Hacker News Reader

Comment by mgkimsal | Hacker News Reader

In 1985, much of what we could look back on of 1955 was in black and white. Much of what we look back on in 1985 is in color. Personally, I think that plays a pretty big role in how we look back at stuff. Even much of the 60s is still in color, but the 50s - TV shows, movies, etc - the artifacts we have are largely B&W.

View on HN

Also, we probably have a lot more footage of 1985. Since video recording equipment got cheaper, more videos got made. Since many of those videos still exist, 1985 is still "present" in 2015 to a much greater degree than 1955 was in 1985. The same holds true for audio recordings.

Standard definition video is the new black and white. At this point when I see sub-HD video it looks like an old artifact of history.

I really think the medium for recording/displaying history has a lot to do with how 'current' recent history feels. And I think b/w to color is a much bigger jump than SD -> HD.

e.g. 'WWII in color' films make things feel remarkably more relatable than B/W footage

Wouldn't be surprised if we see a similar change, if not more dramatic, if/when VR becomes a more prevalent form of media

Standard definition isn't too bad, it's that old analog video has degraded. Older videos have weird VCR artifacts from being stored on tapes for years. Older movies have the color washed out and sound distorted. Even older pictures often have weird color.

30 years from now kids will occasionally stumble upon youtube videos made today, and they will look exactly the same as when they were made. Possibly better if upscaling algorithms improve and are more common.

I hated the sampling rate far more than the low resolution. Old TV, over an antenna was maddening. On the other hand, analog movie resolution was noticeably superior in resolution until recently. The only serious artifact I recall was the jitter of text in the credits

Reply on news.ycombinator.com