SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the surgically-grafted-to-the-inside-of-the-eyelids dept.
The top google hits say that there is little or no benefit to resolution above 4k. I recently bought a 40" 4k tv which I use as a monitor (2' viewing distance). While this is right at the threshold where I'm told no benefit can be gained from additional resolution, I can still easily discern individual pixels. I'm still able to see individual pixels until I get to about a 4' viewing distance (but I am nearsighted).
I did some research and according to Wikipedia the Fovea Centralis (center of the eye) has a resolution of 31.5 arc seconds. At this resolution, a 4k monitor would need to be only 16" at a 2' viewing distance, or my 40" would need a 5' viewing distance.
Now the Fovea Centralis comprises only the size of 2 thumbnails width at arms length (2° viewing angle) and the eye's resolution drops off quickly farther from the center. But this tiny portion of the eye is processed by 50% of the visual cortex of the brain.
So I ask, are there any soylentils with perfect vision and/or a super high resolution set up, and does this match where you can no longer discern individual pixels? Do you think retina resolution needs to match the Fovea Centralis or is a lesser value acceptable?
My 40" 4k at 2' fills my entire field of view. I really like it because I have so much screen real estate for multiple windows or large spreadsheets, or I can scoot back a little bit for gaming (so I don't have to turn my head to see everything) and enjoy the higher resolution. I find 4k on high graphics looks much nicer than 1080p on Ultra. I find the upgrade is well worth the $600 I spent for the tv and a graphics card that can run it. Have you upgraded to 4k and do you think it was worth it? I would one day like to have dual 32" 8k monitors (not 3D). What is your dream setup if technology and price weren't an issue?
Written from my work 1366 x 768 monitor.
Related discussions: First "8K" Video Appears on YouTube
LG to Demo an 8K Resolution TV at the Consumer Electronics Show
What is your Video / Monitor Setup?
Microsoft and Sony's Emerging 4K Pissing Contest
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday January 11 2017, @12:15PM
This is one thing I don't understand. When I see a match on a telly in the pub, the TV image quality is barely better than analogue was 20 years ago, and sometimes far worse. There may be more pixels, but half of those pixels are just showing blocking or scaling artifacts, worse both. OK, there might be a few "HD" channels that live up to the name, but it seems like the majority is just garbage transmitted like the garbage that it is. So I think this change is driven more by simply pushing the tech onto the market rather than it actually being demanded.
1080p 46" 60Hz TV as primary monitor, viewing distance 60" - 150" depending on what I'm doing - works great for my needs.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Wednesday January 11 2017, @05:31PM
720p and 1080p came out well ahead of widespread content availability as well. As consumer adoption rates continue to rise, if through nothing else than attrition as older sets fail and are replaced, the content will continue to grow.
I'm surprised HD adoption, especially in sports, is so poor over there. In the US our sports tend to be the technology leader when it comes to broadcasts, especially our football (US football, not rest of the world football) games.