3 ms·
I feel like I'm missing something here. A display that has enough pixels to show the pixel resolution of the source should be able to resolve all the (subsample
by glhaynes 9y ago
I feel like I'm missing something here. A display that has enough pixels to show the pixel resolution of the source should be able to resolve all the (subsampled) chroma information as well, should it not? (Er, at least as long as the subsampling is done at an integer divisor of the original!)
Anyway, a high-resolution source could look better than a low-resolution source when displayed on a display with the same resolution as the low-resolution source for a number of reasons, perhaps the most obvious being that the high-resolution source might be of higher bandwidth.
- chrisseaton 9y ago> I feel like I'm missing something here. If you have a 2k screen, you may think there's no point watching a 4k video instead of a 2k video. Well there is even if you ignore bitrate - because the 4k video when resized to 2k will contain more colour information than the 2k video shown at 2k. > A display that has enough pixels to show the pixel resolution of the source should be able to resolve all the (subsampled) chroma information as well, should it not? Yes, but the point is that a display that does not have enough pixels to show the resolution of the source, will be able to show colour per-pixel in the 4k video, rather than colour per-every-other-pixel as it would in the 2k video. (Chroma subsampling is not this simple in practice.)
- glhaynes 9y agoOh, I see now. Thanks!