3 ms·

> I wonder how many people hit their caps, switch down to 1080P, and realize they can't tell the difference from the couch anyway. I have to stand closer than

by ashark 9y ago

> I wonder how many people hit their caps, switch down to 1080P, and realize they can't tell the difference from the couch anyway. I have to stand closer than ~6ft away from my now-considered-tiny 42" 1080p TV to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p. At my couch's distance of ~12ft I don't notice the difference between DVD quality and 1080p with most content. According to an online calculator that confirms those numbers so I think it's probably somewhat reliable, I'd need a 78" TV to get the benefit of 1080p at 12' away. I can't even imagine what kind of absurd seating/TV arrangement I'd have to have for 4K to matter. Couch 4ft from a 70" screen? Something like that? In a monitor, yeah, bring on the extra pixels. In a TV though? Why?

Animats 9y ago
Movie video in ultra-high resolution isn't that interesting because it's composed by humans. You're being told where to look. Watching 2160p video on a desktop of walking or driving through interesting places with a stabilized camera gives a real feeling of presence. You can look where you choose (especially with spherical video) and see the detail. [1] (Shenzhen) [2] (Harajuku) [1] https://youtu.be/NTcx0OHehdE?t=57 https://youtu.be/NTcx0OHehdE?t=57 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiQ4YDH3g80 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiQ4YDH3g80
- ashark 9y ago
  Is that the kind of thing one might watch on TV (so, not a monitor) enough to make it worth the 4K upgrade? Cables, receiver, TV, all of that. Seems like more of a VR thing to me (though I don't have a VR rig, so what do I know). On a TV it'd be more a novelty than an actual thing you'd sit down to watch for minutes to hours every single week, I'd think.
nsxwolf 9y ago
I think HDR is going to be to most people what 4K is, only because it won't be commonly available at lower resolutions. Similar to the hi res audio formats don't sound better because of the hi res, but because the studios chose to release better masters with higher dynamic range for the format.

by ashark 9y ago

Animats 9y ago

Movie video in ultra-high resolution isn't that interesting because it's composed by humans. You're being told where to look. Watching 2160p video on a desktop of walking or driving through interesting places with a stabilized camera gives a real feeling of presence. You can look where you choose (especially with spherical video) and see the detail. [1] (Shenzhen) [2] (Harajuku) [1] https://youtu.be/NTcx0OHehdE?t=57 https://youtu.be/NTcx0OHehdE?t=57 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiQ4YDH3g80 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiQ4YDH3g80

ashark 9y ago
Is that the kind of thing one might watch on TV (so, not a monitor) enough to make it worth the 4K upgrade? Cables, receiver, TV, all of that. Seems like more of a VR thing to me (though I don't have a VR rig, so what do I know). On a TV it'd be more a novelty than an actual thing you'd sit down to watch for minutes to hours every single week, I'd think.

nsxwolf 9y ago

I think HDR is going to be to most people what 4K is, only because it won't be commonly available at lower resolutions. Similar to the hi res audio formats don't sound better because of the hi res, but because the studios chose to release better masters with higher dynamic range for the format.