▲ 58 ▼ Study Boldly Claims 4K And 8K TVs Aren't Much Better Than HD To Your Eyes, But Is It True? (hothardware.com) submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by artifex@piefed.social to c/technology@beehaw.org 26 comments fedilink hide all child comments A new study published in Nature by University of Cambridge researchers just dropped a pixelated bomb on the entire Ultra-HD market, but as anyone with myopia can tell you, if you take your glasses off, even SD still looks pretty good :)
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 child) It sounds like the study actually did include display distance, and gave different requirements depending. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 point 10 months ago (1 child) My point is, I could do a study too and claim that 4K/8K TVs are much better than HD to your eyes. Its just the setup and source that makes the difference. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) Now that I've actually looked at the study, what they did is make an apparatus with continuously adjustable distance to display and try to get people to distinguish scaled, fairly similar clips until they couldn't anymore. Actual maximum pixel-per-visual-degree values varied quite a bit based on colours involved and the like. And like @GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org said, they framed the results the opposite way to the article - human vision can distinguish more than previously thought. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 point 10 months ago (1 child) My point is, I could do a study too and claim that 4K/8K TVs are much better than HD to your eyes. Its just the setup and source that makes the difference. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) Now that I've actually looked at the study, what they did is make an apparatus with continuously adjustable distance to display and try to get people to distinguish scaled, fairly similar clips until they couldn't anymore. Actual maximum pixel-per-visual-degree values varied quite a bit based on colours involved and the like. And like @GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org said, they framed the results the opposite way to the article - human vision can distinguish more than previously thought. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) Now that I've actually looked at the study, what they did is make an apparatus with continuously adjustable distance to display and try to get people to distinguish scaled, fairly similar clips until they couldn't anymore. Actual maximum pixel-per-visual-degree values varied quite a bit based on colours involved and the like. And like @GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org said, they framed the results the opposite way to the article - human vision can distinguish more than previously thought. permalink fedilink source parent