General Category > General Discussion
4K TVs.. waste of time?
Superchop:
--- Quote from: BlackAndGreen on September 19, 2015, 05:50:26 AM ---
--- Quote from: Thom Grayson on September 12, 2015, 05:29:05 PM ---
--- Quote from: Megatron on September 12, 2015, 04:51:27 PM ---Anyway...I don't know the specs of film vs digital, nor do I really care. Theaters are big and nice, but when it comes to fine detail (which is important to me) it is severely lacking. So this may be taboo to film "purists", but I prefer the blu ray digital over film.
--- End quote ---
I don't think the home video versions are more detailed than the theater versions. I think you are talking about pixel size - which is obviously smaller on a home TV than it is on a massive screen - which can result in things looking sharper even though no detail has actually been added. PPI has more to do with sharpness than resolution does, in many cases.
--- End quote ---
wrong! ppi, what is that, no one advertises that. resolution is what is importan
--- End quote ---
Do you know what ppi even is? If not how can you say that he's wrong?
Resolution is only as important as every other factor involved in watching a movie...by itself it means nothing.
And not for anything but nobody advertises PPI because the average consumer won't understand what it even means. Advertisements keep things simple so people understand. You don't hear xbox or sony commercials talking about how much ram their systems have...
wiggy:
--- Quote from: Megatron on September 12, 2015, 04:51:27 PM ---
--- Quote from: wiggy on September 12, 2015, 07:44:17 AM ---
Funny you would think that, as the films used in movie production have a "resolution" which far exceeds 4K. It's not until movies are made digital that they actually lose a great deal of detail or resolution. That said, a lot of films are shot digitally these days, which is quite sad IMO.
Also, movies are not shot at 260fps. Not even close, so I'm sort of confused as to exactly what you're seeing at 260fps?
--- End quote ---
Quick note - I meant 240fps, not 260. Typo, my bad...
Anyway...I don't know the specs of film vs digital, nor do I really care. Theaters are big and nice, but when it comes to fine detail (which is important to me) it is severely lacking. So this may be taboo to film "purists", but I prefer the blu ray digital over film.
As for 60fps vs 120 vs 240 - the hardware adds smoothing and motion blur to fill in the gap between frames. In many cases this is the "Soap Opera" effect. A good blu ray to look at is anything with a car chase or something else really fast moving. The Dark Knight (scene where the truck flips) is actually really cool to watch in standard 60fps, then 120 then 240 in succession. And yes, the difference is noticeable. Some don't like it, some do. Different strokes.
--- End quote ---
But it's not an option thing, it's just fact. Film has a "resolution" that far exceeds ANYTHING you'll ever watch on that 4K TV. I'm not arguing whether or not you prefer it, but the assertion that there's more detail in an upscaled 1080P image or even 4K simply isn't true. It's not "taboo".
The goofy frame rate thing is about as silly as Lucas going back and adding all sorts of stupid CGI to his old films. It's taking what is NOT broken and attempting to "fix" it. That's my opinion, but the fact is that nothing you watch at 240 FPS was ever intended to be viewed with that sort of filtering.
Megatron:
--- Quote from: wiggy on September 19, 2015, 06:18:35 PM ---
But it's not an option thing, it's just fact. Film has a "resolution" that far exceeds ANYTHING you'll ever watch on that 4K TV. I'm not arguing whether or not you prefer it, but the assertion that there's more detail in an upscaled 1080P image or even 4K simply isn't true. It's not "taboo".
The goofy frame rate thing is about as silly as Lucas going back and adding all sorts of stupid CGI to his old films. It's taking what is NOT broken and attempting to "fix" it. That's my opinion, but the fact is that nothing you watch at 240 FPS was ever intended to be viewed with that sort of filtering.
--- End quote ---
OK, so the theater has more "inset whatever here" than home video. That's fine. But if I can't see the fine detail in the theater, then I don't care as much.
And as for "how it is intended" - I don't care what someone INTENDS me to do with their product. Movies, games, whatever. When I pay for it, I do what I want with it. The difference between the 240fps and the Lucas stuff is that there is no way to remove what the producers put onto the disc. If I feel like watching a more "traditional" style movie, I can turn the smoothing off. It isn't trying to fix anything, it is watching the movie with a filter - turn it on or leave it off, your choice. But to say that something is only meant to be enjoyed the way it was "intended to be" is naive, especially for someone who modifies older hardware and games. NES games were never meant to be upscaled to HD, yet people still have consoles that play NES games in high resolution via HDMI. I play Call of Duty - I don't touch the multiplayer. Ever. In fact, I don't play ANY multiplayer games. The developers would insist that I am "missing the full experience." Does that mean I am enjoying it incorrectly?
Thom Grayson:
--- Quote from: Megatron on September 19, 2015, 06:34:33 PM --- I play Call of Duty - I don't touch the multiplayer. Ever. In fact, I don't play ANY multiplayer games. The developers would insist that I am "missing the full experience." Does that mean I am enjoying it incorrectly?
--- End quote ---
Good to see there is someone else who actually knows Call of Duty has single-player! I know too many people who never play single-player, and in fact skip it intentionally.
I actually quite enjoy their single-player, with multiplayer only getting cursory attention if my friends have been bugging me to play with them.
Einhander:
Hi, I was wondering if someone could help me with a question I have. PS3 and 360 display a 720 resolution. Now what would happen if you played them on 4k? Would they look worse or better? Because we all know what happens when you play standard definitions on a HDTV. The images are distorted. Would playing consoles that are 720 and trying to upscale the games on a 4k actually make the games worse?
And if that's the case, then what are we gonna do each time we get new consoles and tvs? We can't just keep a tv with a different resolution for each console we get. This is something that concerns me.
I want 4k in the future. But if my PS3 and PS4 games look worse on a higher resolution, that's gonna be a problem. Because having a CRT and one HDTV is all I have room for.