“This strategy would have several consequences. First, a transition towards better codec, dropping the efficient but CPU-consuming encoding codec H.264 for adopting Wavelet transform-type of codec which will allow even better compression rate while offering better efficiency,” HardMac reports.
“The ultimate goal for Apple would be to promote this new format to support 4 K video (up to 4096×2160,” HardMac reports. “Of course, main customers do not have necessarily a 1080 HD TV at home, so a 4K-compatible device, even less. However, Apple would be planning to enter the market from the high-end, as it did for the iPhone, and in the coming weeks/months we should see Apple products with display offering an increasing definition.”
HardMac reports, “Apple has already been in contact with companies manufacturing camera and camcorder, as well as Google, the latter having announced yesterday that YouTube would now support 4K video.”
Read more in the full article here.
SIR G…
Actually, the ultimate display (30″ variety) would support the 8K standard in a 16:10 format. The 8K standard supports 8192 x 4320. A 16:10 format would be 8192 x 5120 for a approximate pixels per inch of 322.
Will such a desktop display ever come to pass? Probably, but unlikely in the next 10 years.
However, if you track back, Evans and Sutherland used to ship a projection system that did 8k x 4k (8192 x 4096) — not quite Digital Cinema 8K. It was a front projection system. It was amazing. They didn’t sell many and discontinued the line.
“CPU-consuming encoding codec H.264” I thought that was flash!
I personally see NO market at this time for 4K in the consumer market. This will be a PRO end market codec. Example: Feature HD movies shot, processed and projected in digital.
I PREDICT: this video format will be accompanied by the now long delayed release of FireWire 3200 hardware in order to accommodate the bandwidth for recording, processing and sending 4K data. USB 3 can’t cut it.
Shadowself – 720p was always meant, but never properly used, for sports. It’s supposed to be a progressive 60-frames-per-second for smoother slowdowns.
@Chris D.,
“Seriously, Steve, this is getting old fast. Another video format?
MP4, license debacle, thanks guys (and I am looking at you, too, Apple), really!
Pixlet, 2003, Mac only (Wavelet based) and left to die.
Quicktime File Format, so yesteryear.
QTVR, awesome for 360 views and interactivity… aaaand kinda discontinued.”
Yes, because there’s a need for a format that’s better suited for ultra high resolution like 4K, and it makes sense for Apple to lead the way.
The issues around MP4 have to do with H.264, not the MP4 container or codec. The default MP4 codec doesn’t have the same issues as H.264, but it sucks in comparison to H.264. You could however use MP4 with a variety of comparable codecs and avoid the H.264 issues.
Pixlet was/is an editing codec. It was developed specifically for Pixar’s use and then Apple provided it for others. As an editing codec, why would Apple bother developing it for other platforms/software?
QuickTime as a container was the basis for the MP4 container.
QTVR…ya, I’m bummed about this. It’s funny that it was a lot more popular when production used to be far more difficult/expensive. Now it’s hard to even get software.
wouldn’t be surprised that this rumored move by Apple has come
about thorough their connections with RED.
What? What connections. I’m ready for 4K. Anyone want to up the anti to 4k 3D? btw, wavelets…. hard to understand. Meg2, meg4 easier.
God, I wish Apple had connections with RED. I’d cry myself to sleep less.