movies not being in 16:9 but a much wider aspect ratio that will also be cropped or letterboxed
For the record, most movies are shot in 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 This compares to 1.33:1 (4:3) and 1.77:1 (16:9).
A movie shot in 1.85:1 is very close to HD-TV's 1.77:1, so it can be shown on HD-TV without letterboxing and very little loss of edge information. But a movie shot in 2:39:1 would require significant horizontal cropping or letterboxing to fit a 1080p display. There are some "cinema" rated TVs and projectors with wider aspect ratios. A 2.37:1 display (and adapter!) resolution equals 2560x1080 (as opposed to 1080p's 1920x1080).
Plenty of pixels to display HD in 1080p. Is my math correct? Anybody?
Yes -- PLENTY of pixels for iPad 3 to display 1080p. Perhaps it's my fault to assume that iPad 1 & iPad 2 will ALSO be upgradeable to iOS5. THOSE devices won't be able to display true 1080p.
We are talking about two different things here: iOS 5.0 software upgrade and iPad 3 hardware upgrade. I think the original contention was: "iOS 5 will allow 1080p". Probably TRUE on iPad 3 (rumors), probably false for 15+ million iPad 1/2 owners.
We are talking about two different things here: iOS 5.0 software upgrade and iPad 3 hardware upgrade. I think the original contention was: "iOS 5 will allow 1080p". Probably TRUE on iPad 3 (rumors), probably false for 15+ million iPad 1/2 owners.
Looking at the article, it is all about the hardware. iOS is mentioned in passing, in relation to whether or not the iPad3 will have a higher rez display.
Other people started bringing in crazy references like "well not all movies are 16:9" and "you guys don't know the difference between storing digital files, playing rejiggered files downconverted to fit the screen, and outputting to an external HD display" and other cranky stuff.
Nice to know that the new iPad will finally be able to display HD content in HD resolution on the screen built into the device.
Do you know how outputting to a display/projector works?.
Sure I do. I've been working with technology 34 years and was at IBM when the first PC came out in 1981. But I'm as human as the next Nerd and can make mistakes. I think we're just misunderstanding each other (comparing apples to oranges, if you'll ignore the pun!).
Based on the rumors, it sounds as if iPad 3 will have a much higher (4x) resolution 2048x1536) display adapter so that iOS 5.0 on it will not only display true 1080p, but also project/AirPlay it. Right?
The confusion here, is that iOS 5.0 will probably also run on 15+ million iPad 1 & 2 units. But the display adapter on these units is only 1024x768 -- a lower hardware resolution than needed for true 1080p.
A software upgrade such as iOS 5.0 cannot by itself fulfill new hardware requirements. So unless Apple included a 2 megapixel display adapter in iPad 1 and 2 units but restricted it to 1024x768, and is only now "unlocking" this hardware with iOS 5.0, owners of older iPads won't be able to AirPlay/project true 1080p video. Right?
It's like if hackers could convert HD-TV firmware (software) on older HD-TVs to make them 3D HD-TVs...
Nice to know that the new iPad will finally be able to display HD content in HD resolution on the screen built into the device.
But we DON'T know this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjnovak
Based on the rumors, it sounds as if iPad 3 will have a much higher (4x) resolution 2048x1536) display adapter so that iOS 5.0 on it will not only display true 1080p, but also project/AirPlay it. Right?
Sure, if the rumor's true.
Quote:
The confusion here, is that iOS 5.0 will probably also run on 15+ million iPad 1 & 2 units. But the display adapter on these units is only 1024x768 -- a lower hardware resolution than needed for true 1080p.
And that's where you're wrong. The iPad 2 has always done 1080p out for video, even with iOS 4. iOS 5 will definitely keep that.
We have people running iOS 5 and using 1080p content already.
Then you know something I don't know. But ask them if the 1080p content displays without scaling. If so, I apologize, and Apple has been hiding higher capable hardware in iPad 1 and/or 2 units, which only being "unlocked" with iOS 5.0.
I'd much rather have a camera with a faster shutter than one with higher resolution. When I look at my iPhone 4 pictures, most problems have to do with blurred movement, not lack of resolution.
But if you increase the shutter speed, there wouldn't be enough of an exposure unless they were able to increase shutter sensitivity and/or reduce noise, so that you'd be shooting at a higher ISO. But reducing noise is tough on such a small sensor. And the lens is so small, you're probably shooting at the equivalent of at least f11, so you're already stopped down quite a bit and without a larger lens, there's no way to open the lens more.
But you're right about resolution. Higher resolution will compound the problem because the photosites on the sensor will be closer together, generating heat, which causes noise in the image.
But that's the compromise when you shoot with a small lens/sensor. It's amazing it gets the quality that it does. While smartphone cameras are starting to kill off the low end of the point-and-shoot camera business, that's the difference between them. The larger the lens and sensor, the more quality you're usually going to get (and vice-versa). That's why pros shoot with "full frame" bodies - with sensors that are at lesat the same size as 35mm film was (36x24mm).
We've got a width of 2048 pixels. that is the 16. 2048/16=128
So we need to calculate whether, after letterboxing, there will be 1080 lines available vertically.
Let's see - so we have a total of 1536 lines available. We need 9 blocks of pixels, the same size as before, in order to dispay the height.
Each block of pixels is 128 pixels. So 9 * 128 = 1152!
Plenty of pixels to display HD in 1080p. Is my math correct? Anybody?
Except if we're responding to the birthersXXXXXXXX strict 1080p-ers, the horizontal needs to be exactly 1080*16/9 = 1920, so we'll need to drop 2048-1920 = 128 of horizontal pixels (2 64-pixel pillars) to allow an un-stretched 1080p by-the-numbers display, leading to a black surround of the whole video.
If I can find one, the first 1080p video I watch on such a display will show angels dancing on the head of a pin.
We've got a width of 2048 pixels. that is the 16. 2048/16=128
So we need to calculate whether, after letterboxing, there will be 1080 lines available vertically.
Let's see - so we have a total of 1536 lines available. We need 9 blocks of pixels, the same size as before, in order to dispay the height.
Each block of pixels is 128 pixels. So 9 * 128 = 1152!
Plenty of pixels to display HD in 1080p. Is my math correct? Anybody?
Just to clarify - I think you are asking about the number of pixels in a 16:9 subset of the rumored doubled iPad3 4:3 (16:12) screen size of 2048 x 1536.
That would be 2048 horizontal (all of them) and 1536 x 9/12 = 1152 vertical, with 192 pixel high blank borders top and bottom in 16:9 mode.
My guess is that this alleged 1/3 higher resolution iPad is just an engineering sample and not intended as a production candidate. It'll never get beyond the DVT stage.
Apple prototypes hundreds of devices a year and only a few designs make it to market. It would make sense that there would be some oddities like this speculated one.
If, by "hundreds", you in fact mean "several", then yes, I agree.
Comments
movies not being in 16:9 but a much wider aspect ratio that will also be cropped or letterboxed
For the record, most movies are shot in 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 This compares to 1.33:1 (4:3) and 1.77:1 (16:9).
A movie shot in 1.85:1 is very close to HD-TV's 1.77:1, so it can be shown on HD-TV without letterboxing and very little loss of edge information. But a movie shot in 2:39:1 would require significant horizontal cropping or letterboxing to fit a 1080p display. There are some "cinema" rated TVs and projectors with wider aspect ratios. A 2.37:1 display (and adapter!) resolution equals 2560x1080 (as opposed to 1080p's 1920x1080).
But unless the iPad 1 or 2 has a display ADAPTER capable of generating 1080p's 2 million pixels in the first place,
Seriously, what are you talking about? Do you know how outputting to a display/projector works? Do you know what happens?
Also, the iPad doesn't do "480p" natively and the adapters do up convert to 1080p.
Plenty of pixels to display HD in 1080p. Is my math correct? Anybody?
Yes -- PLENTY of pixels for iPad 3 to display 1080p. Perhaps it's my fault to assume that iPad 1 & iPad 2 will ALSO be upgradeable to iOS5. THOSE devices won't be able to display true 1080p.
We are talking about two different things here: iOS 5.0 software upgrade and iPad 3 hardware upgrade. I think the original contention was: "iOS 5 will allow 1080p". Probably TRUE on iPad 3 (rumors), probably false for 15+ million iPad 1/2 owners.
THOSE devices won't be able to display true 1080p.
Unless you use a projector or external display. YES.
I think the original contention was: "iOS 5 will allow 1080p". Probably TRUE on iPad 3 (rumors), probably false for 15+ million iPad 1/2 owners.
No, it's not false. We have people running iOS 5 and using 1080p content already.
We are talking about two different things here: iOS 5.0 software upgrade and iPad 3 hardware upgrade. I think the original contention was: "iOS 5 will allow 1080p". Probably TRUE on iPad 3 (rumors), probably false for 15+ million iPad 1/2 owners.
Looking at the article, it is all about the hardware. iOS is mentioned in passing, in relation to whether or not the iPad3 will have a higher rez display.
Other people started bringing in crazy references like "well not all movies are 16:9" and "you guys don't know the difference between storing digital files, playing rejiggered files downconverted to fit the screen, and outputting to an external HD display" and other cranky stuff.
Nice to know that the new iPad will finally be able to display HD content in HD resolution on the screen built into the device.
Do you know how outputting to a display/projector works?.
Sure I do. I've been working with technology 34 years and was at IBM when the first PC came out in 1981. But I'm as human as the next Nerd and can make mistakes. I think we're just misunderstanding each other (comparing apples to oranges, if you'll ignore the pun!).
Based on the rumors, it sounds as if iPad 3 will have a much higher (4x) resolution 2048x1536) display adapter so that iOS 5.0 on it will not only display true 1080p, but also project/AirPlay it. Right?
The confusion here, is that iOS 5.0 will probably also run on 15+ million iPad 1 & 2 units. But the display adapter on these units is only 1024x768 -- a lower hardware resolution than needed for true 1080p.
A software upgrade such as iOS 5.0 cannot by itself fulfill new hardware requirements. So unless Apple included a 2 megapixel display adapter in iPad 1 and 2 units but restricted it to 1024x768, and is only now "unlocking" this hardware with iOS 5.0, owners of older iPads won't be able to AirPlay/project true 1080p video. Right?
It's like if hackers could convert HD-TV firmware (software) on older HD-TVs to make them 3D HD-TVs...
Nice to know that the new iPad will finally be able to display HD content in HD resolution on the screen built into the device.
But we DON'T know this.
Based on the rumors, it sounds as if iPad 3 will have a much higher (4x) resolution 2048x1536) display adapter so that iOS 5.0 on it will not only display true 1080p, but also project/AirPlay it. Right?
Sure, if the rumor's true.
The confusion here, is that iOS 5.0 will probably also run on 15+ million iPad 1 & 2 units. But the display adapter on these units is only 1024x768 -- a lower hardware resolution than needed for true 1080p.
And that's where you're wrong. The iPad 2 has always done 1080p out for video, even with iOS 4. iOS 5 will definitely keep that.
We have people running iOS 5 and using 1080p content already.
Then you know something I don't know. But ask them if the 1080p content displays without scaling. If so, I apologize, and Apple has been hiding higher capable hardware in iPad 1 and/or 2 units, which only being "unlocked" with iOS 5.0.
The iPad 2 has always done 1080p out for video
I see that in the specs, but according to this... http://hd.engadget.com/2011/03/02/th...g-to-see-here/
...it can't do 1080p H.264, only 720p H.264. How exactly are your people showing 1080p?
Whoops, you're right. http://lockergnome.net/questions/127...or-1080p-video
Nope.
It will not play 1080p content. It upconverts (or the TV upconverts) from 720p.
Look at the section on codecs. It cannot even play 1080p, much less display it, and cannot even output it over HDMI.
The best you can possibly be doing is displaying 720p content upconverted to a 1080p screen.
Will iOS5 be able to play true HD? The iPad3 seems to be able to display it, if the OS can deal with it...
I'd much rather have a camera with a faster shutter than one with higher resolution. When I look at my iPhone 4 pictures, most problems have to do with blurred movement, not lack of resolution.
But if you increase the shutter speed, there wouldn't be enough of an exposure unless they were able to increase shutter sensitivity and/or reduce noise, so that you'd be shooting at a higher ISO. But reducing noise is tough on such a small sensor. And the lens is so small, you're probably shooting at the equivalent of at least f11, so you're already stopped down quite a bit and without a larger lens, there's no way to open the lens more.
But you're right about resolution. Higher resolution will compound the problem because the photosites on the sensor will be closer together, generating heat, which causes noise in the image.
But that's the compromise when you shoot with a small lens/sensor. It's amazing it gets the quality that it does. While smartphone cameras are starting to kill off the low end of the point-and-shoot camera business, that's the difference between them. The larger the lens and sensor, the more quality you're usually going to get (and vice-versa). That's why pros shoot with "full frame" bodies - with sensors that are at lesat the same size as 35mm film was (36x24mm).
It will not play 1080p content. It upconverts (or the TV upconverts) from 720p.
NOPE. If you'd pay attention to the rest of the thread, it does 1080p video. In iOS 5, it'll do 1080p video even straight from the Movies app.
Look at the section on codecs. It cannot even play 1080p, much less display it, and cannot even output it over HDMI.
Except that's iOS 4. in iOS 5 you can do 1080.
Will iOS5 be able to play true HD?
Since we already know the answer is yes, yes.
The iPad3 seems to be able to display it,
You keep acting like you know this.
Nope.
It will not play 1080p content. It upconverts (or the TV upconverts) from 720p.
Look at the section on codecs. It cannot even play 1080p, much less display it, and cannot even output it over HDMI.
The best you can possibly be doing is displaying 720p content upconverted to a 1080p screen.
Will iOS5 be able to play true HD? The iPad3 seems to be able to display it, if the OS can deal with it...
http://appadvice.com/appnn/2011/06/f...y-capabilities
Not sure for video but for games it will be able to output FullHD i.e. 1080p.
"The upcoming AirPlay functionality of Real Racing 2 HD will provide the same experience as the current wired method.
? Full-screen, gorgeous 1080p (1920 x 1080) visuals
? No black borders
? No scaling ? full HD
? Silky smooth 30 frames per second
? Dual-screen racing ? real time telemetry on your iPad 2"
OK, I'll attempt the arithmetic.
We've got a width of 2048 pixels. that is the 16. 2048/16=128
So we need to calculate whether, after letterboxing, there will be 1080 lines available vertically.
Let's see - so we have a total of 1536 lines available. We need 9 blocks of pixels, the same size as before, in order to dispay the height.
Each block of pixels is 128 pixels. So 9 * 128 = 1152!
Plenty of pixels to display HD in 1080p. Is my math correct? Anybody?
Except if we're responding to the birthersXXXXXXXX strict 1080p-ers, the horizontal needs to be exactly 1080*16/9 = 1920, so we'll need to drop 2048-1920 = 128 of horizontal pixels (2 64-pixel pillars) to allow an un-stretched 1080p by-the-numbers display, leading to a black surround of the whole video.
If I can find one, the first 1080p video I watch on such a display will show angels dancing on the head of a pin.
OK, I'll attempt the arithmetic.
We've got a width of 2048 pixels. that is the 16. 2048/16=128
So we need to calculate whether, after letterboxing, there will be 1080 lines available vertically.
Let's see - so we have a total of 1536 lines available. We need 9 blocks of pixels, the same size as before, in order to dispay the height.
Each block of pixels is 128 pixels. So 9 * 128 = 1152!
Plenty of pixels to display HD in 1080p. Is my math correct? Anybody?
Just to clarify - I think you are asking about the number of pixels in a 16:9 subset of the rumored doubled iPad3 4:3 (16:12) screen size of 2048 x 1536.
That would be 2048 horizontal (all of them) and 1536 x 9/12 = 1152 vertical, with 192 pixel high blank borders top and bottom in 16:9 mode.
If so then your math is correct.
My guess is that this alleged 1/3 higher resolution iPad is just an engineering sample and not intended as a production candidate. It'll never get beyond the DVT stage.
Apple prototypes hundreds of devices a year and only a few designs make it to market. It would make sense that there would be some oddities like this speculated one.
If, by "hundreds", you in fact mean "several", then yes, I agree.
If, by "hundreds", you in fact mean "several", then yes, I agree.
The original iPhone had hundreds of designs. What makes you think any other device doesn't get the same treatment?
2a x 2b = 4ab