General > General Technical Chat
Just because technology can do something, doent meant its always right
thinkfat:
3D on the TV really hasn't caught on, has it? My last TV was an LG with WebOS (big mistake), with 3D, and yes, Avatar was absolutely brilliant. But that was about the only film I ever watched in 3D. The current TV, one of the Sony Bravia Android sets, doesn't feature 3D any more and it's a top-of-the-line, gigantic OLED slab of screen. 3D is gone, IMHO.
ebastler:
Yes, it seems that 3D has been replaced by 4k and then 8k as the latest fad, "here's why you need to buy a new TV set yet again" sales pitch. All three are equally unconvincing arguments in my opinion...
bd139:
Resolution is different. It's a function of the size of the screen and the viewing distance.
3d is pointless though. You can strap a couple of 4k screens to your head if you need that. Makes far more sense.
bd139:
--- Quote from: Simon on June 19, 2022, 06:00:45 pm ---
--- Quote from: bd139 on June 19, 2022, 11:03:22 am ---Ah yes that’s one reason I bought a mirrorless recently. The processing on the smartphones is quite destructive. Some of that is actually the finish of the metalwork though and some of it is the low quality jpeg I exported but the phone is doing some weird stuff.
But quite frankly the image is a pretty good approximation of reality and that’s what matters to most people.
I mean if you consider bokeh and grain doesn’t really exist it puts things into perspective. Compromises everywhere and that’s part of the art.
--- End quote ---
The only reason I still keep a DSLR is because - lenses. All phones have tiny sensors and short lenses and distort all of the perspective. All these kids that think they are fat and that are having nose jobs have not looked at themselves in the mirror properly. I once compared a photo of a group of friends taken on a smartphone with one taken on my camera with a 50mm prime lens. It was then obvious but only on comparison that the further to the edge of the picture you go on the smart phone, the more the faces are seriously distorted.
--- End quote ---
Worth pointing out here that all lenses have some inherent distortion in them and vignetting. Most of the cameras and some smartphones perform corrections on this on the device or provide lens metadata which Lightroom etc can correct later if required.
And there is a huge difference between a crap smartphone camera and a decent smartphone camera. The span of outcomes is pretty huge depending on how much you spent mostly. Spend £800+ on a smartphone and you might get a decent camera too if you're lucky :-DD
SiliconWizard:
While 3D TVs were mostly useless - a gadget that you would use a couple times and then would get too annoying and useless to make any sense - more DPI (up to some reasonable value) does add something. Whether you personally find it useless is subjective.
As I mentioned, it's funny to see that many people don't have a problem with a full HD display on a 6" mobile phone, or even 4K now, but would find 4K already too much on a 50" (or over) display. Granted you don't look at them at the same distance, but you can definitely tell a difference between Full HD and 4K on a 50" display at a distance of a couple meters. As to 8K, I haven't seen enough 8K displays of the average size of a TV set to be able to tell. I'd be willing to think that it would make more visible difference for static images than moving ones, though.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version