4K video over wifi? On what, a 20 thousand dollar tv? that is how much a 4K tv would set you back these days, maybe even more.
Also - based on the "resolution" the human eye can detect, and based on average viewing distances from a TV, a 1080P or 4K tv would have identical sharpness, and our eyes would perceive the images as being exactly the same.
4K is really a useless, high priced, luxury technology that nobody really needs, and that our eyes are not equipped to handle. Why companies keep investing in this is beyond me.
...
Have you actually seen one up close? Please go see one... I saw a huge difference in sharpness and this was on an 85-inch TV... and i was standing up close right in front of it and also from over 10 feet back! So with that logic, 720p is just as good as 1080p?
...
Also, you do know prices will drop right? I'm all for going forward and improvements.
...
No, not with that logic 720P would be the same as 1080P. Where did you even get that from?
As I said, and this is a known fact - the human eye, from average viewing distances, is unable to discern the differences between 1080P and 4K. NOT from 720P to 1080P, which the human eye IS able to discern. And yes, I have seen a 4K tv up close. They look amazing when you are 1, 2, 3 feet away, but thats not a realistic viewing distance. With a comparable 1080P tv, side-by-side, same screen size, at the recommended viewing distance, which I think it 8 - 10 feet, I could not see a difference. The colours were more vibrant on the 4K, probably because of contrast ratios, however the sharpness and over all image quality were the same.
I'm all fo...
(continues)
...
I saw one when walking in to a tiger direct store and it just looked amazing... doesnt the recommended viewing distance vary depending on screen size?
And what i meant is, at a certain distance 720p would look the same as 1080p...
...
So by your logic, the human eye is unable to discern the difference between an image on TV and the reality around you? As long as that's more than a laughable concept, then clearly their's room for improvent.
...
No - not by my logic, by a proven fact, look it up. I would post a link but I'm working right now.
I thought it was widely known that the human eye can not discern between 1080P and 4K at the recommended viewing distance.
I guess it isnt. I will educated you.
The human eye can not discern between 1080P and 4K at the recommended viewing distance.
...
I think we are arguing 2 different points, so we'll focus on your point. Even if what your saying is scientific fact, I would still argue that real world comparisons paint a different picture. Maybe because in the real world, that whole part about "recommended viewing distance" plays a much bigger role. Now correct me if I'm wrong but what they actually mean by the 'recommended' viewing distance is the optimum distance. So if that does hold true, then a 4K TV would quadruple the range of that optimum viewing distance... That, to me is a major improvement in itself.
...
croodJun 19, 2013, 8:30 PM
Unfortunately, your living room is unlikely to quadruple in size.
...
I read somewhere that the limit for the human retina is 600ppi at about 8 inches or beyond... what is the PPI on a 4k tv with 85" display??
...
$20,000 for a 4X TV? Try $5000 for the 55" Sony XBR-55X900A at Crutchfield. To put that into perspective, in 2000 or 2001 I saw an amazing 60" Sony LCD projection set for around $8000, and only 2-3 years after that I bought Sony's updated model for $3600.
Personally I like it when technology goes well beyond the point I'm told my senses cannot tell the difference because I often can experience the differences. If you go well beyond that point then you probably really are safely at a point where improvements have no benefits.
For example, I was told DLP TVs were wonderful because almost no one could see the rainbow effect the tech produced. I could and had a hard time watching those sets. We're often told that 128mbs MP3s are CD qu...
(continues)
...