Looks like the control room at a TV station! Excessive? Perhaps. This three-up beauty seems more my speed:
Big fat main work area with yer palettes and PathFinder windows etc. off on the side panels. Mmmm...that would be sweet. But again, I have to ask, why not one screen that size? One argument for multiple screens would be how applications currently behave. For instance, Photoshop goes into full screen mode on whatever display your image is currently sitting inside. In this manner you can put all the palettes off to the side and have a totally unobstructed view of the image. With a single large screen the palettes would in theory be on top of your canvas area. I also wonder if one would be subject to the "work expands to fit the time allotted" phenomenon, except in this case it would be "image size expands to fit the screen boundaries".
People have an innate desire for their image to fill up the complete physical area they are given. You may know the frustration of trying to explain differing aspect ratios to a layman (i.e. your parents) They just think in terms of "there's black bars and the image isn't filling the screen" regardless of the reality that ALL of the source image is being displayed. And who can blame them, really? Certainly mixing 4:3 and 16:9 is inherently half-assed and leads to these confusions. If the image doesn't touch the bezel you're being cheated is what they're thinking.
What really is the ideal size display? You want it to have more than enough room to show everything you want to show, but not be so large that you have to crane your neck or move your chair around. One theory I came up with would be that the screen should be as wide as your outstretched arms and as tall as you can reach while seated. This also assumes relatively close viewing distance of about 18-24".
But what about curved? Can they do curved screens? Is that gonna screw up the beauty of perfect geometry of LCDs? A curved screen would seem to make sense if it's going to be as wide as your uh, armspan. And I assume, it would correct for viewing angle falloff.
What about touch screens? Like Apple's latest phone, or that dude from that one link I can't find with the touch screen doodad. Now what about a really BIG touch screen like that, and not only that but make it 200-300ppi (I have yet to set eyes on a roentgen display, but I desperately want to) It would be not so much a display, but your whole damn desk. A drafting table, even! What about a 200ppi display as big as this:
Yeah, I'm lazy, I used the same screen grabs over and over, but it's just to show a general idea of scale. Imagine if you had that big of an area to work inside? We're talking tens of thousands of pixels here, but it's only a matter of time before that becomes entirely practical. And what if you could pick the top of this thing up, hang it on the wall and watch a movie on it? Wacom's already got a monitor you can draw on with a stylus (haven't used it) but I thought it would be super cool if the thing was just friggin' desk-sized. This could also encourage desk neatness because who's gonna wanna set their junk down on their 300,000 pixel gem of a display even if it IS a flat surface (that which attracts all objects to it, regardless of physical or chemical property)
Cripes, maybe someone already did it (not the touch screen part though)
sharps-4k-x-2k-64-inch-ultra-high-res-monitor/
And Jesus Wept...
No comments:
Post a Comment