sdetoni wrote:Darkflame wrote:
I would hope in 10 years time theres a more significant upgrade. Resolution is sooooo overated. Give me decent colour depth, contrast, forcefeedback and smell-a-vision please.
Oh, and 3D while your at it.
You realise you will eat your words in the future. Resolution is everything, even on 32" displays. The finer the pixel pitch, the better...
But I dont *care*
In motion its already as good as my eyes.
Its other stuff holding it back.
I dont see the point in going beyond what the majority of people can visualy tell apart.
(Id love some double blind tests done, metaphoricaly of course :p)
If everything else was the same, then yes, making something as good as possible in one aspex would be fine. But its always tradeoffs.
If we push for resolutions greater and greater, we are diverting research from other stuff. We are pushing up file sizes, and almost certainly increaseing enviromental impact. (whats the failure rate on these screens like?)
Id like the industary to get a good colour depth, contrast,longer lifetime, greater powerefficiancy, good refresh rate, and no lag.
Give me a 720p tv with those things rather then a 1080p without them any time.
And if the goal of tv is to replacate (safely)
"as if we were there" then 3D is also very much the way to go and will add so much more then a few more lines.
I assume anyone that thinks resolution is overrated still runs their PC at 640x480 then?
Used like a tv, 720p is fine. If my eyes cant tell them apart at that range (in motion) now, they certainly wont in 10 years.
Used up close, your reading stuff.
The image is both more static and closer, thus your eyes are absorbing more detail.
And for that I wont be happy till its like e-paper, with print like clarity and contrast.
This is quite a different thing to sitting back and watching a movie.
] - [
