still experimental (of course) but 7680p might just be enough resolution for every video fanatic.

http://www.dailytech.com/NHK+Demonstrates+Ultra+HD+Signal+16+Times+Better+Than+HDTV/article7466.htm

that would be 4320p ;)

and up to 4000 fps...

Ridiculous slow motion? :o

The article states: "by 2020, Ultra HD will be ready for broadcast to households."

So we'll probably get it by 2030 here in the states?

Only the rich will get it as it is just for theatrical presentation only.

No portable UHDV cameras though, the motion will make you REALLY motion sick. Big and bulky cameras are better for UHDV.

Edit: Oh, and IMAX is already about 7000p but not 60p. 10000x7000 actually. (yet it was made in the 80s...)

The article states: "by 2020, Ultra HD will be ready for broadcast to households."

So we'll probably get it by 2030 here in the states?

Heheh.... Well, considering that small market tv stations are now just starting to switch over to broadcasting a digital SD signal, I'm not going to hold my breath. I'll give you the top 5 markets by 2030... and the others by 2040! I also cringe to think at what a display like that would cost. If 50-inch plasmas offering 1080i were selling for $20k 7 years ago, these will probably put that first-gen price to shame...

Jack might be right- only the mega-elite will be able to afford it!

Holy Christ child! 194Gb per minute of footage? That's like 11.6 Terabytes for 1 hour of footage. What's the data rate gonna be on that sucker?

Oh well, I guess Red's going to have to step up to the challenge - I'm envisioning a gattling-gun style array of Red Ones that shoots 8k footage by being rotated by a manual crankshaft!

Wow, you people are very sceptical. 200 years ago, how many people would have thought cars would become a reality. 1993, I remember cd's holding more data than hard drives, now hard drives hold 500+ gigs of space.
But yes, I am also sceptical of tv stations willing to fork over more money for the resolution. How long has parts of europe had analog hd?

By then, our descendents, clad in sheepskins, might be picking over the ruins, finding the lenses and prolonging the climate change by using the pretty glassy things to light their cooking fires out in the barrens if we don't get our environmental priorities right pretty smartly..

Will that work in Vegas 4.0?

The only way to edit this is to take all 16 HD 1080p60 streams and edit them one stream by one in perfect sync... or online editing might also work.

Would I care? My eyes will not be able to see the difference anyway ... in 2020.

This has been demoed for an number of years now. At the moment 4G can do deliver an compressed stream large enough, but optical will be able to deliver pay TV.

The best part of the best human vision tops out around something like 32-72 thousand pixels across (this is an small spot in the very centre of vision).

The problem with this stuff is focusing, so they should work out auto assist focusing systems.

In 1981 Bill Gates said, "Nobody will ever need more than 640K RAM!"

By the time UHDTV makes an appearence at the local electronics store a USB flash drive will hold more than 1TB.

In 1981 Bill Gates said, "Nobody will ever need more than 640K RAM!"
No, he did not. 640 KB was a limit of the architecture at that time (1 MB max, with the upper part reserved for ROM's). It was a big jump from 64 KB that was available previously and in 1981 no-one did need more than 640 KB. It was not a prediction for the future!

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates#Misattributed

Also see how the real quote was supposedly "640K ought to be enough for anybody" (TODAY, 1981), no mention of 'ever' in there

I have to say in 1981 making those decisions I felt like I was providing enough freedom for ten years, that is the move from 64k to 640k felt like something that would last a great deal of time
Source: http://tickletux.wordpress.com/2007/02/20/did-bill-gates-say-the-640k-line/ (see update at the bottom)

In other words, they moved from 64 to 640 KB (could go no higher due to architecture limits of the Intel chip) and thought that would last 10 years.

Holy Christ child! 194Gb per minute of footage? That's like 11.6 Terabytes for 1 hour of footage. What's the data rate gonna be on that sucker?

Oh well, I guess Red's going to have to step up to the challenge - I'm envisioning a gattling-gun style array of Red Ones that shoots 8k footage by being rotated by a manual crankshaft!

11 TB in 20 years will be just like 20 GB, or maybe 10 GB today. I remember 20 years ago, we were using 16 MB hards drives :-)

No, he did not. 640 KB was a limit of the architecture at that time (1 MB max, with the upper part reserved for ROM's). It was a big jump from 64 KB that was available previously and in 1981 no-one did need more than 640 KB. It was not a prediction for the future!

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates#Misattributed

Also see how the real quote was supposedly "640K ought to be enough for anybody" (TODAY, 1981), no mention of 'ever' in there


Source: http://tickletux.wordpress.com/2007/02/20/did-bill-gates-say-the-640k-line/ (see update at the bottom)

In other words, they moved from 64 to 640 KB (could go no higher due to architecture limits of the Intel chip) and thought that would last 10 years.



O plague right well prevented!

What about the one where the CPM guy reckoned that 64K was enough ;). Actually I did some thinking about the CPM program problem back in the period, or how to make an shell GUI program that transformed text based CPM programs into full GUI programs, amazing what you can do with chucks of 64k (as Intel 8086 did).

Adam: I have no idea what you're saying

Let's get back on topic!

Never mind the increased resolution of sensors - what kind of optics are going to be needed to clearly resolve that detail. I realise people will say film lenses, but surely the light sensitivity of such a hi resolution sensor will require much faster optics due to the relative lack of light per pixel ?

Never mind the increased resolution of sensors - what kind of optics are going to be needed to clearly resolve that detail. I realise people will say film lenses, but surely the light sensitivity of such a hi resolution sensor will require much faster optics due to the relative lack of light per pixel ?Don't assume that sensor-manufacturing technology won't improve. It won't do to have to use a very large imager to counter decrease sensitivity due to extreme pixel density -- the lenses would get unmanageably large and heavy, and depth of field unmanageably shallow. I think it's pretty certain that if the technology is ever to move outside the lab and into the mainstream, it has to be made more practical. And that means using more-light-sensitive materials.

Never mind the increased resolution of sensors - what kind of optics are going to be needed to clearly resolve that detail. I realise people will say film lenses, but surely the light sensitivity of such a hi resolution sensor will require much faster optics due to the relative lack of light per pixel ?

My gravity warp lens (another thread in joke). Seriously, you ever notice that ion Star Trek that the very fast ships the Enterprises chases at huge distances look close and slow (bi-planes) that must be the warp field going telephoto ;)

The sensitivity of pixels have taken an enormous artificial boost of thousands of times, over recent years sensors latitude has been increased by thousands as well. SN ratio has taken an improvement recently too, but how much?

If you are connected with Molly's Pilgrim let me know I have fun info for you.
LydiaDotRobertsonAtMacDotCom

No, he did not. 640 KB was a limit of the architecture at that time (1 MB max, with the upper part reserved for ROM's). It was a big jump from 64 KB that was available previously and in 1981 no-one did need more than 640 KB. It was not a prediction for the future!

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates#Misattributed

Also see how the real quote was supposedly "640K ought to be enough for anybody" (TODAY, 1981), no mention of 'ever' in there


Actually it was Ken Olsen who said something like that.

In 1977, Ken Olsen, the founder and CEO of Digital Equipment Corporation, said, "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home."

These Japanese companies kind of piss me off in doing this. If they want to do this crazy stuff, they should design hard drives capable of handling that amount of video data. They should design processors capable of editing the amount of data necessary for that resolution. They should do both of those things first before they bother coming up with this stuff.

When you can fit more than a few hours of completely uncompressed HD on a hard drive or even a home video disc, then it might be time to talk about increasing resolution.

Plus, the upgrade from NTSC to High Definition has been hard and expensive enough already on the TV and Video industry.