How is 4K Ultra HD "Four Times the Resolution" of 1080p? - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 63 Old 11-08-2014, 03:04 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 0
A couple more tidbits for thought.

What is the difference in scale between 1080 HD and 2160 UHD? If I render an image at 1080, what relative factor of scale would I need to render at 2160? Would that be 400%, or 200%? The 2160 image is only twice as large in any single axis. And it is the single axis alone that defines the relative difference in sharpness, not the 2 dimensional factor of 4 that defines the difference in total image elements.

The only objective way to discern or compare the apparent sharpness of video or film, whether in display or projection, is through the use of linear resolution charts that effectively relate a single axis (dimension) for comparison. Under ideal conditions, with respect to the difference between 2160 UHD and 1080 HD, such charts reveal a difference in sharpness never greater than 2.

Again, as stated upfront in my first post: I agree that 2160 UHD has four times the pixel count of 1080 HD and (as loosely defined by some, but not all) can be referred to as having "four times the resolution." No debate there. What I've tried to illustrate through this and previous posts in this topic (through the use of several different examples and explanations provided with appropriate context) is the argument that it is at best misleading to then suggest, as most manufactures do in their overly-zealous marketing of UHD, that as a result of having "four times the resolution" it is also four times as clear or sharp. That's all.

My posts here have been to provide opinion, and to perhaps reopen a discussion of the topic with others. The purpose of a forum topic such as this is to exchange information: to learn or inform, and sometimes to argue and debate. Whenever I post in any forum setting, I am always mindful that the people I may be communicating with are just that - people. People with experience that is different from mine, and opinions that may not agree with mine. Above all, people that deserve my respect just for the very fact that they are people, not contingent upon what they say.

Have I offended you in some way, tgm1024? Is there really cause provoking your incessant, personally derogatory snarks, such as claiming I resort to " . . . the most childish of arguing techniques . . ." or that my future comments might " . . . pollute this thread any further . . .?"

Or how about other comments you've made that appear to be not-so-veiled attempts to intimidate or bully others into submission, such as "We go through this over and over and over" or "I have no more time for your line of reasoning" or "If you wish to hold your ground on this and fight the uphill battle against the world, be my guest. But you'll lose" or "You need to stop fighting this." And those are just excerpts from this one thread alone . . .

There's a not-so-fine line between commenting and trolling . . .

Last edited by bart.; 11-08-2014 at 07:13 PM.
bart. is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 63 Old 11-09-2014, 08:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,793
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 631 Post(s)
Liked: 925
And the troll word surfaces....

Let's take the teeth out of this for a moment.

What I took offense to was this: "From reading your other responses in this thread I get the impression that its doubtful any other facts or evidence presented by myself or others will persuade you, so I'll stop here."

"Facts and evidence" is a conversational attempt to place me in the category of someone refusing to listen to some wave of information. There were no "facts and evidence from others". Evidence? Those were opinions. I've been in the business of image processing and computer graphics for a long time. What I'm talking about comes from that experience, and from how the industry uses the term with regard to displays. And those would be my opinions.

But for a wave of such information, have you done the google search I suggested?

For perceivable clarity it's not about a mere pixel count, because as Joe Bloggs and I pointed out, the pixels have to mean something. But it is about how much information (non muddied, clear information) is present to allow you to discern what's being drawn, or to present it with clarity, or or or or or (choose your own wording, perhaps sidestepping "sharpness"). To that extent 4x the image information present is 4x the resolution.

The notion of what a display's resolution is has been established for years and years.

We've been around and around this. If you wish to reinvent that concept of a display's resolution, then go ahead. But it will be an uphill battle for you. I wouldn't regard it as worth it.

rodtsasdt 111111report*
P-1 CUR ALLOC 20195.....5805M
HELLO GREGORY

Last edited by tgm1024; 11-09-2014 at 08:44 AM.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #63 of 63 Old 11-09-2014, 08:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,793
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 631 Post(s)
Liked: 925
Look, I'm done here. This is silly.

rodtsasdt 111111report*
P-1 CUR ALLOC 20195.....5805M
HELLO GREGORY
tgm1024 is online now  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General



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