Stacking problem. - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 41 Old 10-21-2013, 09:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 824
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmReverie View Post

Indeed.

As I am in a mean mood I am going to jump into the category of being a buzz kill. So to begin unless you sit really close your screen or have unnaturally good sight going beyond 4k is not going to yield any visibly better results. For example assuming a 100" 16:9 screen, that you are sitting at what THX recommends and that you have 20/20 vision you can only see up to a bit over 1400p anything beyond that we cannot see.

To get a benefit of going beyond 4k once again using a 100" screen you would have to be sitting around 7foot and 5 inches from the screen or closer. Basically you are going to have to sit uncomfortably close to a screen for watching films for beyond 4k to be beneficial.


This is only if you say resolution is the only benefit, higher resolution gives you more than only higher resolution. But of corse there is a limit to what we can see, but I have had 4K for nearly 2 years now and these seating distance discussions is totaly wrong, you can easy see the difference on a 100" screen from 6m distance or longer( I have only tested 6m because this is the limit of my HT).

Regards
Andreas

My Homecinema

Andreas21 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 41 Old 10-21-2013, 10:59 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
biliam1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 853
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmReverie View Post

Indeed.

As I am in a mean mood I am going to jump into the category of being a buzz kill. So to begin unless you sit really close your screen or have unnaturally good sight going beyond 4k is not going to yield any visibly better results. For example assuming a 100" 16:9 screen, that you are sitting at what THX recommends and that you have 20/20 vision you can only see up to a bit over 1400p anything beyond that we cannot see.

To get a benefit of going beyond 4k once again using a 100" screen you would have to be sitting around 7foot and 5 inches from the screen or closer. Basically you are going to have to sit uncomfortably close to a screen for watching films for beyond 4k to be beneficial.


I get where you're coming from.

I have 20/10 vision after Lasik surgery a few years back.

I sit about 9ft from a 116" wide scope screen, which is about 100" in the 16:9 portion of it.

I totally feel comfortable that close and could sit closer.

I often sit about 1 screen height or less for IMAX and the larger venue screens and about 1.5 screen heights for regular theaters.
biliam1982 is offline  
post #33 of 41 Old 10-21-2013, 01:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
FilmReverie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Grid
Posts: 652
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

This is only if you say resolution is the only benefit, higher resolution gives you more than only higher resolution. But of corse there is a limit to what we can see, but I have had 4K for nearly 2 years now and these seating distance discussions is totaly wrong, you can easy see the difference on a 100" screen from 6m distance or longer( I have only tested 6m because this is the limit of my HT).

Which agrees with what I said. It's only that you need higher then 4k when you go even closer. It is just until about 7 foot and 5 inches on a 100" screen you won't see the full benefits of 4k. But once you go closer then that an even higher resolution becomes beneficial. As I said from THX recommended viewing distances it is a bit over 1400p that you need which means 4k is superior to 1080p and that you definitely should be able to see the difference (you just wont be able to resolve all the detail that 4k has). Hence unless you are sitting closer then around 7 feet and 5 inches from a 100" screen there is no benefit to going beyond 4k (outside possibly of allowing keystoning without image quality loss, but this last point is just a guess).
FilmReverie is offline  
post #34 of 41 Old 10-21-2013, 01:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 824
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmReverie View Post

Which agrees with what I said. It's only that you need higher then 4k when you go even closer. It just until about 7 foot and 5 inches on a 100" screen you won't see the full benefits of 4k. But once you go closer then that an even higher resolution becomes beneficial. As I said from THX recommended viewing distances it is a bit over 1400p that you need which means 4k is superior to 1080p and that you definitely should be able to see the difference (you just wont be able to resolve all the detail that 4k has). Hence unless you are sitting closer then around 7 feet and 5 inches from a 1080p screen there is no benefit to going beyond 4k (outside possibly of allowing keystoning without image quality loss, but this last point is just a guess).

Do you have much experience with 4K??

Regards
Andreas

My Homecinema

Andreas21 is online now  
post #35 of 41 Old 10-21-2013, 03:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
FilmReverie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Grid
Posts: 652
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

Do you have much experience with 4K??

Very little. But math doesn't lie. Don't get me wrong I am extremely excited for 4k and there is a notable jump from 1080p to 4k. It's just that resolutions beyond 4k are going to be of limited use for home theater use as for most people 4k is a resolution beyond what they will be able to resolve detail at. Which is what you want, but once you have achieved that there is no visual benefit to going higher (once again their may be for keystone purposes etc).

1080p does not achieve that, 4k does. 4k is definitely an improvement assuming you sit at thx or smpte recommended distances.
FilmReverie is offline  
post #36 of 41 Old 10-22-2013, 03:28 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 824
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Higher resolutions than 4K may not give us more detail, but it might give us something else in HT so I don´t want to say we don´t need it.smile.gif

Back to stacking. I will test stacking with 2 Sony HW55 when they are released to see what this gives me in 3D, will post the results here when I have done the test.

Regards
Andreas

My Homecinema

Andreas21 is online now  
post #37 of 41 Old 10-22-2013, 04:35 AM
Advanced Member
 
FilmReverie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Grid
Posts: 652
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

Higher resolutions than 4K may not give us more detail, but it might give us something else in HT so I don´t want to say we don´t need it.smile.gif

Back to stacking. I will test stacking with 2 Sony HW55 when they are released to see what this gives me in 3D, will post the results here when I have done the test.

I agree and beyond 4k is most definitely useful in many situations. My 27" gaming monitor giving my viewing distance would benefit from being higher then 4k as would real imax. I'm all for progress I just think some people forget that humans will soon become the limit and not the tech itself. Also if beyond 4k really would help with keystone that would be amazing as it would make installing projectors so much easier, or maybe i'm just lazy. wink.gif
FilmReverie is offline  
post #38 of 41 Old 10-24-2013, 05:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,359
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmReverie View Post

Very little. But math doesn't lie.
Yup. From what I've read the eye can see about 100 pixels per degree (better vision higher, worse less of course), that results in the following required vertical resolutions to match the eye:
http://www.nhk.or.jp/strl/results/annual2010/2010_chapter1.pdf

1.0x picture height: 5313
1.5x picture height: 3687
2.0x picture height: 2807 (note that this is within the SMPTE recommended viewing distance and is "significantly" higher than UHD)
2.5x picture height: 2262 (still higher than UHD)
3.0x picture height: 1892 (pretty close to UHD, well above HD, and a pretty comfortable and I'd argue common seating distance)
3.6x picture height: 1626 (pretty close to the THX maximum recommended seating distance)
4.0x picture height: 1425 (this is the SMPTE maximum recommended seating distance)
4.5x picture height: 1268
5.0x picture height: 1142 (this is about the THX maximum acceptable seating distance, still above 1080p/HD)

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is online now  
post #39 of 41 Old 10-24-2013, 02:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
I'm not sure if THX has updated their recommendations for viewing ratios, but I recall asking at their booth at a show (maybe CES, maybe CEDIA) years ago how they came up with the angle. They told me that they tested how close they could get before seeing the pixels on a 1080p display. I thought that was rather interesting since whether the pixels would be a problem depended on things related to which display they used, such as pixel layout (many displays don't even have the 3 primaries for a pixel taking up the same space) and fill ratio, and that people could in the future try to apply THX recommendations to displays that were higher than 1080p. I don't recall the THX organization being clear in the media how they came up with the number. I had to ask.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #40 of 41 Old 10-24-2013, 03:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
FilmReverie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Grid
Posts: 652
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

I'm not sure if THX has updated their recommendations for viewing ratios, but I recall asking at their booth at a show (maybe CES, maybe CEDIA) years ago how they came up with the angle. They told me that they tested how close they could get before seeing the pixels on a 1080p display. I thought that was rather interesting since whether the pixels would be a problem depended on things related to which display they used, such as pixel layout (many displays don't even have the 3 primaries for a pixel taking up the same space) and fill ratio, and that people could in the future try to apply THX recommendations to displays that were higher than 1080p. I don't recall the THX organization being clear in the media how they came up with the number. I had to ask.

--Darin

I personally use SMPTE guidelines and not THX which are not based on resolution concerns.
FilmReverie is offline  
post #41 of 41 Old 10-24-2013, 03:37 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmReverie View Post

I personally use SMPTE guidelines and not THX which are not based on resolution concerns.
Another thing that I think many people haven't realized with THX commercial cinema values is that those numbers of 26 and 36 degrees are for the largest viewing angle seat (kind of a worst case). They didn't say that people should sit in a certain spot, just that all the seats should have at least some viewing ratio. Most seats would be higher when a commercial theater was built to those numbers.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

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