Simon Edmondson Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29940270 A friend posted this link to a story on the BBC about the implications of 4K for animators. Perhaps of interest ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fae_alba Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Sort of begs the question of why adopt such a technology. Just because you can is no reason to do it. I quite frankly don't see any lack of quality with the current animated movies being released, so where is the gain in doubling the image quality? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuchur Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 I do not see a real big advantage neighter... it does make sense for hardware manufacturer, but that's it. You will need faster hardware to play the 4k videos at those framerates... that means: faster cpus, faster gpus, better displays, better batteries to keep the displays with much higher resolution runnin while being able to support the better graphiccards, etc. The viewing experience will not rise significantly if you ask me... movies should be watch a little away from the TV set and like that you just do not need 300 dpi there. Nobody could tell the difference from 5m away. Okay you can create bigger TVs, but lets face it: Most people can not even fit a 65" and up TV into their living rooms... It just does not make much sense at all too me... FullHD is a great resolution which fullfills very high standards even for people with laptops or other computer displays in most cases. Yes, if you are really after 300dpi it will not be enough, but I do not see why you need that when most people's eyes are not able to see that anyway... But I doubt that we will be able to stay away from it... and I even doubt it will stopp there... we will see 8k and even 16k displays following that just because the manufactureres will need it and bigger numbers always sell better, right? See you *Fuchur* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*A:M User* Shelton Posted November 19, 2014 *A:M User* Share Posted November 19, 2014 Can not imagine the render times?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hash Fellow robcat2075 Posted November 19, 2014 Hash Fellow Share Posted November 19, 2014 Illumination currently has 20,000 computers in a "render farm"... That would mean for a 90 minute film, at 24 fps, each computer only contributes about 6 frames. Res is a cost problem but I think the 48fps will be worse for animators. You'll have to start making explicit holds where before just passing through a keyframe at 24fps might have been enough for it to register. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuchur Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 48/50fps is actually FullHD... 4k at best should run at 60fps... makes it even worth... See you *Fuchur* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.