4 ms·

http://i.imgur.com/xiW4vdw.png http://i.imgur.com/xiW4vdw.png

by skizm 12y ago

thenmar 12y ago
What does "full benefits" mean?
- wiremine 12y ago
  Here's the full article: http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter/ http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter/ It doesn't really say, but I would guess it has to do with when you start to see individual pixels.
  - thenmar 12y ago
    Thanks!
sampo 12y ago
That is a very nice chart. But gee, one length (viewing distance) is in different units than the other length (screen diagonal size). Hilarious.
- chipotle_coyote 12y ago
  I'm not entirely sure I follow why you feel this is significant. At least in the US, we tend to measure viewing distance in feet and diagonal screen size in inches, and those are both measures of length. It's not like the two axes are "feet" and "fluid ounces."
  - antimagic 12y ago
    Even if it was fluid ounces, that's still not a problem - A line chart of my account balance would have Euros on the y-axis and months on the x-axis. It's still a meaningful chart though...
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
Shivetya 12y ago
Well with a 4K display your able to sit closer to larger ones because you will not detect the pixels as easier. I know many people think you want more distance with a larger set, but with 4Ks they are just fine, as long as don't move your eyes to much to see the entire screen.
ninkendo 12y ago
That chart should really be zoomed to about 1/5 its size... it goes up to 150 inch? Who has displays that big? The X axis should go from 10 to 60, the Y axis should go from 1ft to 30ft, max. As it is, it's not all that useful for figuring out what the density limits of a desktop monitor are. (Average desktop monitor sizes occupy maybe 1/12 of the X axis!)
- davidcuddeback 12y ago
  The chart wasn't made for desktop monitors. It was made for TVs. It's from this article: http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupid/ http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupi...

http://i.imgur.com/xiW4vdw.png http://i.imgur.com/xiW4vdw.png

by skizm 12y ago

http://i.imgur.com/xiW4vdw.png http://i.imgur.com/xiW4vdw.png

thenmar 12y ago

What does "full benefits" mean?

wiremine 12y ago
Here's the full article: http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter/ http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter/ It doesn't really say, but I would guess it has to do with when you start to see individual pixels.
- thenmar 12y ago
  Thanks!

sampo 12y ago

That is a very nice chart. But gee, one length (viewing distance) is in different units than the other length (screen diagonal size). Hilarious.

chipotle_coyote 12y ago
I'm not entirely sure I follow why you feel this is significant. At least in the US, we tend to measure viewing distance in feet and diagonal screen size in inches, and those are both measures of length. It's not like the two axes are "feet" and "fluid ounces."
- antimagic 12y ago
  Even if it was fluid ounces, that's still not a problem - A line chart of my account balance would have Euros on the y-axis and months on the x-axis. It's still a meaningful chart though...
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

Shivetya 12y ago

Well with a 4K display your able to sit closer to larger ones because you will not detect the pixels as easier. I know many people think you want more distance with a larger set, but with 4Ks they are just fine, as long as don't move your eyes to much to see the entire screen.

ninkendo 12y ago

That chart should really be zoomed to about 1/5 its size... it goes up to 150 inch? Who has displays that big? The X axis should go from 10 to 60, the Y axis should go from 1ft to 30ft, max. As it is, it's not all that useful for figuring out what the density limits of a desktop monitor are. (Average desktop monitor sizes occupy maybe 1/12 of the X axis!)

davidcuddeback 12y ago
The chart wasn't made for desktop monitors. It was made for TVs. It's from this article: http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupid/ http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupi...