4 ms·

People are also not considering that unless you get a 4K feed (which is not that common or costs a lot more) 1080p will look blurry or not as a good on a 4K scr

by relyks 4y ago

People are also not considering that unless you get a 4K feed (which is not that common or costs a lot more) 1080p will look blurry or not as a good on a 4K screen of that size

kmlx 4y ago
> 4K feed (which is not that common or costs a lot more) from my experience 4K and 1080p costs the same. not only that, but i haven't really seen popular youtube uploads or movie streams in 1080p for a good chunk of years now.
- relyks 4y ago
  To get 4K content on Netflix, Paramount+, Hulu, you need to pay more for the premium subscription. On Prime Video and Disney+, the 4K content is usually limited to only the original content. You can get 4K movie/TV show rentals (pay on demand) that will cost more. Digital linear TV services like YouTube TV or fuboTV don't provide 4K feeds for live content most of the time (not including on demand). News streams are still 1080p and sports streams are occasionally in 4K but it's not very often. I didn't know more people are uploading 4K content on YouTube though.
  - kmlx 4y ago
    damn, you’re right. thanks for the thorough comment! i do pay more for 4k for netflix and co. my mistake was thinking about renting titles on prime and rakuten, where i get 4k(uhd) and 1080p at the same price.
saiya-jin 4y ago
This is something I don't get - why aren't four 4k pixels in square used to render 1 pixel from 1080p signal? Unless you mean that input device does have 4k connection to TV, but content being played is 1080p, thus some interpolation happens (but still I would expect modern hardware should make it hard to spot, with good photo editing you don't lose quality dramatically when resizing).
- relyks 4y ago
  I'm not an expert on this, but I don't think the dimensions and aspect ratio would work with that? I do mean that the input device has a 4K connection to the TV. Like you mentioned, interpolation (upsampling) needs to happen. It depends on the algorithms or hardware chips used, but it's been pretty noticeable for me. I was trying to imply that it might be worth keeping a 1080p display/TV depending on what type of content you want to watch. In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to get a 4K display if all the content you watch is in 1080p.
  - NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
    1080p content is 1920x1080. 4K content is 3840x2160. You just literally double-up the pixel size in each dimension; there's no need for interpolation or anything else that will cause blurring. I've been working on an FPGA project that involves 1080p into a 4K monitor over HDMI and it looks very sharp to me, even on high contrast edges with a pretty critical eye.
rowanG077 4y ago
This definitely shouldn't be the case. 1080p can be cleanly upscaled simply by displaying every pixel 4 times. If you have blurry results your display or output device is doing wonky stuff.

by relyks 4y ago

People are also not considering that unless you get a 4K feed (which is not that common or costs a lot more) 1080p will look blurry or not as a good on a 4K screen of that size

kmlx 4y ago

> 4K feed (which is not that common or costs a lot more) from my experience 4K and 1080p costs the same. not only that, but i haven't really seen popular youtube uploads or movie streams in 1080p for a good chunk of years now.

relyks 4y ago
To get 4K content on Netflix, Paramount+, Hulu, you need to pay more for the premium subscription. On Prime Video and Disney+, the 4K content is usually limited to only the original content. You can get 4K movie/TV show rentals (pay on demand) that will cost more. Digital linear TV services like YouTube TV or fuboTV don't provide 4K feeds for live content most of the time (not including on demand). News streams are still 1080p and sports streams are occasionally in 4K but it's not very often. I didn't know more people are uploading 4K content on YouTube though.
- kmlx 4y ago
  damn, you’re right. thanks for the thorough comment! i do pay more for 4k for netflix and co. my mistake was thinking about renting titles on prime and rakuten, where i get 4k(uhd) and 1080p at the same price.

saiya-jin 4y ago

This is something I don't get - why aren't four 4k pixels in square used to render 1 pixel from 1080p signal? Unless you mean that input device does have 4k connection to TV, but content being played is 1080p, thus some interpolation happens (but still I would expect modern hardware should make it hard to spot, with good photo editing you don't lose quality dramatically when resizing).

relyks 4y ago
I'm not an expert on this, but I don't think the dimensions and aspect ratio would work with that? I do mean that the input device has a 4K connection to the TV. Like you mentioned, interpolation (upsampling) needs to happen. It depends on the algorithms or hardware chips used, but it's been pretty noticeable for me. I was trying to imply that it might be worth keeping a 1080p display/TV depending on what type of content you want to watch. In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to get a 4K display if all the content you watch is in 1080p.
- NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
  1080p content is 1920x1080. 4K content is 3840x2160. You just literally double-up the pixel size in each dimension; there's no need for interpolation or anything else that will cause blurring. I've been working on an FPGA project that involves 1080p into a 4K monitor over HDMI and it looks very sharp to me, even on high contrast edges with a pretty critical eye.

rowanG077 4y ago

This definitely shouldn't be the case. 1080p can be cleanly upscaled simply by displaying every pixel 4 times. If you have blurry results your display or output device is doing wonky stuff.