Thread:BunsenH/@comment-26971439-20170701173335/@comment-24577221-20170702045306

Someday, probably, but at present it isn't terribly useful. 6000 x 6000 is much higher resolution than current standard monitors can show. One only needs that kind of resolution in an image if one needs to do fancy graphics work and wants to be absolutely sure there won't be any artifacts when the image is finally displayed.

Consider that the image of the Galvana, as currently displayed in my browser on a decent-quality new-ish laptop, occupies an area of about 270 px x 268 px. The real image is 1834 x 2458. I hope that the reduction takes place on the server, rather than the huge image being delivered to me and then scaled down by the browser, since what I'm seeing is scaled down by a factor of a bit more than 9 in each dimension -- an overall difference in area of 84x. It isn't going to look any better if the original is 6000 x 6000, since it will still be scaled down to fit the same area.

In ten or twenty years when everyone is watching super-mega-ultra-gonzo-definition VR video and computer graphics are expected to have better resolution than human eyeballs, sure. I can't say it will be a good use of resources, mind you.