|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Retina display = perfect smut viewing device? |
| 1-11 of 11 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 06-27-12 11:25pm - 4561 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
otoh (0)
Active User Posts: 159 Registered: Sep 17, '10 Location: UK |
Retina display = perfect smut viewing device? Has anyone seen the new Macbook Pro? The display is very impressive - 15" 2880x1800px. Most mid-range 15" laptops use 1366x768 - so this has 5 times the pixels in the same screen size and could essentially show a 3000px image full size. I'm mostly a Mac user but wouldn't get one of these now - it's daftly expensive but it's good to see what kind of tech will hopefully filter down to mainstream in the next few years - if you think of scaling that up to a larger screen, we may see perhaps a 22" screen capable of displaying a 5K image. It's definitely worth having an ogle, just to see how incredibly sharp it is - and to think how good it would be for ogling our favourite models  For those of us downloading and keeping pictures, that's a good reason to go for the higher-res ones... | |
|
||
| 06-28-12 06:59am - 4560 days | #2 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I use a projector, giving me a very nice 60" image.  | |
|
||
| 06-28-12 11:21am - 4560 days | #3 | |
|
jberryl69 (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,000 Registered: Nov 27, '10 Location: neverland |
I HAD a projector, but the last time I went to set it up the light source had burned out and at over $300 to replace it I just had to say "fuck it".  If it ain't grits, it must be a Yankee.If you're going to lay her head over the pool table and fuck her throat, get your fucking hand off her throat! | |
|
||
| 06-28-12 03:24pm - 4560 days | #4 | |
|
otoh (0)
Active User Posts: 159 Registered: Sep 17, '10 Location: UK |
Nice But... what resolution is your projector? It's probably XGA - 1024x768? So although the pictures are big, you don't see all the detail. With the out-of-my-reach new Apple laptop, you'd see pretty much every pixel of a 3000px image on there.Imagine if you projector could show eg Hegre-Art's ludicrous 80 megapixel images across those 60"... | |
|
||
| 06-28-12 06:02pm - 4560 days | #5 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Maybe he is using a 4K Digital Cinema Projector? I mean, those things have a native resolution of 4096 x 2160 and they can project an image over 100 feet wide. Of course, they also cost about 75,000 USD... "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 06-29-12 05:53am - 4559 days | #6 | |
|
gaypornolover (0)
Active User Posts: 153 Registered: Jul 09, '11 Location: Birmingham, UK |
I always get confused about display resolutions - I know generally the higher the better but isn't such a high resolution like that on a relatively small screen going to make everything tiny and difficult to see? I thought only big monitors could handle huge resolutions - or am I hopelessly behind the times?! | |
|
||
| 06-29-12 06:16am - 4559 days | #7 | |
|
otoh (0)
Active User Posts: 159 Registered: Sep 17, '10 Location: UK |
Good question - it depends on the OS. Typically, your OS elements - windows, controls, menus etc, are designed to a certain number of pixels; so following that, then yes, standard use of the computer on a monitor this high resolution will be difficult - everything will be too small! But OSs are becoming more resolution-independent; Mac OS will scale pretty much everything, Windows perhaps not so much (just a guess). So when you look at this computer, your menus, buttons, etc seem the same size as you'd expect; just they use more pixels, so are much sharper, crisper, than on a regular monitor. But I think it can deal with images smartly and show you them at 1:1 - so you'd see the same image but much, much sharper than you are used to, with more visible detail, without having to zoom in to see it. If you have, or have access to, an iPhone 4/4s (or another recent high-end smartphone), take a close look at it - you'll see you probably can't even see the pixels on the screen, they are so fine - then compare with your own PC monitor, where you can. I'm hoping in the next few years we'll be seeing that kind of resolution on our computers too. Edited on Jun 29, 2012, 06:36am | |
|
||
| 06-29-12 06:36am - 4559 days | #8 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
I do not have $75000 available for a projector. So, yes, mine is VGA 1024x768. But I disagree about not seeing the detail. There are several reasons for this. 1) I Often recrop images since the ones that are shot from further back are usually less blurry. I might therefore crop the central 1024x768 portion of a 6000x4000 image. 2) Size matters more than resolution. An image has more impact on me if it is lifesize even if I do not have the sharpness of detail created by the higher pixel count of a high resolution display. 3) I am not especially turned on by the ability to examine the contents of each skin pore. I am more interested in the expression on a model's face. 4) Most sites offering 80 megapixel images also use large format cameras at large lens apertures, resulting in 80 megapixels of blur. Higher resolution of viewing a blur does not add to my enjoyment. So I agree that a 6000x4000 image would be nicer viewed on a 6000x4000 projector than on a 1024x768 one. But I would rather see it on a 60" 1024x768 projector than on a 15" 2880x1800px monitor screen. Personally, I would consider $300 to replace a lamp well worth the money. Alternatively, just buy a new projector. About half the cost of a projector is the lamp. I have had a couple of projectors in 6 or 7 years but, fortunately, never had a lamp failure. On my first projector, I bought a spare lamp when I bought the projector, against the advice of the vendor, who told me I was wasting my money. He was right. The projector failed before I ever needed that lamp. And it was a lot more than $300 too. | |
|
||
| 06-29-12 06:51am - 4559 days | #9 | |
|
Claypaws (0)
Suspended Webmaster Posts: 144 Registered: May 16, '12 Location: UK |
What otoh says makes a lot of sense. But my short answer to your question is still "Yes". The higher resolution will make the image sharper. However, if the detail is smaller than you can read from normal viewing distance, the sharpness will not help you. Try viewing a beautifully sharp 10x8", high quality print on quality photo paper, from a distance of 20 feet and compare what you see with the same image on a cheap desktop printer viewed from 2 feet away. The latter will be less pretty but show you more. LCD monitors do have a native resolution because their pixels are physical pixels. The screen is actually physically divided into a fixed number of little squares. The sharpest image results when you set the OS resolution to the native resolution of the monitor. But that is not necessarily the best resolution if your eyes cannot see small details at normal viewing distance. On a CRT monitor, there are no physical pixels and you have more freedom to set the resolution to your preferred value without being affected by a native resolution. I still use a CRT monitor. | |
|
||
| 07-07-12 02:13am - 4551 days | #10 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Higher resolution, especially on a 15" display, should make it quite sharp and crisp (though I prefer not to describe porn in those terms!), but Apple wouldn't introduce a screen like that without having the OS ready to handle it, which is mostly just scaling the icons and toolbars. There might be a problem with older custom icons but someone has probably already come up with a work around. Sadly, your older lo-res videos and photos are not changing size, though the display isn't so big physically that it would be as obvious. There are already some 4K videos on YouTube though, but videos of this size are more of an issue for hosts' servers and Internet speed than viewers' displays. I'm not sure if we are all ready to see porn that was shot in such high resolution, say like on a Red Epic camera (very professional for porn, but not completely out of reach of a big enough studio). Makeup is going to have to be perfect for closeups, not too mention all the details makeup can't fix!  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 07-31-12 05:59am - 4527 days | #12 | |
|
marcdc1 (0)
Active User  Posts: 139 Registered: Jan 10, '07 Location: New York |
Damn. Your like my new hero.   PS Great Idea - I'm looking at my walls trying to figure out how to do it. | |
|
||
| 1-11 of 11 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
