Originally Posted by Owen
Since video has no sharpness at the pixel level why on earth would we care about how sharp the edges of pixels are or how sharp 1:1 mapped digitally created test patterns look when they have no relationship to real world video?
Owen James Cameron is moving to New Zealand. Perhaps you could drop by and see him to put things into perspective. Ask him if he is going back to NTSC or PAL?
Seriously people look at computer data screens just as much as we look at video. Did you forget this aspect?
The competition (flat panels) have no lens to soften the image quality or three panels with all sorts of added (and easily observable) alignment distortions. Projection system should be transparent as possible or else consumers will naturally switch over. This means the optical path should be of camera quality.
Any softening of the image should be left to the engineers. The transmission, storage or reproducing display system should in in no way alter the image.
HD camera and mastering techniques are constantly evolving. Most of us can see the result of improved MTF/contrast in every stage of the capturing and mastering chain. Thank you James Cameron for raising the standards.
Audio went through a similar evolution. Digital filters improved greatly over time and are able today to capture high frequencies close to the Nyquist limit. Again, its the mastering engineer who selects to add low level dither or increase bit depth.
Consumer audio systems should not be adding noise, distortion or resample. Realizing just how bad mp3 degraded a generation of listener enjoyment, Steve Jobs was planning to go to 24 bits. These are the leaders who are making our lives more enjoyable.
This is what high fidelity or high technology is all about. People will pay for the best quality experience. Hopefully the very expensive Sony 4K display will resolve 4K resolution. (the less expensive Sony projector have issues resolve 1080. see Kris Deering's review of the 95ES). If not 80-90" flat panels will - and for much less.