Why have we jumped to 4K?

SexyGreyFox said:
Those comparisons are a bit unfair.
I'll guarantee that a 1080 bird being shown on my Full HD TV will not look like that but more like the image on the left.
The 1080 bird on the 4K TV would be even better but have no idea of a 4K bird on a 4K TV.
Click to expand...

They are not unfair. Watch this video:


The right part is always blurred, washed out and the colour representation is obviously worse.

SexyGreyFox said:
I'll guarantee that a 1080 bird being shown on my Full HD TV will not look like that but more like the image on the left.
The 1080 bird on the 4K TV would be even better
Click to expand...

The 1080p bird on a 2160p 4K will look better again because of the higher pixel per inch. Retina screen vs non-retina screen.
Also, the 4K TV most likely has a more modern processing which will try to upscale and compensate the differences.
But native 4K is in all cases the best.

Until we up to 8K :)
 
"Resolution
Image resolution is typically described in PPI, which refers to how many pixels are displayed per inch of an image.
Higher resolutions mean that there more pixels per inch (PPI), resulting in more pixel information and creating a high-quality, crisp image.
Images with lower resolutions have fewer pixels, and if those few pixels are too large (usually when an image is stretched), they can become visible like the image below.



When you change the resolution of an image, you are saying how many pixels you want to live in each inch of the image. For example, an image that has a resolution of 600 ppi will contain 600 pixels within each in of the image. 600 is a lot of pixels to live in just one inch, which is why 600ppi images will look very crisp and detailed. Now, compare that to an image with 72ppi, which has a lot fewer pixels per inch. As you've probably guessed, it won't look nearly as sharp as the 600ppi image.
Resolution rule of thumb: When scanning or photographing, always try and capture the image at the largest resolution/quality.
Why?
It's better to have more information than not enough! It's much easier for image editing applications, like Photoshop, to discard any unwanted image information (reducing the size of an image) than it is to create new pixel information (enlarge an image)."
What is Resolution? - All About Images - Research Guides at University of Michigan Library (umich.edu)
 
Copying and pasting without any demonstration of comprehension isn't an answer to being told the previous thing you copy pasted was a gross exaggeration.
 
Let's put it this way. A 54" 4k TV has exactly the same pixel density and size as a 27" 1080p TV. If they support the same panel tech and features they can display exactly the same thing, at the same scale. Stack 4 of the latter together and you have the same number of pixels. Scaled to the same size on each, exactly the same bird image (or whatever), with identical pixel configurations can be displayed. The 4k TV doesn't have an inherently sharper image than the 1080p tv in this case.

But in reality we don't typically watch 1/4 of a screen.
 
SexyGreyFox said:
All I can say is we are an old couple and we had a Samsung Full HD 43" that we mainly played 1080 content on (or less).
This time last year because we stayed in so much, I talked her into a 4K 43" Hisense for mostly 1080 content (or less) and we were both amazed at the difference in quality.
Put something like the Green Planet on my Full HD in the other room and compare it to the 4K and the difference is massive even with our old eyes.
Click to expand...

...unfortunately bbc 4k/hld(hdr) output, is limited to green planet , drwho, peakyblinders ...no olympics either.
neither whiitaker or attenborough are my cup of tea.
 
Hotwired said:
Copying and pasting without any demonstration of comprehension isn't an answer to being told the previous thing you copy pasted was a gross exaggeration.
Click to expand...

Some people show very low level of understanding of the matter or are simply trolling.
Leave them to read more and write less.

That's why it's meaningless to continue any discussion with them or trying to explain anything. Period..
 
HDR makes a bigger impact than 4k in movies IMO

But I have an 83" OLED so the difference between 1080p and 4k is also noticeable.

Games at 4k do always look much better than 1080p though.
 
4K8KW10 said:
Some people show very low level of understanding of the matter or are simply trolling.
Leave them to read more and write less.

That's why it's meaningless to continue any discussion with them or trying to explain anything. Period..
Click to expand...

He was talking to you and we've all seen you in your DAB thread making a complete fool of yourself and you'll go the same way in this thread.

I use Photoshop every day since the 90s so it's pointless telling me about resolutions.
 
Tired9 said:
Still to this day I cannot see a visual difference between a high-end 1080P screen and a 4K one.
the only differences I found were from panel quality and the benefits of colour reproduction, not resolution.

Why are people so hell bent on not accepting a better superior panel instead of more pixels?

I sit at a distance from my TV of 10 feet and this is by no means a long distance. In stores I have to get really close to the TV to make the resolution seem like a jump visually whilst I can instantly see a quality panel from a crap one purely from colour reproduction and response time.

Why are we so accepting of crap technology that only really benefits professional work - loads not the end consumer especially us casuals?

Would it not make sense to push for the best panel quality? Raise prices based on this? rather than trying to push higher res?

This came into my head after putting down money for a 32 inch QHD monitor which will be used with games consoles for media purpose and the odd game or two (XBOX ONE X can push 1440P from the downsampled 4K output).

After looking around...

https://www.avforums.com/threads/is-there-any-point-in-4k.2251217/
Click to expand...


My condolences for your boomer eyes. Whether you're 60 years old or not, your eyes must be if you can't see a difference. Luckily you can get help, there is specsavers or even laser
 
Grim5 said:
My condolences for your boomer eyes. Whether you're 60 years old or not, your eyes must be if you can't see a difference. Luckily you can get help, there is specsavers or even laser
Click to expand...
Millennial eyes, it's funny I can read off a car license plate from a good 100 meters or more but hardly see a difference between 1080P and a 4K one in a store unless I am right up to it.
Must be my bad eyes.

4K8KW10 showing marketing pics... no surprises there.

I have lost faith in finding any intelligence in most places these days.
 
Tired9 said:
Millennial eyes, it's funny I can read off a car license plate from a good 100 meters or more but hardly see a difference between 1080P and a 4K one in a store unless I am right up to it.
Must be my bad eyes.
Click to expand...
It's very clear that other people can see a big difference at a regular viewing distance so I think you found your answer. There is a point of diminishing returns for resolution but 1080p isn't it for most people. You also have my condolences for losing the eyesight genetic lottery.

Tired9 said:
I have lost faith in finding any intelligence in most places these days.
Click to expand...
Trolling forums is a strange way of looking for intelligence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom