Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Recalculations place it at 0.4999.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.



Elliptical Video Format

  [vote for,

Rectangular video formattings are well suited for a few things: reading text, displaying 2D tables, tiling(cartography) and pictures of rectangular objects, but that's about it.

For an application that emulates first-person "looking", ie: movies, entertainment TV, etc. the field-of-view and attention focus of human eyesight is roughly elliptical: corner elements are so non-sequitur that TV networks often park advertisements there with almost no degradation of entertainment quality.

So that's the idea: elliptical recording/playback devices, and storage-format.

Using pixels, identical in both size and count, an elliptical screen will be almost 13% larger in both height and width than a comparable rectangular display. A 32" rectangular TV's worth of pixels is equivalent to a 36" elliptical TV.

FlyingToaster, Feb 15 2013

Please log in.
If you're not logged in, you can see what this page looks like, but you will not be able to add anything.


       I think it'd make me feel like i'm in Flash Gordon or something. I have thought about spiral scanning in the past. I wouldn't see my field of view as elliptical, even though it sort of is (maybe more movie binocular-style field of view in that sense) because the back of my head isn't a colour. Interesting, [+].
nineteenthly, Feb 15 2013

       It's not only physical field-of-view of course, but field of perception, which is mostly going to be centered since that's where cameramen put it.   

       And yes, there's a good possibility that the Buck Rogers TV genre did futuristic elliptical screens for the same reason: a larger perceptive field for the same amount of electronic bandwidth.
FlyingToaster, Feb 15 2013

       I was sure I had an annotation here somewhere...
MaxwellBuchanan, Feb 15 2013

       ah, you did, I went to swat a spider on the screen with my mouse pointer and hit the delete button... something about pork pie hats ? no, wait...   

       "I don't see how manufacturing costs would be more expensive than rectangular unless LCD screens are cut out of immense swaths of tri-pixel sheets" (?).   

       The contested figure 1.128… is (4/pi)œ : the answer to the oft-asked question "How much taller and wider is an elliptical screen compared to a rectangular screen of the same aspect ratio and surface area ?"   

       ie: the 32" >> 36" claim is poetically licensed only in respect unit of measurement (diagonal inches). More precisely worded the resulting ellipse would fit into a 36" rectangle (36.1 actually).
FlyingToaster, Feb 16 2013

       // TV networks often park advertisements there with almost no degradation of entertainment quality. //   

       That's a very subjective statement; once perhaps true, it now only highlights the trend in animated ads, ads that take up fully a third of the screen area, seizure-inducing flashing ads, ads for the program that is currently playing and, most maddening of all, twitter feeds. Honestly, I really do not want to know what the tweeting viewer thinks of a dime-store 'reality' show that's only in production because it's a cheaper alternative to a test pattern.
Alterother, Feb 16 2013

       In the same way as a soluble computer consisting of small components with LEDs on them (which is an old idea of mine) could shape itself differently, maybe a bunch of optical fibres could be arranged elliptically, rectangularly and so forth.
nineteenthly, Feb 16 2013


back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle