I think we should all be a little circumspect when anything is given as "self evident".
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary
It comes down to content.
|
I expect people will mostly continue to spend their money wherever there's content to support their wishful thinking, and then convince themselves that their purchase was worthwhile (classic examples being Hi-Fi systems and vinyl records). But will they (most people) actually see or hear the difference? Doubtful.
The medical science and maths is pretty straightforward. A very good human eye (6/6m or 20/20ft visual acuity - suitable to be a fighter pilot without corrective lenses) can resolve approximately
1 arcmin. From that, the maths gives - for an optimistic 100 inch screen size - the following maximum resolution viewing distances:
2K (FHD/regular BluRay) - 3.96 metres
4K (UHD/4K BluRay) - 1.98 m
8K (still called UHD, apparently) - 0.99 m
This all scales linearly for screen size, pixels, viewing distance and visual acuity.
If you sit further away than the distances above, your (20/20) eye cannot resolve all the additional detail and the higher resolution is lost. As an example, at my current viewing distance (measured) of 3.3m, and assuming excellent vision, I would
not see the difference between 4K and 8K, but I might see some extra detail in 4K ... not forgetting that's for an extremely large 100 inch screen. For my 55" screen, I would not see any difference between 2K and 4K (which is what I observe ... yes, of course, I've tested it!).
Many people will buy whatever the marketing convinces them they "need", like overly-large SUVs, cars that can do 280km/hr, $1000+ smartphones, the latest clothing 'fast fashion' and ever-larger screens with pixels too small to resolve with the human eye from typical viewing distance.