Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
What the #### are you talking about psicodude? The chart doesn't say there's no difference between 480p and 4k. It says you can't tell the difference between different resolutions at a given distance because the human eye isn't able to identify resolution at those distances. That is scientific fact. It's biology.
If you look at a 60' screen from thirty feet, you will not be able to discern which screen is 4k and which is 480p on the basis of resolution alone. Of course you'll probably be able to tell the difference because an old 480p TV is going to be much worse in many other respects besides resolution than a newly created 4k screen. But if you took, say, a top of the line Samsung or Panasonic 1080p plasma from 2013 in 55", put it next to a random 55" 4k LED screen running a 4k video in a dark room, and tried to decide which was a better picture from 15 feet away, you'd pick the plasma because of better colour depth and black levels and because you can't see the difference in resolution. Period. This is simply reality.
|
Relax Corsi. I didn't say you were stupid, I said that chart is stupid.
There are too many variables involved to make a chart stating that at x feet away you need a y size screen to notice a difference. Like you said, different screen qualities, features, and even eyesight make it nearly impossible to come up with a magic formula like this chart implies there is. I even stated that the difference between 1080 and 4K isn't as huge as the marketing suggests and that video sources are so compressed that it doesn't matter much anyway.
The point I was trying to make is that 4K is pretty much the standard for TV's in 2017 and that the OP should future proof his investment by making the jump now. The real bonus is that a current model 4K screen is going to come with a lot of features that will pay off in the years to come as well, such as CEC, HDR, Dolby Vision, etc.