| Conina said: 1080p is perfect for my 47''-TV (and I don't have the space to replace it with a bigger model. |
Yup... thats a lot of money.
| Untamoi said: Good movie is a good movie no matter the resolution and bad movie won't get any better with higher resolution. I still watch old movies from 40's and 50's and I don't think resolution would make no difference when I watch those movies. |
I agree that a bad movie stays a bad movie in higher resolution and that a good movie stays a good movie in lower resolution.
But I strongly disagee that the resolution makes no difference at all. Even many old movies (f.e. Gone with the Wind, Casablanca, Quo Vadis, Spartacus, Mutiny on the Bounty) look much better on Blu-ray than on DVD and I enjoy them even more due to the higher resolution, digitally rescanned and remastered picture and audio quality.
I have a new Samsung 4K/UHD 65 inch television. When I brought it in the living room to replace my 55 inch Samsung 1080p television (that I love) my wife was like "really, why, I bet it will be a marginal improvement".
As soon as I streamed some 4K videos from YouTube and Netflix my wife was like "Holy Shit!, that picture is amazing, I am not even upset anymore!".
Maybe older or first gen 4K televisions are only marginal. But I have a 2016 and it is amazeballz.
4K content is a HUGE upgrade to 1080p.
I kind of agree. I have no interest in 4k for now because;
A) 4K projectors cost too much
B) My 129'' image at 1080p is good enough and where it isn't good enough, its because of the movie. (ie originally too grainy, like Black Swan or Halloween)
People who claim they see a night and day difference are probably sitting too close to the TV. I don't see how that is enjoyable.
| foodfather said: I kind of agree. I have no interest in 4k for now because; A) 4K projectors cost too much B) My 129'' image at 1080p is good enough and where it isn't good enough, its because of the movie. (ie originally too grainy, like Black Swan or Halloween) People who claim they see a night and day difference are probably sitting too close to the TV. I don't see how that is enjoyable. |
I game in a small room and bought a 60 inch tv, which in hindsight is far too large for my 5-6 foot viewing distance. Simply because when playing a game I have to divert my eyes noticeably to other areas of the screen to take in everything. For me, the 1080 to 4k jump would be insane. When I get a 4k I plan on getting a bit smaller, but still using the already posted multiple times chart to determine the right size for my situation, on the smallest end possible of course.
4k is not a scam. I notice improvement
| Volterra_90 said: 4k definitely looks much better than 1080p. I was amazed when I first saw a high quality image in a 4k TV. |
Same here.
It's all about those uncompressed pixels © Microsoft
Deus Ex (2000) - a game that pushes the boundaries of what the video game medium is capable of to a degree unmatched to this very day.
Very few games actually play at render at 4K. Even the most powerful gaming PCs would struggle to render that at a respectable frame rate, or hell, even at 30fps.
What Sony and MS are likely pushing is some kind of upscal to 4K which won't look as good as an image that actually renders at 4K. It'll be a while still before we can see that in real time (although there are some 4k films, but I haven't checked to see if those are upscaled or true 4K.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Currently Online 
