File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
What constitutes high res for you?
For me it's over 2k pixels on one or more sides.

Also, post your highest res pic.
>> Anonymous
bump
>> Anonymous
Post some seriously high res shit now.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
I would post a seriously /hr/ worthy picture, but here is a mb limit..
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Couldn't bother going through everything, so here's a reasonably hr picture.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
i dont think of anything as hi-res unless its at least 2k pixels on each side.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Likewise, 2,000 pixels on one side, although I will post less if it's the only way to fulfil someone's request.
>> Anonymous
please continue posting this great epic F1 images.
I've been saving since the first thread started.
>> Anonymous
anything over 700x700 is high resolution
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>450138
This always happens - I post a random F1 image in a random thread, someone requests more, more is posted and the thread garners no replies and I end up looking like a dick. :)

I'll look into doing another one sometime soon, but it won't be for at least a week. I'll try and post slower this time, and keep the thread active for a bit longer. Any suggestions as to what you want me to start the thread with?

But, yeah. No more cluttering up someone else's thread.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Wont let me upload my huge firefox logo ]: 10000x9000
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
HR for me is anything bigger than my monitors. 3840x2400 on the right, 2560x1200 on the left. 12MPixels. Yay.

Have a screengrabbed test target. Came out as 3844 wide for some reason. Sauce is a pdf on t'web, if you want something less sucky than jpg.

And, F1-HR-guy. You're a star. Gratitude from here.
>> Anonymous
quality > quanitity
>> Anonymous
>>450195
fuck year
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>450195
Both is best.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
wish I had something better to say was my highest res..
>> Anonymous
>>450078
I hate this fake fucking image, because every time I get my hopes up, thinking it's an amazing picture, but then I see the horrible cut&paste and just get pissed off
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>Also, post your highest res pic.

>Images greater than 10000x10000 pixels are not allowed.
>Maximum file size allowed is 8192 KB.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
This is a scaled down version of the pic found at the following two links;

(200MB JPEG, 29566 X 14321)
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2007/16/images/a/formats/full_jpg.jpg

(479MB TIFF, 29566 X 14321)
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2007/16/images/a/formats/full_tif.tif
>> Anonymous
I have a 10000x10000 awesome smiley @ 0.99mb but 4chan won't allow me to upload it :(
>> Anonymous
all of F1 images are fine, just new ones or maybe about crashes (famous ones) I don't know anything is fine. Also more Ayrton will be very apreciated.
Thanks anyway for the bunch of images you have upload
>> Anonymous
op your pic would be an amazing map for a fps
>> OP is a "Menger Sponge" Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>450285
It's called a menger sponge
>> Anonymous
http://apollo.sese.asu.edu/METRIC_PREVIEW/AS15-M-0081/AS15-M-0081.LRG.png
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
at least 1.5k on one side and no less than 1.2k on the other
>> Anonymous
> Also, post your highest res pic.

I'm not allowed.
>> Anonymous
>>450285
Quake 3 had maps like this
>> claycorn
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>450228

holy hell, I came.

What is that a photo of?


also, not nec. my "highest res" but almost, and there arent any other pretty faces itt.

1k on each side is min. for hr, even though my monitor is over 1k... i guess im just old school, sry. i prefer hr to be around 2k/side, atleast 1.5k x 2k though
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
bumping to off the top shitty jailbait not-hr thread.
samefag as prev post

also, bagels.
>> Anonymous
A long time ago I had found some pictures of aerial photos from Iraq, they where a picture of one of the rivers and some smoke furls going over, it was high res enough you could pick hair color and hats off peoples head when zoomed in all the way. Found it at http://www.hugi.is/hahradi/ by randomly clicking around on words that sounded similar to english words. There were more high res pictures but my computer at the time was too slow. That was pretty highres and that always was my standard of what REAL high res should be. Wish I still had those pictures.
>> Anonymous
I frown a little if I don't have to scroll on 1920x1200.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
anything that firefox reduces to lower than 50% in order to view the entire thing.
>> $teve
>>450848

That is one of the most badass pictures I have ever seen.
>> Anonymous
OP,
I seen something like this on salvia once
Bad memories man....
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>451049

MOAR?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>450192
What the fuck kind of screen is 3840x2400?

I'm working with 2x 2560x1600's and several other random smallerish screens here. But I seriously want your 3840x2400. Or four of them.
>> Anonymous
>>451184

It's 4, 1920x1200...
>> Anonymous
>>451186
No, it's one piece of glass. a vp2290b . Web has info.
Highly recommended. If you're a poorfag, you can get ones with a duff line of pixels, noticeable but not that bad, since pixels are so damn small. eBay is the only real source, both of broken and good ones. And you'll be needing a reasonably decent video card. But, if you like pixels, there's nothing comparable.
>> Anonymous
Seconded. I got two VP2290b side by side (7680x2400 desktop) and it's great for CAD work. I also have an early prototype IBM T221 with glossy screen.

The downside is a relatively crappy screen update rate (25 Hz is the normal one, unless you use 4 DVI connectors). The internal refresh is 42/48 Hz depending on model.
>> Anonymous
>>451184
ah you could maybe help me decide, ive been trying to figure out which display is better.
Dell 30" or Apple 30"
I've been leaning more towards the apple monitor, Which do you prefer?
>> Anonymous
>>451232
I dont think i could work that big, I seen a picture of the monitor and the taskbar/icons were tiny, I'd need some jam jar glasses to see that shit.
>> Anonymous
>>451261
Dear god.
Apple: Dell:
16ms response time. 8ms response time
700:1 contrast ratio 1000:1/3000:1 depending on monitor
DVI. 2DVI, composite, component, displayport, hdmi.


For the love of god, do not pay $1800 for an apple monitor when the superior-in-every-way dell is 600 cheaper.
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productcompare.aspx?c=us&category_id=6761&cs=19&l=en&
amp;s=dhs&prods=222-7175,223-4890
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>451184
Why would you need so many monitors.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
For me it's something to fit in the size of a movie poster
ie - about 2k ~ 2,5k
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>451287

Actually, Apple Cinema Displays use S-IPS rather than S-PVA. This makes them better in every way and you wrong in every way.