Final Unicourse'tan Çalış, Yüksek Notu Garantile!
%25 İndirim Kodu: FRM25
Yükleniyor...
Dersi İzle
GÖRÜNTÜLEYENLER
+36
Premium Özellik
Bu konuyu kimlerin görüntülediğini görmek için Premium üyelik gerekir.
Premium'a Geç
Vizesine Unicourse'tan Çalış, Yüksek Notu Garantile!
Dersi İzle
SPONSORLU ETKİNLİK
Fikrini Gerçeğe Dönüştür
Projeni dünyaya göstermek için sahne hazır. Red Bull Basement başvuruları açık.
Başvurunu Yap[video source vs monitor resolution] Can somebody explain why a 1080p/full HD video can look great on my 42 inch 4K TV screen (no upscaling!)?
-
Isn't a full HD resolution ( 1920 x 1080 ) almost four times less pixels than 4K ( 3840 x 2160 )? I think I understand that a higher bit depth gives me more information per pixel, resulting in for instance less banding, but I still expected my 1080p 10-bit video files to look very soft and literally low-res.
-
Isn't a full HD resolution ( 1920 x 1080 ) almost four times less pixels than 4K ( 3840 x 2160 )? I think I understand that a higher bit depth gives me more information per pixel, resulting in for instance less banding, but I still expected my 1080p 10-bit video files to look very soft and literally low-res.
3840x2160 isn't almost four times the pixels of 1920x1080. It is exactly four times the pixels. So every full HD content will be upscaled without any loss. One pixel will just take up four pixels in the higher resolution.
On top of that full HD already gives a very sharp image. And when you are far away enough and/or the screen is small enough and/or your eyesight is bad enough there is no visual difference between the two.
-
Isn't a full HD resolution ( 1920 x 1080 ) almost four times less pixels than 4K ( 3840 x 2160 )? I think I understand that a higher bit depth gives me more information per pixel, resulting in for instance less banding, but I still expected my 1080p 10-bit video files to look very soft and literally low-res.
There is still some upscaling going on in the TV.
It would have to upscale, otherwise it would have to leave some pixels blank.
-
Isn't a full HD resolution ( 1920 x 1080 ) almost four times less pixels than 4K ( 3840 x 2160 )? I think I understand that a higher bit depth gives me more information per pixel, resulting in for instance less banding, but I still expected my 1080p 10-bit video files to look very soft and literally low-res.
Our vision doesn't scale linearly. 8k doesn't look 4x better than 4k.
Try it on vr goggles though, that's where you can better notice these differences.
-
3840x2160 isn't almost four times the pixels of 1920x1080. It is exactly four times the pixels. So every full HD content will be upscaled without any loss. One pixel will just take up four pixels in the higher resolution.
On top of that full HD already gives a very sharp image. And when you are far away enough and/or the screen is small enough and/or your eyesight is bad enough there is no visual difference between the two.
Thanks! Naturally I fucked up the post by not telling that it's 42 inch screen. But then, depending on everything else you said, such as the distance to it and my eyesight, it still - evidently - can look good...? XD
-
There is still some upscaling going on in the TV.
It would have to upscale, otherwise it would have to leave some pixels blank.
You mean, it stretches out the image to fit the 42 inch screen?
-
You mean, it stretches out the image to fit the 42 inch screen?
The other person told you the same thing, but basically for every one pixel, it will generate four pixels that are exactly the same as that one pixel would be.
It turns a one by one array into a two by two array.
There's probably also some tech wizardry going on on the processor in the TV itself that is built in by the manufacturer.
-
Our vision doesn't scale linearly. 8k doesn't look 4x better than 4k.
Try it on vr goggles though, that's where you can better notice these differences.
I have the resolution in VRChat at 88% because there's hardly a difference between that and 100% and it can prevent crashes (I only have 8gb of vram, when 12 is recommended)
in actual videos I imagine it's quite a difference though.
-
Thanks! Naturally I fucked up the post by not telling that it's 42 inch screen. But then, depending on everything else you said, such as the distance to it and my eyesight, it still - evidently - can look good...? XD
For me the jump from VHS to DVD was big enough. I usually don't even mind watching SD content. I almost never go out of my way to get 4k content. Most of my library is at full HD.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Kayıt Ol Giriş
