What's the DPI limit for human perception? Is the IBM/Viewsonic panel there or close already? Anyway, I don't see why any manufacturer would go over that limit..
Also there's a definite limit to the size of screens due to how big a vision cone we can comfortably observe at a time. I think it might be close to a 30" widescreen held at normal display distance (judging from my short experience of the 30" at store, maybe even less) so I don't expect to see much bigger screens than that for desktop use. If you want to monitor things in peripheral vision and have a look at them now and then, another screen of the same kind can be added on the side or both sides. But more than that on desktop seems useless.
The screens that are used for remote viewing are another thing entirely.
I predict the next big thing coming to desktop, after the 30" and so displays, is decent VR goggles. They need to pack a lot of resolution in there... but it's coming >P
So what did Hollywood do for all those long, cold decades before Apple released the 30"?
Hehe
Actually, while duals are the way to go, I'm sure high end post houses are snapping up the 30" displays, if for no other reason than to impress a client.
Obviously this is not very scientific research, but seems okay. Looking at his conclusions, about 150dpi should be enough for desktop.
A plus of a super high res (400+ dpi) display would be that you could lean halfway towards it and it would still look "totally real".
edit: though initially sounds boring, that could be really cool! Imagine you're playing a realistic type FPS, think there's someone in the weeds but are not sure, and you just lean in a bit to have a closer look.. Technically speaking you can do that now, but then it would matter much more, since you not only get magnification but actually see more detail. (Not realistic btw! You can't "lean in" like that in the real world )
The big problem with the other sets bang and olufson offer is that plasma screens go dead. after 4 years, the pixels will fade out. this one is LCD, much better. And it is the perfect size. 32'. I view this thing sitting six feet back. If you ever get a great tube, or have one, watch the LOTR: The Fellowship of the Rings on it, first thing you do.
One of my friends has this, but wouldn't let me use it till I beat him in a game of halo 2.
Comments
Also there's a definite limit to the size of screens due to how big a vision cone we can comfortably observe at a time. I think it might be close to a 30" widescreen held at normal display distance (judging from my short experience of the 30" at store, maybe even less) so I don't expect to see much bigger screens than that for desktop use. If you want to monitor things in peripheral vision and have a look at them now and then, another screen of the same kind can be added on the side or both sides. But more than that on desktop seems useless.
The screens that are used for remote viewing are another thing entirely.
I predict the next big thing coming to desktop, after the 30" and so displays, is decent VR goggles. They need to pack a lot of resolution in there... but it's coming >P
Originally posted by Amorph
So what did Hollywood do for all those long, cold decades before Apple released the 30"?
Hehe
Actually, while duals are the way to go, I'm sure high end post houses are snapping up the 30" displays, if for no other reason than to impress a client.
Originally posted by Stecs
DPI limit on the human eye is significantly higher than the ~200 dpi on the T22. Consider 1200 dpi + printers...
1) It's cheaper to put more dpi in printer,
2) dpi is a selling point in printers like MHz is in computers,
3) print products are often viewed closer than display is,
4) I would think the dots can mix a bit, since it's paper, maybe they need overkill dpi numbers to achieve a decent real dpi
Google tells me there's one guy who has written about the subject: http://www.blaha.net/Main%20Visual%20Acuity.htm
Obviously this is not very scientific research, but seems okay. Looking at his conclusions, about 150dpi should be enough for desktop.
A plus of a super high res (400+ dpi) display would be that you could lean halfway towards it and it would still look "totally real".
edit: though initially sounds boring, that could be really cool! Imagine you're playing a realistic type FPS, think there's someone in the weeds but are not sure, and you just lean in a bit to have a closer look.. Technically speaking you can do that now, but then it would matter much more, since you not only get magnification but actually see more detail. (Not realistic btw! You can't "lean in" like that in the real world
A computer screen this size, shape, and depth resolution so I can play everygame as good as gamecube/xbox games on their highest settings.
The matching TV:
http://www.bang-olufsen.com/sw28078.asp
The big problem with the other sets bang and olufson offer is that plasma screens go dead. after 4 years, the pixels will fade out. this one is LCD, much better. And it is the perfect size. 32'. I view this thing sitting six feet back. If you ever get a great tube, or have one, watch the LOTR: The Fellowship of the Rings on it, first thing you do.
One of my friends has this, but wouldn't let me use it till I beat him in a game of halo 2.
That took a while.