What is Digg?47 Comments
- Discosis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Gosh, they might need to rely on engaging stories for once...
- CLIFFosakaJAPAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's funny how the U.S. finally have to encounter these HD problems. In Japan where HD has been broadcasting since 1988, the Japanese Cosmetic companies have already released specially formulated Facial Makeup just for these HD problems. Sometimes it really boggles my mind, that my own country, the U.S., can be so far behind. Cell phones, Video/TV hardward & Technology, Hybrid Cars, etc....the list goes on....
- breakneckridge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I definitely noticed something in that pic of Cameron Diaz on the tonight show, but it wasn't her teeth.
- infurio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Shallowest story I've ever seen... What the hell does it matter what anyone looks like?
Any society that has a star system deserves to fall. - bobthedino, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So Jessica Alba is "HD ready"? w00t!
- UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1yeah one of the first things i notice when i see a show in HD is how uneven some of their teeth are. I've never seen Conan in HD but that must be a little frightening, especially when he zooms in on his makeup just for the HD viewers.
- onimusha115, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think this is good, maybe it will fix one of the big problems in america and it will make it so everyone dosent strive to look like the stars. Im sure if i had professional makeup/hair artists work on me for an hour and then have someone follow me around with a spotlight all day i would look pretty damn good as well.
- Sirocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0They had the same fears when DVDs very first circulating. I'm sure Robert Deniro's mole will look every bit as charming in hi-def :(
- datagod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This isn't something you want to read about first thing in the morning...yuck...all those chicks with big zits...blech!
- Acill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Heh, lame. Does anyone actually look at them in a movie and care? I just watch them for what they are not who is in them.
- plumeria, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The author seems just a little full of himself.
- cyberfelon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's a higher resolution than HDTV when you watch a movie at the cinemas so this is far from a new problem. This only proves the makeup on talk shows is worse than in movies, which isn't surprising. The article talks about it like this is the first time we've seen celebrities in a high detail format, conveniently forgetting to mention photographs and 35mm film.
- mcbesq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is a six-month old news story. No digg for old news
- Ravenlock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0plumeria says: The author seems just a little full of himself.
----------
You have a talent for understatement. :-p - saintwanker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0lol, who cares? no digg.
- rainwater2k5, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is a bunch of crap. They can use soft filters over any lense. By using a soft filter you are softening the picture but not the resolution.
When HD get's even bigger. Films and TV will use soft filters when they need to. - durerca, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0demesix, it doesn't matter how good the capture is. The problem is that the viewer's screen now displays that detail in much more detail then before. Obviously not as well as the capture source, but much better than before.
- demesisx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is ***** because 35mm film still has far superior resolution to the current HD standard. Cinematographers have currently agreed that the only resolution that even approaches that of 35mm film is a scanned "4K negative" or Raw capture on the Dalsa Origin or Panavision Genesis. Even at 4K, it's still agreed that it is only EQUAL to 35mm...not higher resolution.
- IHaveIssues, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0+Digg ... for the nipples.
- GarySwager, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes, this will be a good thing. I'm always quite relieved to see that celebrities, up close, look like actual people, blemishes and all.
- cheese06, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ cliffosakajapan,
the U.S might lag behind in terms of electronics/latest technology on the consumer side but the U.S is by far the most advanced industrial nation that creates advanced technology behind the scenes. - LilGator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0demesisx, this isn't talking about source resolution, it's talking about what the consumer sees nowadays ... 35mm may be higher resolution than HD, but output to a DVD, the consumer doesn't see what they are arguing here.
- DrunkPrimate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You ever seen a European TV show? like a true one that uses normal actors. They are attractive people but they are normal people with skin problems and bad teeth. I think America just needs to get over it and deal with the fact TALENT in theater is far more important then how you look. We wouldnt have the likes of many famous actors if it wansnt for that. The only thing they really could do not to worry about looks is just use an all CGI cast very similar but with more advance technology in Final Fantasy Advent Children.
- CLIFFosakaJAPAN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"cheese06"
....but as an American, I feel it is almost a birthright to be able to enjoy the fruits of our technology labor as a consumer; that's why living here in Japan with all the cool things they are already using kind of irks me that the U.S. doesn't let the citizens "use" these things in a more timely manner. This "slow" trend must stop,.,..NOW... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0old news...no digg
- Ravenlock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Additionally, no digg, if only because this is the LAST thing we as a society should be caring about, and we ought to be collectively ashamed of ourselves.
- dggeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Rather than trying to make stars out of ordinary looking people, the studios and networks might have to place their bets on individuals who are naturally beautiful, those who will look great in any setting, including high-def."
This is not good. This means that Hollywood will be depending on a much smaller pool of talent. If you think movies are bad now, just wait until they start cutting off the nose to spite the face (pun intended). - starman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Did film just disappear overnight?
No digg. - artofluke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0More importantly, think about how porn embraces new technologies. VHS over beta, DVD, etc, etc. Who wants to see acne on Jenna Jamesons ass? Me, that's who! But the average man? I can't see porn embracing HDTV which should make it a long ways coming.
- Laughingman234, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How sad is that! Cmon people honestly throw me a freaking bone here.
- vannyx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0(in a hick accent) i dont know what you all talking about, but it sure does sound smart.
- mote, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0cliffosakajapan
you can keep your super advanced keitai technology, I moved back to the States because living in a crowded overpriced bore of a nation wasn't all that special. Plus, I appreciate the one technology Japan has yet to master: central heating. - ConorKiley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Dr. Ruth Peters.
Doctor of what? I read about this 2 years ago, this is a non-story. HD shows blemishes, big damn deal. - PFCalcio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The London Telegraph??? You think he would find out the name of the paper if he was being interviewed for it. It's the Daily Telegraph.
- LeFrenzy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0funny.
- Lionhart, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0cliffosakajapan
Actually the first country to use High definition was France, but they were forced to switch back because of the other European countries.
Now stop your stupid blind Japanese Nationalism. - starman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"The only thing more detestable then a digg know-it-all is a filmmaking know-it-all. If any of you jackasses had real substantive knowledge of broadcasting or filmmaking, you wouldn't be wasting your time replying to a story about HD and skin flaws."
Well, you are - optimusfx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Cameron poked both my eyes out with those things!
- Phssthpok, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Check these out
http://idontlikeyouinthatway.com/image_pages/b05h.html
http://idontlikeyouinthatway.com/image_pages/b05j.html
Ohhhhhhhhh yeaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!! - nothingbutBS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Quote about Bill Clinton:
"And, maybe it's my imagination, but his nose seems to have gotten bigger, like he's a real-life Pinocchio."
Obvoiusly the person writing these one liners is completely ignorant and doesn't realize your ears and nose are the only things that grow throughout your entire life, no matter how old you are. Lame jokes. - gol706, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Oh good god....this story is painful on so many levels. The only entertainment that can be extracted from this is the image of panicking TV execs worrying about this.
- billizm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Good for HDTV.
- stealthyslyth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hey, I found it amusing that Hollywood (and some other people) felt that this was important. Whether it's old news or not I just submitted it for laughs really.
- 4answer2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0hmm, this shows up in my rss feed but i can't find it on the latest front page stories...
- infurio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0To me, beauty is in the quality of the character portrayed - not in the face. Steve Buscemi, Philip Seymour Hoffman and William H. Macy will always look good on camera because they are phenomenal actors. Same goes for actresses like Kate Blanchett and Thora Birch.
Finally, we'll see the flaws in their bodies and faces... Next up, they'll show us the flaws in their character! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0The only thing more detestable then a digg know-it-all is a filmmaking know-it-all. If any of you jackasses had real substantive knowledge of broadcasting or filmmaking, you wouldn't be wasting your time replying to a story about HD and skin flaws.
The point isn't resolution, it's that the production techniques used in capture are subpar when compared to higher resolution productions. What was sufficient in lighting and makeup for live NTSC television is no longer sufficient for live HD television.
Pack of jackasses.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is