By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

I didn't see a difference on my 65" monitor. But that has a lot of reasons.

1. Still images are harder to compare. It's much more noticeable in moving images. Our eyes do not work with pixels, they work with minute differences in color and light information. Our eyes are not built to compare still images or pixels for that matter.

2. The images were not fullscreen. Which means no matter what screen you looked at them they will be artificially smaller and therefor have a much higher pixel density, which is the actual thing out eyes will notice. For example on my screen the pictures only took up about half of it, effectively doubling the DPI.

3. The textures are extremely low res and low detail. Harder to make out details when there are none. This has been done deliberately to troll people, of course.

4. It's harder to see differences when you don't know what to look for. That's just a psychological trick also done deliberately to troll people. Now that I know what to look for it's much easier to spot the difference.

In conclusion, higher resolutions are always better and OP is a troll.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network
curl-6 said:

That's a zoomed in view.

When I play games, I don't do so through a magnifying glass.

Look at the green text in both non zoomed in screenshots

One you can read the other not

The problem with this comparison is its a bad comparison, it should use a game designed for modern pcs, i.e with high res textures



Conina said:
Verter said:

Now that you say it, I can see a clear downgrade from the screenshot #5 to the #6, but only if I open the images on a new tab at a larger scale.

Of course you have to open the images on a new tab!

Otherwise you don't compare 4K to 1440p to 1080p to 720p images, you are comparing 546p-images downscaled from different resolutions!

This forum is fixed for 1200 pixels horizontal (including avatar pix and frames) and the area left for pictures is 972 pixels horizontal. That leads to downscaled 16:9 screenshots in 972 x 546, so even lower than 720p:

[Image]

True! And that could apply to the rest of my post too. But this being a resolution test, I thought it was relevant to share those details, even if they can be obvious.

Also, at first I didn't know exactly what was being tested (the thread title was simply "test"), so I compared all these small images just looking for something strange or out of place and of course I didn't see a thing. =P



Please, feel free to correct my English.

vivster said:

I didn't see a difference on my 65" monitor. But that has a lot of reasons.

1. Still images are harder to compare. It's much more noticeable in moving images. Our eyes do not work with pixels, they work with minute differences in color and light information. Our eyes are not built to compare still images or pixels for that matter.

2. The images were not fullscreen. Which means no matter what screen you looked at them they will be artificially smaller and therefor have a much higher pixel density, which is the actual thing out eyes will notice. For example on my screen the pictures only took up about half of it, effectively doubling the DPI.

3. The textures are extremely low res and low detail. Harder to make out details when there are none. This has been done deliberately to troll people, of course.

4. It's harder to see differences when you don't know what to look for. That's just a psychological trick also done deliberately to troll people. Now that I know what to look for it's much easier to spot the difference.

In conclusion, higher resolutions are always better and OP is a troll.

You notice it when seeing them fullscreen i hope



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

curl-6 said:
Conina said:

If any of you can't see the difference you should get your eyes checked immediately

That's a zoomed in view.

When I play games, I don't do so through a magnifying glass.

It's not zoomed in. It is a 1:1 picture-excerpt of Kirby007's 4K-original files to fit into the 972 pixl with usable for forum postings. Not upscaled, not downscaled.

For all the people here who are to lazy to open the pictures in a new tab and just scroll down in the thread to form their opinion.

Although, there are probably even a few people who browse the forum with their old phone or 3DS browser with even more downscaled pictures.



Around the Network
kirby007 said:

You notice it when seeing them fullscreen i hope

No, you don't.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

DroidKnight said:

Going up to 4K resolution TVs does allow you to move in closer to take advantage of the better resolution which does give an edge in competitive gaming and adds to immersion in watching movies or playing games.  I wouldn't say 4 1/2 feet away on the 55" TV is having your eyeballs too close to the screen.

This exactly. I sit 12ft from 65", didn't need to be 4K but HDR is nice. 1440p upscaled to 4K looks exactly the same to me as native 4K.

I could upgrade my 1080p projector to 4K (also 12ft yet 92" screen) however projectors aren't great at contrast and certainly not with HDR (unless you have $70K to burn)

It's different behind a monitor since you can always lean in to see more detail. While playing tlou2 I had to get up from the couch to see that the keypad I had to type numbers on was arranged like a keyboard, not like a phone/remote. Low contrast, zoomed out, can't see it from the couch. That's another thing, lower contrast, darker scenes need less resolution. 20/20 vision only applies to high contrast, well lit tests.



Can't see a difference, but I think my monitor is 1080p at best, and may actually be 720p so I wouldn't.



All I can say is...WoW...I'll see myself out.



Conina said:
curl-6 said:

That's a zoomed in view.

When I play games, I don't do so through a magnifying glass.

It's not zoomed in. It is a 1:1 picture-excerpt of Kirby007's 4K-original files to fit into the 972 pixl with usable for forum postings. Not upscaled, not downscaled.

For all the people here who are to lazy to open the pictures in a new tab and just scroll down in the thread to form their opinion.

Although, there are probably even a few people who browse the forum with their old phone or 3DS browser with even more downscaled pictures.

It is zoomed in, I am looking at Kirby's images in full screen right now, and compared to your images the character is more than twice as big on screen in the latter.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.