crackerwax

Has it come to this! Has the general public, buoyed on a wave of HD hysteria, become so gullible that they’re going to be fooled by this sort of nonsense.

6.2 million sub pixels? I’ve never heard such a load of old twaddle in my life. Presumably they’re making reference to the fact that each pixel on an LCD panel is made up of a red, green and blue pixel, or sub pixel.

Your average punter isn’t going to know this though, they’re going to assume that the million pixels, sub or otherwise, is the same million pixels they’re used to from digital cameras and as we all know more mega pixels equals better cameras right!

Thinking about it though this could actually have the reverse effect on the type of person they’re trying to attract, who might not have realised that high definition in television terms is still pretty low in comparison to the sort of resolutions available on modern digital cameras.

True HD (as the marketing saps are now calling 1080p in a desperate bid to make it look as though they weren’t conning everybody with the shitty 720p sets they were hailing as a revolution last summer) looks pretty blocky when you put it up against the sort of resolutions you’ll get from even an average digital camera.

1920 by 1080 versus 3200 by 2400, that’s a twofold increase in vertical resolution straight away, don’t want the punters to actually start comparing resolutions now do we? Six mega pixel versus seven mega pixel looks much better than 1080 versus 2400!

Still most punters don’t care, they assume that HD will make Coronation Street look amazing. The sad thing is though that at the end of the day they just like it because it’s flat and shiny and it’s only because said punter has this outlook that the marketeers can get away with this sort of bollocks.