« Topics
1234...789
noggin13,891 posts since 26 Jun 2001
Couldn't you get 48fps up to 50fps with the same speedup used to show 24p movies in 50i? Admittedly doesn't solve the issue of showing it in a 60Hz environment, but better than nothing. I find it a shame they've not tried to do that with any home video releases or TV Showings of the Hobbit movies, and they're either 24p or 25p with PAL speedup. I found the HFR very impressive in the cinema, and it's a shame we can't see it at home.


They won't release a 2D HFR version of The Hobbit (they didn't release it in the cinemas in HFR 2D) - and Blu-ray doesn't support 3D at 1080p50 or 1080p60 - so it would either have to be half-resolution 1080p or released 720p. Neither were likely - and the 60Hz issue is still a biggie.
Neil Jones4,604 posts since 23 Dec 2001
Central (West) Midlands Today
It never fails to amaze how "old" these systems are by the time they become common palace. No doubt 16k already exists in some lab situation


All technology is "old" by the time it reaches mainstream. That's the way it is.
Even computer parts that have literally rolled off the production line and into a computer near you is already at least one generation, sometime two, behind what Intel/AMD are currently working on.

I dare say 20k, 24k or even 32k are all potential future technologies, though this presumably puts us at a stage where we'll be able to literally see sweat dripping off everybody at the Olympics but the bigger question is, how effective is that going to be on most domestic TV screens of 26-54"?
davidhorman2,063 posts since 8 Mar 2005
Channel Channel Islands
It never fails to amaze how "old" these systems are by the time they become common palace. No doubt 16k already exists in some lab situation


Even 8k is pushing it as far as the limts of human vision are concerned. I suppose there will always be people who won't be happy until their TV fills their entire field of vision, though (even if that means you only ever really see about 25% of what's happening)...
noggin13,891 posts since 26 Jun 2001
It never fails to amaze how "old" these systems are by the time they become common palace. No doubt 16k already exists in some lab situation


Japan nearly shot some HD at the Moscow 1980 Olympics... I saw the LA 1984 HD test footage in 1989/1990ish...

That Japanese system is very close to the 1080i we use today. It really is amazing how 'old' some systems are.
Spencer For Hire5,625 posts since 13 Jan 2003
Yorkshire Look North (Yorkshire)
Surely we’ll get to the point soon where it’s not actually worth making picture resolution any higher. Anything above 4K only has to be worth it for large, public screens or ardent home cinema buffs. I don’t believe the general public is that bothered about filling an entire wall of their house in order to be able to see each and every one of Huw Edwards’ nasal hairs in 8K. I struggle sometimes to tell the difference between HD and 4K on our 55” TV, and the other half still can’t tell the difference between SD and HD on it (and complains it’s too big and makes our house look chavvy).

Aren’t we just heading further into enthusiast only territory? Or will we just get to the stage where it’s as easy and cheap to broadcast everything in 8K or above*, and everyone just downscales to suit their needs?

*excluding BBC regional news, obviously. 😉
Robust amateurism