Why not an 8K monitor? They make the 4Ks look old which they are at this point.Jones, Amihere, Boston. And a new 32", 4K, HDR, 120 HZ, monitor.
Christmas? I can't wait until Christmas!
I want a 5 player UCONN 2019 class of Boston, Jones, Griffin, Horston, & Amihere signing NLI on the hood of their father's cars ( if necessary) on the 14 of November.
Why not an 8K monitor? They make the 4Ks look old which they are at this point.
I wouldn’t say antique, but 4 and 5K monitors have been around for years, and last year the first of the 8Ks were released, but you’d likely need to upgrade your video card to run it at full resolution and refresh rate. Not all applications play nice with such a high resolution as text can be microscopically small, so that and the high cost are reasons not to upgrade just yet. But look at the total number of pixels: HD is 2.2 million pixels, Ultra HD (4K) 8 million, 5K 14.7 million, Ultra HD 2 (8K) 33 million, so you can gauge how much the resolution improves as you increase Ks.I just got a 50" 4k 2 months ago (and I ❤️ it). Now you're telling me it's already an antique? WTH?!?
The problem is the human eye is a finite machine. That makes the problem twofold.Why not an 8K monitor? They make the 4Ks look old which they are at this point.
Bad news. Sony already has a 16K monitor in their laboratory.I just got a 50" 4k 2 months ago (and I ❤️ it). Now you're telling me it's already an antique? WTH?!?
The problem is the human eye is a finite machine. That makes the problem twofold.
1) In order to tell the difference between 4K and 8K you need to half your viewing distance. That's because as the pixels get smaller you are effectively further from the object on the screen. This was the same problem in telling the difference between 1080p and 4K. For the human eye to recognize 1080p from Std definition the viewer needed to be 5 feet from a 40 inch screen (6 ft from 48" screen, 7 ft from a 56" etc.) So, for 4K it's 2 feet from a 32" screen (3' from a 48" screen, 4' from a 64" screen etc.) This also applies to TV's of course. Which is why manufacturers nicely say you need to sit closer. They of course fail to tell you how close. Business is business, and they want to sell as many as possible. Manufacturers will willingly make and sell consumers as many 43" and 50" 4k TV's as they can make. Along with Adam Smith one of the great gods of modern economy is PT Barnum who understood people don't by product they buy the pitch. People are suckers and uninformed ones at that. Long way finally short, for a human to tell the difference between a 4K monitor and an 8K monitor one would need to sit 16" from the screen. Not very practical. For gamers, who are driving the 4K monitor market, 2' from a screen with 120 hz and HDR is just about right. Nvidia is releasing their new cards next month or so and two of those should get us gamers all the 4K, 12o hz, HDR goodies we want. Now for consumers and TV's, they may not be able to tell the difference between P and K, but HDR, brightness and colors, that people can recognize from any distance. That seems to be what is driving that market.
2) Modern gaming monitors today use what is called adaptive sync, which sync's the refresh rate of the monitor with the frames coming from the video card. It makes for smooth gameplay. When the framerate drops, the refresh drops. When the frame rate rises, the refresh matches it, and that prevent all sorts of ugly screen issues. Today's video cards have enough problems trying to put out 6o fps at 4K. Gamers like framerates and refresh rates upwards of 120 (which is measured in HZ's), and current cards just can't produce 120 hz at 4k. For the most part 8K is a PT Barnum wet dream for business, and a worthless, confusing nightmare for consumers.
Bad news. Sony already has a 16K monitor in their laboratory.
I wouldn’t say antique, but 4 and 5K monitors have been around for years, and last year the first of the 8Ks were released, but you’d likely need to upgrade your video card to run it at full resolution and refresh rate. Not all applications play nice with such a high resolution as text can be microscopically small, so that and the high cost are reasons not to upgrade just yet. But look at the total number of pixels: HD is 2.2 million pixels, Ultra HD (4K) 8 million, 5K 14.7 million, Ultra HD 2 (8K) 33 million, so you can gauge how much the resolution improves as you increase Ks.
Break up the virtual Huskies!Horston, Jones, Boston, Amihre, and Griffin signed up. Class of death! For everyone else that is....
Might be a few decades for broadcast to adopt it.Bad news. Sony already has a 16K monitor in their laboratory.
Again, a technology no one is calling for, that has no real benefit, and would really just be scam for people to buy another Star Wars compilation. Unless of course the average person is willing to sit 6" from a 32" screen that would probably cost you a years salary.Might be a few decades for broadcast to adopt it.