I think it was AMD that said 16k per eye, think VR, is what they consider "the" limit of human vision.
The real problem is that human vision is not based on quanta. It's more analog, where the center of vision is incredibly sensitive, and we can pick up artifacts by the quantization of images.
I'm thinking eye tracking will allow for dynamic resolution. That way the entire screen doesn't have to be rendered at max resolution, just the parts in the center of vision.
The biggest problem is the display. Dense displays are hard to make, and thus expensive. There's current effort to cleanly embed a "microdisplay" that provides high resolution in the center of the viewing area. And efforts to make it mobile via mirrors and prisms, so that it can exist where eye-tracking says your eye is pointed.
Well, if the pixels are too small to discern even via VR the "non real life" look would be due to compression artifacts and color banding, not due to resolution. Compression artifacts and banding are much more pronounced in quite dark scenes, where a greater problem than color banding is basically "brightness banding". Limiting compression or using a more efficient codec can partially or fully resolve the issue of the artifacts. Employing 12-bit per color sources and monitors would in turn get rid of the color/brightness banding. At the very least true 10-bit monitors and sources need to be used as a bare minimum. Doing both means much larger file sizes and more expensive devices, but that's the trade-off of life like VR.
Maybe a quote that applies to what i said instead of a random one that doesn't? Fact is higher rez requires more scaling, no matter size. A 8k phone screen would just chew through every battery, apps would not scale right, so many problems.
Most people don't actually. Believe it or not most people don't have unlimited data plans, which is what the point of watching on the road vs why bother using phone when you are at home on wifi. lol
This is just another way for Corning to sell product. 8K has nothing to do with any of this. There’s nothing so different about the way 8K displays are manufactured that requires special glass, and Apple has been using IGZO screens for years for iPads, and even phones. I believe they use them for other machines as well. Larger screens aren’t made any differently. They just aren’t cut down as much to smaller sizes.
"Since all materials have a different crystal lattice" This is false. Many materials share the same crystal lattice. For example, Sodium Chloride, Magnesium Oxide, and tons of other materials have the face-centered-cubic lattice.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
27 Comments
Back to Article
HStewart - Wednesday, May 15, 2019 - link
Any idea on cost, these sound expensive more than $10,000 Samsung 8K TV I saw last Sunday at BestBuy.shabby - Wednesday, May 15, 2019 - link
Does this glass support 16k? Lolbcronce - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
I think it was AMD that said 16k per eye, think VR, is what they consider "the" limit of human vision.The real problem is that human vision is not based on quanta. It's more analog, where the center of vision is incredibly sensitive, and we can pick up artifacts by the quantization of images.
I'm thinking eye tracking will allow for dynamic resolution. That way the entire screen doesn't have to be rendered at max resolution, just the parts in the center of vision.
SteveX107 - Friday, May 17, 2019 - link
Some VR headsets already have eye tracking. However, I think the most difficult problem is projecting a processor to handle that resolutionLord of the Bored - Saturday, May 18, 2019 - link
The biggest problem is the display. Dense displays are hard to make, and thus expensive.There's current effort to cleanly embed a "microdisplay" that provides high resolution in the center of the viewing area. And efforts to make it mobile via mirrors and prisms, so that it can exist where eye-tracking says your eye is pointed.
Santoval - Monday, May 20, 2019 - link
Well, if the pixels are too small to discern even via VR the "non real life" look would be due to compression artifacts and color banding, not due to resolution. Compression artifacts and banding are much more pronounced in quite dark scenes, where a greater problem than color banding is basically "brightness banding". Limiting compression or using a more efficient codec can partially or fully resolve the issue of the artifacts. Employing 12-bit per color sources and monitors would in turn get rid of the color/brightness banding. At the very least true 10-bit monitors and sources need to be used as a bare minimum. Doing both means much larger file sizes and more expensive devices, but that's the trade-off of life like VR.imaheadcase - Wednesday, May 15, 2019 - link
"Corning expects its Astra Glass to be used for tablets, laptops, "As if people will even use 8k on those devices. lol
FunBunny2 - Wednesday, May 15, 2019 - link
"Nobody will ever need more than 640K"-- William Gates
coburn_c - Wednesday, May 15, 2019 - link
He must be the one keeping all the 4k phones at bay.imaheadcase - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
Nah, what keeps them at bay is people like to have a phone battery that lasts vs one that needs to be charged every 8 hours. lolimaheadcase - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
Maybe a quote that applies to what i said instead of a random one that doesn't?Fact is higher rez requires more scaling, no matter size. A 8k phone screen would just chew through every battery, apps would not scale right, so many problems.
damianrobertjones - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
Please include the ENTIRE statement... .dullard - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
Except William Gates put that as the LOWER limit, not the upper limit.Lord of the Bored - Saturday, May 18, 2019 - link
"640 by 480 should be enough for anybody."brunis.dk - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
"Nobody will ever watch FullHD movies on a tiny screen, what would be the point?" -anonymousimaheadcase - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
Most people don't actually. Believe it or not most people don't have unlimited data plans, which is what the point of watching on the road vs why bother using phone when you are at home on wifi. loljordanclock - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
High pixel density =/= 8K for all of these devices.The very first paragraph outlines the range of uses for this improved glass.
SteveX107 - Friday, May 17, 2019 - link
Maybe, in the future, we will have a foldable phone which you can use as a TV, tooLord of the Bored - Saturday, May 18, 2019 - link
We can but hope!olafgarten - Wednesday, May 15, 2019 - link
The Oxide is redundant, IGZO stands for Iridium Gallium Zinc Oxidewillis936 - Wednesday, May 15, 2019 - link
Maybe it’s Iridium Gallium Zinc Dioxide.ingwe - Wednesday, May 15, 2019 - link
It is Indium and not Iridium. Which is good because there is even less Iridium available than Indium.sorten - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
I still haven't moved to 2.5Kmelgross - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
This is just another way for Corning to sell product. 8K has nothing to do with any of this. There’s nothing so different about the way 8K displays are manufactured that requires special glass, and Apple has been using IGZO screens for years for iPads, and even phones. I believe they use them for other machines as well. Larger screens aren’t made any differently. They just aren’t cut down as much to smaller sizes.Don’t believe the hype.
Skeptical123 - Thursday, May 16, 2019 - link
Smart move by Corning to expand it business.A-Tech-fan-55 - Friday, May 17, 2019 - link
"Since all materials have a different crystal lattice"This is false. Many materials share the same crystal lattice. For example, Sodium Chloride, Magnesium Oxide, and tons of other materials have the face-centered-cubic lattice.
urbanman2004 - Friday, June 28, 2019 - link
I didn't realize how versatile Corning was until I watched this mini documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lopwv2ViNMw&t=...