General > General Technical Chat
The EU is banning 8K TV's!!!
<< < (49/53) > >>
KaneTW:
There's a few considerations that go into effective human eye resolution. The spot size of the lens (around 10 um), the various cone densities (http://www.cvrl.org/database/text/intros/introdens.htm), the brain combining L/R images for additional fidelity, etc etc.

60 PPD in the foveal region and much less in the periphery is what I operate with. That being said, a VR set with 35 PPD is very close to being perfectly lifelike (apart from reduced peripheral vision).
vad:
Let’s do some elementary math here.

Statement #1. Angular resolution of human eye is about 0.017°, according to Wikipedia. Angular resolution is defined as angular distance between two points that an instrument, human eye in this case, can distinguish.

Statement #2. For a digital image to resolve two points separated by 0.017° angle, angular distance between its two adjacent pixels should be at least half angular distance between the points, according to Nyquist sampling theorem. In other words angular distance between two adjacent display pixels should be <= 0.0085°, before a person with 20/20 vision could start noticing sampling artifacts.

Statement #3. For the best cinema theatrical experience, horizontal viewing angle should be around 45-50 degrees, according to SMPTE and THX recommendations. Let’s choose 47.5° as recommended sweet spot, and then compute the smallest horizontal pixel resolution requirement as 47.5° / 0.0085 °/pixel = 5,588 pixels. 4K image with 3,840 horizontal pixels does not meet this requirement, and 8K image does.

For 85” TV a person has to sit 7 feet (2.1 meters) from the TV for 47.5 degree horizontal viewing angle. If you, like me, sit much further from TV, you should not see any difference between 4K and 8K. In cinema, however, 8K projectors can potentially bring some improvement. AFAIK, most digital cinema projectors are either 2K or 4K today.
eti:
Doesn’t matter how many “K” you have, it’s still the same inane, woke agenda drivel coming through.
Ice-Tea:

--- Quote from: eti on November 12, 2022, 08:21:20 am ---Doesn’t matter how many “K” you have, it’s still the same inane, woke agenda drivel coming through.

--- End quote ---

You should get a TV with a remote, mate!
tooki:

--- Quote from: PlainName on November 11, 2022, 01:10:00 pm ---
--- Quote ---At about 18” ... we can resolve about 300 pixels per inch
--- End quote ---

That's theory, and no doubt best case. What does practice say? I've seen people with their phone stuck up their left nostril and others holding them at arm's length. Theory is great, but it doesn't tell you how it actually is.

--- End quote ---
Sorry, I should have been clearer, in that I meant that 18” is the normal closest distance for typical use, but yes, closer isn’t too uncommon. Even so, I think my memory was slightly off, see below.

The question of resolution, however, is much clearer, because it’s a function of angular resolution, as I explained in an earlier reply, which has a link to a page about why more resolution doesn’t make sense, and that page has a link to an online resolution calculator.

Consider that for years, 300dpi laser printers were the norm, and considered razor sharp. Higher resolution helped a little bit on text, but its real value was in producing much smoother halftones. Displays don’t need extra resolution to do halftoning, since their pixels can directly take intermediate values.

I just checked this calculator: https://stari.co/tv-monitor-viewing-distance-calculator
I entered numbers to approximate a sheet of paper at 300dpi: 14” diagonal, 2400x3300 pixels. It says the minimum distance (to not be able to see individual pixels) is 26cm, just under 11 inches. So I think my memory about display resolution was 300dpi at 12”, not 18”, and that I was conflating that with the 18-24” that we commonly sit from a computer display, not a phone display.

That same calculator includes some criteria for field of view, calculating a minimum viewing distance that provides for a 70 degree field of view, e.g. 3.1-8.4 feet (0.95-2.55m) for a 60”. (That 70° is actually on the high side, though: the THX standards say 40 degrees maximum, and recommend 6.0-9.0 feet for 60”.)

But even with that calculator, which suggests shorter minimum distances than others, an 85” 8K TV has what they call a visual acuity distance (at any distance greater than this, the angular resolution of the eye cannot discern a single pixel) of 2.9 feet (0.87m), while even their minimum distance for 70° is 4.4 feet. So even a very generously short minimum distance is substantially longer than the distance at which a pixel cannot be discerned. Since this ratio is independent of screen size (being a function of angular resolution and angular field of view), it follows that 8K does not and cannot ever make sense for watching video.

Computer displays are a different matter, since we don’t need to keep the whole screen in our field of view: we can have a large display up close and then focus on a specific area of it by moving your head closer to the area of interest.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod