CES 2006 News & Announcements
- Thread starter Titanio
- Start date
That's the thing. On big HDTVs, SD looks like crap and HD really shines. On good CRTs, SD can look quite good. Still nothing on HD.
The bigger the panel, the more you get from HD.
Pugger has a 37" Panny 500 which is an amazing 720p set. At that size, 1080p would probably be almost wasted. In fact i'm quite sure i'll end up buying a 720p panel simply because i don't expect to get a panel that's bigger than 32".
I'm sure it's all subjective, i see a huge difference between DVD and HD.
The bigger the panel, the more you get from HD.
Pugger has a 37" Panny 500 which is an amazing 720p set. At that size, 1080p would probably be almost wasted. In fact i'm quite sure i'll end up buying a 720p panel simply because i don't expect to get a panel that's bigger than 32".
I'm sure it's all subjective, i see a huge difference between DVD and HD.
Watch Impress's article on the BDA conference yesterday:
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060106/ces09.htm
I'm only using Google Translator, but Kaz Hirai and Ken Kutaragi were both there apparently. Kaz talked about Blu-ray and games, and threw out the statistic that in PS2's first year, 74% of titles were on CD, 26% on DVD. 5 years later, 5% were on CD, 95% on DVD, and he expects the same trend to occur with DVD and Blu-ray.
Ken was there too - not sure if he spoke in front of the audience, but he spoke to Watch Impress anyway. He wouldn't confirm PS3's release date, but he said that a number of specifications, like the AACS specification (the content management system for blu-ray), were pending finalisation. He also said that Sony wants to adopt the next-generation HDMI standard into PS3, if it's ready on time (it's due in the first half of 2006), which will allow 16-bit per component colour, versus the 12-bit per component they have now. There's some other discussion about it, but the auto-translation is a bit muddy.
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060106/ces09.htm
I'm only using Google Translator, but Kaz Hirai and Ken Kutaragi were both there apparently. Kaz talked about Blu-ray and games, and threw out the statistic that in PS2's first year, 74% of titles were on CD, 26% on DVD. 5 years later, 5% were on CD, 95% on DVD, and he expects the same trend to occur with DVD and Blu-ray.
Ken was there too - not sure if he spoke in front of the audience, but he spoke to Watch Impress anyway. He wouldn't confirm PS3's release date, but he said that a number of specifications, like the AACS specification (the content management system for blu-ray), were pending finalisation. He also said that Sony wants to adopt the next-generation HDMI standard into PS3, if it's ready on time (it's due in the first half of 2006), which will allow 16-bit per component colour, versus the 12-bit per component they have now. There's some other discussion about it, but the auto-translation is a bit muddy.
London, I did see a huge differnece in the shop, before I lashed £2300 at it. They had demos streamed from a Harddrive, of Mountain flowers and sky Divers etc. However when its come to real film, such as Narnia the difference looked for want of a better word smaller. To be honest I think I should wait till I get a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player because I have no idea what the quality of the trailers from LIVE are like. tkf it was a bit terse with the comment "they" but I really do think that HD content what ever type, is going to have trouble convincing, the general public that its worth the jump. The difference between VHS-DVD was big bold and clear. I'm not sure the jump to HD is as cut and clear.
Pugger said:
Oh i stated centuries ago that the real war is not between Bluray and HDDVD, but really between Bluray+HDDVD and DVD, and i'm sure we all know that DVD will keep "winning" that war for a loooong time.
Eventually, when many people have HDTVs, they'll see that HD looks better on their sets than SD, and things are definately picking up, but it will take a loooong time. Especially because of price (i mean... 500 quid for the SKY-HD box?!?!?! Ridiculous) and general public acceptance.
At least it seems some studios are committed to releasing Bluray discs at the same time as DVD versions...
A couple of different pics from the PS3 BD playback demo are here:
http://www.edn.com/media/CES2006/KIF_0448.JPG
http://www.edn.com/media/CES2006/KIF_0450.JPG
Evidently, from the last pic, whatever was spitting the image out is behind the wall.
edit - I've also updated the original post again, this time with more specific news for PS3 and X360. If I've missed anything, let me know!
http://www.edn.com/media/CES2006/KIF_0448.JPG
http://www.edn.com/media/CES2006/KIF_0450.JPG
Evidently, from the last pic, whatever was spitting the image out is behind the wall.
edit - I've also updated the original post again, this time with more specific news for PS3 and X360. If I've missed anything, let me know!
Last edited by a moderator:
DUAL HDMI?
You only need 1 to watch HD material protected with HDCP, not 2.
You only need 1 to watch HD material protected with HDCP, not 2.
Nicked said:
I guess you're referring to the last pic. It's not a mandatory requirement at all, but this was a 1080p/60 demo. For 1080p/60, I've heard you need more bandwidth than a single HDMI cable offers. The vast majority of movies won't be 1080p/60, but 1080p/24 I think.
I think the next HDMI spec also allows 1080p/60 on one cable.
I ain't sure on all this, though, my memory's a bit fuzzy..
Titanio said:
Info on whether 1080p60 works through today's HDMI is still a bit fuzzy. Some people say that depending on the cable, you might or might not be successfull.
The only TV out now in Europe that has 2 HDMI ports is the Toshiba WLT58, some other have HDMI and DVI. All these sets are 720p sets, so the dual HDMI is only there for mutliple hardware, not to be then "re-composed" into a full 1080p60 image.
Here's a bit more info about when Blu-ray players will hit the US - April, pending the completion of the Blu-ray Java spec, scheduled for March.
http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/01/06/samsung/index.php
http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/01/06/samsung/index.php
I'll risk l-b's ire and ask another naive question. What's the benefit of >8 bit per channel, outside of true HDR displays? Or is it forward looking and that's it's only benefit?Titanio said:
No, you're thinking of Circuit City's failed Divx platform. These were time-decayed DVDs. Basically, you bought a DVD for about 5 bucks, put them in a Divx machine, it dialed home and authorized the disc, and you had 24 hours to watch it. After that, it was a coaster.Hardknock said:
This "format war" was very short lived and almost took down Circuit City with it.
.Sis
ManuVlad3.0
Regular
Sis said:
Shifty Geezer said:
My ire!!??!?!?!?!?!?! I'M PERFECTLY CALM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111one
Seriously, more than 8 bit per channel processing obviously has its benefits even though the end result (the HDTV) can only display much less than that. The problem is that the final colour you see is an approximation, therefore the more detail you original material has, the better the approximation is. Colour banding for example still happens, and the more bits you have internally, the better the final approximation looks. Or, instead of "better", i should say "closer to the real thing".
Obviously it's still the case of "will we actually see a difference?"... HDR displays will help for sure, but even just non-HDR ones. In the end, if you spent lots of cash of a nice HDTV, you'd want it to display something GOOD.
What worries me is that most HDTVs have their own digital processing so in the end what we see on the screen will be an approximation of an approximation of an approximation of reality. With lots of filtering in between and sometimes even analog-digital conversions thrown in.
Reality is still king
london-boy said:
1366x768 is a 16:9 aspect ration so you wouldnt have black borders (unless the movie youre watching was filmed in w wider aspect ration than 16:9.
I think you are really overestimating the difference between scaling 720p or 1080p to the native res in question (1366 x 768). Some would argue that its better to have the resolution be as close as possible to the panel's res, giving less chance for the scaler to 'screw it up'. Regardless, i wouldnt base a purchase decision on the idea that 720 will look 'worse' than 1080p on this display.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
as for that Dell PC with 4 SLI'd Nvidia NV47 / G70 / GeForce 7800 GPUs - that's like 1.2+ billion transistors worth of wasted graphics processing power -- that probably does not have even 2x the performance of a single G70 GPU in all cases.
expletive said:
No the borders Phil meant (i think) is borders ALL AROUND the image, to retain 1:1 pixel mapping - which will basically looks like when you use an LCD screen at its native resolution - very sharp. Without borders, the set scales the image to its native resolution, which can look less sharp than 1:1 pixel mapping. Or at least, that's what i meant. So i wont reply to the second part of your post cause you thought i was thinking about something else...
