The human eye can't even process the difference between 4k and 8k except possibly on very, very large screens. So... I guess let us know when our eyes can be surgically upgraded to tell the difference?
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/02/29/few-can-tell-the-difference-between-8k-vs-4k-tvs-according-to-double-blind-study-by-warner-bros/
The human eye can't even process the difference between 4k and 8k except possibly on very, very large screens. So... I guess let us know when our eyes can be surgically upgraded to tell the difference?
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/02/29/few-can-tell-the-difference-between-8k-vs-4k-tvs-according-to-double-blind-study-by-warner-bros/
The human eye can't even process the difference between 4k and 8k except possibly on very, very large screens. So... I guess let us know when our eyes can be surgically upgraded to tell the difference?
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/02/29/few-can-tell-the-difference-between-8k-vs-4k-tvs-according-to-double-blind-study-by-warner-bros/
Thats not true but the distance you have to sit to see the difference is very great. Something like over 10 feet from the monitor/TV. If you are any closer you use 4k. If your screen is small then 65 inches again you should use 4k
SeaGtGruff wrote: »When my old computer crashed and I got a better one, I tried running on higher settings for a time. But the first thing I noticed is that it just made it harder to spot Alchemical plants, Clothing plants, and even wood, so I went back to a lower setting even though my new computer can run the game on a higher setting without losing much performance.
There's a lot wrong with that statement IMO.The human eye can't even process the difference between 4k and 8k except possibly on very, very large screens. So... I guess let us know when our eyes can be surgically upgraded to tell the difference?
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/02/29/few-can-tell-the-difference-between-8k-vs-4k-tvs-according-to-double-blind-study-by-warner-bros/
MEBengalsFan2001 wrote: »
When I got my 4k set I heard the same thing. There is little difference between 1080p and 4k unless you get a bigger screen size.
So I did this. I had a 50" 1080p set and compared it to a 4K 50" set. Ran the same show that was 4k at that time on one set and the other at 1080p. This was all before HDR. I could tell the difference between the two sets very easily. The imagine was clearer with more details on the 4K set.
When to Best Buy before the lockdown and got to experience the same with a 4K vs. 8K. The 8k set was up scaling the 4k set. Both from the same manufacture and both sets had HDR. From what I saw you can see some subtle difference in 8k vs. 4k. Comparing 8k to 4k. From my experience it is similar to going from 1080p to 4k. Going from 1080p to 8k you will definitely see a difference.
My recommendation for screen resolution is based on TV size.
720p screen sizes that are lower than 32"
1080p screen size between 20-48"
4K screen size from 40-65"
8k screen size from 55+"
I'm currently using a 4K HDR 55" screen and I won't upgrade to 8K unless I get a 60" screen or bigger because I can't justify the price of a 8k set that is 55". In fact the 8K prices need to come down to what 4K prices were in 2018/2019 before I get a new set.
Overall if you do upgrade make sure whatever set you upgrade to has more features than the current set you have or you may find yourself disappointed and going back to the older set if you didn't junk it.
Also, keep in mind that Best Buy WANTS you to buy the 8k since it will without a doubt be the most expensive model available. They use certain tricks to make the displays of more expensive models look better. I would only trust third party setups when doing a comparison.
Kiralyn2000 wrote: »
Yep. The TV industry keeps introducing new "must have" features every year or two, to get suckers to buy in to more expensive models (and avoid the decreasing profit margin on the rational TV models.) So many Big Advertised features of the last decade or two, that I just don't see people talking about anymore. (remember when they were pushing 120Hz, and then 240Hz? And 3D! That totally caught on! We're barely reaching the point where there's content for 4k TV owners, and they're pushing 8k! It's so stupid.)
The test described in the linked piece is also pretty stupid, as it involves downscaling original 8k content and re-upscaling it, and also showing both resolutions on the same screen sequentially, instead of side-by-side at native 8k/4k resolutions.
shhh... let the man enjoy his 8k.
jeez, can't even post a pretty picture without someone starting some AYUKCHUYALLY... debate.
Real life is still better.
Kiralyn2000 wrote: »
Yep. The TV industry keeps introducing new "must have" features every year or two, to get suckers to buy in to more expensive models (and avoid the decreasing profit margin on the rational TV models.) So many Big Advertised features of the last decade or two, that I just don't see people talking about anymore. (remember when they were pushing 120Hz, and then 240Hz? And 3D! That totally caught on! We're barely reaching the point where there's content for 4k TV owners, and they're pushing 8k! It's so stupid.)