Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric L who wrote (18738)	3/11/2002 7:57:47 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Respond to of 34857

Thanks, you surely move around on these threads (tried the search function of SI, but lousy) Some basic things I have come to believe in (besides what I just wrote on 8-16-32MB of display memory) - Male visual stimuli demands both smooth movements and sharp contours, really high bandwidth, much smarter compressions than the 2-3 most popular these days. - things become even more demanding when considering 3D-objects, but luckily the brain has the capability to reconstruct known 3D objects from simple 2D objects. (hands are much better on mapping 3D objects than 2D eyes, one reason handsets should be hold in hands, not only seen on pictures, to be experienced) - even better, from a display, processing and memory point of view, some simple lines can make any brain skip both 1600x1200 resolution, 2D or 3D, to arouse the thoughts of the same thoughts, if both the pixel resolution of the eye and the visual center of the brain is bypassed, if one goes directly to the interpreting, associative center (some claim this is not always true, in that analysis I miss the aspect of if there is anything to associate with in that center) That is where the "artistic" way of looking at, producing things comes in, and the basic limitation is that one can only view some 3000-5000 pixels at full resolution due to the limitation of the eye (that is why soap-operas for NTSC must switch between backlighted facial closeups and larger views all the time, although it also helps for producing the stuff) That is, it is more a question of who and how the stuff is produced, than the real resolution. Ilmarinen Playboy is (was) funny, why do(did) they systematically blurr out exactly the details every normally experienced associating (fe)male has associated in his(her) brain?? (u-movie producers do the opposite) Some claim it because of the lack of earlier, existing, detailed, visual associations??? (not to forget the 3D hands-on experiences) Anyway, the newest flashmovies of Nokia are pretty good???