Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
https://www.avforums.com/article/4k-netflix-vs-blu-ray.12398
From our usual viewing spot, which is around 7.5 feet (2.3m), we could honestly see zero difference between the two frames and, in a wider sense, the entire scene. So, we moved a little closer, to around five feet, and it was still impossible to see any resolution differences and it was only when we were between 2 and 3 feet where any extra details could be seen on the Shield – we’re talking a couple of skin pores and a very small wispy hair so not exactly a quantum leap and, of course, there aren’t many folks sitting that close to a 65-inch screen.
For this comparison I enlisted some child labour – I left the room while my 10yr old switched inputs – to try and make it as blind a test as possible. Again, there was nothing in it from a sensible viewing distance and, if anything, the Blu-ray image possibly looked a little better from really close up. That is likely the result of the frames being hundredths of a second mis-matched and the over-riding feeling from viewing the entire scene was that we couldn’t tell them apart.
Rounding off the comparisons, because we think you’re probably getting the idea that we are really struggling to tell these apart, let’s take a look at something really colourful as Saul retreats to his office behind the salon.
There’s a very tiny lighting difference between the two shots but you would be extremely hard pressed to tell the two frames apart in real life, never mind a compressed photo viewed through your smartphone or PC. Despite repeated rewinding and reviewing, again, there is just no visible difference on a 65-inch screen from 7.5 feet away and, once more, even when we got really close, we just failed to pick out any further details, in either frame, so our conclusion is another score draw with both just looking fantastic.
There you have it. 4k TV's as I have been saying for ages are a waste of money currently
From our usual viewing spot, which is around 7.5 feet (2.3m), we could honestly see zero difference between the two frames and, in a wider sense, the entire scene. So, we moved a little closer, to around five feet, and it was still impossible to see any resolution differences and it was only when we were between 2 and 3 feet where any extra details could be seen on the Shield – we’re talking a couple of skin pores and a very small wispy hair so not exactly a quantum leap and, of course, there aren’t many folks sitting that close to a 65-inch screen.
For this comparison I enlisted some child labour – I left the room while my 10yr old switched inputs – to try and make it as blind a test as possible. Again, there was nothing in it from a sensible viewing distance and, if anything, the Blu-ray image possibly looked a little better from really close up. That is likely the result of the frames being hundredths of a second mis-matched and the over-riding feeling from viewing the entire scene was that we couldn’t tell them apart.
Rounding off the comparisons, because we think you’re probably getting the idea that we are really struggling to tell these apart, let’s take a look at something really colourful as Saul retreats to his office behind the salon.
There’s a very tiny lighting difference between the two shots but you would be extremely hard pressed to tell the two frames apart in real life, never mind a compressed photo viewed through your smartphone or PC. Despite repeated rewinding and reviewing, again, there is just no visible difference on a 65-inch screen from 7.5 feet away and, once more, even when we got really close, we just failed to pick out any further details, in either frame, so our conclusion is another score draw with both just looking fantastic.
There you have it. 4k TV's as I have been saying for ages are a waste of money currently
