Is'nt a 84" 4K panel similar to 4x 42" 2K panels ? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 8 Old 06-18-2013, 11:07 AM - Thread Starter
Haw
Senior Member
 
Haw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 12
If 4K UHD is defined as having a pixel resolution of 3,840 x 2160 pixels , then isn't it similar, in the case of a 84" 4K UHD TV, to having 4 units of 42"1080p FHD TV's stacked in a 2 by 2 arrangement (1920+1920) horizontally by (1080+1080) vertically? I can't then figure, besides the bigger size, why a 84" 4K TV should look better than its component 2K TV's.
Haw is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 8 Old 06-18-2013, 01:33 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
anthonymoody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: ny, ny usa
Posts: 5,650
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Well yes it's "similar" but the issue is that you can sit way closer to a 4K set than you can to a 1080P set before you see any pixels, so the overall experience is way more immersive.

Stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking, nerf herder.
Double True!
anthonymoody is offline  
post #3 of 8 Old 06-18-2013, 02:17 PM - Thread Starter
Haw
Senior Member
 
Haw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post

Well yes it's "similar" but the issue is that you can sit way closer to a 4K set than you can to a 1080P set before you see any pixels, so the overall experience is way more immersive.

But isn't the pixel density per square inch remains the same in the 1080P set in this case?
Haw is offline  
post #4 of 8 Old 06-18-2013, 03:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JlgLaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
In your example they may share similar square inches of screen size, BUT, they do not share the same number of pixels, with 1080p displays having just above 2,000,000 pixels to over 8,000,000 pixels with a 4K display. The pixel density is therefore higher on a 4K display which accounts for the ability to sit much closer to the display without seeing the pixel structure.


Jim
JlgLaw is online now  
post #5 of 8 Old 06-18-2013, 07:54 PM - Thread Starter
Haw
Senior Member
 
Haw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by JlgLaw View Post

In your example they may share similar square inches of screen size, BUT, they do not share the same number of pixels, with 1080p displays having just above 2,000,000 pixels to over 8,000,000 pixels with a 4K display. The pixel density is therefore higher on a 4K display which accounts for the ability to sit much closer to the display without seeing the pixel structure.
Jim

Agreed that 4K display has a higher pixel count of over 8million but this total of over 8million is the same whether the 4K dispaly is a 50" or 100".

Similarly, 4 pieces of 2K panels stacked in a 2 by 2 cube would give us over 8 million pixels as well: (1920x2)horizontal x (1080x2)vertical = 8,294,400 which would qualify it to be called a 4K panel, no?

The point I am trying to figure out is: are panel manufacturers not charging us too high by making us believe in so-called larger 4K panels where in actual fact they are simply re-packaging their money-losing 2K panels and selling them to re-coup their loses.
Haw is offline  
post #6 of 8 Old 06-18-2013, 08:22 PM
Member
 
bd5400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haw View Post

Agreed that 4K display has a higher pixel count of over 8million but this total of over 8million is the same whether the 4K dispaly is a 50" or 100".

Similarly, 4 pieces of 2K panels stacked in a 2 by 2 cube would give us over 8 million pixels as well: (1920x2)horizontal x (1080x2)vertical = 8,294,400 which would qualify it to be called a 4K panel, no?

The point I am trying to figure out is: are panel manufacturers not charging us too high by making us believe in so-called larger 4K panels where in actual fact they are simply re-packaging their money-losing 2K panels and selling them to re-coup their loses.

You don't make a 4K panel by gluing together four existing smaller 1080p panels....

Theoretically they can be viewed as "equivalents" but the advantage of 4K is that up until this point that 84" television would have been 1080p. Now, an 84" television can be 4K giving it a vastly higher pixel density allowing you to be much closer while still maintaining quality. This, in a single panel without borders or lines interrupting the screen. You can scale any number of televisions together to form a single image. That's been done for years with video walls and other types of displays. Technically that would allow you to display ultra high definition video but it wouldn't be on a single screen meaning there would be large black lines outlining the border of each individual television. A 4K television essentially takes that concept and removes those interior borders in one large high resolution panel.
bd5400 is offline  
post #7 of 8 Old 06-19-2013, 05:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JlgLaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haw View Post

Agreed that 4K display has a higher pixel count of over 8million but this total of over 8million is the same whether the 4K dispaly is a 50" or 100".

Similarly, 4 pieces of 2K panels stacked in a 2 by 2 cube would give us over 8 million pixels as well: (1920x2)horizontal x (1080x2)vertical = 8,294,400 which would qualify it to be called a 4K panel, no?

The point I am trying to figure out is: are panel manufacturers not charging us too high by making us believe in so-called larger 4K panels where in actual fact they are simply re-packaging their money-losing 2K panels and selling them to re-coup their loses.



It's not about the display's panel, it is all about the chipset used to generate the resolution displayed on the panel. A 2K chip will only generate approx.2,000,000 pixels, and a 4K chip generates over 8,000,000 pixels. All "true" 4K displays utilize 4K video chips to generate the resolution. I also disagree with your underlying premise about manufacturer's motives, and therefore do not believe they would do what you suggest (not that it actually works).



Jim
JlgLaw is online now  
post #8 of 8 Old 06-19-2013, 06:30 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
anthonymoody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: ny, ny usa
Posts: 5,650
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 59
At the end of the day, looked at narrowly, yes - if you sit 2.5" from a 42" 1080P set the detail level would appear the same as if you sat 11' from an 84" 4K set.

However, in practice no one sits 2.5' from a 42" set. And, even if they did, our brains take contextual cues from things other than relative distance and pixel density in order to form a full sense of what we are experiencing. That's why an 84" set at 11' is waaaaaaay more immersive than a 42" set at 2.5' even if statistically they are the "same" in terms of relative distance and pixel density.

Stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking, nerf herder.
Double True!
anthonymoody is offline  
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off