Re: Canon shows off prototype 30-inch 4K reference display,
 

On Apr 18, 3:12*am, mummycul...@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid
(MummyChunk) wrote:
> From ENG
>
> Canon To Exhibit Prototype of 30-Inch 4K Industrial Video Display
> Currently Under Development at NAB 2012
>
> LAKE SUCCESS, N.Y., April 12, 2012 – Canon Inc. today announced that
> the Company is developing a 30-inch, 4K resolution industrial video
> display*, a prototype of which will be exhibited from April 16 to 19
> at the NAB Show 2012, the world's largest international digital event
> for audio, video, film, broadcast and communications, held in Las
> Vegas.

$8000? $10000?

Re: Canon shows off prototype 30-inch 4K reference display,
 

On 19/04/2012 12:12 a.m., RichA wrote:
> On Apr 18, 3:12 am, mummycul...@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid
> (MummyChunk) wrote:
>> From ENG
>>
>> Canon To Exhibit Prototype of 30-Inch 4K Industrial Video Display
>> Currently Under Development at NAB 2012
>>
>> LAKE SUCCESS, N.Y., April 12, 2012 – Canon Inc. today announced that
>> the Company is developing a 30-inch, 4K resolution industrial video
>> display*, a prototype of which will be exhibited from April 16 to 19
>> at the NAB Show 2012, the world's largest international digital event
>> for audio, video, film, broadcast and communications, held in Las
>> Vegas.
>
> $8000? $10000?
>
Some TV panel makers have "4x 1080" (QFHD - 3840 x 2160) displays, but
"4k" is 4096 pixels wide.
4k might be a niche, with insufficient demand at initial high prices to
build up volume to get prices down - that might be exacerbated by
competition with "QFHD" displays if that becomes a de facto standard.
I guess the dominant panel makers (LG and Samsung) do production runs of
hundreds of thousands of each panel model. I doubt there's going to be
that sort of volume demand for 4k panels, and that if there's going to
be a "standard" for high volume markets (home cinema etc) the format
decided for distribution of media (disk/streaming/broadcast) is going to
determine what's going to be an affordable standard for ordinary folks.
"QFHD" would be very nice for still photo editing - 4k wouldn't be
significantly better.

Re: Canon shows off prototype 30-inch 4K reference display,
 

On 19/04/2012 10:06 a.m., Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012-04-18 17:46 , Me wrote:
>> On 19/04/2012 12:12 a.m., RichA wrote:
>>> On Apr 18, 3:12 am, mummycul...@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid
>>> (MummyChunk) wrote:
>>>> From ENG
>>>>
>>>> Canon To Exhibit Prototype of 30-Inch 4K Industrial Video Display
>>>> Currently Under Development at NAB 2012
>>>>
>>>> LAKE SUCCESS, N.Y., April 12, 2012 – Canon Inc. today announced that
>>>> the Company is developing a 30-inch, 4K resolution industrial video
>>>> display*, a prototype of which will be exhibited from April 16 to 19
>>>> at the NAB Show 2012, the world's largest international digital event
>>>> for audio, video, film, broadcast and communications, held in Las
>>>> Vegas.
>>>
>>> $8000? $10000?
>> >
>> Some TV panel makers have "4x 1080" (QFHD - 3840 x 2160) displays, but
>> "4k" is 4096 pixels wide.
>> 4k might be a niche, with insufficient demand at initial high prices to
>> build up volume to get prices down - that might be exacerbated by
>> competition with "QFHD" displays if that becomes a de facto standard.
>> I guess the dominant panel makers (LG and Samsung) do production runs of
>> hundreds of thousands of each panel model. I doubt there's going to be
>> that sort of volume demand for 4k panels, and that if there's going to
>> be a "standard" for high volume markets (home cinema etc) the format
>> decided for distribution of media (disk/streaming/broadcast) is going to
>> determine what's going to be an affordable standard for ordinary folks.
>> "QFHD" would be very nice for still photo editing - 4k wouldn't be
>> significantly better.
>
> BRD + HD (1080p) as installed in most homes is beyond visual acuity as is.
>
> For QFHD to provide its resolution experience one would need a 80"
> screen and be sitting within 5 or so feet of it. (Just WAG-ing the
> numbers, but it's on that order.
>
I don't agree. I'm typing this while using a 60" 1080p screen at about
10 feet. If I look at a 1px black line on white background, "staircase"
aliasing is very easily visible.
60" is still too small, about 80-100" may be an ideal screen size for
the room I'm in.
The advantage might not be immediately apparent, but may become so as 4k
digital is adopted for shooting and intermediate editing - assuming that
there might be some way to view it (except at a cinema). Some movies
are already being shot and intermediate edited in 4k.
But I don't have much expectation that it (4k or QFHD home cinema) will
become a reality any time soon.

>
> 4K would be pretty useless for home use. (And in a 30" monitor,
> resolution would be beyond imperceptible at a comfortable viewing
> distance for the display).