It can now render in 1080p?

Oh and hard shadows from fire like it's 1999...

Did you guys watch the entire video (in 1080p)? It's clear that pieces of the hill were coming down for a while. He filmed it exactly because he thought a landslide might happen.

Okay, you got my vote.

That was pretty kick-ass, especially in fullscreen 1080p. Now what is it and where can I see more?

I think @lucky760 is into that sort of thing.

Made me squeeze my palms ! I wanted to push that finger backwards too ! !

Also if your computer can take it, do the 1080p option. Soooo worth it

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I have to agree with those sentiments ^. They have been making some really poor user experience decisions - my least favourite is the switching automatically to 1080p when going full screen.

YouTube went to shit about a year ago. I don't know what changes they made, but now:
-videos default to 1080p when available, and they never cache correctly and play through; I have to manually change it down to 480p to get a decent stream that doesn't empty the buffer.
-only certain videos will buffer the entire video; most will only buffer a few extra seconds, then stop. Only pushing play gets the stream downloading again. This leads to it either 1) stopping because I'm not actively playing it, or 2) stopping because the buffer runs out.
-it restarts the stream if I click on fullscreen or minimizing it back down.

None of these problems used to happen. I know it's free, but it's the internet version of New Coke now.

(Note: this is not VS related; this happens on directly on YT as well as VS.)

Been happening to me the past couple of days over and over again via YouTube.com when using different machines. I believe in most all cases I was in 1080p mode.

Definitely an issue on their end.

>> ^Grimm:

Watched this...realized I needed to watch it again in fullscreen HD mode...do yourself a favor if you haven't already.

You just -had- to point that out, didn't you?

Okay, I give up...I'll be getting one by the end of the year. Gotta love enough resolution that you can clip the shakiness out and still have full 1080p leftover.

>> ^Fletch:

If you look closely near the bottom the screen (about an inch above the lower edge of the video on my monitor) at the 1:20 mark, just left of center, you can see the heat shield hit and the subsequent plume of dirt that it creates. Watch it in 1080p (full screen) for the clearest view.
Thanks! I knew this was in the video somewhere, but since the frame pans off the heat shield's descent for several seconds I kept losing it.

That last picture is faked where it shows the rover and a sound zooming out. That's zooming out of a still image, as there is no motion of all that sand moving between the camera and the rover.

And 1080P doesn't consist of Ultra HD. Ultra HD is 4k or higher. Just sayin.

If you look closely near the bottom the screen (about an inch above the lower edge of the video on my monitor) at the 1:20 mark, just left of center, you can see the heat shield hit and the subsequent plume of dirt that it creates. Watch it in 1080p (full screen) for the clearest view.

>> ^jmd:

Seriously? I mean... really? were upvoting for a sound effect that has been in effect since the beginning of time itself.. and has been on the most basic and oldest of sound editors.. all recorded on some dudes awesome cell phone mic...
I wheep for you guys..


The reverb of your basic sound editor is cheap tinny crap. Good reverb is computationally expensive and hard to get right. We've been getting there in the past years, but still great to have the real stuff.
I agree with the mic though - 1080p video but shitty compressed mono sound in a video that's _about_ sound...*sigh*

Oh and I'm a bit confused about your last sentence...referencing urbandictionary, are you farting underwater or are you going to piss in my sink?

>> ^saber2x:
There was a initial plan to have 3d cameras by James Cameron, but that was stopped due to a lack of time to test the cameras. http://www.space.com/11241-nasa-mars-rover-3d-camera-james-cameron.html
>> ^steroidg:
>> ^Deano:
C'mon NASA, 1080p, full screen!

1080p? Pffft, why stop there, let's get a IMAX 3D camera on board . Mars landing on giant screen ftw!!!



At least there are still some 3D images coming our way from NASA!

There was a initial plan to have 3d cameras by James Cameron, but that was stopped due to a lack of time to test the cameras. http://www.space.com/11241-nasa-mars-rover-3d-camera-james-cameron.html

>> ^steroidg:

>> ^Deano:
C'mon NASA, 1080p, full screen!

1080p? Pffft, why stop there, let's get a IMAX 3D camera on board . Mars landing on giant screen ftw!!!

>> ^A10anis:

>> ^Confucius:
>> ^A10anis:
>> ^Deano:
C'mon NASA, 1080p, full screen!

A perfect landing using radically new technology, and you are complaining about the resolution!? Jeez, no pleasing some people...

NASA/Space/Mars program is intensely connected to public opinion. Better images, higher resolution etc.... more support more money. NASA should drop some scientific equipment and get some higher resolution images (that sir is what we call looking at the long-term game). Why do you think they release these images?

Oh, ok, lets drop the science to allow higher resolution. Stfu you idiot.


Oh, ok, come out from beneath the bridge and show us who you really are... OMG! It's Mr obvious troll! And I just fed him! NOOOOOOO!