Viewing distance chart (720p vs. 1080p vs. 4K vs. 8K and beyond) - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 25 Old 06-19-2012, 07:56 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Randomoneh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Recently I say a viewing distance chart for 4K, 1080p , 720 and lower resolutions. However, it was based on premise that angular resolution of 60 pixels per degree is enough. So , I created one based on 200 ppd figure which seems to be a limit of what a person with great vision (visual acuity) could perceive.

376
Full resolution here.
Randomoneh is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 25 Old 06-19-2012, 09:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
mtallent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cecilia,KY
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
My own test using 1080P test signals would dis-agree with you graph. For example with a 10 inch screen viewing from 40 feet away I think you would be pressed to tell if the set was turned on much less it was 1080P resolution. See the graph in my sig for one that I think is pretty accurate based on 20-20 vision eye resolving power.

Mike T

Size Matters

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
mtallent is offline  
post #3 of 25 Old 06-19-2012, 10:00 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Randomoneh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
720p and lower resolutions are not present on this graph simply because recently there is a battle going on related to 1080p vs 4K viewing distance.

As for angular resolution higher than 60 pixels per degree, there is more than enough proof 60 is not even close to limit of human visual system.
Randomoneh is offline  
post #4 of 25 Old 06-19-2012, 11:26 AM
Senior Member
 
elario's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtallent View Post

My own test using 1080P test signals would dis-agree with you graph. For example with a 10 inch screen viewing from 40 feet away I think you would be pressed to tell if the set was turned on much less it was 1080P resolution. See the graph in my sig for one that I think is pretty accurate based on 20-20 vision eye resolving power.
Mike T

10" display at 40 feet? You misundersand the graph I think.

It is not suggesting that you can appreciate a 10" 1080p display at 40 feet.

The graph deliberately omits sub 1080p resolution lines because it assumes we are past that phase of technology. So we are only interested in what occurs from 1080p and above.

If sub-1080p lines were plotted then 10" display would intersect them way before 40 feet.
Randomoneh likes this.
elario is offline  
post #5 of 25 Old 06-20-2012, 07:30 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Randomoneh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I have updated first message with angular resolution of 400 pixels per degree, 8K and 16K.
Randomoneh is offline  
post #6 of 25 Old 07-12-2012, 02:07 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Randomoneh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Added more precise chart based on angular resolution of 200 pixels per degree.
Randomoneh is offline  
post #7 of 25 Old 09-04-2012, 02:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Wait- so this chart claims that a person with a 42" TV and 20/20 vision can appreciate the full potential of 1080p vs 720p from as far as 17ft away? This is incredibly hilariously inaccurate, do you work for a company who produces 4K panels?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
post #8 of 25 Old 09-04-2012, 02:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 32
P.S. I got here by reading the comments in this article: http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/4/3289567/4k-tv-future/in/3040349 and reverse image searching on Google. You seem very active on the internet for just an average Joe. Almost like you're promoting a product.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
post #9 of 25 Old 09-05-2012, 07:24 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Randomoneh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by cakefoo View Post

P.S. I got here by reading the comments in this article: http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/4/3289567/4k-tv-future/in/3040349 and reverse image searching on Google. You seem very active on the internet for just an average Joe. Almost like you're promoting a product.
I've never gave advice to anyone online about what TV to buy. This is my hobby any I find it very interesting. I usually visit tech sites daily and since I've read a LOT about visual acuity I feel like fish in the water when talking about anything related to it. I enjoy talking about it just like audio enthusiast enjoys discussing audio equipment. Nine, ten months ago I didn't know as much about this topic as I know now so you could find posts made by me in which I discuss this topic from different angle - simply because I didn't know that much about it.

About the chart. It is the upper limit. Read rest of the discussion on The Verge article you've linked to. It is based on NHK research (hence 200 pixels per degree / 100 cycles per degree):


About 20/20 vision - these are the acuities of study participants:
Randomoneh is offline  
post #10 of 25 Old 09-08-2012, 09:57 AM
Senior Member
 
ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose, Ca, USA
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Doesn't the visual acuity histogram seem a little odd. Better than 20/20 is considered somewhat rare. This distribution looks like you would see for military aviators.

Ernie
ernie is offline  
post #11 of 25 Old 09-08-2012, 12:39 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Randomoneh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernie View Post

Doesn't the visual acuity histogram seem a little odd. Better than 20/20 is considered somewhat rare. This distribution looks like you would see for military aviators.
Ernie
That histogram includes acuities of study participants (measured on Snellen chart). As you can see, maximum acuity was 20/6.3. Now, if we were to simply convert Sneller chart results to limit that applies to displays (expressed as center-to-center pixel spacing (in arcseconds / arcminutes / arcdegrees) or as number of pixels per degree of viewer's field of view), upper limit would be 0.32 arcminutes (center-to-center pixel spacing) that is ~187.5 pixels per degree [of viewer's field of view].

However, correct probability chart from study suggests [some of the] participants (obviously those with highest acuity - 20/6.3) would be able to perceive difference in quality up to ~200 pixels per degree.
Obviously pure Snellen chart results underestimate ability to perceive difference in quality related to increase in resolution, by some degree. This is also suggested by author of Air Force Research Laboratory paper. At page 4 there is a detailed table comparing Snellen chart letters to what human visual system can be expected to see (including what is possible to see on a display):



Now, about your comment:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernie View Post

Better than 20/20 is considered somewhat rare.
That is really a misconception:



Have a good day!
Randomoneh is offline  
post #12 of 25 Old 02-11-2013, 11:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ryan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Wow! I just saw this.

So, your claim is that someone can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 20" display from about 15 feet?!!

Am I reading this chart wrong, or is the chart wrong?

'Cause something is definitely wrong here.
Ryan1 is offline  
post #13 of 25 Old 02-11-2013, 11:50 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Randomoneh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I'm not happy with exact wording and sharp transitions. I'll make a change or two soon. I hope it'll be more clear then.
Randomoneh is offline  
post #14 of 25 Old 02-12-2013, 07:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Beerstalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Peoria, IL
Posts: 1,978
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

Wow! I just saw this.

So, your claim is that someone can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 20" display from about 15 feet?!!

Am I reading this chart wrong, or is the chart wrong?

'Cause something is definitely wrong here.

Yes, that is what his chart says. However, you have to realize his chart is based on pretty much the very best vision that has ever been measured by a human, so it's a bit unrealistic. I can understand his hesitation to have everyone use the older charts at 60ppd because many people do have vision better than that (it is based on 20/20 vision which is actually below average for young/middle aged people, it is average for older people). I myself have 20/10 vision (at least the last time I had it measured) so I can tell a difference at distances further than the 60ppd chart shows. I think this chart is a bit much though, since it would be like a handful of people on earth that might be able to tell the difference at the distances he is charting. Now if he were to make one using 20/10 vision or something closer to that I think it might be more helpful.
Beerstalker is offline  
post #15 of 25 Old 02-21-2013, 01:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,237
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Liked: 51
This chart is ridiculous. It puts the distance for 1080p on my 60" TV at 26-44 feet?!?! That's nuts. The thing would be TINY. I can't see pixels on good 1080p content at 9 feet. This whole 4K thing is nonsense. The adoption of HD isn't even complete yet, and we have this massive, gaping hole between the quality of cable and something like VUDU HDX or Blu-ray. All 4k is going to do is make regular cable TV look even more sh*tty than it does not at 1080p, which is already bad enough. This is suggesting that I would be able to see the difference between 4k and 8k at 9 feet away from my TV? That's absurd.
BiggAW is offline  
post #16 of 25 Old 04-15-2013, 02:21 PM
Member
 
Xevious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post

This chart is ridiculous. It puts the distance for 1080p on my 60" TV at 26-44 feet?!?! That's nuts. The thing would be TINY. I can't see pixels on good 1080p content at 9 feet. This whole 4K thing is nonsense. The adoption of HD isn't even complete yet, and we have this massive, gaping hole between the quality of cable and something like VUDU HDX or Blu-ray. All 4k is going to do is make regular cable TV look even more sh*tty than it does not at 1080p, which is already bad enough. This is suggesting that I would be able to see the difference between 4k and 8k at 9 feet away from my TV? That's absurd.


This range seems a lot more accurate than the other chart I found flying around which is ridiculous. I can read off my 3840x2400 display with extremely small font sizes 2-3 feet away without issue. I can read everything on my 1440p 27" display from ~6 feet away no problem. I am getting a 50 inch 3840x2160 display and according t the other chart I have seen in circulation:

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.png

For a 50 inch display to get the full benefit of 4k you have to be 2.5 feet away from it. WHAT?? I have a 22.2 inch monitor that I sit that far away from and I can see the pixels so saying that you have to be that close to a 50 inch is so ridiculous its laughable. Whats funny is I have horrible vision (when uncorrected) as my prescription is -5.75 diopters in my right eye and -5.25 in my left.


According to Randomoneh's chart for a 50 inch 4k tv you need to be between 20 and 11 which IMHO is MUCH MUCH more accurate for me than that other chart. I mean a much smaller 27 inch 1440p monitor I have no problem at ~6 feet and considering the pixels are significantly bigger on a 50 inch 4k tv I would be able to view it from 10-15 feet easily.
Xevious is offline  
post #17 of 25 Old 04-17-2013, 07:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
mtallent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cecilia,KY
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xevious View Post

This range seems a lot more accurate than the other chart I found flying around which is ridiculous. I can read off my 3840x2400 display with extremely small font sizes 2-3 feet away without issue. I can read everything on my 1440p 27" display from ~6 feet away no problem. I am getting a 50 inch 3840x2160 display and according t the other chart I have seen in circulation:

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.png

For a 50 inch display to get the full benefit of 4k you have to be 2.5 feet away from it. WHAT?? I have a 22.2 inch monitor that I sit that far away from and I can see the pixels so saying that you have to be that close to a 50 inch is so ridiculous its laughable. Whats funny is I have horrible vision (when uncorrected) as my prescription is -5.75 diopters in my right eye and -5.25 in my left.


According to Randomoneh's chart for a 50 inch 4k tv you need to be between 20 and 11 which IMHO is MUCH MUCH more accurate for me than that other chart. I mean a much smaller 27 inch 1440p monitor I have no problem at ~6 feet and considering the pixels are significantly bigger on a 50 inch 4k tv I would be able to view it from 10-15 feet easily.

I think you need to run a one pixel wide test signal to determine weather you are seeing all the resolution available, not small text. For 1080P I run a test signal that is alternating white and black one pixel wide. If you are close enough to see the pattern as very fine vertical stripes then you are resolving the image. If it just looks like a grey solid image then you cannot see the full resolution. You have to have 1:1 pixel mapping from your computer for this to be valid. Any image resizing will show up as much larger light and dark vertical bands in the image.

When I play this test signal on my computer to my 65 inch DLP set I can just see the vertical stripes when at a distance of about 7 feet and when moving back to 8-9 feet I cannot see the stripes, and with glasses I have about 20-20 vision. This distance agrees very close to the chart link in your post.

Mike T

Size Matters

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
mtallent is offline  
post #18 of 25 Old 08-28-2013, 04:44 PM
Newbie
 
terryaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have to agree, something is way out of whack here ? Many have established that 4K needs you to sit within the screen size, from screen to benefit. Which co-insides with cinema owners claiming you will need to sit in the first six rows of the cinema to benefit. Which is also approx. a 1:1 ratio.
terryaaa is offline  
post #19 of 25 Old 09-03-2013, 01:25 PM
Newbie
 
Counterpwnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Had to make an account just to offer my two cents.

Isn't the chart relaying how close one would need to be to appreciate the improved pixel count? For instance, you'd need to be 20-feet or closer to appreciate the difference between 1080p and 4K on a 50-inch display. Outside of 20-feet, the two look the same to a person with normal vision.
Counterpwnt is offline  
post #20 of 25 Old 09-04-2013, 02:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
mtallent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Cecilia,KY
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
If you are referring to the chart that is in my sig, then with a 50 inch screen at 20 feet you would not be able to see ANY difference from 480P to 4K, they would all look the same resolution. If you wanted to fully resolve the pixels in a 1080P image on a 50 inch screen you would need to be about 6-7 feet away from the screen. I have run some test signals at 1080P pixels and on my 65 inch screen at 8 feet I can just make out the individual pixels on special test signals. This agrees pretty much with the distance chart.

Mike T

Size Matters

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
mtallent is offline  
post #21 of 25 Old 09-05-2013, 11:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Beerstalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Peoria, IL
Posts: 1,978
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 23
No, he is talking about the chart in the first post. According to it you would be able to tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p on a 50" screen from around 22 feet.

Again, I think this chart is a little overzealous because it is using an eyesight figure that only a couple people in the world have. I do like the idea of a chart using better than 20/20 vision though as many people have vision better than 20/20 myself included.

I think it would be very interesting if he could put together different charts for varying eyesight. I believe this chart equates to about 20/6 vision measured on the Snellen scale. What about making charts for others like 20/8, 20/10, 20/12, 20/16, 20/24, 20/30 etc. Then people can actually look at a chart based on their visual acuity and get more accurate results.
Beerstalker is offline  
post #22 of 25 Old 02-19-2014, 09:29 PM
Member
 
aakrusen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Why is OP's chart severely different from Carlton Bale's chart?
http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.png
aakrusen is offline  
post #23 of 25 Old 02-20-2014, 09:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Beerstalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Peoria, IL
Posts: 1,978
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 23
If you read the other posts you would see it explained a few times.

His chart equates to about 20/6 vision measured on the Snellen scale. The chart in your link equates to 20/20 vision measured on the Snellen scale.

I have asked him about maybe creating charts based on other visual acuity ratings but he has not done so (and I haven't bothered to either).
Beerstalker is offline  
post #24 of 25 Old 05-06-2014, 08:23 AM
Newbie
 
mmihacsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Please reply with your Sig's link to reference the chart you mentioned.

Thanks

mmihacsi is offline  
post #25 of 25 Old Yesterday, 11:05 AM
Member
 
jrcrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 22
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 10
i am so confused with this. so for a 120 inch tv? how far should i sit to appreciate 4k resolution from a projector?
jrcrunch is offline  
Reply HDTV Technical

Tags
720p Vs 1080p , 1080p Vs 720p
Gear in this thread - 1080p by PriceGrabber.com

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