Will the new OLED display 4:4:4 without any issues and will content providers (4k blu-rays) give us at least 4:2:2? - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 56 Old 10-02-2013, 09:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

"Raw", meaning they're capturing the bayer pattern itself?  That seems very weird, but you're right in that it gives you the best the camera can possibly give you.
Yes, Red's cameras shoot raw video, just like DSLRs shoot raw images. Basically they just record the values for each photosite as-is, and it's processed on your computer after the fact, rather than the image quality being set at the time of capture by the camera's debayering algorithms.

Processing raw data gives you significantly more flexibility with the adjustments you can make to the image compared to "pre-baked" files.
Chronoptimist is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 56 Old 10-02-2013, 11:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Glimmie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 7,917
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Liked: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

"Raw", meaning they're capturing the bayer pattern itself?  That seems very weird, but you're right in that it gives you the best the camera can possibly give you.

Yes, single sensor cameras employ chroma sub sampling right form the start. So all this 4:2:0, 4:2:2 talk versus 4:4:4 is a bit misleading. This is nothing new, back in the video camera days industrial and later consumer cameras all resorted to single or two tube configurations in higher end models. The optical color filtering process was similar to Bayer. But the broadcast grade cameras always used three tubes for full chroma resolution. It was only at the NTSC encoding stage where the chrominance was limited.

A Bayer camera does not capture X:X:X bandwidth but rather an X:Y:Y or X:Y:Z aka 4:2:2 or 4:2:1. What we do have today is the computer horsepower to estimate the missing pixels quite accurately. But no,it's not 100%.

And different de-Bayer algorithms produce subtle difference in color reroduction due to the interpolation. the use of .RAW files only means you can try different de-Bayer algorithms, use different algorithms for different shots, and later use more advanced algorithms if practical.

But make no mistake, a Bayer sensor IS NOT full RGB bandwidth.

Glimmie's HT Page
Being redone - comming soon!

Glimmie is offline  
post #33 of 56 Old 10-02-2013, 04:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Also, consider on-the-fly downconversion of bayer single-sensor.

So you can effectively have 4:4:4 equivalence with a Bayer camera, because the chroma subsampling could be done at the original native resolution (e.g. 4K) before downconversion (e.g. 1080p). The sensor would have enough spatial separation of all color components (red/green/blue) that when converting bayer to chroma-separated formats, the resulting image appears practically effectively 4:4:4-equivalent with full 1080p chroma detail, with (by all practical means) identical resolution-resolving detail in both luma test patterns & chroma test patterns, when using cable connections that transmits in 4:4:4...

Downconverting a sufficiently-high-enough-resolution bayer (4K, 5K, etc) will, in real world, pretty much practically max out the RGB bandwidth of 1080p.

RED Digital Cinema can do this. I've seen sharper images from a bayer-full-resolution-capture-downconvert-to-1080p, than from true 3-CCD-1080p, so obviously, other inefficiencies are at play (e.g. leakage between adjacent CCD pixels, CCD quality, diffraction, etc.)

Some cameras are now doing good real-time downconverting from a full sensor readout (instead of doing ugly pixel-skipped readouts), so that you can no longer detect differences in chroma/luma resolutions in the outputted resolution...

This is why I say, effectively, you can now pretty much (by all practical purposes >99%) max out RGB bandwidth of a destination resolution, from a sufficiently-enough overkill of a bayer sensor. There may be inefficiencies (faint nyquist artifacts, light sensitivity reductions caused by filters, etc) but resolution-wise, it's not an issue -- we're already past diminishing point of returns once you're using high-quality sensors several times the resolution of the destination format you want to max-out the RGB bandwidth of.

Not all cameras are there. But we're technologically there.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #34 of 56 Old 10-02-2013, 05:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
It is probably best to upsample, process, and then downsample if necessary. Raw processing is quite sophisticated these days, and simply taking one of the color channels and treating it as if it were the full resolution image is not likely to produce good results.

You could certainly do this with 4:2:0 4K content on a 1080p display, as that has been through the mastering process. Even so, I suspect that with really good chroma upsampling, it may still be beneficial to upsample first, and downsample to 1080p rather than display it 1:1 on a 1080p display.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #35 of 56 Old 10-02-2013, 05:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Glimmie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 7,917
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Liked: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

Also, consider on-the-fly downconversion of bayer single-sensor.

So you can effectively have 4:4:4 equivalence with a Bayer camera, because the chroma subsampling could be done at the original native resolution (e.g. 4K) before downconversion (e.g. 1080p). The sensor would have enough spatial separation of all color components (red/green/blue) that when converting bayer to chroma-separated formats, the resulting image appears practically effectively 4:4:4-equivalent with full 1080p chroma detail, with (by all practical means) identical resolution-resolving detail in both luma test patterns & chroma test patterns, when using cable connections that transmits in 4:4:4...

Downconverting a sufficiently-high-enough-resolution bayer (4K, 5K, etc) will, in real world, pretty much practically max out the RGB bandwidth of 1080p.

Absolutely, if you oversample.

Glimmie's HT Page
Being redone - comming soon!

Glimmie is offline  
post #36 of 56 Old 10-04-2013, 09:43 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
JediFonger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 12
some of the last few posts are over my head. can you guys link me some online material i can study up on bayer and color channels? are you saying that digital capture is already capturing at 35mm resolution or not? hard to decipher.

so all this talk about color depth is useless or do i still have a point? do we need to rise up and tell content providers to start encoding future 4k blu-rays in higher color depths or not?

to the edge of eternity and depth of infinity, stupidity knows no bound.
JediFonger is offline  
post #37 of 56 Old 10-04-2013, 10:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediFonger View Post

some of the last few posts are over my head. can you guys link me some online material i can study up on bayer and color channels? are you saying that digital capture is already capturing at 35mm resolution or not? hard to decipher.

so all this talk about color depth is useless or do i still have a point? do we need to rise up and tell content providers to start encoding future 4k blu-rays in higher color depths or not?

 

Be clear here.  Color "depth" is the number of bits used to describe any one color component.  (Please folks, no YCC lecture here).  The 4:4:4 business has to do with chroma sub-sampling, where they spatially draw the color component at a lower resolution than the luma information.  The bayer filter is simply a way of arranging elements in a sensor (think of these as the reverse of subpixels) to best represent the sensitivities of the eye.  Because our eyes are mostly sensitive to green (twice so than red, and 6 times so over blue, give or take), there are usually more green filtered sensors.  You get things that look like this:

 


There are other patterns, that cleverly add things like "white" sensors and/or further reduce the amount dedicated to blue, etc.  But in the simplest RGBG (RGGB, etc.) case, all you do is hack raw resolution in half in each direction, because 4 sensors is all you need to complete the pixel.

 

I think you will like the diagrams and explanations on this page a lot.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #38 of 56 Old 10-04-2013, 07:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 96
tgm1024 has an excellent answer to the first part of your question. Now addressing the second part of the question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediFonger View Post

...are you saying that digital capture is already capturing at 35mm resolution or not? hard to decipher.
Strictly speaking about spatial resolution -- we're already technologically well past 35mm quality already, as a civilization. Extreme case: Just look at NHK 8K sample video at the demos they've given, and you'll see something more closely resembling IMAX resolution rather than 35mm resolution.

We'll likely soon have 8K bayer cameras downconverted to 4K for today's Digital Cinema, practically maxing out the RGB bandwidth of 4K. It's already started: RED has 5K cameras already, There's the Sony F65 too, 6K resolution (some say 8K, but without controversy). These are already giving you oversampling for 4K too to use up more RGB bandwidth, it already starts to approximately resembles 4:4:4 more often than 4:2:2 in resolution tests (apples to oranges, I know, but, strictly speaking, in terms of equivalent chroma resolution, like a red/black resolution test pattern). A lot of the 5K oversamples I've seen, easily surpass 35mm resolution. Even IMAX downconverted to 4K still looks sharper than 35mm film. On today's 4K digital cinema projectors, oversampled bayer downconverts to 4K already surpass typical 35mm resolution. Throwing another monkey wrench: It depends on the variables. Plain multiplex print? Master 35mm reel? Print from an IMAX? The quality of the grey matter of the people creating the viewing material? Straight 4K-bayer-to-4K-projection may not always outperform pristine 35mm master reels (the type reserved for Mann's Chinese Theater, and other flagship theaters) or really good 35mm prints of an IMAX reel, but it already outperforms multiplex prints on common 35mm projectors (now mostly discontinued in North America). Even 2K digital projection is an observed resolution improvement over a worn print on a crappy multiplex projector. (let's ignore other dynamics for now -- e.g. dynamic range -- which is another ball of wax altogether).

Resolution-wise, I've seen great 1080p that greatly outperforms poor 35mm, and I've seen 35mm outperform poor 4K.
But on average, right now, we well past the technological point where digital resolution can made to easily outperform 35mm film resolution.

Most multiplex digital cinema projectors are just 2K. So some of what you thought was 4K is actually only 2K. And make sure, if you're watching a 4K projector at the theater, it's playing good 4K material rather than 2K. On those, those presentations definitely consistently surpass 35mm resolution (unless the multiplex has neglected the projector's maintenance -- as so often happens!). Example is the movie "Oblivion" which used zero film (good example of oversampling to almost max out 4K RGB bandwidth). It even resembles IMAX resolution more than than 35mm! A bit blurrier than true IMAX, but way sharper than 35mm. And we're not even yet at widespread true 8K bayer sensors for practically maxed-out RGB bandwidth.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #39 of 56 Old 10-09-2013, 08:19 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
JediFonger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 12
thanks tgm1024, that was super-helpful. i remembered reading stuff like that... many years ago but haven't continued my 'studies' in reading about it. dang it's crazy 2/3 of full light is simply discarded! smile.gif

so that this mean that our discussion for re-encoding current film content in greater than 8-bit color is useless since the source (when digitizing) all along the production chain is still stuck at 8bit?

it woulud seem to me that film restoration chain will have to upgrade everything on the chain to better than8 to have a useful restoration. otherwise, it seems all this is uselss talk if the entire chain is stuck at 8bit.

to the edge of eternity and depth of infinity, stupidity knows no bound.
JediFonger is offline  
post #40 of 56 Old 10-09-2013, 08:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Most cameras are shooting 14-bit or greater these days.
Even with an 8-bit source, when you are compressing content, it is more efficient to use higher bit-depths.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #41 of 56 Old 10-09-2013, 11:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediFonger View Post

thanks tgm1024, that was super-helpful. i remembered reading stuff like that... many years ago but haven't continued my 'studies' in reading about it. dang it's crazy 2/3 of full light is simply discarded! smile.gif

 

There are solutions to a lot of that.  One such solution is to have a white light sensor embeded in it all.  That becomes a bit interesting, because they're able to then use the overall "gray component" of the RGB triad in addition to the RGB individually.  Or at least that's the way I'd code it.

 

There are other solutions I've seen as well which split the light onto 3 discrete sensor arrays.  The sensors are each getting 1/3rd of the total, but each element of which is able to be substantially larger (and hence more sensitive).  I first discovered that little trick about 10 years ago for consumer video cameras.

 

And then there's the simple process of putting the wiring for the sensors actually underneath the sensor (instead of on top).  The others here I'm sure know of many other tricks to mitigate the loss of light.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #42 of 56 Old 10-19-2013, 10:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Most cameras are shooting 14-bit or greater these days.
Even with an 8-bit source, when you are compressing content, it is more efficient to use higher bit-depths.

 

Well all they need to do is lower the effective resolution (using more sensors per pixel) and the bit depth increases.  "Over Megapixel" the sensor, and you get zilch.

 

Or are you talking about the native color resolution of each sensor natively?


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #43 of 56 Old 10-19-2013, 10:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Well all they need to do is lower the effective resolution (using more sensors per pixel) and the bit depth increases.  "Over Megapixel" the sensor, and you get zilch.
Or are you talking about the native color resolution of each sensor natively?
I mean the cameras are recording values from 0-16383 for each pixel (14-bit) which means there's a lot better gradation and more flexibility/dynamic range available when editing. For example:

fh5JZhts.jpg
Source
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #44 of 56 Old 10-20-2013, 12:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

I mean the cameras are recording values from 0-16384 for each pixel (14-bit) which means there's a lot better gradation and more flexibility/dynamic range available when editing.
Or 0 to 16383.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #45 of 56 Old 10-20-2013, 02:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Well all they need to do is lower the effective resolution (using more sensors per pixel) and the bit depth increases.  "Over Megapixel" the sensor, and you get zilch.
Or are you talking about the native color resolution of each sensor natively?
I mean the cameras are recording values from 0-16384 for each pixel (14-bit) which means there's a lot better gradation and more flexibility/dynamic range available when editing. For example:

fh5JZhts.jpg
Source

 

No, I understand that of course.  (odd number of course at the end: 0 to 2^bitnum -1).  I was asking if you were commenting about the subpixel sensors sensitivity, not the overall pixel.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #46 of 56 Old 10-20-2013, 03:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

No, I understand that of course.  (odd number of course at the end: 0 to 2^bitnum -1).  I was asking if you were commenting about the subpixel sensors sensitivity, not the overall pixel.
Cameras don't really have "subpixels". The sensor has X amount of photosites, and they are then overlaid with color filters to produce color images. So each "subpixel" (photosite) should have 14-bit (or better) resolution.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #47 of 56 Old 10-20-2013, 08:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

No, I understand that of course.  (odd number of course at the end: 0 to 2^bitnum -1).  I was asking if you were commenting about the subpixel sensors sensitivity, not the overall pixel.
Cameras don't really have "subpixels". The sensor has X amount of photosites, and they are then overlaid with color filters to produce color images. So each "subpixel" (photosite) should have 14-bit (or better) resolution.

 

PMing you.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #48 of 56 Old 10-29-2013, 06:13 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
JediFonger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 12
i got my questions answered! http://www.avsforum.com/t/1496765/smpte-2013-uhd-symposium

it's about time someone gets what i'm thinking!!! :0 i hope the industry really adopts XYZ! sounds like that's about as future proof as you can get!!!

to the edge of eternity and depth of infinity, stupidity knows no bound.
JediFonger is offline  
post #49 of 56 Old 11-01-2013, 08:24 PM
Member
 
MrBonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Yes. 4:2:0 is totally enough! I REALLY enjoy seeing reds and purples destroyed by subsampling! Hurr durr.

4:4:4 consumer video playback of content filmed in 4:2:2 would even be an improvement because the color wouldn't be effectively sub-sampled TWICE.
(Once when filmed, again when re-compressed from 4:2:2 to 4:2:2 again or to 4:2:0)
MrBonk is offline  
post #50 of 56 Old 11-02-2013, 07:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBonk View Post

Yes. 4:2:0 is totally enough! I REALLY enjoy seeing reds and purples destroyed by subsampling! Hurr durr.

 

"Hurr durr"?  "Destroyed"?

 

*For video* you generally don't see it.  Yes, of course you can see a difference side by side, but the reds and purples aren't "destroyed" in chroma subsampling, each is at the same bit-depth they were before (<---many people get this wrong), the color components are just at a lower resolution.  Your eyes are just *not* as spatially sensitive to color as they are to luminescence.  And be clear: when looking at stationary items in 4:4:4, even if you're looking at a color high resolution line on a high resolution monitor, much of what makes it a "high resolution looking line" in the first place is the luma impact on your eyes, not the color component.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #51 of 56 Old 11-02-2013, 09:35 PM
Member
 
MrBonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
It's extremely easy to see color that has been sub-sampled.

And it's even easier when you know the difference.
MrBonk is offline  
post #52 of 56 Old 11-05-2013, 07:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by xianrenppsg View Post
 

yes,many other things that need to improve instead of just pixels. if we get 12 or 16bit 1080p, i will actually be happy with that!

32.gif

 

Bit depth (color depth) has nothing to do with chroma subsampling.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #53 of 56 Old 11-05-2013, 08:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBonk View Post

It's extremely easy to see color that has been sub-sampled.

And it's even easier when you know the difference.

 

If you're confining your statement to spatial resolution, then yes.  But it's not "extremely easy" for video at normal viewing distances, not 4:4:4 to 4:2:0.  For stationary graphics (such as for PC use, or gaming), yes, you have edge effects that can pop out at you.  But your statement:

Quote:
Yes. 4:2:0 is totally enough! I REALLY enjoy seeing reds and purples destroyed by subsampling! Hurr durr.

is incorrect.  Split your screen down the middle with the left red and the right purple.  At 4:4:4 there is no difference from 4:2:0; the colors themselves are left alone.  If the boundaries end on odd pixel boundaries, then at that transition point, you'll see the effects.

 

Are you thinking of the color compression that can occur when transfering from models to models, such as RGB->YCC->RGB when enough bits aren't used for the middle calculation?


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #54 of 56 Old 11-05-2013, 09:23 AM
 
vinnie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nunya
Posts: 11,657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 1010
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Bit depth (color depth) has nothing to do with chroma subsampling.
That's a spammer to which you responded (the parroting type).

Original post from page 1:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediFonger View Post

ok that makes the two of us tgm2014.

what i don't really get is avs folks who have many many pages on 4k, ultra HD this and 3D that, and all these newer awesome definition stuff... but totally neglect the fact that most of the contents we possess today are all still 8bit!!!! i wished they did 4:4:4 all the way back in the HDTV and built it into blu-ray.

instead... we are left with content that needs to catchup quite a bit. as far as i know, even the newer 4k specs currently being 'talked' about by content providers are still ignorant of the color depths. all people talk about is resolution... not realizing there's a heck of a lot more going on in there than just pixels... lumens, colors, grayscales, so many other things that need to improve instead of just pixels. if we get 12 or 16bit 1080p, i will actually be happy with that!!!!

why isn't there an uprising!! biggrin.gif
vinnie97 is offline  
post #55 of 56 Old 11-05-2013, 10:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,121
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 261 Post(s)
Liked: 660

^Whoa.  You can mentally keep track of a lot of stuff!


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #56 of 56 Old 11-05-2013, 02:13 PM
 
vinnie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nunya
Posts: 11,657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 1010
I wish...I think it's because I'm using Firefox and the manner in which it displays webpages. These parrots tend to insert an image at the end of their posts that fails to display and for a brief moment, I can detect the filename of said image before it vanishes from sight. I suppose we can call it quick-eyed if anything. smile.gif
vinnie97 is offline  
Reply Flat Panels General and OLED Technology

Tags
Sony

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off