can be a bit tricky sometimes, can't it? If you had a 42" 4k television or monitor you would need to sit no farther than about 4 feet away to see the full potential of it come out. If you sat 6 feet away the image would be indistinguishable from 1080p if you were using the full potential of a 1080p monitor (probably accomplished by downscaling a 4k video).
Then you've got the fact you need a good source material to make the most of whatever resolution you choose. You can download 1080p blu ray rips of movies that usually come out to around 2.7 gigabytes for a 2 hour movie, having been re-encoded from a 25 gb source file. These videos are bit starved and although they are technically "1080p" the detail level that is seen in any scene with even a slight bit of movement is probably not much more than a full-power 720p encode.
And even if you do everything technically right, if the people making your source material were even slightly off-the-ball during production you won't get the full quality of 4k. Any slight loss of focus will blur the image and reduce resolved detail to around 1080p or less. 4k is pretty hard to sustain from a production standpoint. 8k is a nightmare. And there is the fact that a lot of consumers record things in 4k with lenses that just aren't sharp enough to really gather the detail for that to make a difference except in very controlled conditions.
There's viewing angles, contrast levels, response times... these things also influence whether an image looks more detailed or not.
This is why 8k will never actually be "a thing" for home users.
Liam Howard
or you can simply use it like a normal person, ignoring that meme graph
Eli Fisher
>ignoring facts
lol, you can ignore it, but it's still true an 85" 8k at 6-7 feet will look identical to a 4k monitor of the same size.
Asher Parker
they should get rid of the native resolution thing instead of bumping the resolution every year and making old content look even worse.
Chase Gray
Oh it's far too late for that, user. It was always too late.
More autism:
Back in the 90s before HDTV was widespread you could have owned a 36" CRT television if you wanted to be a hot shot. You could order a service called 4DTV that was available on C-Band satellites. When you did this you would have access to the highest possible signal quality available, the "master feed" used to transmit television programs to lesser satellite and cable networks. This was as close to straight-out-of-the-camera as you could get. I was lucky enough to see one of these set ups and watched quite a lot of television on it. It blew me away, and I haven't really felt like many improvements have been made since.
I'd be more into giving up on 16:9 and going back to 4:3.
Frame rate and aspect ratio are way more important to me than resolution. Recently I was playing games on a CRT projector in 1280x960@100hz on an 84" screen. It was great.
Brayden Scott
just be honest with yourself OP, all this has nothing to do with watching movies, it has to do with your untreated autism
There is some higher than 720p anime, mainly Gundam Thunderbolt, and the new netflix stuff that's being produced.
But no TRUE 4k source at the moment.
Alexander Cook
What this means is that 2K 1080p is all we need, the rest is just corporations trying to get your $$$$$$. 2K upscales to 4K fine at normal viewing distances, only autists sit 2 feet from a massive screen. The only reason to get a 4K screen is for more space for your loonix or windoze desktop, where watching video is in your browser or app because you are not sperg enough to sit 12 inches from a 84" screen and watch full screen videos.
Connor Long
"Untreated" doesn't imply that something is an illness. one example: untreated water Getting autistic people used to the "real" world is very important for them to be as high functioning and fulfilled as they can be. You could call this treatment if you don't immediately place prejudice on words.
William Barnes
>mommy told me that i'm special and different and that I should be proud I'm not a boring old neurotypical! there is help out there user you can be cured break the conditioning
Jace Hall
It's ridiculous cycle:
>480i looks great when full potential is utilized >technology progresses to the point full-power 480i can easily be delivered to home users >NOPE >time to send shitty bit-starved 720p and 1080i instead which looks about as good as a full-power 480i image but costs the consumer more >technology improves to the point full-power 1080p is deliverable and 1080p sets are getting very affordable >NOPE >time for 4k lol
And it goes on and on. It's a roller coaster. The consumer has their socks knocked off by their first look at the new tech, but within a year or so that tech has been gimped down to the same old shit level. I can watch Dish Network in "720p" on channels like Destination America and I swear it looks worse than a 360p youtube video sometimes.
Gavin Morales
No one is forcing you to buy 4k, if you're fine with 1080, keep using 1080.
If you want better looking 1080, take the source 4k and downscale it yourself.
Charles Miller
That's exactly what I do. I also bought used 24" 16:10 monitors that lack HDMI ports because they were the best price/performance. I'll probably go up to 27" 2560x1600 by the end of this year since there are some benefits going up to that size from a desktop viewing distance.
Dylan Peterson
>I can watch Dish Network in "720p" on channels like Destination America and I swear it looks worse than a 360p youtube video sometimes. Dish Network's 1080p is 1440x1080 and it's likely the 720 is some other cheat.
Anthony Adams
>1080p blu ray rips of movies that usually come out to around 2.7 gigabytes for a 2 hour movie
Yup. That's about 2500 kbps. Worse than an average youtube video, but that's what people watch.
Charles Flores
> 40"-45" monitors desperately need 8k and would even get some marginal benefit from 12k/16k.
tell me something else I didn't know.
Easton Gomez
It is, see Kimi no na wa
Carter Ross
This chart is complete bullshit. Anyone who has ever been 5 feet from a normal 46" 1080p display compared to an equivalent sized 4k display should be able to realize this.
Jeremiah Harris
This, have it as my monitor
Carter Davis
Kimi no na wa is 1080p source with 4k upscale.
John Phillips
Are you going to sit 2 feet from a 45 inch monitor?
Leo Walker
>Are you going to sit 2 feet from a 45 inch monitor?
I'm sitting about 1.5' from a LG 43UD79-B as I type this. ~40" is the patrician form factor right now for anybody who doesn't specifically need high DPI for photo work or high fps for gaming, though the latter restriction should be lifting gradually over the next year with the belated introduction of UHD@120Hz/DP1.3 display controllers.
Michael Price
This is a fact
Hudson Gonzalez
>feet Ugh, what the fuck is this? How many meters?
Blake Young
Libre AV1 will replace patent heavy h265 HEVC but I predict 4K will be shrunk into 2500kbps. I will take 2k 1080p and less bandwidth.
Justin Morales
Meters would be useless on this chart because the entire scale is ~3.5 meters
For reference for our seemingly uneducated international posters, 1 meter is roughly 3.3 feet.
Gabriel Powell
>Libre AV1 will replace patent heavy h265 HEVC for online media maybe, not for distributed media like blurays, those are H265 and will continue to be so.
Charles Evans
Okay, cm then.
Logan Barnes
>he needs hand holding
If you know how many feet are in a meter you should be able to work it out yourself in your head VERY easily, if you can't then how the fuck did you end up on Jow Forums? This is super basic shit. Unit conversion in your head should be one of the most basic things you can do...
Lincoln Ramirez
I've got a 65" 1080p TV. I sit around 8 feet away from it. (Living room setup). TV is perfect size for the space. Other words it ain't the center piece/show stopper/etc of the room. The fireplace wins that round. But anyway I can watch pretty much whatever I want and it looks decent and I get the "theater" like atmosphere to boot. Sitting like 3ft (or closer) to such a tv is a dumb ass thing to do, all your doing is ruining your eyesight. The whole point of buying a big screen is to sit far back from it and get the surround theater like experience. Then you got the whole content resolution thing. Watch something, say a vhs res rip of some show, on a 65" at 3ft and see how fucking shit the quality is. Then watch it at 8+ ft. Hey the quality ain't to bad now. Reason? Viewing distance. Eyes can't see all the little micro blocks at 8+ft compared to 3 ft.
Cameron Barnes
My name is Chad and I'm here to fuck your mom. I use a 768x1024 VGA display.
