Anyone have some recommendations on which one you would get if it was free from the list below in UHD. This is from Google Play so they're not HDR but maybe in the future?

Sausage Party
This Is The End
Chappie
Elysium
Captain Phillips
Fury
Concussion
The Night Before
The Wedding Ringer
The Other Guys

I'm just saying, at 20/20, you should be able to see all the detail 4K has to offer on a 65" screen at about 4.4ft. Any closer and you're just making individual pixels clearer, not actually seeing additional detail. Obviously if you don't quite have 20/20, then there will be a benefit.

For the full benefit of 4K, you'd need 190" at that distance, although you'd see a benefit over 1080p with any size over 95". Below that size and you're not even seeing 1080p worth of detail.

The calculation is based on the observation that the human eye can see approximately 300dpi at a distance of 1ft. Therefore, to find the dpi you can see at any distance, take 300, and divide it by that distance in ft.

Screen sizes are diagonal, so you need the diagonal resolution of 4K, which using the pythagorean theorem gives you 4,405.81434

Take that number and divide it by the dpi you found above, and you'll find the size you need to see the full detail of 4K. You can do this for any distance and resolution by manipulating some of the values, and can also find ideal distances for an existing screen by finding the dpi of the screen and then taking 300 divided by that number to find the distance.

At 8ft, on a 65" screen, you're seeing approximately 2124x1195 worth of resolution. Better than 1080p, but just barely. That's about where I sit from my screen, possibly even further, so that's why I focus on a good HDR experience myself.

For a 65" screen, I'd recommend a viewing distance between 5-8ft if you want to see more detail than 1080p, but not clearly see the individual pixels.

Sent from my OnePlus One using Tapatalk

Brings up an interesting thought I was having the other day. I'm also about 9+ feet from my 65", so I'm really all about the HDR. It's unlikely, as this is a family TV, that I'm ever going to have an arrangement for 6 foot viewing distances and still have a reasonable family room arrangement.

But I was thinking how often it's just me at night watching a movie after everyone's in bed. It would be nice to be able to have a comfortable way to adjust to a 6-7ft viewing distance. Main seating is a heavy recliner couch, so pulling it across the carpet isn't practical. Was wondering about the potential of some kind of folding or portable chair, yet something that was also going to be comfortable for 2-3 hours, so a folding lawn chair probably won't cut it.

Does anyone do anything to accommodate different viewing distances for different situations like that? Have some kind of flexible chair they use in that situation?

What size screen at 13ft? Do you have a calculator for that determination?

In fact even the industry bodies involved can't agree on a single solution, so ultimately it should come down to personal preference.

I'm just saying, at 20/20, you should be able to see all the detail 4K has to offer on a 65" screen at about 4.4ft. Any closer and you're just making individual pixels clearer, not actually seeing additional detail. Obviously if you don't quite have 20/20, then there will be a benefit.

[...]

For a 65" screen, I'd recommend a viewing distance between 5-8ft if you want to see more detail than 1080p, but not clearly see the individual pixels.

Yes. But at eight feet away you are too far away to see all the detail. Although I would think it's actually a sliding scale at both ends.

I hate these "optimal viewing" scales and graphs. 4.4 ft from a 65" screen is pretty much unpractical in the majority of viewing setups. I also couldn't see sitting that close to a tv for the 8+ hours I'm watching NFL on Sundays. I might be able to do a 2 hour movie, but not general tv viewing.





I'm close to 9ft from my 65" set and I can see the difference in detail between 4K and 1080p.





All this is just my opinion.

Don't forget HDR, like resolution, lose it's goodness when you sit too far.

The perceived contrast ratio from the TV is reduced because of the external light source... Aka your pupil will adapt to external light reducing the capacity to see all the nuance.

There's still the wide color gamut left...

Well as long as you sit in a dark room to watch HDR, that shouldn't be a problem.

Sent from my OnePlus One using Tapatalk

I hate these "optimal viewing" scales and graphs. 4.4 ft from a 65" screen is pretty much unpractical in the majority of viewing setups. I couldn't see sitting that close to a tv for the 8+ hours I'm watching NFL on Sundays. I might be able to do a 2 hour movie, but not general tv viewing.


I'm close to 9ft from my 65" set and I can see the difference in detail between 4K and 1080p.


All this is just my opinion.

I sit about 12-13" away from my 55" and I can see the difference from my 50" Plasma.
Those scales and graphs sound more like marketing material to sell bigger screens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They're based on the science of the resolving power of lenses. It's a well understood science, used especially for the creation of telescopes to ensure they have enough resolution to make out the details they were intended to. The human eye is very similar to other lenses, and it has been measured to have a resolving power of about one arc minute, or about 300dpi at a distance of 1ft. That's actually where the "retina display" standards come from.

Not trying to be rude, but at those distances and size, you're probably getting a placebo effect.

Sent from my OnePlus One using Tapatalk

So now you're telling me what I can and can't see?
You can trust your charts and I'll trust my eyes!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are those the options for the free movie if you buy a Chromecast Ultra deal?

Is it me or are the many posts re distance from display a bit off topic?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I got Chappie on the Sony Ultra app. It was in HDR, and I thought it was quite impressive visually, with sharpness and color. While the HDR will be missing and it might affect the colors, I found it to be pretty razor sharp in detail...that might come through. I could be wrong, but I think that was a native 4k movie...not sure about any of the others.

The movie itself isn't very good, and is downright cheezy for the most part. However, I found it a little more engaging than I was expecting...I didn't hate it. I was actually a bit surprised considering I didn't love District 9 and highly disliked Elysium.

I saw The Night Before on a plane, and actually enjoyed it quite a bit, but you probably have a pretty good idea if you like the movies from that crew or not. I thought it was a cut above the usual fare from those guys. I'm not sure how much 4k brings to the table, but I'd actually like to see it in HDR sometime, considering it takes place almost completely at night with a lot of colorful lights.

I've seen some of the others, don't have any real thoughts one way or another about how they'd be in 4k or eventually HDR. I don't see a really no-brainer great movie in the bunch.

I'm just saying science has a pretty clear understanding of these things. Of course some people have better than 20/20 vision, but many people will think they're seeing better just because it's a nicer TV. When I bought my first HDTV, a 1080i CRT, I immediately was amazed by the way it looked. It wasn't until a few months later that I realized my cable box was set to 480i instead of 1080i. We can be easily convinced we're seeing a better image just because other aspects of the TV are better, when we're not actually seeing more detail. 1080p still has a lot of detail in it.

I've measured my own eyes and they lined up pretty close to where the science said they should.

Sent from my OnePlus One using Tapatalk

So now you're telling me what I can and can't see?
You can trust your charts and I'll trust my eyes!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hate these "optimal viewing" scales and graphs. 4.4 ft from a 65" screen is pretty much unpractical in the majority of viewing setups. I couldn't see sitting that close to a tv for the 8+ hours I'm watching NFL on Sundays. I might be able to do a 2 hour movie, but not general tv viewing.


I'm close to 9ft from my 65" set and I can see the difference in detail between 4K and 1080p.


All this is just my opinion.

Now, for video games it's a different issue. If a game has poor anti aliasing at 1080p, then there will be a big difference at 4K at just about say distance. However, if the AA is good, like Uncharted 4, then there's not much of a difference without HDR unless you're up close.

Sent from my OnePlus One using Tapatalk

Video game is like you said another issue.



It's all about how graphic processing is done. A 1080p movies with real image has no aliasing, a game at 1080p has a lot for the same screen size.



How Disney do it is they make their 3d film in 4k-8k and than downsample them to 1080p to eliminate the aliasing.



Our anti aliasing technique are usually trivial and the only good solution is downsampling... However it take as much power as running at a higher definition.



Anyway long story short. 4k is visible on video games at a much higher distance.



Personally I sit 4 feet from my 55"and can't see much difference between 4k and HD, it's all about placebo. However for video game the difference is amazing

If you can't tell the difference from 4' away then there's something wrong with your eyes. 4x the resolution right there!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Virgin TV V6 - is this a US product?

http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/13...a-sky-q-beater

For the love of Pete's Dragon, can you guys please take the "how much resolution can you see at what distance" discussion/debate to any of the dozens of other threads where it's already been discussed/debated ad nauseam?

XOXO

This thread is about discussing how 4K movies look, and viewing distance and size is a big factor in that. It's about as on topic as you can get.

Sent from my OnePlus One using Tapatalk