4 ms·

Resolution isn’t necessarily about having the ability to stop and see individual pixels though. If nothing else, there is a difference in 1080p versus 4K when

Resolution isn’t necessarily about having the ability to stop and see individual pixels though. If nothing else, there is a difference in 1080p versus 4K when it comes to aliasing. The absolute best antialiasing, is to increase resolution. The effect of resolution on all edges that aren’t perfectly vertical or horizontal is noticeable. There are also particle effect differences where your particles have a 4x boost in definition. I’m not saying it’s a big deal, but there are factors that go beyond sitting distances. I personally think these distances calculators are made to sell bigger TVs, but won’t immediately discount 4k as just pointless.

function_seven 6y ago
This reminds me of the misunderstandings around frame rate. It used to be that people would think "you can't make out individual frames of video at 24fps, so there's no reason to go higher than that". And, yeah, I don't see a fast-moving slideshow at 24fps, but there is still a significant visible difference between 24, 30, 48, 60, 144, etc. Just because you can't make out the building blocks of the thing, doesn't mean you can't see the effect of increasing the resolution (whether spatial or temporal).
- nitrogen 6y ago
  Latencty went through a similar dark age until recently. People would argue that human reaction times are at best around 100ms, but the feedback loop formed by the eyes and ears, through the hands, into the keyboard/mouse/musical instrument, and back out to the ears/eyes, is much more sensitive than that.
  - LocalH 6y ago
    Rhythm games are proof of that. Despite the 80ms or so "inherent latency" that we have, we can still be pretty exact in terms of synchronization with external stimuli.
Dylan16807 6y ago
Yeah, our eyes can pick up on subtle misalignments 5-10x smaller than the "retina" levels for distinguishing between pixels.

function_seven 6y ago

This reminds me of the misunderstandings around frame rate. It used to be that people would think "you can't make out individual frames of video at 24fps, so there's no reason to go higher than that". And, yeah, I don't see a fast-moving slideshow at 24fps, but there is still a significant visible difference between 24, 30, 48, 60, 144, etc. Just because you can't make out the building blocks of the thing, doesn't mean you can't see the effect of increasing the resolution (whether spatial or temporal).

nitrogen 6y ago
Latencty went through a similar dark age until recently. People would argue that human reaction times are at best around 100ms, but the feedback loop formed by the eyes and ears, through the hands, into the keyboard/mouse/musical instrument, and back out to the ears/eyes, is much more sensitive than that.
- LocalH 6y ago
  Rhythm games are proof of that. Despite the 80ms or so "inherent latency" that we have, we can still be pretty exact in terms of synchronization with external stimuli.

Dylan16807 6y ago

Yeah, our eyes can pick up on subtle misalignments 5-10x smaller than the "retina" levels for distinguishing between pixels.