Why have we jumped to 4K?

DeliciousStorage said:
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.


Trolling forums is a strange way of looking for intelligence.
Click to expand...
Using the word "Trolling " is todays way of shutting down your opposition when you have nothing to give instead of using the mind. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Reverse Trolling

Using stupid accusations that I must have no eyes or bad vision too.

You also never looked into all the different ways that 4K screens trick you with better colour gamut, HDR etc, there is more, but the resolution it's self is not what you are seeing a major difference with.

Calling someone a troll is damaging to the thread but also the reputation of the person but it don't mean people who comprehend what is said see it as trolling, it just means there is a separation between people who think alike.
The more intelligent are not fast to call others labels though unless fully evidenced and warranted.
 
Last edited:
4K8KW10 said:
They are not unfair. Watch this video:


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



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 :)
Click to expand...
Here is a test for you.

Do you have a 1080P screen handy?

I have taken an image from that video of the 4K camera vs the HD one.

Now tell me, does it still look way sharper and better on the 4K one?

I already know the answer is yes.

Want to know why?

When a camera resolves an image it is processing an image into a data file, the more raw data there is to be stored, the better the output quality just like movies that are encoded.

At 1080P and even 1440P or 4K, this difference is night and day yet you are still looking at that image between different resolutions.

How strange!

The HD output on this camera is just bad.

Try using a dedicated quality HD camera.


Untitled.png
 
Accounting for this screen being 2560x1440 native at 27" with a PPI of 109.. my naked eye cannot see any of the lines on the screen even at 1080P and neither can yours from the distance I took these two photos.
This is shot at a distance of around 1.3 feet.

Cameras can pick up way more than our vision, especially infrarared ... this is just my crappy Moto G8 phone camera.

And yet you can still see a marked improvement even on 1080P which looks very blurry because it is not a native screen resolution on my panel and the pixel layout is completely out of sync to 1080P.

Both images are highly grainy because the camera is also picking up all the black lines on the panel so it interferes with the picture regardless, this is a drawback of cameras. They simply pick up more.



IMG-20220207-165159738.jpg


IMG-20220207-165243974.jpg






This image here is from sitting back into my chair which would be roughly 2 feet.

IMG-20220207-165358222.jpg



Even the camera which picks up way more than we can, cannot resolve anything but a full image, which is not as limited as a humans eye sight.

Cameras also pick up backlight way more than our naked eye on all displays.
 
I am getting confused. If your saying a 4k image/resolution is not much better than a 1080p one, then equally what is the point in having 1440p?

Surely for graphic design, content creation, workflows, watching movies etc. there must be a difference - but the way I am reading the last page anyway is basically just go back to a 1080p monitor and we can all sing kumbaya?
 
gpuerrilla said:
I am getting confused. If your saying a 4k image/resolution is not much better than a 1080p one, then equally what is the point in having 1440p?

Surely for graphic design, content creation, workflows, watching movies etc. there must be a difference - but the way I am reading the last page anyway is basically just go back to a 1080p monitor and we can all sing kumbaya?
Click to expand...
Because I sit very close to my screen just like you or anyone else.

Video games benefit from higher resolution due to the way they are rendered; aliasing. Movies and images.. not so much most people don't sit anywhere as close to the screen as someone at a PC.
 
4K is definitely better than 1080p, there's no doubt about that BUT it is all very contextual. 4k on a phone or computer monitor is great as you're up close and personal. 4K on a 55 inch TV where you're sat 10 feet away vs 1080p... Not so much but change that 55 inch TV for 85binch and it will look better than an 85 inch TV at 1080p

Play a game on a gpu that runs at 60fps at 1080p and that's enjoyable. Play a game at 4k at 15 fps and that's not so much! So would 1080p be better in that case?

Netflix 4k vs 1080p is not a very good comparison as they can and do change the bitrate that makes a massive difference. You ideally need uncompressed 1080p content vs 4k content and then compare the difference. Screen size and distance definitely plays a part though but at what distance people notice the difference is highly personal.

On a side note my girlfriend sees everything in standard definition until she puts her glasses on so when I sit down to watch TV and she doesn't have the HD channel on and we pay for it I'm not impressed haha.
 
Nemiyen said:
4K is definitely better than 1080p, there's no doubt about that BUT it is all very contextual. 4k on a phone or computer monitor is great as you're up close and personal. 4K on a 55 inch TV where you're sat 10 feet away vs 1080p... Not so much but change that 55 inch TV for 85binch and it will look better than an 85 inch TV at 1080p

Play a game on a gpu that runs at 60fps at 1080p and that's enjoyable. Play a game at 4k at 15 fps and that's not so much! So would 1080p be better in that case?

Netflix 4k vs 1080p is not a very good comparison as they can and do change the bitrate that makes a massive difference. You ideally need uncompressed 1080p content vs 4k content and then compare the difference. Screen size and distance definitely plays a part though but at what distance people notice the difference is highly personal.

On a side note my girlfriend sees everything in standard definition until she puts her glasses on so when I sit down to watch TV and she doesn't have the HD channel on and we pay for it I'm not impressed haha.
Click to expand...

I have a 4k monitor for my workstation/gaming rig. I do from time to time watch Prime Video on it and is acceptable from about a meter away. It comfortably beats HD screens I see within the house or at other places so my eyes obviously can see something crisper about it.

The first sentence you gave, its not what the thread title suggests. If we are talking tv's and sitting 10m away I could understand, however my desktop use, gaming and watching content ~1m away its definitely better (maybe not always justifying the price) but this panel cost me not very much and very pleased with it. I hope to get a 42" HDR panel from LG as the upgrade here if I am lucky some day soon.
 
All depends on the person and the content, these same discussions happened when 1080p became a thing, oooh its not worth it etc, but again it was all about the quality of the content, the display and the context within which it was used.

In general I prefer UHD enough to pay extra for its content, my missus doesn't get it at all, though she does notice the difference between SD and HD at least so that is something but it is clear our eyes are in a different place. Scalers on screens do a great job of fixing 1080p content on 4k screens that you think you don't need (need is not the right term) the UHD source but when you buy 4k bluray you get both the 1080p and the 4k UHD and despite cracking scalers I've not seen a case where 4K doesn't trump 1080p.

For work I use a 4k for CAD and do so on a large 43inch screen as I need real estate to see the content, unfortunately that resolution is a bit low for that size screen and how close I am sat and I could do with something middle ground like 5 or 6k, 8k is too much of a jump for my eyes well at the size that gets typically sold for design work, 8k @ 32" with no scaling is :eek:.
 
sandys said:
All depends on the person and the content, these same discussions happened when 1080p became a thing, oooh its not worth it etc, but again it was all about the quality of the content, the display and the context within which it was used.

In general I prefer UHD enough to pay extra for its content, my missus doesn't get it at all, though she does notice the difference between SD and HD at least so that is something but it is clear our eyes are in a different place. Scalers on screens do a great job of fixing 1080p content on 4k screens that you think you don't need (need is not the right term) the UHD source but when you buy 4k bluray you get both the 1080p and the 4k UHD and despite cracking scalers I've not seen a case where 4K doesn't trump 1080p.

For work I use a 4k for CAD and do so on a large 43inch screen as I need real estate to see the content, unfortunately that resolution is a bit low for that size screen and how close I am sat and I could do with something middle ground like 5 or 6k, 8k is too much of a jump for my eyes well at the size that gets typically sold for design work, 8k @ 32" with no scaling is :eek:.
Click to expand...

Well us men have an ego to uphold, but you have a marked use case for 4K and even higher. 42" is stupid at a normal PC sitting distance IMO, but I can definitely see it being beneficial for critical work.

Sadly most men because they lack in other areas tend to gravitate towards upholding what they purchase as a status symbol and don't put in the brain power to understanding what they have which I would assume the missus would enjoy hearing about if she is not a total douch nozzle or has the time. If she is below your intelligence level so you can't talk to her, you now get my issue with some people.. being unheard is awful.

Passion, women love it.. at least some do.. I dunno choose wisely I say.

I chose intelligence from a woman, people gravitate towards all sorts...
 
Tired9 said:
42" is stupid at a normal PC sitting distance IMO,
Click to expand...

You are entitled to your opinion and perhaps it is true for how you use it but I actually have my 4k on arm so I can pull it even closer for some gaming, racing games for example, when I have my wheel out, where your field of view is consumed by display are awesome, again all about the content and context, sure it's not VR but the immersion is high, again here the 4k res can be low and initially I can see between the pixels, need higher res, but after a bit the games are so fast you don't focus on it.
 
sandys said:
You are entitled to your opinion and perhaps it is true for how you use it but I actually have my 4k on arm so I can pull it even closer for some gaming, racing games for example, when I have my wheel out, where your field of view is consumed by display are awesome, again all about the content and context, sure it's not VR but the immersion is high.
Click to expand...
That sounds pretty awesome in all fairness, I can visualize the experience you are getting somewhat.

My 31" 1440P 75hz is on an arm at the end of the bed so Netflix and chill and gaming in 1 combo, XBOX One X when I feel lazy.
Lay back, ignore the world or sit at the comp and play with better control in games that require it and better visuals.

We are not miles apart it seems.
 
I game and watch TV/movies on a 60 inch 1080p and looks great to me

The only game I could do with some extra Res is FS2020 when in the cockpit

Personally I think panel quality and calibration followed by size are more important to overall experience than resolution - I have a Panasonic ZT65 which I use which has been calibrated to the nth degree (by me)
 
Last edited:
Buckster said:
I game and watch TV/movies on a 60 inch 1080p and looks great to me

The only game I could do with some extra Res is FS2020 when in the cockpit

Personally I think panel quality and calibration followed by size are more important to overall experience than resolution - I have a Panasonic ZT65 which I use which has been calibrated to the nth degree (by me)
Click to expand...

Great TV that, wouldn’t be in too much of a hurry to change to a 4k oled.
 
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...


Here you go, now will you see the difference: https://www.specsavers.co.uk/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom