Sqrl said:
Filming movies at 2500x1500 or any UHD resolution has nothing to do with the eye's limitation at proper viewing distance. The further your screen is the less pixels you will be able to actually percieve, this is easy to imagine if you think about a TV moving off into the horizon until it is a single pixel to your perception. On the other hand when it comes close to you, or when you get close to your TV you can see individual pixels. Thus the comment about proper viewing distance. A maximum pixel perception is directly tied to the distance you view the screen at. For entertainment purposes it is irrelevant if you can put your face up to your screen and see pixels because that is not how you will actually be using the screen. The reasons you would film at higher resolutions are many, there are a ton of editing advantages to it, but even then if you had a theatre that could support the full resolution (they do exist) you could do it simply because the people sitting in the first 10 rows or so are too close. I honestly don't know what the average size of a movie screen is but for even say a 30ft diagonal screen the minimum distance would be around 40 to 45 ft which is why in the front of most theatres there is a rather large space between the first row and the stage/screen.
|
Even that's not far enough, though I'm one to prefer sitting farther back anyway.
I sat in the front group of rows when watching The Return of The King..... NOT FUN
