|
Samsung unleashes ultra-sharp 2160p HDTV
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 19 May, 2008
The electronics giant Samsung has introduced a new LCD TV this week at the 2008 SID symposium in Los Angeles that sports "ultra definition" resolution of 3840x2160, or 2160p.
Current LCD panels have at maximum, 1080p (1920x1080) HD resolution so this new TV blows that out of the water. It is however, lower quality then the upcoming 4k standard which has a 4096x1716 working resolution.
... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
supertape
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. May 2008 @ 00:14 |
Link to this message
|
PS: @supertape, unless you have the ability to join into the conversation at the level it's being discussed then I suggest you stay out of the conversation between mack786 and I.
Wow, what a rude person. I tell someone they have a nice post, then make a joke about sony with a patch, and I get verbally bitch slapped by someone who I didn't even point the comment at? Wow. Very nice of you. In the future keep my name out of your posts.
HELP A NEWBIE
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
samshizze
Junior Member
|
22. May 2008 @ 00:42 |
Link to this message
|
I believe HDMI cables are maxed out at 1080p. So they must of created some sort of Ultra HDMI. PS4 FTW!!!
|
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
22. May 2008 @ 08:18 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by supertape:
Wow, what a rude person. I tell someone they have a nice post, then make a joke about sony with a patch, and I get verbally bitch slapped by someone who I didn't even point the comment at? Wow. Very nice of you. In the future keep my name out of your posts.
You quoted the conversation between mack786 and I, so how does it not involve me?
Since you jumped in after his reply before I had a chance to respond, you basically made it sound like mack786 had good points and I did not. You are obviously anti Sony and you have every right to your own opinion. However, I still stand by my comment that if you can not contribute to the conversation that mack786 and I were having at the level that it's being discussed then I will consider it nothing more than a Childish stab at Sony with nothing solid to even back that opinion from.
If you bothered to even read the content that mack786 and I were discussing, you would see that I have kept an open mind and I didn't hesitate in pointing out when mack786 had made some good points.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. May 2008 @ 08:53
|
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
22. May 2008 @ 08:25 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by samshizze:
I believe HDMI cables are maxed out at 1080p. So they must of created some sort of Ultra HDMI. PS4 FTW!!!
HDMI v1.3 supports up to 2560 x 1600 (1600p)... But yes, still not enough for 2160p.
|
|
supertape
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. May 2008 @ 18:47 |
Link to this message
|
I said "good post" and was referring to the quoted part (yours) and the original. Both sides good. And the patch stab at sony was a joke at all of there patches. I love sony and have a ps3, hdtv, etc. Sorry you took it the wrong way. That's the thing about typing, you don't get the personality behind the post. If you don't understand you should probably not be quick to leave such an insensitive response? See your local psychologist.
HELP A NEWBIE
|
Staff Member
4 product reviews
|
23. May 2008 @ 02:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
BACK ON TOPIC OR IM LOCKING IT.
|
Senior Member
|
11. June 2008 @ 23:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
How far can better viewing go, I mean the eye can see only so much, I mean when you watch like a bluray now which is about as clear as clear can get, I think the rest is to keep consumers dupped that the viewing is better with all this extra bigger numbers crap.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
hdyes999
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. August 2008 @ 06:20 |
Link to this message
|
ummm.. I think this part of the article may be wrong, at least in some fashion...
quoted:
"It is however, lower quality then the upcoming 4k standard which has a 4096x1716 working resolution."
Is there some other reason "maybe color resolution" why 4k standard is higher when 4k yields a picture quality a little above 7Mp & 2160p yields 8.85Mp.
I am probably wrong in the way I calculate megapixel resolution but even so, the numbers show a higher resolution for 2160p....
2160p...
3840x2160=8,829,440pixels/frame
4k
4096x1716=7,028,736pixels/frame
From what i see here, 2160p is sharper/better than 4k.. if someone here see's what im saying here as wrong, could you please tell me why??
If the argument is that, for a 20:8 screen ratio recorded movie, it is higher then I would beg to differ. Almost all HDTV's are 16:9 and most material that would come out would likely come out in 16:9 to make the most of it.
Already, 16:9 means bars on the right & left to sub for 4:3 ratio shows of old and on top & bottom to display a full width 20:8 movie. Movie theatres should still push 20:8 but to the sides of the screen simply add detail that won't spoil the movie if it has to be cut away to fit a 16:9 aspect ratio later, when it goes to disc for our home HD viewing. This is enough to get people to want to see it on the big screen yet still be able to appreciate & understand the movie at home on a 16:9 display without wasted rez space for those black bars.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. August 2008 @ 06:38
|
