If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gizmodo)   Good news: the latest chipsets support 4096x2304 video, you can even download free movies at that resolution, and even watch YouTube. You DO have a 4096x2304 display, don't you?   (gizmodo.com) divider line 58
    More: Cool, YouTube, reveal, free movies  
•       •       •

4472 clicks; posted to Geek » on 03 Jun 2012 at 7:42 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



58 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-03 07:56:22 AM
HOLY farkING HELL
 
2012-06-03 08:05:02 AM
No.

/Don't judge me
 
2012-06-03 08:26:05 AM

AtlanticCoast63: No.

/Don't judge me


We all have such tiny, tiny resolutions. How could we ever hope to fully immerse a woman in our media?
 
2012-06-03 08:28:30 AM

DrunkenBob: AtlanticCoast63: No.

/Don't judge me

We all have such tiny, tiny resolutions. How could we ever hope to fully immerse a woman in our media?


fark that


Imagine how awesome video games could be with that kind of resolution. Of course, it would probably cost you a few grand for a card that can hadle it, but still,it would be worth every penny
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-06-03 08:30:18 AM
Why would I want such a small monitor that can't even display all my camera's megapixels?
 
2012-06-03 08:35:00 AM
I run my new monitor at 1920 x 1080. I never thought there is anything higher than that. And it's a 27 inch monitor too. I do need a new vidya card but its still nice.

/mines bigger
 
2012-06-03 08:35:51 AM
Hipster thread anyone?

/ $600 PC from Costco will do me fine till I upgrade in 2-3 years thank u very much.
 
2012-06-03 08:37:42 AM

wrenchboy: I run my new monitor at 1920 x 1080. I never thought there is anything higher than that. And it's a 27 inch monitor too. I do need a new vidya card but its still nice.

/mines bigger


I have an iMac with a 27 inch screen. Can't remember the max res, but it is too damn small for me to read. Like yourself, I keep my res on 1920x1080
 
2012-06-03 08:44:44 AM
Interesting stuff. Wish I had something that could display that.

Wow, if you scroll into the comments, you shall notice the article writer is an amazingly obnoxious dickbag.
 
2012-06-03 08:47:44 AM
I understand better resolution is good, but how much stuff really needs to be at a higher resolution to be enjoyed? I can't think of ten movies that would be improved by a higher resolution.
 
2012-06-03 08:50:51 AM
Apparently a future IMac with 27in display may support 5120x2880. Link
 
2012-06-03 09:08:00 AM
My computer displays at 5760x1080 or 3240x1920 depending on how I tilt the monitors but I'd rather have one really high-res monitor when it comes to strategy games and other stuff that doesn't span across three very nicely. Movies would be honestly very low on my list of 'shiat I wanna try' with such a display, they're already pretty good at 1080p.
 
2012-06-03 09:36:53 AM
My iPad has a quarter of that (1/2 x 1/2) approximately. Just need 3 more and a way to hook them together...

:-/

/slightly annoyed that my iPad has higher resolution than my computer
//still love it, though
 
2012-06-03 09:39:40 AM
riveraveblues.com
 
2012-06-03 09:54:47 AM

BumpInTheNight: My computer displays at 5760x1080 or 3240x1920 depending on how I tilt the monitors but I'd rather have one really high-res monitor when it comes to strategy games and other stuff that doesn't span across three very nicely. Movies would be honestly very low on my list of 'shiat I wanna try' with such a display, they're already pretty good at 1080p.


I don't think you usually count the individual colors when you quote a resolution. 1920 x (RGB) = 5760.
 
2012-06-03 09:59:29 AM
I'm happy with my 1600X900 resolution. It's better than what I used to have.

/Can no long call my computer garbage.
 
2012-06-03 10:04:49 AM

wrenchboy: I run my new monitor at 1920 x 1080. I never thought there is anything higher than that. And it's a 27 inch monitor too. I do need a new vidya card but its still nice.

/mines bigger


32" at 1920x1080. I can just baaarely see the pixels and I have really sharp eyesight.
 
2012-06-03 10:08:28 AM
Pfft... only 4k? With my monitors' set up, I have a seamless spherical section with crystal-clear 16k resolution.

Get with the times, people.

Gosh....
 
2012-06-03 10:11:49 AM
Awesome! Just think what Hollywood could do with one of these once they add a 1.4f lense, shakey cam, and found footage from teenagers who just bought a nice camera.
 
2012-06-03 10:16:41 AM

Quantum Apostrophe: BumpInTheNight: My computer displays at 5760x1080 or 3240x1920 depending on how I tilt the monitors but I'd rather have one really high-res monitor when it comes to strategy games and other stuff that doesn't span across three very nicely. Movies would be honestly very low on my list of 'shiat I wanna try' with such a display, they're already pretty good at 1080p.

I don't think you usually count the individual colors when you quote a resolution. 1920 x (RGB) = 5760.


He's saying he has three 1920x1080 monitors all hooked to the same computer. If you have them horizontal you get (1920*3)x1080, if you have them vertical then you get (1080*3)x1920.

What I'm interested in, though, is whether he has BEZELS.
 
2012-06-03 10:18:40 AM
For a computer screen? That's dumb. At least than three feet you're not going to be able to see much difference between 720p and 1080p, much less these ridiculous resolutions.

For a movie theater screen? That might make sense.
 
2012-06-03 10:21:06 AM

cman:

I have an iMac with a 27 inch screen. Can't remember the max res, but it is too damn small for me to read. Like yourself, I keep my res on 1920x1080


The problem isn't the screen resolution. It's that at some point in this history of GUI design (and I'm not blaming Xerox, Microsoft or Apple) the concept of a 10pt font morphed in to a 10px font, basically the scaling is screwed up.

A 10pt Times New Roman character should be pretty much the same size at 800x600 as it is *bonkers resolution of a modern display* there should just be more detailing of that character due to the higher pixel density.

It's pretty annoying that WYSIWYG is now appended with the words "kinda maybe".
 
2012-06-03 10:21:40 AM

moothemagiccow: For a computer screen? That's dumb. At least than three feet you're not going to be able to see much difference between 720p and 1080p, much less these ridiculous resolutions.

For a movie theater screen? That might make sense.


I think you have that backwards, chief.
 
2012-06-03 10:22:56 AM
im trying to work up the stones to remove my bezels, but that particular operation has a high pucker factor.
 
2012-06-03 10:24:13 AM

Fubini: Quantum Apostrophe: BumpInTheNight: My computer displays at 5760x1080 or 3240x1920 depending on how I tilt the monitors but I'd rather have one really high-res monitor when it comes to strategy games and other stuff that doesn't span across three very nicely. Movies would be honestly very low on my list of 'shiat I wanna try' with such a display, they're already pretty good at 1080p.

I don't think you usually count the individual colors when you quote a resolution. 1920 x (RGB) = 5760.

He's saying he has three 1920x1080 monitors all hooked to the same computer. If you have them horizontal you get (1920*3)x1080, if you have them vertical then you get (1080*3)x1920.

What I'm interested in, though, is whether he has BEZELS.


Cursed Bezels, they're smallish compared to most (Asus VW248TLBs) but I don't have the heart to remove the plastic casing to reduce them further quite yet. At this point I've decided already that my next display setup will be one of those over the top 3xprojectors on a curved screen just to finally dispatch that visual nag. Space constraints prevent me from realizing this for now, not quite enough room in mom's basement yah know.
 
2012-06-03 10:29:29 AM

High Karate: im trying to work up the stones to remove my bezels, but that particular operation has a high pucker factor.


I had an LG 19" 1280x1024 die out of warranty a year or so back so I decided to give it a try, its actually pretty straight forward once you work up the courage to pop open the first of the tabs holding the two halves together. The display and everything else is still pretty well protected beneath it within a metal shell and the buttons are almost always on a little PCB that you can stick to some other surface, the hassle I found was trying to put the casing back on with those buttons still in the right spot.
 
2012-06-03 10:31:52 AM
Is there any scenario in which 4096x2304 is not ridiculous overkill? To discern individual pixels in that, you'd have to hold an tablet less than 6 inches from your face. You'd have to sit 3 feet from a 50" display. At these distances, the screen would be so close that 90% of the image would be outside your central macular vision. You literally can't see all of it at once.
 
2012-06-03 10:38:02 AM
pfff three 2650x1940s side by side

Who needs 4096x2304 when they've already got 4800x2560?

What, you don't WANT an $8000.00 triplex monitor?

Get a bigger desk first... its a four foot wide rig even with the custom frame and overlaps.
Comes up at around $10,000 with that frame and enough cardware to push it.
 
2012-06-03 10:56:38 AM

Nem Wan: Is there any scenario in which 4096x2304 is not ridiculous overkill?


Do some research on anti aliasing vs. screen resolution.
 
2012-06-03 10:56:39 AM
Meanwhile, my 11 year old computer won't play standard Youtube videos at anything more than 3 frames per second.

/sigh.
 
2012-06-03 11:04:10 AM
From time to time, I get to work with ultra-high-resolution equipment.

A projection system with multiple stacks of HD projectors, run from a modern screen-blending switching system? Very cool. Lot of work to set one up, though.

/biggest I ever saw: 6000x1500 pixels - 120 feet wide - over a million $ in projectors alone
//heard of a 12,000 pixel wide screen once
///csb
 
2012-06-03 11:04:44 AM
You DO have a 4096x2304 display, don't you?

Not quite yet, but I'm ready to spend as soon as the hardware from Apple's June 6 announcements becomes available. Double-DPI displays on MacBooks, and maybe iMacs.

Overkill? I would've thought so at one point. But a few minutes with a new iPad convinced me otherwise. There's a huge difference between a conventional-resolution anti-aliased display and a "retina"-resolution AA display.
 
2012-06-03 11:08:57 AM

cman: wrenchboy: I run my new monitor at 1920 x 1080. I never thought there is anything higher than that. And it's a 27 inch monitor too. I do need a new vidya card but its still nice.

/mines bigger

I have an iMac with a 27 inch screen. Can't remember the max res, but it is too damn small for me to read. Like yourself, I keep my res on 1920x1080


Me three.

My wife wanted the 27", I swear.
 
2012-06-03 11:18:48 AM

wrenchboy: I run my new monitor at 1920 x 1080. I never thought there is anything higher than that. And it's a 27 inch monitor too. I do need a new vidya card but its still nice.

/mines bigger


There are screens with resolutions dwarfing "High Definition" 1920x1080.

I mean, my 23" monitor has the same resolution as a newly developed 4.8inch screen, 1920x1080. That technology could easily outstrip the 4096x2304 resolution from the article.

citation
 
2012-06-03 11:26:02 AM

cirby: From time to time, I get to work with ultra-high-resolution equipment.

A projection system with multiple stacks of HD projectors, run from a modern screen-blending switching system? Very cool. Lot of work to set one up, though.

/biggest I ever saw: 6000x1500 pixels - 120 feet wide - over a million $ in projectors alone
//heard of a 12,000 pixel wide screen once
///csb


6000 px at 120' is only about 4 dots/inch.

Not exactly high-resolution, is it?

/that's a hell of a screen though
 
2012-06-03 11:30:42 AM
personalshoplifter.com
 
2012-06-03 11:38:09 AM
Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy:
6000 px at 120' is only about 4 dots/inch.
Not exactly high-resolution, is it?
/that's a hell of a screen though


Well, to be fair, you're supposed to look at it from at least 50 feet away, and it was legible from a couple of hundred yards...

/this computer = 1920x1080 from about three feet
//can see the pixels if I pay attention
 
2012-06-03 11:40:51 AM
From the trailer it looks like Koyaanisqatsi for the 21st century
 
2012-06-03 12:14:46 PM
You DO have a 4096x2304 display, don't you?

No. I don't. I probably never will. And neither will you.
 
2012-06-03 12:22:31 PM
You DO have a 4096x2304 display, don't you?

Wonderduck:
No. I don't. I probably never will. And neither will you.

Yeah, it's probably going to be 3840x2160, then multiples from there.

/seen one already
//pretty
 
2012-06-03 12:45:20 PM
3840x1080 so I'm about half way there...

=Smidge=
 
2012-06-03 12:51:58 PM
 
2012-06-03 01:00:08 PM

Greenbeanx: Hipster thread anyone?

/ $600 PC from Costco will do me fine till I upgrade in 2-3 years thank u very much.


I built mine for $300 7 years ago. Video card finally crapped out on me.

Not a gamer though.
 
2012-06-03 01:38:09 PM
9.7" screen with 2048x1536 resolution here, at 264 DPI.

/it's an iPad 3
//Flame on?
 
X15
2012-06-03 02:15:40 PM
I'm waiting for Samsung to get off their asses and perfect the S27A850T.

27" @ 2560 x 1440
 
2012-06-03 02:19:16 PM
This guy does

www.lifebyalbum.com
 
2012-06-03 02:41:41 PM
3,840x1080 ... and not as one screen :(
 
2012-06-03 03:40:46 PM

DanZero: This guy does

[www.lifebyalbum.com image 640x358]


i.imgur.com


/Love the new scoreboard, except it shows nothing useful in stunning high-def.
 
2012-06-03 04:15:21 PM
Apparently there are screens out there that run this resolution. Of course, they're probably $10K or so. And if you prefer a projector instead of a screen, you can basically double that number.

Very 1%.
 
2012-06-03 07:43:09 PM
1366X768... Yeah buddy!
 
Displayed 50 of 58 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report