Wrong. I'm a consumer and I want it.
Terry, you're using a single outcome as the basis of your argument, when there are many bases to argue. 4K in your 12' living room. OK that might not be realized by the average consumer. But the uses of higher resolution media in production, post, and delivery have huge, undeniable benefits in all arenas. Just because you think you can't discern it on a TV doesn't mean someone can't resolve that detail in a large auditorium, or on a retina computer screen, or in whatever is to come (holographic TV, headset stereo TV, etc.). There are so many benefits to having a highest available resolution source that outweigh the ONE detraction you are using as a reason to argue against it.On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 2:24 PM, tcurren@aol.com [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
This is the ultimate scam of this century. Billions will spent on infrastructure for something 99 percent of the people will never see and absolutely no consumer I know is asking for.
---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <davidadodson@...> wrote :I could not agree with you more, Bouke. However, that said, many sales outlets are requiring 4K masters now, and so producers are getting jittery about deliverables.
On May 8, 2015, at 10:18 AM, 'Edit B' bouke@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Yeah, but that touches another point.The scaling algorithm will make a HUGE impact on the end result.Bouke(Who actually thinks that 'future proofing' to 4K is nonsense,and except high budget movies the whole 4K is nonsense / emperors clothes,and the whole reason the porn industry 'went 4K' has to do with a 1K (USD) bmd cam.)Now, who can give me a torrent for 'Dark star' , in HD that isn't a blown up VHS copy?
__._,_.___
Posted by: Mark Spano <cutandcover@gmail.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (18) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment