
Amazon release new Fire TV with 4K support - Osiris
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00U3FPN4U
======
nsxwolf
Does anyone have a rational justification for watching 4K content on common
sized panels (50-75 inches), at common distances (10-15 feet)? Can you really
see a difference from 1080p, and is it worth the extra expense and bandwidth
required?

3DTV was a fad and it failed, but you could at least see the 3D effect. What's
the appeal of 4K in the living room? Is it in the homeopathic audiophile nut
territory, or should I believe the hype?

~~~
bydo
For normal viewing sizes and distances, and for anyone without incredible
vision, the increase in resolution has about as much effect as oxygen-free
solid gold directional HDMI cables.

The enlarged color space and allowance for higher frame rates in the UHDTV
specs, though, are definite improvements.

~~~
t0mbstone
I have 20/30 vision (without glasses), which means things are slightly blurry
from a distance, and when I switched to 4K, I notice a BIG difference.

With my glasses on (giving me 20/15 vision), the difference in picture quality
is even more evident.

Expensive gold plated HDMI cables, on the other hand, don't result in ANY
picture quality difference, though. HDMI is digital, and even cheap HDMI
cables can usually transmit an identical signal.

~~~
bydo
Above you mention that this is with a 65" display from 10' away.

A 65" television with a 16/9 aspect ratio is 56.65" wide.

So:

A 480p (DVD) image is displayed at 12.71 ppi.

A 720p image is 22.59 ppi.

A 1080p image is 33.89 ppi.

A 4K UHDTV image is 67.78 ppi.

With 20/30 vision at a distance of ten feet you are capable of resolving 19.10
ppi, so 720p is an improvement over 480p, but anything higher is wasted
pixels.

With "average" 20/20 vision you (or perhaps your guests) would be able to
resolve 28.65 ppi, still somewhat less than the full resolution of a 1080p
image but a distinct improvement over 720p.

With 20/15 vision you are capable of resolving 38.20 ppi, so, with a viewing
distance of ten feet and a 65" television, 4K is actually a modest improvement
over 1080p.

If you can actually see a difference in resolution from ten feet with your
glasses off, you may want to speak with your optometrist, as by definition you
have been provided with an incorrect prescription.

Some further information and the formulae used above are available here:
[http://jaredjared.com/2012/10/visual-acuity-
dpi/](http://jaredjared.com/2012/10/visual-acuity-dpi/)

*Edit: I accidentally used 4096 pixels of width (the cinema standard) to compute the 4K ppi, rather than 3840 (UHDTV); corrected above.

~~~
t0mbstone
You can keep trying to delude yourself, and you can spout theoretical numbers
all day, but I know when a picture looks better and more crisp.

You're like one of those people who claimed that nobody needed 1080p
televisions because 720p was more than enough.

------
sctb
Current discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10233295](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10233295)

