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: 4, Insightful) by wonkey_monkey on Wednesday January 11 2017, @08:50AM
Is Screen Resolution Good Enough Considering the Fovea Centralis of the Eye?
Or are you just sitting too close to your screen?
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
That's because most people don't watch 40" TVs from 2' away.
If you really want a 110 degree viewing experience, you're using the wrong equipment in the first place. Personally I don't know you can stand the distortion or the neck/eye strain (you're going to have to move one or the other to see anything outside of the middle 10% or so).
(but I am nearsighted).
I'm not surprised!
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Wednesday January 11 2017, @01:35PM
So what affordable equipment could he use instead of the TV to achieve the desired results at an equally high resolution? I'm genuinely interested.
"rancid randy has a dialogue with herself[...] Somebody help him!" -- Anonymous Coward.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday January 11 2017, @02:10PM
Both at work and home I have three monitors in a semicircle ish shape on my desk. The combined res in X is better and in Y is worse, but its OK. At home each monitor has a separate machine because they have separate jobs to do and frankly it works better and faster and in freebsd using a NFS home directory scheme isn't exactly rocket surgery. At work I've experimented with various combinations of multi-machine and multi-output video cards.
The neck/eyestrain thing is pretty bogus as I'll look at the middle screen most of the time but the side screens will be showing some kind of data sheet or howto or ebook or video or email. Trying to use all that space as one six foot wide emacs window that wraps around would be quite agonizing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 11 2017, @03:19PM
OP here, sorry I don't have an account.
40" 4k is basically four 20" 1080p, stacked in a square, without a bezel. Like I in the submission, so much room for activities. 2' viewing distance is just standard for monitors.
I really prefer turning my head to having to scroll / switch windows. Neck strain? No. Not that I've experienced. It is no wider than dual monitors, which people seem to have no problem with.
If you get eye strain from looking outside of the center 10% of your vision, then I'm sure you enjoy your 10" monitor.
I became near sighted in high school, which was a long time ago. Nearsightedness runs in my family. My eyesight has degraded linearly with time (increased prescription by -0.5 every few years) despite the various changes in my life.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 11 2017, @05:50PM
This here.
I have just moved to the same setup from a 3 monitor setup with a 4k 49" TV. (NB: not all TVs are as good for this as others, for a guide try this one: http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-usage/pc-monitor/best [rtings.com] )
Less neck strain, better quality and more desk space.
Also I use an app called Displayfusion to move general windows easily from a square 2x2 (i.e. 4 seamless 1080p windows) to a 3x1 (central window slightly larger) window configuration depending on whether the extra length is needed for reading. (contrary to popular opinion I have found from experience extra length is not always needed)
These can mix an match easily and I find it very productive and MUCH less annoying.
For programming and music recording I set up the IDE in several layouts for the context. You can mix the above to get a 1/3 window in the middle and 6 potential windows around the edge. Using your IDE/DAW's windowing options you can change easily to any number of configurations.
Don't anyone tell me this does not work or is bad: you have no idea what you are talking about!