Jump to content

https://www.floatplane.com/video/1jFiXmOENX

 

Spoiler

Here's another (obviously different) video on one of the featured products just so non-floatplane people know what I'm talking about.

 

Very cool technology.  The 45:1 split is particularly interesting.

 

I've said before that when it comes to traditional flat displays as we know them, there is not now, nor will there ever be, a need for more than 8K.  It's truly an "end game" resolution, dictated to be so by the reality of our biology.  If you have an 8K panel, you can sit close enough to see the pixels, or far enough to actually see a reasonable amount of it all at once, but never both.  The rule for a display to be "retina" is that regardless of resolution, you don't see pixels at normal viewing distance.  My 8K claim is simply taking that concept to it's logical limit, factoring out field of view, distance, and size for a single maximum reasonable value.  I continue to stand by this claim.

 

However, at the same time I also acknowledged that in the future, there would likely be new technology that I could not imagine which would not be in any way beholden to this same rule, and it appears we already have one in a big way.  To get the same kind of fidelity with something like this, due to that 45:1 split, you would need a 55k base panel!

  1. TVwazhere

    TVwazhere

    Would there possibly be a need for more than 8K for VERY large panels (such as entire wall TV's)?

  2. vanished

    vanished

    Only if the design assumed and intended people to never see the whole thing at once, but then I'd call that not a "traditional flat display".  I'm talking about a monitor you'd have on your desk, or a TV, etc.  An ad wall like that is sort of a special case and more akin to many monitors combined anyway (and likely is).

     

    Another example is VR, I don't have exact figures but the resolution needed to cover each eye's entire fov at a retina density is likely well beyond 8K, and you'd need two.

×