1080p/60 HDMI Clarification

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21475&highlight=hdmi

Here's the link to that thread I mentioned about. What a funny thread.

 

I meant gain for the studio that's funding the movie. You're not going to get any more people buying movies than already do. What's in it for them to finance a higher frame rate? The movie industry could have gone higher frame rate years ago.
As for effects budgets scaling linearly, well that obviously depends on the work being carried out, but a lot of the bread and butter work is still just cleaning up in post like wire/scenery removal, colour grading etc. A lot of this can't just be done automatically.
I would imagine hand tuned motion capture would take longer and of course you'd double any cg rendering time.

 

Not sure if accurate, but the last majornelson podcast corrects the 1080p/60 hdmi limitation by saying that it can't support 1080p/60 and 5.1 or greater digital audio simultaneously. Hence the newer higher bandwidth hdmi revision. I tend to agree with M$ decision about not waiting around for these emerging standards that will only ever benefit a miniscule percentage of users. By the time a 1080p/60 environment reaches even a million households, we'll be well in to the next next-generation of consoles. I saw a recent study that said 50% of HDTV owners don't even have an HD source (over air, cable, or satellite) connected to it. That's just sad!

 

That's great, but Henshaw's comments are almost a year old and were basically correct at the time.

 

And how many will do native 1080p60?

 

This isn't correct. Just for starters, audio is sent along separate wires from video.

 

Yes, separate but still inside the cable.

 

The total bandwith is shared.

 

I think the cable has 19 cores (wires).

 

So the audio will use all 19 wires to send packets of data on each wire?

 

I don't think it works that way.

But I'm pretty sure they could come up with a version which would use all bandwith (~5 Gbps) for audio.

 

And why on earth would they do that?!
I'm pretty sure there are wires dedicated to sound and a lot more dedicated to video, it's the most logical solution, but i stand to be corrected if that's not the case.

 

This weeks Major Nelson xxxcast had a very interesting talk about HD, it was brought up alot about 1080p30 and 1080p60, why the olympics suck in HD compared to DiscoveryHD. The guy talking is not a marketing guy ( I want to say he is a video engineer) he went on to say that 1080p is great when you are talking about 1080p60 but it has double the bandwidth requirements of 720p/1080i/1080p30 (which are all interestingly enough about the same bandwidth) definitely worth a listen.

NOTE* If you are not an engineer or a video geek, you may get the "deer in headlights" look about yourself.

 

I believe type a is 19 and b is 29, or maybe I have them reversed.

 

They probably won't, I only tried to explain (not very good apparently) that the format has a certain bandwith which can be used as they see fit...

I guess that makes sense.

 

He was partially correct, but he's still spinning the fact that 1080p sets that accepts 1080p signal via HDMI were only a year away. He was making it sound like 1080p via HDMI was not a reality.

If you mean by, what accept 1080p/60?, then only one set is avaliable atm, HP md5880n.

Also, we're barely into the beginning of the year, we can expect more 1080p sets this year.

If you want a 1080p set, I hear Sony's 50in SXRD can be had for $3k at Fryes Electronics.

 

Well...

I think that's his point.

Another problem is manufacturers like to keep things unclear. All those (1024x1024) sets with 'HD-compatible' on it for example. Sure they accept the signal, but jeez...

The same is true for 'Accepting 1080p'. What's that anyway? Native? Upscaled? Only 30 frames?

You gotta love these guys.

 

His point was that their system, Xbox 360, was not going to be able to do 1080p30/60 via HDMI and that PS3 doing 1080p30/60 via HDMI was not a reality.

And you think the average Joe would cares?