The pixel dies in five years.

category: offtopic [glöplog]
"640kb should be enough for everyone"
[Too bad for the glow, though...]


2:10 onwards.
added on the 2012-12-14 15:07:22 by Preacher Preacher
added on the 2012-12-14 15:10:03 by Rob Rob
salinga, xtrim... go watch some vectrex demos. No pixels, but plenty of cubes and glow. Raster bars, on the other hand...
added on the 2012-12-14 15:30:32 by psonice psonice
and puppet-shows return...
added on the 2012-12-14 15:42:55 by rudi rudi
"On PC it's so easy to make demos it's not a challenge any more."
added on the 2012-12-14 15:49:10 by Adok Adok
"Steve Jobs was a genius who revolutioned what computing was all about"
added on the 2012-12-14 16:00:37 by zerkman zerkman
I wanted the article to be about some new vector screen contraption :(
added on the 2012-12-14 16:05:47 by msqrt msqrt
"shaders will kill the demoscene"

"you can get infinite detail with voxels"

"we will make a hardware raytracing gfx card"

"the Cell processor will kill x86"

"JPEG2000 is so much better nobody will want to use Jpeg anymore"

"WebGL will change the web forever (2009)"
added on the 2012-12-14 21:45:23 by iq iq
when a pixel die on my lsd screen i provide him massage, and if it works, I watch "Masagin" (farbrausch) to thank my screen
added on the 2012-12-14 23:38:33 by Tigrou Tigrou
"I think there is a world market for maybe 5 computers."
WebGL actually does have the potential to induce interesting changes. There is a lot of interest in the visualization field to move things to WebGL for example. But of course expecting that WebGL will be the new foundation for all kinds of web pages is silly.

As for the pixels, lets create a savethepixels.com web site.With lots of cat pics.
added on the 2012-12-15 11:08:01 by dv dv
added on the 2012-12-15 11:20:27 by v3nom v3nom
The Pixel can't die unless our displays find a way to display vectors directly / natively (which is not going to happen until we get holograms, like notch's SPED3)

Until then vectors can only be a medium for saving vectors, but they will still need to be rendered to pixels.

Also why fear vectors? All the fancy 3D don't use any pixels anymore.
added on the 2012-12-16 00:01:51 by S0lll0s S0lll0s
3D dont use pixels anymore? no more textures and frame buffers?
Man I sleep too long last night and missed the revolution.

This whole video concept is really a joke in itself.

Vector/contour is one of THE worse way to express natural images.
Its a FAIL by design.

Side note. RGB Pixels ARE vectors . So killing pixel would be killing vectors.
Who wants to do that.. Cant we all get along ?

added on the 2012-12-16 00:13:42 by T21 T21
Side note. RGB Pixels ARE vectors . So killing pixel would be killing vectors.

No no no no no. Vectors are little arrows that are pointing somewhere. And I've yet to see a little colored square that is really a little arrow. Seriously.
added on the 2012-12-16 17:20:17 by kb_ kb_
You mean like
BB Image

(Okay it's not a "square", strictly speaking, but then, RGB is 3D.)
added on the 2012-12-16 17:30:00 by Gargaj Gargaj
What about the pixels in a normalmap? Each one is a vector.
added on the 2012-12-16 18:12:24 by fizzer fizzer
BB Image
added on the 2012-12-16 18:27:07 by Tjoppen Tjoppen
kb_, I will assume that you are sarcastic. But for the record.

RGB pixels are 3D vectors, each component representing a magnitude in the corresponding dimension.
Those discreet RGB pixels are just 'gamma compressed' 3D vectors.
And this become more evident when color operation can be expressed as pure vector/matrix math.
Example concatenating saturation, hue rotation, brightness, contrast, etc.. operation into a single matrix to operate on those little RGB vectors that are pixels.

added on the 2012-12-16 19:27:30 by T21 T21
added on the 2012-12-16 20:59:42 by trc_wm trc_wm
What trc said.
added on the 2012-12-16 22:59:40 by kb_ kb_
Cant argue against that ...
added on the 2012-12-16 23:28:49 by T21 T21
Also, Willis06a
added on the 2012-12-16 23:57:09 by kb_ kb_