Sharp Demos World’s First 85-inch 8K4K Display

[exfileme]

Sharp is sporting an 85-inch 8K4K display at IFA 2011, but don't expect market saturation until after 2020.

Sharp Demos World’s First 85-inch 8K4K Display : Read more

 

[zankuto]

Great even higher resolution when we cant even get decent 1080p programing. I wonder if apple will try to patent this?

 

[dragonsqrrl]

OMFG... this coming decade is looking better all the time. I'm pretty sure this is somewhere around the resolution set for the next HD standard. It's awesome to see an actual prototype out.

 

[rottingsheep]

hey, that's sharp

 

[afrobacon]

I don't mind waiting; 2020 shouldn't be too long after (or before) I could care for such resolutions. Either way, it sounds awesome.

 

[bootsatthboar]

The problem will be storage for 4320p video. Squeezing down 1080p video onto a 25 gb disk is something of a stretch, so I don't expect this to hit the market until holographic storage becomes cheaper (read: most of the patents expire).

 

[Nesto1000]

*goes to empty out life savings*

 

[Pyree]

Display dimension is: 216cm diagonal (188cm horizontal and 106cm vertical), pixel size about 0.24mm. Excellent!

 

[drwho1]

Surprised nobody has mention porn yet....

More serious, I would love this but I don't think we would actually see something like it make a dent on the market for at least 20 years. It took a long time for people to embrace HDTV and it will take at least about the same time for people to want to switch their HDTV's to a new format.

 

[southernshark]

by the time it comes out, my eyes wont be able to see the difference.

 

[igot1forya]

Finally, this would help bump the resolution of desktop monitors who have been held back by TVs and their restrictive standards.

 

[Guest]

Its ridiculous. The high def TV shows look awful, cause people are bloody ugly. Why the hell do I want to see Tom Cruise's zits at a retarded resolution? So I can see which ones are ready to pop?

Its a waste of money. Its a parallel to the megapixel race in cameras. Its not the resolution that matters, its the quality of the image. WOrk on making everything look amazing, then worry about higher res.

 

[Guest]

Whats the video input though? If you could hook up dual dvi or triple dvi and run it like an eyefinity setup for gaming it would be so epic.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]bootsatthboar[/nom]The problem will be storage for 4320p video. Squeezing down 1080p video onto a 25 gb disk is something of a stretch, so I don't expect this to hit the market until holographic storage becomes cheaper (read: most of the patents expire).[/citation]

actualy its not even hard, sure its hard if you dont compress it, but even at a compression that takes 30 min down to about 1gb, its hard to notice the drop in quality.

[citation][nom]Igot1forya[/nom]Finally, this would help bump the resolution of desktop monitors who have been held back by TVs and their restrictive standards.[/citation]

um no... you are just wrong...
we can use tvs as monitors, so thats what most are made to be, a tv/monitor.
i got a 1920x1200 with a tv tuner, and if you want you can get a 2560x1600, but thay cost allot.

the fact is that single cards struggle at 2560x1600, and even if they can play it, its at lesser graphical settings.

you wont see a jump from 1080p to anything higher until mid range cards can handle the higher resolution, at least on basic levels.

[citation][nom]mediaslave[/nom]Its ridiculous. The high def TV shows look awful, cause people are bloody ugly. Why the hell do I want to see Tom Cruise's zits at a retarded resolution? So I can see which ones are ready to pop?Its a waste of money. Its a parallel to the megapixel race in cameras. Its not the resolution that matters, its the quality of the image. WOrk on making everything look amazing, then worry about higher res.[/citation]

megapixle race had some merits, but once they went into the 12 megapixle area, going any higher there would have been stupid. now its about better lenses and better sensors, once we can get slr quality on consumer cameras, the mp race will go on a bit more.

-------------------

you know i'm surprised NO ONE has mentioned this yet, at 5-10 feet away, will i see all that detail? at 15 feet away, will it look any better than 1080p?

dont get me wrong, i believe that consumers need 4k, but thats it. you really dont need more unless you are using a theater projector and are going on a 100 foot screen.

 

[supere989]

The Human eye is 124 MegaPixel..... I want 1:1 screens. K Thx

 

[Camikazi]

[citation][nom]gartfer[/nom]alidan has got to be the biggest idiot ive seen post in a comments section all fucking week.The fact is that if this 90345739825x353535325 screen is still just a shitty 6-bit display, then its still just a shitty 6-bit display, regardless of size. Even 8 bits isnt amazing, but it more than likely that this screen is just another POS low color poser.[/citation]
Some places saying it is 10-bit and supports 22.2 channel sound.

 

[alidan]

can someone tell me where im wrong in what i say? id love that to be pointed out by someone who didnt just make an account and post... well, the style of message that gartfer posted.

 

[bak0n]

The difference between 720p and 1080p was only slightly noticeable to me. 16x 1080p will mean nothing to me I've got to assume.

 

[kryojenix]

8K4K ??? Isn't this standard called SHV? (Super-Hi-Vision) ...by some other Japanese company and possibly broadcaster NHK?

 

[ipp350z]

Now imagine watching 3D porn on this thing... the future sounds awesome...