this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
1350 points (98.6% liked)

memes

10259 readers
3069 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (7 children)

How many Ks is real life resolution and at how many fps does it run?

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Whatever the resolution of 'real life', what matters is at what point our little eyes and brains no longer can perceive a difference.

In average scenery, the general consensus is about 60 pixels per degree of vision. If you have something a bit more synthetic, like a white dot in empty space, then that sort of specific small high contrast would take maybe 200 pixels per degree to ensure that the white dot is appropriately equally visible in the display versus directly seeing. A 75" display 2 meters out at 4k is about 85 pixels per degree. This is comfortable enough for display.

Similar story with 'frames per second'. Move something back and forth really fast and you'll see a blurry smear of the object rather than observing it's discrete movement. So if you accurately match the blurring you will naturally see and do low persistence backlight/display, you'll get away with probably something like 60 FPS. If you are stuck with discrete representations and will unable to blur or turn off between meaningful frames, you might have to go a bit further up, to like 120 or 144 FPS.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (3 children)

That kid was about as cool as kids could be back then. I wonder what he's up to today.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Jennykichu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 9 months ago

4K looks the same as 8K on a 46" TV

[–] Enzy@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago

Resolution =/= graphics

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Are they already really talking about the PS6? I'm still using my PS1, 2, and 3!! I'll never catch up at this rate. I probably will not get the PS5 anyway - I haven't seen many games that look like they'd justify my buying one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I enjoy 4k on the monitors I sit only a few inches from all day, but so far I find it hard to justify a whole chain of upgrades for the living room when I think the picture quality already looks great at 10+ feet away or whatever . To be clear, I mean I don't see the need to upgrade the living room from 1080p to 4k, let alone beyond that

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago (6 children)

It really depends on the size of tv. It's like a cinema screen, you want very high resolutions for that even though it's far away, because it's a large size

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] adorable_yangire@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

bro i just want full raytracing-

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] art@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

I can't really imagine being close enough to any screen where I need more than 1080p. I'm sitting across the room, not pressing my face against the glass.

[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 months ago

Sony Bravia Z series. Bought in 2010 I think? Still works like a charm!

[–] Dhar@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago

Don't worry. Either the PS9 won't need a screen or we can sue for false advertising. https://youtu.be/iwhPkBHLdqE?feature=shared

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›