Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

CMO's Quad Full High Def Display

By , Robert Buonanno - Source: Tom's Hardware | B 17 comments

If Full HD is not enough for you (and there’s always those who want more) Chi Mei Optoelectronics showed us a rather nice alternative.

Brace yourselves for the Chi Mei’s new, ready for mass production, 56" Quad FHD panel.

The picture was definitely impressive, even if you could notice that the video was a Full HD one upscaled to a resolution of 3840x2160 pixels.

To play a quad Full HD, you’re going to need a special player. In this case, to show off the panel, Chi Mei used a 4K HDD player provided by the Japanese company, Keisoku Giken.

Chi Mei claims that this V562D1 panel has a contrast ratio of 1200:1 and a more than decent response time of 6.5 ms. The electrical interface enables two dual DVI and four single DVI inputs and an eight channel LVDS.

So, who would buy something like this? One of the main problems with televisions or displays like this is that a lot of the time, they cost a small fortune. However, Chen Li Yi, director of CMO’s LCD TV business division doesn’t seem to be so concerned about shifting the units. In an interview a while back Chen said that no matter how expensive, there’s always going to be the people who are willing to fork out top dollar for a telly:

"Some people want such a TV no matter what the price."

CMO Quad HD CMO Quad HD

Discuss
Display all 17 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • -1 Hide
    sacre , June 13, 2008 9:23 PM
    This is stupid. The price of the players would be rediculous for the fact at a resolution like that you would need a player that can transfer 40+mbps. If not more.
  • -1 Hide
    Anonymous , June 13, 2008 9:43 PM
    nothing outputs that resolution anyways...
  • 0 Hide
    lancelot123 , June 14, 2008 12:19 AM
    USB 3.0 sure wouldn't have a problem with the bandwidth.
  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , June 14, 2008 2:10 AM
    I will definitely get one!
    ...... in the next ten years ...... :D 
  • 1 Hide
    samprasfan , June 14, 2008 12:02 PM
    It says right in the article that it takes 4 DVI inputs, it's the same as if you were outputting a display onto four HDTVs. Instead, it has one quad HD screen that works as 4. Learn to read.
  • -2 Hide
    Anonymous , June 14, 2008 3:49 PM
    That's too funny. Look at the picture close up. The violin strings are nothing but jaggies from end to end and the text in the bottom right hand corner is pixelated. This reminds me of the good ol' days of EGA with 16 colors.
  • 1 Hide
    hawler , June 14, 2008 5:08 PM
    Actually if you click on the picture once it looks jaggie. thats because it's being shrunk from its actually resolution and browsers suck at shrinking pictures and maintaining good quality. See that little magnifying glass with a plus in it? click on the picture and it will go back to is original size with much better quality
  • 0 Hide
    plbyrd , June 14, 2008 6:32 PM
    This is just a first step down the road to 300dpi computer screens (today's screens are typically adjusted for 96dpi), which are essential for future software interface paradigms. The reason that Microsoft has moved to a 3D desktop environment with Vista's Aero is in preparation for 300dpi monitors which are not as far off as you'd initially think. Scalable 3D interfaces just get better and better with more resolution and 3D uses much less memory to describe an image at these massive resolutions as 2D requires.
  • 0 Hide
    Luscious , June 14, 2008 10:02 PM
    Absolutely nothing new to read here folks - Mitsubishi already had a 3840x2160 quad HD monitor available a year ago (56P-QF60LCU). The price at that time was around $50,000 if I remember right.

    The problem with the technology, other than requiring a brute-force PC with 4 HD video outputs to harness the resolution, is that you can only display static images. 1080p video will not look any better at all. On the other hand, if you're into serious CG, CAD or digital artwork, this monitor will make your jaw drop to the floor and your eyes bug out.

    Not to disappoint movie fans though, film does have a native resolution of 4096x4096, which means QHD video IS possible.

    So, if you think you are rich and can blow 50K on this monitor, how about you invest another few million with your other rich friends into the technology to convert 35mm film into QHD video, and while you're at it, invest another few hundred million to develop the storage/playback technology.

    It will probably be at least another 15-25 years before we see QHD video broadcasts, due to the sheer bandwidth requirements (250MB/s uncompressed), so you can forget about that QHD TV as well.
  • 0 Hide
    mdharrington , June 14, 2008 10:43 PM
    well,luscious
    converting 35mm film to 4k has been done for like 10 years, by way of arri laser scan and others.

    and there are several video cameras doing native 4k right now....Red, Dalsa ect...
    4k storage and playback has been around for about....10 years(maybe a little less) i could name about 5 products right now

    and next year red ray comes out from red (red.com)
    with 4k playback from standard dvd's using proprietary wavelet encoding

    there have been sony 4k projectors out for years btw as well....

    your comments would seem pessemistic..... if you made them 10 years ago....
  • 0 Hide
    mdharrington , June 14, 2008 10:52 PM
    red.com
    dalsa.com
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_picture_film_scanner
    http://www.red.com/nab/red_ray

    seriously folks this stuff has been around for a while.
    red ray is going to be under $1000
    so me and my millionare friends could by 1000's of them
  • 0 Hide
    Luscious , June 15, 2008 6:47 AM
    md:
    You seriously don't want to use wikipedia as a credible source now do you? Not if you work in the industry. Show me a high-resolution device that was available 10 years ago other than film? D-VHS, Digital-S, DTheater - all 1080P based, not 4K. Now unless you can prove me otherwise, there is no device in existence that can output native 3840x2160 digital video at 30 frames/sec, simply because no such video codec/format exists. If you go back 10 years, there may have been hardware to convert film frames to 8MP TIFF images, but no where near the processing power to handle the 250MB/sec bandwidth for a fluid video stream. U320 SCSI arrived only in 2002, and required some serious hardware to even approach 250MB/s thoughput. A raid farm of U320 drives needed to process just one feature-length 3840x2160 stream would set you back $3500 today, and would have been a hell of a lot more expensive back then. Only recently have graphics cards become available that can process such high resolutions and possibly maintain 24/30 FPS.

    There was no such consumer (or professional) device 10 years ago as there is yet to be a consumer device today or even in the next 5-10 years.

    Film projectors are nothing new, but you are obviously confusing film with digital video and consumer devices versus professional editing equipment. You may be a millionaire, but your money sure won't buy you any brains.
  • 0 Hide
    mdharrington , June 15, 2008 3:32 PM
    cineform.com
    4k playback through adobe premiere
    i have it on my laptop

    dvs clipster 4k uncompressed playback for the last 5 years
    iridas frame cycler

    here's a system been in use for years http://www.quvis.com/?Action=Products&SubAction=4K

    4k playback.....i watched 4 videos at nab on a 4k projector, and 1 at red in california....in the last 2 months....

    the only reason i give you wikipedia is so you can read over and see where the world really is

    if you don't beleive me fine....go on making stuff up, i'm sure a lot of people out there would believe you
    i could post links for at least 10 4k playback devices, but if you check out wikipedia you could find them yourself
  • 0 Hide
    mdharrington , June 15, 2008 3:46 PM
    oh did you check out red ray
    red.com
    4k playback for under $1000 out in about 9 months

    these guys are a bit more
    http://www.gvs9000.com/flypack.html

    here's one of those codecs that don't exist
    http://cineform.com/products/Aspect-Prospect.htm


  • 0 Hide
    mdharrington , June 15, 2008 3:53 PM
    oh this is the one they used in california on a sony 4k projector
    http://www.keisoku.co.jp/en/product/vw/recorder/udr20e/index.html

    check out dvs clipster as well
    http://www.dvs.de/

    this stuff is usually 10 bit or 12 bit as well

    next year red will have a 5k camera for $40000

    probably be a while for 5k stuff though.....2 years maybe
  • 0 Hide
    mdharrington , June 15, 2008 3:56 PM
    in case you think i'm still confused
    http://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/ext/SXRD/index.shtml

    that is a digital projector been out since 2004

    seriousely this is my line of work.....
  • 0 Hide
    mdharrington , June 15, 2008 4:14 PM
    sorry i'm being a bit of an ass

    sometimes i turn into a snob when it comes to this stuff

    the point is this stuff is here and ready (4k) the general public just isn't aware because it's trickled down from the ultra high end video market
    apologies luscious....