Why 4K TVs are stupid

[Martin Stevens]

I want 4K brew in my brew.

[Graeme Nattress]

As I think I've been quoted - sit far enough away (have small enough angle of view) from the TV and even VHS looks great..... Thus proving you don't need any higher image quality than VHS provides. Anyone who wants to sit closer to the screen or have a larger TV (or projection screen) is just plain wrong, even though cinema (never mind IMAX) is a much more involving experience than watching TV in the home. :-)

Graeme

[PatrickFaith]

In Japan the average living room (that is if you have a dedicated one) is like 4x5 m - sitting close to TV is inevitable...
OK, I am exaggerating, but you catch my drift...

Your right Peter, his premise is that people are watching TV 10 Feet away ... which is invalid(my average distance is 3 feet). His focus on contrast is important though, that's why 4k with lasers is critical. I know with my 2k monitor (for film coloring), non-profesionals can instantly can tell the quality difference.

[Vino Harris]

For the future couldn't they bump the scarlet up to 4.5K and 24fps 5K to stay ahead of the game with a firmware upgrade? The red one had 5 years but we may have 2 before the other brands catch up to 4k. Now that I'm going broke i don't want someone to drop a camera for 5 thousand and its 6K..you know what i mean take a look at what happen to sony they dropped two cameras PMW3 and the FS100. The fs100 can do things that the $20.G camera can't do.

Then Red dropped the epic M Epic X & scarlet and killed all markets, the scarlet is killing sony alone 20 G's vs 12G's footage night and day..Sony buyers got creamed.

[Christoffer Glans]

Isn't the resolution gain from 1920 to 4K almost exactly the same as DVD to 1080p, if not more?

In math, not in perception.

The larger the screen or the closer you sit the higher the demand for 4K, most people don't have really large screens so the demand for 4K isn't there for them, only from them who want big screens or who sit close to their screens.

The parameters of perception become more important the higher resolution you get and revolutions only happen when visionaries creates a large demand. Like, in Sweden almost every TV in every home and public place everywhere has been replaced by LCD's and Plasmas, that isn't true everywhere in the world.

I want 4K, I just think that 4K will happen when it's the only resolution you can get in your new TV. Like changing to electric cars, that will only happen when there aren't much of a choice or the choice is easy economical and practical. I'm speaking of the large big world of regular people now, not us who work and love great images, catch my drift?

This is why I'm waiting for the Red projector, the consumer version would create such a tsunami of opinions in the public because it gives so much for a reasonable price.
If a laser 4K 3D projector hit the market for a consumer price, it will kill everything, there wouldn't make any sense to buy anything else, even for consumers.

[Hrvoje Simic]

Subjective necessities and priorities vary, but it wouldn't be wise to take seriously generalized statements about human abilities, made by people who quote quotes.

The author is clueless about the nature of human vision by focusing on a single factor taken out of context, and with attempts of defining its limits seems to be lost within mathematics.

That's cool, 1920x1080 prints need framing and love as well.

[David Rasberry]

I can say from experience that a 50" 4k monitor with 4k material is visibly much better even from 8 to 10 feet away. It's not that you see more fine detail. The detail you do see is much better quality due to higher MTF and better micro contrast in the visually critical range around 1.6k. It is like the difference between looking at a TV and looking through a window. Same is true sitting on the back row of a 4k theater vs a 2k theater. The image just has a more organic life like quality to it.

[Roberto Lequeux]

The article is what's stupid... Sorry, but it begs for it.

Give this guy 4k content on a triple digit screen with great contrast, low glare, etc... then we'll talk.

Don't feed the troll-bloggers.

[Christoffer Glans]

I can say from experience that a 50" 4k monitor with 4k material is visibly much better even from 8 to 10 feet away. It's not that you see more fine detail. The detail you do see is much better quality due to higher MTF and better micro contrast in the visually critical range around 1.6k. It is like the difference between looking at a TV and looking through a window. Same is true sitting on the back row of a 4k theater vs a 2k theater. The image just has a more organic life like quality to it.

Most people don't have a 50" television set, for those that do, I agree, the same goes for theaters, but anyone who sit in front of a fullHD 32" television in a normal living room I understand if they question it.
But as said, show him true 4K in it's true nature where it belongs and he will say otherwise.

[Jake Bastian]

Apparently not, if they confuse width with hight:-)

Yes 'hight' is a hard one ;)