Ironically, not available in 1080 quality.

Your video, 16-year-old skateboarder lands a 1080 at X Games, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Tom Shaar completed a 1080 in competition while participating in the 2012 X Games Asia on April 30, 2012. The description is incorrect.

1080s? We've been doing that on snowboards for years now!


Nah, just kidding... that's some epically *skillful skating right there.

Mad props to the kid.

(That is how one uses that expression, right? I'm old and Irish, so I don't get to say shit like that much)

Why do you mention 4k, when this is only 1080? Need proof? Download the video, it's not 4k. The original may have been, but this is not.

Dear god, of all videos to offer a 1080 option for...

And what's with the extremely, high-res macro close-up shots? Look, I know the video title is self-explanatory and I have only myself to blame for clicking, but... man... Some of the skin doesn't even look human.

And is this so serious an issue in India that they have a metal instrument designed solely for it?

To top it off, my computer inexplicably strained to play this one back, as though my PC was trying to spare me the disgust.

I think the article I saw about this was "First 1080 landed by a 12 year old." As in other people have landed 1080s...just not as young as twelve.

>> ^ulysses1904:

Actually wouldn't that just be a 900? He went airborne facing up, did two 360 degree spins (facing up two more times) then did a 180 to be facing down again.


Follow the top edge of the board. It's pointing up again when he lands. He turns his head during the jump, but his chest faces left both before and afterwards.

360p?
I expected at least 1080 with an option for 3d.

*skillfull ?? two l's ?

I was playing 1080 snowboard on n64 a couple hours ago, and as a PRO I can confirm that this set of tricks takes some skills with the left thumb and right hand.

Welcome to beyond-HD; this will eventually be up for download in 4069x2304 (4x 1080) resolution.

yeah your to far gone no saving you If I was you I would end your life now , you are forbidden from enjoying something I hate so much!

The screen size thing dosen't matter if you have a 1080p tv or hd projector or evan better 2 hd projectors stitched and you sit relatively close to it then the screen size difference interms of what is in your fov will not be that grate ( obviously it depends on what focal range your eyes are comfortable with but sitting withint he range of 2-5m from 70" screen should be fine ) The effective resolution of 35mm film is about 4000x2000 , but now allot of cinimas use digital projectors and many of them project at 2048×1080 , so all in all a $1000 Tv or $1500 projector will likely do a fairly comparable job. the massive advantage with home system is you can set it up to your taste not some arbatrery pre-decided spec some company has come up with and for sound especially everyone has different taste.

also I don't see the piont of a shaired exsperance with people you dont know and will never talk to . I understand watching a film with some friends or a group and then talking about it but with total randoms that you will never interact with dosent make sense. ( it might make sense when you have a cinema full of black people (or one of those special film nights some cinemas do) and they all screem and shout at the film getting involved more and what have you as that is truly an original exsperance (not one I enjoy but I can certainly see how that could be enjoyable and different from watching a film at home).

The only cinema exsperance I ever had that was better than what could be achieved at home was watching a documentary on a proper spec I max screen ( before they did the bullshit I-max licensing) and at a theem park in France called http://uk.futuroscope.com/ where they had a screen below the floor as well as a normal imax one.

Id probably enjoy going to an american outdoors cinima where you park a car , or evan one where its just in a park or something ,



I think what makes me ill with bog standard cinema is its so procedural with you just been a chiken stuffed in a pen and fed bullshit useless advertising and constantly told ITS THE BEST EXSPERANCE YOU CAN HAVE ON THE BIG SCREEN when infact for allot of people its probably not.

Finaly to finish of my waist of time writing !

I concide that if the cinima is


1) empty or near empty to the piont i cannot notice other people or the only people in it are people i know and are firends with
2) set up correctly sound focus screen everything
3) has comfortable seats not sticky shit on the floor smells nice
4) no quing up no bullshit adverts and no trailers that ruin the plot of new films ( or its possible to miss them all some how)

Then it is better than what you will get at home and will be far more enjoyable in general , having said that that scenario has happened to me 3 times in 14 years and from going to over 30 different cinemas in 2 different countries.





>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^westy:
Although I enjoyed your discussion home cinimas are infinetly better than going out to watch a film evan if you only have a 42" 2 year old LCD tv and bog standard surround sound system.
maybe you have super awesome cinemas where you are but in the uk there is always something objectively wrong and not in a "charming way" ( listed above in my other comment )

I can see where you're coming from, westy. There are so many things that can (and do) go wrong with the theatrical experience: inconsiderate jerks, bad projection, bad sound, uncomfortable seats, lighting issues, too many commercials, and so on, and so on. But I just love going to the movies.
You ask why you'd want to watch a movie in a room full of people you don't know. But I think that sitting in a darkened room full of strangers and having a shared experience is one of the things that makes going to the movies so special.
There's also the fact that, no matter how big the screen is in your home theatre, it's still a mere fraction of the size of a decently-sized theatre. The sound will never be as good at home (assuming the theatre is doing what they're supposed to be doing). The image will never look as good as well-projected film. And again, watching alone at home can never compare to being in a room full of people who are laughing when they're supposed to, or who are all thrilled, or scared, or moved at the same time you are.
But then I've been going to the movies on a regular basis since I was old enough to sit in the seats, so maybe, like you said, I can never be truly objective about it. I don't care how good home theatre technology gets, I'll be going to the movies until the day I die.

Comedy - 6412 votes received (comedy talk)
Video (game) Sift - 5240 votes received (videogames talk)
What the F*ck Just Happened? - 2435 votes received (wtf talk)
Everything geek - 2424 votes received (geek talk)
Animation - 2289 votes received (animation talk)
Music - 2175 votes received (music talk)
Cinema - 1334 votes received (cinema talk)
Terrible! Who gave thatt a green light? - 1197 votes received (terrible talk)
Ball-Flexin' - 1137 votes received (actionpack talk)
Comic Books - 1080 votes received (comics talk)

Really for that 2nd one, I'm not surprised at all...

When I watched this I literally was visioning that game for N64 I usd to play, 1080 snow board ??? it was just as if I was playing that game.. haha.

YT:
These speed tests were filmed at actual web page rendering times. If you're interested in the technical details, read on!

Equipment used:

- Computer: MacBook Pro laptop with Windows installed
- Monitor - 24" Asus: We had to replace the standard fluorescent backlight with very large tungsten fixtures to funnel in more light to capture the screen. In addition, we flipped the monitor 180 degrees to eliminate a shadow from the driver board and set the system preferences on the computer to rotate 180 degrees. No special software was used in this process.
- 15Mbps Internet connection.
- Camera: Phantom v640 High Speed Camera at 1920 x 1080, films up to 2700 fps


"Why does allrecipes.com in the potato gun sequence appear at once, and not the text first and images second? And why does it appear to render from bottom of the screen to the top?"

Chrome sends the rendered page to the video card buffer all at once, which is why allrecipes.com appears at once, and not with the text first and images second. Chrome actually paints the page from top to bottom, but to eliminate a shadow from the driver board, we had to flip the monitor upside down and set the system preferences in Windows to rotate everything 180 degrees, resulting in the page appearing to render from bottom to top.

"Why does the top one third of the page appear first on the weather.com page load?"

Sometimes only half the buffer gets filled before the video card sends its buffer over to the LCD panel. This is because Chrome on Windows uses GDI to draw, which does not do v-sync.

"The screen wipes are so smooth - how was that achieved?"

The screen wipes up in a gradated wipe because LCD pixels take around 10ms to flip and gradually change color.