"In Saturn’s Rings is a groundbreaking giant-screen movie adventure that takes audiences on a space exploration journey of the mind, heart, and spirit, from the Big Bang to the awe-inspiring rings of Saturn.
Narrated by LeVar Burton, In Saturn’s Rings is created entirely of more than 7.5 million stunning images of Earth, the Milky Way, and the Saturn taken by Hubble, Cassini, and other NASA space telescopes looking deep into the past.
The film is made with 2D multiplane parallax techniques developed by Walt Disney combined with Ken Burns technique to avoid using any type of camera projection, 3D models, visual FX, texture maps etc. We also feature some high resolution time lapse photography.
Visit insaturnsrings.com to learn more about how this film was made, screening and release info and more..."
From
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/050818-1415 ...
9 Comments
kir_mokumgaddamn. looks amazing but good luck streaming 8K.
antYou could always download it. Now, the question can you play it smoothly? None of my decade old home and former work computers can, but then I don't even have 4K yet. I just got 1080 HD in late 2014.
gaddamn. looks amazing but good luck streaming 8K.
kir_mokumeven as a file, it would probably chug here and there, depending on the compression and how beefy your machine is. 8K is fucking HUGE and SO unnecessary unless you have an imax theatre in your living room.
You could always download it. Now, the question can you play it smoothly? None of my old computers can, but then I don't even have 4K yet. I just got 1080 HD in late 2014.
wtfcaniuseIt's entirely down to viewing distance and the viewer's vision. 4k is pointless at "normal" viewing distances. Whereas you need something like 16k to match visual acuity in VR. Unless you're simply interested in screen real estate.
even as a file, it would probably chug here and there, depending on the compression and how beefy your machine is. 8K is fucking HUGE and SO unnecessary unless you have an imax theatre in your living room.
kir_mokumwe're talking about movies. 4/8/16K in VR/gaming is very, very different from a 4/8/16K movie.
It's entirely down to viewing distance and the viewer's vision. 4k is pointless at "normal" viewing distances. Whereas you need something like 16k to match visual acuity in VR. Unless you're simply interested in screen real estate.
wtfcaniuseI'm talking about the human eye being able to resolve detail in the image, the source material (Video or Game) is irrelevant.
we're talking about movies. 4/8/16K in VR/gaming is very, very different from a 4/8/16K movie.
kir_mokumsource? i feel like there's a huge caveat to that. filming, editing, VFX, and displaying 16K is a long, long way away. 4K is already difficult and, honestly, rather pointless.
wtfcaniuseJapan is planning to film the 2020 Olympics in 8k@120fps and the cameras have been around for 3-4 years now. Multiple companies are working on 16k VR prototypes. 4k is generally pointless unless as I said you simply want "productive" realestate, or sit very close to the display. Because VR displays are so close to your eye the required resolution to match visual acuity is around 16k. My point wasn't anything to do with VR or games but rather the effective viewing distance from the screen(s).
"At 6 meters or 20 feet, a human eye with that performance is able to separate contours that are approximately 1.75 mm apart"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_acuity
6meters isn't a particular helpful distance for this argument but I'm sure you can do the math. 65" 4k display with 0.37mm pixel pitch would require a much closer distance to resolve the image properly. There is an advantage over 1080p but at normal viewing distances you won't be seeing all the detail of 4k.
source? i feel like there's a huge caveat to that. filming, editing, VFX, and displaying 16K is a long, long way away. 4K is already difficult and, honestly, rather pointless.
StukaFoxsays...Fuck me, that's beautiful.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.