or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Interest In A 1080 vs 4K Shootout? Can We Get to the Heart of the Matter?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Interest In A 1080 vs 4K Shootout? Can We Get to the Heart of the Matter? - Page 3

post #61 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by housequestion View Post

4K gaming with nice visuals is really only possible with most modern games with about $4k in video cards if you want to have the highest settings turned on.
Most people don't seem to realize it, but games now come with options that go beyond the expectations of today's hardware, such as including supersampling options right in the game itself.
Those are the kind of options that exist so that the game still looks good years from now, rather than anyone realistically expecting people to play them at those settings today. With enough supersampling, you can even cause games from ten years ago to have performance issues on a high end system today.
A lot of games have "ultra" settings that are nothing more than increasing the precision of effects, which make almost no visual difference, but introduce a large performance hit for the sake of being more technically correct.

A pair of GTX 780Ti's will cost you about $1400 which is about as high-end as you can get. Yes you can technically use up to four cards in SLI, but games already have trouble fully utilizing two cards. Four will give you better numbers in benchmarks, but surprisingly little benefit in most games. Stuttering is already a problem with SLI, but much worse when you move beyond two cards.

And if you're comparing televisions, you will only need to hit 30fps rather than 60.
Quote:
Originally Posted by housequestion View Post

A good test would be to contrast 1080P with FSAA and visuals cranked vs 4K without.
Then you are not only comparing resolution, you're comparing PC settings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by housequestion View Post

Windows does do above 150% by the way. It's just not one of the options that they hand feed you. In Windows 7, it goes up to 500%. I use it on my MPBr to keep text in certain applications more readable.
Anything that is not 100/125/150% does not scale correctly. While you have the option to set a custom scale, you should not. I would also not use anything less than Windows 8 if you plan on using a high DPI display with the UI scaled up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by housequestion View Post

The better test is a light controlled environment and put a ZT up against a lesser (which would be basically any) 4K TV and see if running a higher resolution makes up for the shortcomings of the set.
Same problem as your suggestions for PC gaming - you are comparing display technologies and not only resolution.
post #62 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

^ LMAO. I came here basically to iterate the same.

All code for: "No, there's not really a discernable difference in the slightest at any reasonable distance where one would actually use the television."

But the thought of these poor guys pausing media on a half dozen screens diving in- back and forth- and saying to themselves "wait I see something...no, I don't it's really the same as the 1080" are nothing if not simultaneously sad and hilarious.

Now, where's the next 5 articles essentially conjured up by those with a vested interest in the propagation of this "technology" that are virtual textual glasses of UHD kool-aid?

James


Bottom line truth.............fan boys get out of here.
post #63 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by housequestion View Post

No, I don't have everything backwards. I'm just not looking at things from an AV enthusiast perspective. The average population won't give a s888 about 4K. That's why DVD's still outsell Bluray. The average person cared about making the shift to flag screens because the change in form factor was monumental and the change in image quality was huge. In the case of 4K, the change in form factor is nothing and the change is image quality is not much.

I know plenty of people who have flat screens and don't even get HD cable. The benefit is not there. The next generation of consoles won't even do it. There's next to no content available and that's not going to chagne any time soon.

"You do not catch the point. Average Joe Sixpack/Jane Pepsi don't give a damn about 4K. BUT once shown 4K and 2K sets with the same price sticker"

Where's your data showing that's ever going to happen? How is that going to scale? Outside of AV nerds, nobody is asking for it or willing to pay more for it. It doesn't make the content that's actually available for normal people (netflix, hulu, hbogo, discs, etc) look any better.

For economies of scale to happen, a lot of regular people have to buy this. Nobody wants it. There's no content available for it, no real argument to make the change and a lot of people aren't even taking advantage of 1080P media let alone thinking about 4k. It's a pipe dream.


You are correct...........
post #64 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by boe View Post

Maybe the question is - do you notice the difference, not if you can see the difference. My father used to decorate the house with candles in the windows for Christmas and unfortunately I often didn't notice. My mother would change her hair style and my father often didn't notice.

I was with a friend the other night looking at TVs. At 8'-10' we stopped in our tracks to look at a 55" TV not knowing it was UHD - just that it was the best dang picture we saw at that point and we walked past many TVs all with their own source - none were using a general broadcast.

The truth is you can DEFINITELY see the difference on a much bigger screen than the 55" screen we were looking at, at 20' . Will you appreciate it or notice it - that is up to you. I couldn't tell you the difference between a $1.80 bottle of wine and a $1,000 bottle of wine but I can tell you the difference instantly between miller, bud, sam adams, Michelob, rolling rock etc - just hand me an unlabeled pitcher of beer and I can identify all the major brands right away.

My attitude is if you and your guests don't care why spend more money but if you do then you have to decide how much it is worth to you.


20 ft away from a 55"

Must have those eye implants like Jordi on sTAR tREK

uNFORTUNATELY cr TOTALLY DISAGREES WITH YOU.

I have made my own comparisons and CR is dead nuts right on the money correct.
post #65 of 101
Well from my testing, 4K looks much sharper than HD to my eyes.wink.gif
post #66 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasst View Post

Well from my testing, 4K looks much sharper than HD to my eyes.wink.gif

What is your viewing distance for "much sharper"?
post #67 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

What is your viewing distance for "much sharper"?

Looking at the photo I posted, the 4K symbol is much sharper than the HD letters wouldn't you say?smile.gif I took that photo that way with the 4K symbol in focus, and the HD blurred just to have some fun with a "play on words".smile.gif

As for me.....well 4K works for my 20/10 vision much better than HD, and I'm capturing 4K every time I film now.
post #68 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasst View Post

Looking at the photo I posted, the 4K symbol is much sharper than the HD letters wouldn't you say?smile.gif I took that photo that way with the 4K symbol in focus, and the HD blurred just to have some fun with a "play on words".smile.gif
As for me.....well 4K works for my 20/10 vision much better than HD, and I'm capturing 4K every time I film now.

I suspect you are talking about the computer monitor viewing scenario (VD=1PH) and then I agree with you.
post #69 of 101
I think you need to look at the picture he posted as proof. smile.gif You're missing something there.
post #70 of 101
Another photo showing a bit more of what I posted.
post #71 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasst View Post

Another photo showing a bit more of what I posted.

 

They got that in a cell phone yet?  :)

post #72 of 101
Consumer Reports also paused movies and did side by side comparisons, sometimes actually seeing a difference at TWO feet, sometimes not.

At regular viewing distances and NOT PAUSED they saw no difference.

Anybody remember pausing a movie to get nose to nose with the screen to look it over ?

Me, neither. I was either going to the bathroom or a refill.

Regardless the Consensus is what CR is saying.

I have read dozens of articles by experts agreeing with CR.

I have did my one side by side comparisons and I agree with CR.


If they stick 4k in the tv and don't charge me for it, then ok as LONG

as I don't have artifacts from the huge upconversion going on or give me a way

to shut off the upconversion because native content may never be available unless

you think WAITING HOURS for content to download is a good thing....lol

Another compression algorithm is not the answer either. We know the issues that

can cause.
post #73 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

What is your viewing distance for "much sharper"?



According to Consumer Reports they SOMETIMES could tell a difference at TWO FEET......................

But you know some here have super human vision but for the rest of us I will take the word of a non biased test such as CR

and my own side by side testS TO BACK IT UP.
post #74 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetmeck View Post

According to Consumer Reports they SOMETIMES could tell a difference at TWO FEET......................
But you know some here have super human vision but for the rest of us I will take the word of a non biased test such as CR
and my own side by side testS TO BACK IT UP.

That can be tested by everybody: go to a shop and look to a 55" or 65" 4K and 2K TVs. They have them quite often almost side by side.
One does see the pixel matrix @2K from 2 feet and one sees silky smooth 4K surface from this distance. What this has to do with the TV
watching? There is no PQ difference from the videophile VD not even mentioning standard folks watching 55" from 12 feet. Same with
showing 4K camcorder and telling "I see razor sharp difference" but without specifying the VD.
post #75 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetmeck View Post

According to Consumer Reports they SOMETIMES could tell a difference at TWO FEET......................
But you know some here have super human vision but for the rest of us I will take the word of a non biased test such as CR
and my own side by side testS TO BACK IT UP.

That can be tested by everybody: go to a shop and look to a 55" or 65" 4K and 2K TVs. They have them quite often almost side by side.
One does see the pixel matrix @2K from 2 feet and one sees silky smooth 4K surface from this distance. What this has to do with the TV
watching? There is no PQ difference from the videophile VD not even mentioning standard folks watching 55" from 12 feet. Same with
showing 4K camcorder and telling "I see razor sharp difference" but without specifying the VD.

 

When the 65X900A first showed up at BB, I watched both an upconvert 1080 source and native 4K (from the magic box).  In both cases at 12 feet I could not only "detect a difference" from the 2012 XBR-65HX950 at 12 feet, but saw a distinct increase in quality.  My eyesight is 20/20 + 20/25.

 

I'm assuming that you've done something similar and not seen a difference and attribute my observations to some sort of psychosomatic response.  Also, the screens themselves are different and configured differently.

 

What I want to see is the screen split left and right with identical footage on a 4K screen.  The left half using 2x2->1x1 NN down-sampling, to simulate 1080.  It would have to be done carefully to make sure that you didn't accidentally end up with 1080 4:4:4 on the left with 2160 4:2:0 on the right.  But it could be done and should be the be-all-end-all to the discussion I would think.

 

Further, I don't have a lot of video editing tools, and am having trouble finding a way to make a 540/1080 split movie to watch that I could just double the viewing distances to get the same effect.

post #76 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

I realize there are a nearly unending number of variables in play here, so please: let's try to keep this dialog constructive and open. Maybe, just maybe, we can come to a fairly equitable set of guidelines if enough are interested in such a demonstration.
Include test cases for computer/gaming use, please.
Computer graphics are much sharper than movies/television, and thus will lead to graphical defects (aliasing, moire artifacts, etc) that are easier to see. For example, try this on your 4K television, your computer running at 3840x2160 connected to the television, using a maximized web browser window:

testufo.com/aliasing-visibility

- This is a torture test, relevant to computer graphics and video games.
- Follow the instructions at the top of that web page.
- Test it with antialiasing ON/antialiasing OFF.
- During antialiasing ON, test with different gamma settings (gamma can amplify/reduce artifacts in the antialiasing, because antialiasing assumes perfect gamma)
- Games often do not do much filtering/blurring/softening to fix artifacts (e.g. nyqist, moire, etc).

With this test, I can see artifacts that remained visible over 10 feet away from a 50" 4K HDTV.

At certain tilts in this test pattern, the artifacting 'beads' have wide separation, about 2 inch apart at 1080p, becomes only 1 inch apart at 4K, but still visible from a big distance. The artifact is easier to see when you step back further away from arm's length viewing distance. Adjusting for perfect display gamma (easier on OLED and DLP), will fix this resolution-based artifact. Perfect real-world video game use-case: Borderlands and Borderlands 2, running from a HTPC connected to a 4K HDTV. The game uses rototscoped fine 1-pixel-thick and 2-pixel thick black lines to surround a lot of polygons. Such situations really amplify display resolution limitations via this artifact, especially during slight line tilts from right angles (creating wide-spaced antialiasing artifacts).
Edited by Mark Rejhon - 11/25/13 at 2:11pm
post #77 of 101
4K looks better than 1080p as long as it is not LCD that always sucks or curved OLED which is ridiculous. You just either have to sit with the picture in your lap or go with massive size. At 8 feet viewing distance you really need at least 110 inches. Size always matters!
post #78 of 101
Why are people arguing over this? This thread is a joke. Whether you can see a difference between 1080p and 4K at the same distance/size is completely subjective from person to person.
post #79 of 101
What can be seen is objective. What people think they see is subjective.

The subjective people belong to the sales force. As long as everything is subjective then everyone should buy everything.

That's how horror stories such as LCD and curved OLED flourish.

There's another way you can always detect the sales force at AVS--they always claim that every Shootout is biased and therefore you shouldn't trust them AND NO Shootout can ever be devised that can be unbiased so guess what?--go ahead and buy ANYTHING--whatever is good in your own eyes--how many trillion times do you hear that CANARD around here?

As long as nothing is OBJECTIVE--as long as you can keep SCIENCE out of everything==as long as you can EXTOL the subjective--guess what?

You can really sell almost anything--JUNK even--such as edge lit LCD and Curved OLED!

Picture Quality can go backwards but that's alright since everything is SUBJECTIVE!

4K LCD and 4K Curved OLED BOTH suck!!!

The greatest 1080p sets beats out 4K sets not because of the resolution--but because all the OTHER parts of picture quality in 4K LCDs for instance--simply sucks SO much that the resolution gain can not make up for all the rest of the SUCKYNESS!

In the future--and who knows how many years it will take to get here--FLAT OLED 4K will beat out the best 1080p--though it will cost a lot.

4K will one day be great but it will take BIG sizes--anyone who tells you that it won't take BIG sizes also belongs to the SALES FORCE!
post #80 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

What can be seen is objective. What people think they see is subjective.

The subjective people belong to the sales force. As long as everything is subjective then everyone should buy everything.

That's how horror stories such as LCD and curved OLED flourish.

There's another way you can always detect the sales force at AVS--they always claim that every Shootout is biased and therefore you shouldn't trust them AND NO Shootout can ever be devised that can be unbiased so guess what?--go ahead and buy ANYTHING--whatever is good in your own eyes--how many trillion times do you hear that CANARD around here?

As long as nothing is OBJECTIVE--as long as you can keep SCIENCE out of everything==as long as you can EXTOL the subjective--guess what?

You can really sell almost anything--JUNK even--such as edge lit LCD and Curved OLED!

Picture Quality can go backwards but that's alright since everything is SUBJECTIVE!

4K LCD and 4K Curved OLED BOTH suck!!!

The greatest 1080p sets beats out 4K sets not because of the resolution--but because all the OTHER parts of picture quality in 4K LCDs for instance--simply sucks SO much that the resolution gain can not make up for all the rest of the SUCKYNESS!

In the future--and who knows how many years it will take to get here--FLAT OLED 4K will beat out the best 1080p--though it will cost a lot.

4K will one day be great but it will take BIG sizes--anyone who tells you that it won't take BIG sizes also belongs to the SALES FORCE!

Art, this is all your subjective opinion, but it seems like you believe every technology before OLED is just simply junk. And it also seems like because YOU dont like curved OLED that is junk. I too dont like curved OLED, however there are people who do. Just as there are people who like LCD tech. We are all different people with different minds that prefer different things. Thats life.
post #81 of 101
OLED might not be the Holy grail but CURVED anything is a joke!

SOME people PREFER to mix chocolate milk--buttermilk--and rootabegga juice together.

That's not life--that's an obscene act that should be against the law!!!

Those people have always loved LCD! A plasma lover would not be capable of such a thing. A Curved OLED lover wouldn't PREFER that mix but he'd defend people that would like it.
post #82 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

OLED might not be the Holy grail but CURVED anything is a joke!

SOME people PREFER to mix chocolate milk--buttermilk--and rootabegga juice together.

That's not life--that's an obscene act that should be against the law!!!

Those people have always loved LCD! A plasma lover would not be capable of such a thing. A Curved OLED lover wouldn't PREFER that mix but he'd defend people that would like it.

Now your just trolling....
post #83 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Now your just trolling....
Now‽ That's Artwood's sole purpose on these forums as far as I can tell.
post #84 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Now‽ That's Artwood's sole purpose on these forums as far as I can tell.

And he still hasn't told us what he uses as a PC monitor!!:}
post #85 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsinger View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Now‽ That's Artwood's sole purpose on these forums as far as I can tell.

And he still hasn't told us what he uses as a PC monitor!!:}

 

LOL.  I fear for poor Artwood once OLED's become ubiquitous.  No more posting issues.  What to do, what to do....

 

UFO: The reason this thread is a joke isn't because of the subjective nature of some of the points.  It's a joke because 4K is a fait accompli.  It's here.  It'll stay.  Some need to get over it.

 

About curved however; this is one wanna-be-trend that I believe will die out once enough people look at each other and say "WTF were they thinking?".  PC monitors----maybe.  Curved home displays for everything else is an absurdity that I don't believe has any lasting power, and I resent its distracting influence on progress.

post #86 of 101
I'll admit it--I use an Apple Imac.

Not my sole purpose but one of my purposes here at AVS has always been to be a counter weight against the display industry rah rah sales force which has always been here.

I'm all for great pictures at non astronomical prices. That almost never coincides with the wishes of the display industry sales force.

The subjective--it's in your own eyes--it's good enough --just shut up and buy the piece of crap crowd!

Such people here in the past have championed rear projection see through LCD--buy a lamp every 6 months CRT--keep buying Sony SXRD because that last great one is that will fix all the problems is right around the corner.

The same people who used to CHEER for the flatness of ANYTHING against CRT are some of the same people who now CHEER for Curved OLED!!! Now is that Sales Force or not?

Now you also have the Good Enough wing of the sales force saying--don't cry over no more Full Array rear lit LCD--BUY edge lit LCD because it IS a step backwards! The sales force is getting so BOLD now that they think they can ADMIT that a product sucks and still get the public to buy it because the public is THAT DUMB!!!

The same people who USED to swear by charts extolling 1080p resolution are now the same people saying burn those very charts and BUY 4K anyway--who cares that scientifically we KNOW that you can't distinguish 4K resolution on a 55-inch OLED set at anywhere near normal seating viewing conditions!

Who cares that none of LCDs problems have been fixed and that LCDs have regressed since the Sharp Elites BUY Inferior Chinese 4K LCD ANYWAY!

The operative points are always BUY and ANYWAY!

I don't believe that pointing out such things when very few point out such things make me a troll! They may make me a thorn in the side of the SALES force and maybe a thorn in the WISHERS!

I don't have a big problem with them. They WISH that OLED was great and affordable and big right now--some of the LCD deluded wish the impossible that 4K LCD would be great and not suck!

I can WISH too--but I'm also capable of seeing the REAL picture now.

This thread is about 4K and 1080. I'll be glad one day when 4K looks great. That day won't happen with 4K LCD or curved OLED--it might happen one day with FLAT OLED and for OLED to be BOTH Flat and Big it will probably take the Chinese to build them--the Koreans will be able to make them--but they will cost a lot.

We should give the Chinese ANYTHING in exchange for Cheap Fantastic Flat Big OLED.

I'd like to have A 110 INCH FLAT OLED 4K Set in my den.

Now 8K would have to be the biggest screen that would fit through my door--at least 170 inches--now that is dreaming! If that ever happened I'd be content forever and wouldn't listen to the sales force trying to sell SMALLER TVs!
Edited by Artwood - 12/11/13 at 3:17pm
post #87 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood 
I'll admit it--I use an Apple Imac.
post #88 of 101
A former great leader of our country told me that sometimes you just have to be shameless!
post #89 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

I'll admit it--I use an Apple Imac.

Not my sole purpose but one of my purposes here at AVS has always been to be a counter weight against the display industry rah rah sales force which has always been here.

I'm all for great pictures at non astronomical prices. That almost never coincides with the wishes of the display industry sales force.

The subjective--it's in your own eyes--it's good enough --just shut up and buy the piece of crap crowd!

Such people here in the past have championed rear projection see through LCD--buy a lamp every 6 months CRT--keep buying Sony SXRD because that last great one is that will fix all the problems is right around the corner.

The same people who used to CHEER for the flatness of ANYTHING against CRT are some of the same people who now CHEER for Curved OLED!!! Now is that Sales Force or not?

Now you also have the Good Enough wing of the sales force saying--don't cry over no more Full Array rear lit LCD--BUY edge lit LCD because it IS a step backwards! The sales force is getting so BOLD now that they think they can ADMIT that a product sucks and still get the public to buy it because the public is THAT DUMB!!!

The same people who USED to swear by charts extolling 1080p resolution are now the same people saying burn those very charts and BUY 4K anyway--who cares that scientifically we KNOW that you can't distinguish 4K resolution on a 55-inch OLED set at anywhere near normal seating viewing conditions!

Who cares that none of LCDs problems have been fixed and that LCDs have regressed since the Sharp Elites BUY Inferior Chinese 4K LCD ANYWAY!

The operative points are always BUY and ANYWAY!

I don't believe that pointing out such things when very few point out such things make me a troll! They may make me a thorn in the side of the SALES force and maybe a thorn in the WISHERS!

I don't have a big problem with them. They WISH that OLED was great and affordable and big right now--some of the LCD deluded wish the impossible that 4K LCD would be great and not suck!

I can WISH too--but I'm also capable of seeing the REAL picture now.

This thread is about 4K and 1080. I'll be glad one day when 4K looks great. That day won't happen with 4K LCD or curved OLED--it might happen one day with FLAT OLED and for OLED to be BOTH Flat and Big it will probably take the Chinese to build them--the Koreans will be able to make them--but they will cost a lot.

We should give the Chinese ANYTHING in exchange for Cheap Fantastic Flat Big OLED.

I'd like to have A 110 INCH FLAT OLED 4K Set in my den.

Now 8K would have to be the biggest screen that would fit through my door--at least 170 inches--now that is dreaming! If that ever happened I'd be content forever and wouldn't listen to the sales force trying to sell SMALLER TVs!

Art

I do appreciate your being candid with us
post #90 of 101

Does sarcasm count as "taking the high road in every post" ?

 

:-P

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Interest In A 1080 vs 4K Shootout? Can We Get to the Heart of the Matter?