514
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 to c/technology@lemmy.world
306 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 :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

Truthfully I haven't gotten a chance to use an 8k screen, so my statement is more hypothetical "I can see a possible benefit".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago*

    I’ve used 5K some.

    IMO the only ostensible benefit is for computer type stuff. It gives them more headroom to upscale content well, to avoid anti aliasing or blurry, scaled UI rendering, stuff like that. 4:1 rendering (to save power) would be quite viable too.

    Another example would be editing workflows, for 1:1 pixel mapping of content while leaving plenty of room for the UI.

    But for native content? Like movies?

    Pointless, unless you are ridiculously close to a huge display, even if your vision is 20/20. And it’s too expensive to be worth it: I’d rather that money go into other technical aspects, easily.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent