Originally Posted by GeoffreyMorrison
I think my bio qualifies my heavily researched article to be a bit more than an "opinion" piece, but whatever.
Not sure why the original link was to the Asian version of CNET. If you don't want to sort through the converted measurements (not done by me, btw), here's the original article:http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7...?tag=cnetRiver
I'm enjoying the debate, even if it does seem awfully similar to the argument a few years ago about 720p and 1080p.
It's always great to have the original author participate in the debate
More educated discussions, less misinformation
Firstly I think when you have a title like "Why 4K TVs are stupid" I think you are prepared and probably soliciting responses. Unless of course this is solely for catching readers' attention
Secondly the thing that come to my mind when I see the title is that you believe the industry is stupid. Even the money losing panel industry is not stupid. They are absolutely smart and rationale but very stressed people. They are just caught in the prisoner's dilemma, which you or me would probably also couldn't escape if we were in the same hotseat. And this dilemma has been the unspoken rule of the game.
That said they cannot push something that is unperceivable. The standard digital camera analogy comes to mind. For a short time people went chasing for MP, even 12MP for a small sensor. End of the day Canon shows processing is more important. To paraphrase Buffett: In the short run it is a voting machine, in the long run it is a weighing machine. Of course the key is how you strategise so that you will be around in the long run, because the other side of the coin is as per Keynes: "the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent". But end game is that markets and consumers in aggregate will be rationale in the long run.
They can mislead in marketing, for eg saying LED LCD has better contrast when the improvement is primarily from using glossy front glass and strong backlight. But key still is it must be perceivable by J6P
. And anecdotally 4k difference is perceivable, just as OLED vs LCD, not a leap but a jump nonetheless.
It is of course similar to 720p vs 1080p argument and with the same variable at play: size and distance. Do you seriously think 720p is similar to 1080p on a Sharp 70" at 10'? People were in general not thinking of 70" back then when the debate of 720p vs 1080p was raging. To a lesser extend 4k will also be perceivable as average TV size increase, while room size doesn't ie the viewing distance does not increase or may even shrink.
Hopefully you have time to go through the discussions in this thread, not all but past 6 months for eg, so to know we are not stupid nor irrational. We have reasons to believe 4k is not unperceivable. Take a look at 1080p on the Plasma 103"... you will see artifacts not seen on a 100" projector. Hence I keep saying projector and fixed pixel direct view is probably not directly comparable.
BTW I think 8k is too much because I think 80" is about optimal for city dwellers due to logistics.