Cool, now I can go repurchase all my cables. At least they're cheap, right?
You will need gold plated cables that have resonance crystal around them to reduce polarisation
HDMI 2.0 officially announced
101–110 of 138 posts
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 120 fps is the minimum for me when it comes to playing games. You like wasting CPU power for placebo-level difference? In a few years (assuming 20-something) you won't care much for games anymore, and 99.999% of the kids are perfectly fine with 60 fps anyway.
People who enjoy games at a competitive level don't just out grow it once they hit late 20s or 30s. I'm 33 by the way. I'm extremely confident that anyone playing a fast paced game at a highly competitive level would notice the difference between 60 and 120 fps+hz -- even in a best case scenario where the frame rate wasn't varied. Frame rate variance is one of the most noticeable things, but even a rock solid 60 fps+…
Well, statistically speaking, most of them do. They get a job, family, etc.
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#103The failure to redesign the connection form factor is a major disappointment. Racking or repositioning a snug receiver with multiple HDMI inputs and outputs will almost guarantee that one will bend or break. This is especially true for low gauge runs over 50 feet.
I would guess that a "snug receiver with multiple HDMI inputs and outputs" would also be snug in the model produced after the connector upgrade. It sounds like the receiver engineers didn't leave enough room between their connectors - regardless of the size.
http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/whats-the-matter-with...
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#104This race for more pixels is misguided. The change I most want to see is deeper pixels, at least 10bpp, preferably more. I'm getting really tired of all the banding I see on what should be smooth gradient images. If a landscape aspect image is P pixels wide then to display a gray scale gradient, black to white, you need ceil(log2(P)) bits per pixel. So a "2K" display needs 11 bits, "4K" needs 12, etc. Then each colum…
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#105This race for more pixels is misguided. The change I most want to see is deeper pixels, at least 10bpp, preferably more. I'm getting really tired of all the banding I see on what should be smooth gradient images. If a landscape aspect image is P pixels wide then to display a gray scale gradient, black to white, you need ceil(log2(P)) bits per pixel. So a "2K" display needs 11 bits, "4K" needs 12, etc. Then each colum…
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#106This race for more pixels is misguided. The change I most want to see is deeper pixels, at least 10bpp, preferably more. I'm getting really tired of all the banding I see on what should be smooth gradient images. If a landscape aspect image is P pixels wide then to display a gray scale gradient, black to white, you need ceil(log2(P)) bits per pixel. So a "2K" display needs 11 bits, "4K" needs 12, etc. Then each colum…
Dithering in the field of video is pretty common, though. But it has a pretty large problem there as well - since dithering is essentially noise, it requires a lot of bitrate to compress efficiently, and if you don't have bitrate to throw at your source, you're most likely going to kill it and just end up introducing banding. Blu-ray is pretty much the main avenue where you have enough bitrate to spare for proper dithering in 8-bit video. Anything less than that, though... well, let's just say that House of Cards on Netflix was suffering from banding a lot.
Banding is actually one of the biggest reasons why anime fansubs these days are generally encoded in 10-bit H.264. Anime tends to have a lot of large and smooth color surfaces and banding was pretty much the hardest thing to avoid with regular 8-bit video - 10-bit on the other hands makes it an almost total non-issue. And for non-10bit displays, it moves the necessary dithering to the playback end, which is obviously a much nicer alternative since you don't have to compress any of that in the video itself. And beyond the gradients, 10-bit H.264 actually gives you better compression quality in general, which just makes it even better.
Now, it obviously comes with the downside of not being supported by hardware decoders anywhere, so you basically will need a decent CPU to decode 10-bit video. For fansubs and the people who make them this isn't that much of an issue though, since the advanced subtitles they use are also generally poorly-supported by hardware players, and this has been the case for a long time.
Next-generation video formats may actually bring higher bit depths to hardware decoders as well, though - H.265/HEVC has a Main 10 Profile intended for consumer applications.
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Well, 100 audio channels 50% lossless compressed files would go about 60 GB for a 2-hour movie. So not really "less than the video". My losslessly-compressed (Lagarith FTW!) VHS captures are ~60GB for a 2-hour movie and that's at 720x486.
Sure, but why compare it with losslessly-compressed video? That's just for editing -- all viewing formats feature lossy video.
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
It always seemed strange that monitors aim for 60fps. That seems like a recipe for input lag. They could aim for 90fps, because when they fail to meet that, at least they'll still achieve 60fps. Then again, the audience of hardcore gamers who would notice that sort of thing is probably small, so I guess it makes economic sense.
This is also why most LCD manufacturers use low quality TN panels. A majority of people just can't tell the difference, don't care enough or they don't care about things like viewing angles. LCD manufacturers in general are really crooked. They have been accused and found guilty of price fixing on multiple occasions. They also love to release monitors with high quality panels initially so they get good reviews and sw…
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#109This race for more pixels is misguided. The change I most want to see is deeper pixels, at least 10bpp, preferably more. I'm getting really tired of all the banding I see on what should be smooth gradient images. If a landscape aspect image is P pixels wide then to display a gray scale gradient, black to white, you need ceil(log2(P)) bits per pixel. So a "2K" display needs 11 bits, "4K" needs 12, etc. Then each colum…
Dithering can help a lot when it comes to displaying large smooth gradients in lower bit depths. Obviously it has its downsides, though - for one, you need to actually implement it where smooth gradients are used, and at when it comes to video games this basically never happens and you end up with notable banding instead. Dithering in the field of video is pretty common, though. But it has a pretty large problem ther…
Re: HDMI 2.0 officially announced
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is also why most LCD manufacturers use low quality TN panels. A majority of people just can't tell the difference, don't care enough or they don't care about things like viewing angles. LCD manufacturers in general are really crooked. They have been accused and found guilty of price fixing on multiple occasions. They also love to release monitors with high quality panels initially so they get good reviews and sw…
I'm on the market for a decent monitor. Are there any brands that you /like/, or is it simply a matter of choosing the least terrible?
More to the point, I'm a graphics programmer / researcher, so monitors with low Delta E are important for my work. The Dell U2711 combined with an i1Display Pro can be calibrated to exceptional color fidelity.