New Samsung 4k for everyone.

Nenu

[H]ardened
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
20,165
780ti does not support 4-4-4 chroma at 4k 60z so you are going to see compression artifacts. You need 970/980 video card.

Better description is you need a gfx card that supports HDMI 2.0 or Displayport 1.2 minimum.
(whichever the display supports)
 

Lateralus

More [H]uman than Human
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
17,318
There was some complain above of "over-analysis". Well, analyzing more consequential features is relatively important.

I agree wholeheartedly, and while I think analyzing the consequential features is a good thing as it allows people to make informed purchase decisions, I think it's unnecessary and even counterproductive to get too mired down in some of the inconsequential things. There were a bunch of us using these and enjoying them early on, but then some people (mostly non-owners) started to get really nit-picky about this and that.

I appreciate all of the information presented and I think Cyph and Brahmzy are doing us a service by comparing models...and I think that people who are sensitive to PWM and blur should have information to decide if a given display will meet their needs. But for others, just try the damn thing for yourself and keep it if you love it like so many of us do...return it if you don't. Not buying it because of this spec or that spec on paper is kind of silly for a lot of people...it would be like me going shopping for cars and skipping over the Miata because it doesn't have 400 horsepower, or skipping over the Mustang GT because it doesn't handle as well as the Miata, when the reality is once I'm behind the wheel of either car I discover how fun they are to drive regardless of how the specs looked on paper. Neither car is absolutely perfect in every detail, but the overall experience is such that I have one heck of a great time driving them.

Looking at them side by side (7100 / 6500) you can definitely spot the differences...but those differences are so slight that it's really going to be a personal decision unfortunately. Wish it were night and day but it's just not, it's another input-lag style preference, some will be sensitive to it, others won't.

Thank you for that...that's the kind of feedback I'm looking for!
 

Agent00F

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
207
I agree wholeheartedly, and while I think analyzing the consequential features is a good thing as it allows people to make informed purchase decisions, I think it's unnecessary and even counterproductive to get too mired down in some of the inconsequential things. There were a bunch of us using these and enjoying them early on, but then some people (mostly non-owners) started to get really nit-picky about this and that.

In order to decide what's consequential it's necessary to understand some display/image basics which may not be obvious, esp after being fed a diet from marketeers and "experts".

These display sites also seem to fixate on perceived problem points without understanding what they really mean. For example that blurbusters site that some seem impressed with go on about how their motion cam is so true to life without mentioning that actively tracking objects across the screen with your eyes is not how most video shots work. Most videos (incl. fps/tps type games) tend to track the object being moved (ie the subject, "you", etc) with the camera so your eyes stay relatively put. Are these nuanced but key issues ever discussed? But then again, "sharp" motion cam or whatever seem to be blurbuster's thing so it may be difficult to disabuse him of the championed cause.

Speaking of frame freezing, the stuttering they capture of PWM with a motion cam is not the same static composites being posted to these forums to show "blur". The latter is frankly being selected out of confirmation bias that certain display have certain "problems" when it's native to the source. Regardless of whether the site operator understands the issues, the key details/points are certainly not impressed upon their readers.
 

pvc

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
123
Spent some more time with the display. Played some Pro Evo Soccer. No noticeable lag for me. And if I don't notice it in this game, I won't notice it.

I did see some ghosting though, but I think that was the game. Played some Witcher 2 and noticed nothing there. So must have been something with PES.
 

Cyph

Gawd
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
812
Looking at them side by side (7100 / 6500) you can definitely spot the differences...but those differences are so slight that it's really going to be a personal decision unfortunately. Wish it were night and day but it's just not, it's another input-lag style preference, some will be sensitive to it, others won't.

Do you have the panels with you or are you comparing pictures from the review? The ghosting on my panel was way more severe than the picture on the review site. If it looked like the picture I wouldn't have exchanged it
Edit: note the game I was playing and the demo pic I posted of the 7100. I'm actually okay with the blur on that pic. Perhaps it manifest itself on certain games more than others.
 

Agent00F

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
207
Your pic of the 7100 just shows multiple frames. All modern displays are based on frames and will exhibit this.

Ironically the way to minimize tracking motion blur is use extreme PWM (60hz same as panel, with brief on-cycle), which is branded as Lightboost. This makes the lack of motion blur in CG very evident, but whatever floats your boat.
 

Lateralus

More [H]uman than Human
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
17,318
Earlier in the thread the Mediabridge 15' HDMI 2.0 cable was confirmed to work, but only on the 40" JU6700 and not the 48". I hope others can confirm 15' cables that work and which model they tested it on.

That was me, but I think it was a fluke that it didn't work on the 48" JU6700. I don't know why it would work one one set and not the other if the internal electronics are the same.

qkslvr221 mentioned that he had no issues with the 15' Twisted Veins cable, but I'm not sure which display.
 

Cyph

Gawd
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
812
Your pic of the 7100 just shows multiple frames. All modern displays are based on frames and will exhibit this.

Ironically the way to minimize tracking motion blur is use extreme PWM (60hz same as panel, with brief on-cycle), which is branded as Lightboost. This makes the lack of motion blur in CG very evident, but whatever floats your boat.

Another thing I didn't consider was that my old my panel may have had issues. Could a hardware problem cause blur? Not sure, but I didn't realize that it's possible to run 60hz 4K on HDMI 1.4 with my GTX 670 (lower chroma). The old panel, I could not switch to 4K 60Hz as the screen showed corruption. This one could. Or perhaps the 6500 does not support 4k 60hz with HDMI 1.4 but the 7100 could. Can someone with a 6 or 7 series confirm that 4k 60hz is possible with the 6500/6700 via HDMI 1.4? That would confirm that my old panel was defective.
 

pvc

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
123
Currently, I have Windows set to turn off my display after 15 mins in power settings. My old monitor used to go into standby almost immediately after that. Is there a similar setting for the JU6500? I did find the 'No Signal' turn off setting but the lowest I can set it to is 15 mins.
 

Brahmzy

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
4,958
Currently, I have Windows set to turn off my display after 15 mins in power settings. My old monitor used to go into standby almost immediately after that. Is there a similar setting for the JU6500? I did find the 'No Signal' turn off setting but the lowest I can set it to is 15 mins.

Nope, 15 minutes is the lowest - SO wish they'd fix that with a firmware update. It would be super easy to offer even a minute.

So my 6ft thin Mediabridge cable came today and works perfectly, as it should:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004LTE5JI/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Nice cheap & thin option.
 

vorpel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
396
The source tends to make a much bigger diff than anything on the display side, esp as displays get marginally better. A sharp/saturated meticulous photo is going to look a lot better on a mediocre 1080p than a mediocre taken photo on anything. Same thing for quality video sources even at 480p.

Sometimes people tend to focus even fixate on things that are perceivable but aren't necessarily consequential. More res is good for very fine detail but only a limited amount of material outside of text/ui/etc warrant it.

Have you viewed good quality (Blu-Ray) source material on a good quality 4K TV with a good upconverter? The difference isn't really subjective - it has been noticed by family and friends alike without prompting.

To each their own - 4k at 65" is great for me.
 

Agent00F

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
207
I play my media through ffdshow with a variety of filters applied (bicubic, sharpen, grain, etc). Past 720p sources it's a matter of diminishing returns, and the most effective effects are based on color/chroma curve reshaping (making colors, etc. pop). Resolution of the display matters less esp at some distance than any of these other factors, and basic sharpening is an effective replacement. I watch movies on a 1080p 120" projector and the aggressive Viewsonic video processing (Silicon Optix Reon-VX?) makes video look better than anything else I've tried.

The primary factor in your comment is likely "65in good quality TV", which also contains these video processors.
 
Last edited:

Wag

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
1,144
The ARC features on this TV are pretty cool. I have my 4k TV hooked up to my Sony 5.1 lossless surround sound headphones from the TV's ARC output to get 5.1 output from Netflix and I also have my Cable STB connected to the Sony 5.1 box. I am able to get my cable box to output to my Samsung TV over the ARC (I wasn't even trying to do this). All the extra info on the programs is cool. Now I want a big HDTV with all these features.:D
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Messages
6
Since i seem to be screwed for choice, which of these is the actual better model as they are the only two below 50-inch i can find that will work in Australia.

http://www.samsung.com/au/consumer/tv-audio-video/television/uhd-tv/UA48HU8500WXXY

or

http://www.samsung.com/au/consumer/tv-audio-video/television/uhd-tv/UA40JU6400WXXY

If i import a UK or US model then it would give me an invalid country selection i am guessing?

Is there any Country settings that current owners of US or UK models can see that let you change it to Australian?
 

Seinfeld

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
446
How do you guys like Tizen, is it good? There is no lag while scrolling thru app list and such? Is the built in web browser any good?
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Messages
1
Hello,

I just got this tv to use as a computer monitor. I realized with my videocard ( an amd 7870) that I wouldn't be plalying games in 4k. What I don't understand though is I can't even get my computer to display a 4k desktop. 1080p is the maximum resolution I can set it to even at 30 hz, is that right? Man I don't want to buy a new videocard at the moment. I'd appreciate anyones feedback on this. Thank you.
 

seku

n00b
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Messages
42
Hi guys, i also jumped on the bandwagon, and a 40" 7100 has just been ordered ... can't wait for it to ship :D

I'll be coming from a 30" Dell PLP setup, and i think i want to keep things that way with the new Samsung TV. A few rough calculations show that the 40" is at around 110 PPI, and the closest thing to that in portrait mode would be a 27" 1440p (at around 108 PPI). Sadly the 27" in portrait are a bit higher than the 40" (10 centimeters or so) ... so no perfect screen alignement as with the Dells unfortunately. :eek:

Now iirc the Samsung is a VA panel ... what 27"screens should i use in order to get a "match" with it? There don't seem to be many VA 27" 1440p out there, if any. Any ideas, suggestions?
 

Cyph

Gawd
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
812
I play my media through ffdshow with a variety of filters applied (bicubic, sharpen, grain, etc). Past 720p sources it's a matter of diminishing returns, and the most effective effects are based on color/chroma curve reshaping (making colors, etc. pop). Resolution of the display matters less esp at some distance than any of these other factors, and basic sharpening is an effective replacement. I watch movies on a 1080p 120" projector and the aggressive Viewsonic video processing (Silicon Optix Reon-VX?) makes video look better than anything else I've tried.

The primary factor in your comment is likely "65in good quality TV", which also contains these video processors.

I watch Netflix on a 65" Plasma. I can assure you the bigger the screen, the bigger the difference on a good display. Smaller screens, distance cures all. Bigger screen, that won't work. Video processor is amazing, and the high end Samsung has some of the best processors in the world. Put in a Bluray source and you tell me 720p and 1080p on a 65" there's no difference. Video games on a big screen in high resolution, the difference is night and day. Unlike video, the difference is clarity not just aliasing. It's like Ipad 1 vs Retina IPad. There's no comparison.

The ARC features on this TV are pretty cool. I have my 4k TV hooked up to my Sony 5.1 lossless surround sound headphones from the TV's ARC output to get 5.1 output from Netflix and I also have my Cable STB connected to the Sony 5.1 box. I am able to get my cable box to output to my Samsung TV over the ARC (I wasn't even trying to do this). All the extra info on the programs is cool. Now I want a big HDTV with all these features.:D

ARC is very cool. Been using this for 2 years with my F8500. Watching movies on surround sound system with subwoofer is very impressive. ;) by the way, I believe you need to pay more for 4k Netflix so if anyone is unable to find 4k videos, up your plan to a higher tier. I'm happy with 1080p on my Plasma as Daredevil looks amazing on my primary TV, the difference isn't as big as 4k gaming. Only OLED trumps Plasma right now in video.

Hello,

I just got this tv to use as a computer monitor. I realized with my videocard ( an amd 7870) that I wouldn't be plalying games in 4k. What I don't understand though is I can't even get my computer to display a 4k desktop. 1080p is the maximum resolution I can set it to even at 30 hz, is that right? Man I don't want to buy a new videocard at the moment. I'd appreciate anyones feedback on this. Thank you.

4k requires HDMI 2.0. You will need to change it to 4k 30hz for your desktop. 1080p can do 60hz. Check what version of HDMI your 7870 supports. Make sure it supports HDMI 1.4,
 

x3sphere

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
2,755
I watch Netflix on a 65" Plasma. I can assure you the bigger the screen, the bigger the difference on a good display. Smaller screens, distance cures all. Bigger screen, that won't work. Video processor is amazing, and the high end Samsung has some of the best processors in the world. Put in a Bluray source and you tell me 720p and 1080p on a 65" there's no difference. Video games on a big screen in high resolution, the difference is night and day. Unlike video, the difference is clarity not just aliasing. It's like Ipad 1 vs Retina IPad. There's no comparison.

You can down sample to get that increase in clarity on a 1080p display, that is what I have been doing for years, and Nvidia makes it really easy now with DSR. Of course it won't look as good as native 4K if close up, but if you are sitting far away from the display, it's hard to see any difference - just like with high quality video.

I had a 55" 4k Samsung and moved to the 55" 1080p OLED... I sit 6ft away but with DSR activated the image on the OLED looks better in every aspect, not only contrast. I didn't notice a single benefit from native 4K at this distance. Now at 3-4ft or something, there was a difference, but that didn't work out for my use case
 
Last edited:

TDSlam720

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
366
I hate the whole distance / resolution relation. a 800x600 image isn't going to look like a 4k image even if you looking at it from the moon. More pixels=More Data= More detail. I cant subscribe to the idea that a picture that's recorded and displayed with more detail somehow becomes irrelevant because someone is sitting a few feet further back
 

Seinfeld

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
446
It's here!!! A bit damaged box but hopefully the TV is not.

mmTgels.jpg


Now the question is, return it or not.. some people in here seems to praise the 7 series but I suspect it's just waste of cash and 6 series would been better choice, the price difference is ca $500, hmm, a bit thought choice.
 

Cyph

Gawd
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
812
I hate the whole distance / resolution relation. a 800x600 image isn't going to look like a 4k image even if you looking at it from the moon. More pixels=More Data= More detail. I cant subscribe to the idea that a picture that's recorded and displayed with more detail somehow becomes irrelevant because someone is sitting a few feet further back

You're arguing against science. Look at the Ultra HD cone. It's between 2-4 ft at 40", the sweet spot for our "monitor."

Take a 720P video, and look at it up close. It's a mess. Now move back further and further, until you no longer see the pixelation. I have a 32" in my bedroom right now, never bothered to upgrade, because it looks HD since it's 15 ft away and only 32". If you put a 4K TV and the 720P TV, same size panels, 200 ft away from you, there's no way you can pick out the details in the 4K vs 720P.
 

seku

n00b
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Messages
42
It's all about how many arc-minutes the eye can resolve. That's why today the TV seller today looked amused as i ordered the 40" panel (prolly thinking i was one of those customers who had no clue about distance/eye resolution ratios.)

When i told him it was for monitor use his jaw dropped sightly though :D
 

x3sphere

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
2,755
You're arguing against science. Look at the Ultra HD cone. It's between 2-4 ft at 40", the sweet spot for our "monitor."

Take a 720P video, and look at it up close. It's a mess. Now move back further and further, until you no longer see the pixelation. I have a 32" in my bedroom right now, never bothered to upgrade, because it looks HD since it's 15 ft away and only 32". If you put a 4K TV and the 720P TV, same size panels, 200 ft away from you, there's no way you can pick out the details in the 4K vs 720P.

For some reason a lot of people dismiss that chart but yeah it is accurate in my experience

I still intend to go 4K in the future but at my distance, it will be on nothing less than a 75"
 

SixFootDuo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,825
With all the damaged sets showing up from shipping here in the US. I would be scared as hell to expect no damage from an Imported set to your country.

I would look at using someones reseller tax id and possibly trying to score a set wholesale from a small shop to control your costs. Think outside the box. Public Joe Consumer always loses.
 

Mako360

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Messages
336
It's here!!! A bit damaged box but hopefully the TV is not.

mmTgels.jpg


Now the question is, return it or not.. some people in here seems to praise the 7 series but I suspect it's just waste of cash and 6 series would been better choice, the price difference is ca $500, hmm, a bit thought choice.

I played XB1 and PC games literally all day on my 48ju6700 yesterday for the first time, and I must be used to shitty LCDs because it was flawless. :D

Have decided to keep it, very happy. What an awesome experience these are. Best buying decision evarrrrr

With all the damaged sets showing up from shipping here in the US. I would be scared as hell to expect no damage from an Imported set to your country.

I would look at using someones reseller tax id and possibly trying to score a set wholesale from a small shop to control your costs. Think outside the box. Public Joe Consumer always loses.

Seriously, these shippers are awful with these it seems.
 

Mako360

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Messages
336
The 40" and 48" is now in stock locally in Miami (Brandsmart).

I have a 40" within the return period. Decisions....

I was fortunate to have Frys within 10 minutes, feel lucky now after all the shipping drama. I've decided to stick with the 48", just really immersive even from as far away as 4-5 feet, and anything closer is just mind-blowing.
 

TDSlam720

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
366
You're arguing against science. Look at the Ultra HD cone. It's between 2-4 ft at 40", the sweet spot for our "monitor."

Take a 720P video, and look at it up close. It's a mess. Now move back further and further, until you no longer see the pixelation. I have a 32" in my bedroom right now, never bothered to upgrade, because it looks HD since it's 15 ft away and only 32". If you put a 4K TV and the 720P TV, same size panels, 200 ft away from you, there's no way you can pick out the details in the 4K vs 720P.


I know what you're trying to say, and I'm saying I don't buy it. TV sizes didn't initially change all that much when we all went to 720p/1080i, but I guarantee if you saw a 42 inch TV playing a 480P DVD at 15ft away it's not going to look as "HD" as a 720p source at 13 ft or any distance for that matter.

I have a 720p projector that shoots up probably a 120-150 inch screen onto the wall, so I'm very familiar with the concept as I can see every pixel from normal viewing, but stand back 5-8 more feet and it looks closer to a 1080p image. I get it, but you're never going to convince me that an image with 4 times the pixels will ever look like an imagine with 1/4th those pixels, I don't care what distance.

And I stand by my example of comparing 480P to 720P. Majority of people will be able to tell the difference. IDGAF about some diagonal lines some turbo nerds drew on a color shaded graph.
 

HA5

n00b
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
47
You're arguing against science. Look at the Ultra HD cone. It's between 2-4 ft at 40", the sweet spot for our "monitor."

Take a 720P video, and look at it up close. It's a mess. Now move back further and further, until you no longer see the pixelation. I have a 32" in my bedroom right now, never bothered to upgrade, because it looks HD since it's 15 ft away and only 32". If you put a 4K TV and the 720P TV, same size panels, 200 ft away from you, there's no way you can pick out the details in the 4K vs 720P.

Those cones don't take into account that most people, especially younger people, have vision better than 60 PPD (pixels per degree). Those cones also don't take into account the effect of moving pixels. Your brain can see movement at greater resolution than static pixels. Look at the moving line on the Worst-Case Aliasing Visibility Test page. You can see the effects of pixels from very far back, even when antialiased. My room isn't even big enough for me to get far enough away not to see the effects at 104 dpi. This is 262 PPD at 12 feet. If the line is both not antialiased and black and white, it's super noticeable. Higher dpi will reduce these effects. I'm not saying the effects are huge, or worth it for viewing normal video. But, saying 4K is no benefit, or that you can't possibly see any benefit at typical tv sizes and viewing distance, is not exactly true.

If it's >1 pixel and shades of gray, then it's not very noticeable from a distance.
 
Last edited:

Mako360

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Messages
336
I know what you're trying to say, and I'm saying I don't buy it. TV sizes didn't initially change all that much when we all went to 720p/1080i, but I guarantee if you saw a 42 inch TV playing a 480P DVD at 15ft away it's not going to look as "HD" as a 720p source at 13 ft or any distance for that matter.

I have a 720p projector that shoots up probably a 120-150 inch screen onto the wall, so I'm very familiar with the concept as I can see every pixel from normal viewing, but stand back 5-8 more feet and it looks closer to a 1080p image. I get it, but you're never going to convince me that an image with 4 times the pixels will ever look like an imagine with 1/4th those pixels, I don't care what distance.

And I stand by my example of comparing 480P to 720P. Majority of people will be able to tell the difference. IDGAF about some diagonal lines some turbo nerds drew on a color shaded graph.

At any big box store you can see any size 4k display from any distance, right next to any size 1080p display.

And guess what?

Get far enough away and they look the same. Sorry Brosef. Brozilla. Brotholemue.

Just did it for about the 100th time while buying the 48ju6700, with sets as large as 105" at 4k (LG) and multiple size OLED 4k displays as well.

It's all about view distance, and it always will be. Needs to shorten with each resolution jump to perceive any true benefit if the variables are equal.

If you think you're seeing a benefit at longer ranges, it's simply display quality/color quality/etc being superior on the newer/higher resolution panel versus the previous/older technology panel. In other words, you're fooling yourself. Put the same content on same year displays at 1080p and 4k from the same vendor running the same level of high end calibration, and the futher you go the closer they get perception-wise.

As others have said, the 1080p OLED displays often look even better than the 4k units they're next to in the store due to color/etc if the view distance is over 12-13 feet at say 60", lol.

And here for the rest of the people...the sane, sharp lurkers...is another "diagonal line some turbo nerds drew" to represent fact, because you know, math and science bruh.

:D
4fHqNKJ.png
 
Last edited:

x3sphere

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
2,755
I know what you're trying to say, and I'm saying I don't buy it. TV sizes didn't initially change all that much when we all went to 720p/1080i, but I guarantee if you saw a 42 inch TV playing a 480P DVD at 15ft away it's not going to look as "HD" as a 720p source at 13 ft or any distance for that matter.

I have a 720p projector that shoots up probably a 120-150 inch screen onto the wall, so I'm very familiar with the concept as I can see every pixel from normal viewing, but stand back 5-8 more feet and it looks closer to a 1080p image. I get it, but you're never going to convince me that an image with 4 times the pixels will ever look like an imagine with 1/4th those pixels, I don't care what distance.

And I stand by my example of comparing 480P to 720P. Majority of people will be able to tell the difference. IDGAF about some diagonal lines some turbo nerds drew on a color shaded graph.

First of all, you would need to make sure the source is the same in order for this to be a valid test. Blu-rays have a wider color space compared to DVD, for example. Downsample a Blu-ray to 480p and view it from 16ft on a 42",guarantee you won't notice a difference from 1080p...
 

Mako360

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Messages
336
Downsample a Blu-ray to 480p and view it from 16ft on a 42",guarantee you won't notice a difference from 1080p...

Wouldn't see the diff from even half that distance.

But we'll let him believe what he wants to, because he "DGAF"...badass! ;)
 

Cyph

Gawd
Joined
Mar 24, 2015
Messages
812
It's here!!! A bit damaged box but hopefully the TV is not.

mmTgels.jpg


Now the question is, return it or not.. some people in here seems to praise the 7 series but I suspect it's just waste of cash and 6 series would been better choice, the price difference is ca $500, hmm, a bit thought choice.

Well, how'd you like it? Don't keep us hanging!

The biggest difference for me was the motion blur. I noticed the difference. However, I'm waiting for Brahmzy to let me know his impression. If he doesn't see much difference in motion, then I have to conclude that my previous set was busted somehow. I won't pay more for just the gloss vs semi-gloss and the superior 120hz interpolation because I don't use it for TV watching.
 

TDSlam720

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
366
Wouldn't see the diff from even half that distance.

But we'll let him believe what he wants to, because he "DGAF"...badass! ;)

Fk u nerd fite me irl!

Seriously though. Even if I can't perceive any difference in the image, the higher resolution image is always going to be the better one simply because there's more data. Something recorded and viewed in 4k will always have more detail in it than 1080p. Higher res means that microscopic freckle that wasn't able to be seen before can now be seen. I don't care if I'm standing 10 ft back and cant pick it out with my bare eye. The image has a whole is more detailed therefore has to be a better image in entirety. I'm not convinced that the brains ability to discern an image can be completely reduced down to distance/resolution etc. The closer we can get to matching IRL the better, I don't care the distance. ( and yes I know we dont see in pixels ) .
 

SixFootDuo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,825
Liars.

I'm 46 with shitty vision and I could see the 4k difference from 25' away the very first time I saw a 4k set back in 2011 or 12' or so.

This is about the speech I made early about people making shit up or going over board with numbers / specs. haters hating haha.

Sorry, I have to get back to my awesome gaming experience

P.S. If anyone needs an opinion, don't go with one guys opinion ... go with the majority opinion for the simply fact, everyone loves it. Don't sabotage yourself our of something pretty damn sweeeeeeet. Too big? I bet you would have 2 or 3 monitors stacked around one another if you had the chance. Latency? What latency? Eye fatigue? whatevers
 

Agent00F

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
207
Those cones don't take into account that most people, especially younger people, have vision better than 60 PPD (pixels per degree). Those cones also don't take into account the effect of moving pixels. Your brain can see movement at greater resolution than static pixels. Look at the moving line on the Worst-Case Aliasing Visibility Test page. You can see the effects of pixels from very far back, even when antialiased. My room isn't even big enough for me to get far enough away not to see the effects at 104 dpi. This is 262 PPD at 12 feet. If the line is both antialiased and black and white, it's super noticeable. Higher dpi will reduce these effects. I'm not saying the effects are huge, or worth it for viewing normal video. But, saying 4K is no benefit, or that you can't possibly see any benefit at typical tv sizes and viewing distance, is not exactly true.

If it's >1 pixel and shades of gray, then it's not noticeable at all from a short distance back.

There's diffraction limit to the human eye same as any other optical instrument, and it's not all that great (Gullstrand is the authoritative eye model, which is optically worse than the schematic one):

030f.gif


This is also generally wrong:

> Your brain can see movement at greater resolution than static pixels

The mind tends to drop processing for high res when things start moving & gets complicated. Watch an explosion with bits flying everywhere at 480p or 4k and it doesn't matter.

----

The broader point is even from purely technical point of view it's a matter of diminishing returns. Look into what a MTF curve means, and see that only certain things (extremely high contrast a la UI elements which never appear in nature) make a diff at high res. Aliasing is a big one because we seem also mentally sensitive to it (perhaps because it looks so unnatural).

In practice this is further limited by source material. It's not just a matter of 4k (8mp) cameras, but the technical sophistication to use them in a way that improves on a 1080p camera. Give your parents a 100mp camera and the family photos/vids aren't going to look any better, and still worse than than any hollywood shot at any res. Even the transition to 720p-ish res gave *professionals* a significant increase in the amount of work necessary.

Computer games in particular have so many other problems that focusing on resolution as some kind of fix to their lack of realism doesn't help anyone's cause except marketers who sell things by bigger numbers. Res is merely an easy number to market quickly unlike color which matters more but is harder to quantify.

Of course you can fixate/squint at the pixels and maybe tell a difference, but it's a ridiculous way to evaluate a product.

tl;dr: the desktop is the only tangible reason to get 4k.
 

HA5

n00b
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
47
This is also generally wrong:

> Your brain can see movement at greater resolution than static pixels

The mind tends to drop processing for high res when things start moving & gets complicated. Watch an explosion with bits flying everywhere at 480p or 4k and it doesn't matter.

You can see the effects that I'm talking about yourself at the test I linked to. I can certainly see it. I'm not talking about fast motion. See the test for what I'm referring to.
 
Top