a 27" display...
I really think though the whole circle of confusion thing is not truly taking into account nuances we can detect unconsciously. It's not as hard a science as the calculations make it look.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"and some new DRM"
Why are they still bothering? It never stopped piracy, and only serves to punish people who buy the stuff (no possibility to rip for iPhone, tablet,etc)
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
Sorry, until Windows fixes it's DPI scaling, there's not much point in having retina-like desktop displays.
"Why are they still bothering?" This time it's gonna be different and we are going to lock the content for good. The company that sold us the "DRM solution" promised it! They also promised nobody can run PowerDVD or WinDVD inside a debugger and figure out the DRM system because the decryption code is protected by magic fairies.