Quote:
Originally Posted by daveeb
I'm sure there's a good reason why you can't get small 4K sets yet. The only real benefit would be HDR unless you were literally nose right up to it.
I'm talking about TV screen size vs resolution here. These sites suggest small hi resolution TV sets aren't really worth it.
https://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/
https://www.digitaltrends.com/home-t...s-1080p-vs-4k/
We're clearly not going to agree. You may well be correct about 4K monitors displaying small text etc, I haven't used one but I do have a 55 inch 4K oled tv that I sit about 4-5 feet away from and I'm glad it isn't any smaller as the 4K benefit would be reduced imo.
You're also underestimating the subjective benefit that HDR brings, far more than moving from 1080 to 4K. |
The good reason is not many people would buy them as the market is there because people want bigger sets. It's got nothing to do with 4k being pointless on small screens. Which is what we were talking about, the OP says they live in a box room and the TV is right next to the computer, so I'm guessing he sits close to the TV.
You need to forget the TV vs monitor debate. They are basically the same thing for what we are talking about. They are saying they aren't worth it because of how close you need to sit, which is what this thread is based on.
Well yes we wont agree, that's because you keep saying its pointless. It might be pointless to you as your viewing distance states it's pointless but it won't be pointless to others. I'm not sure why you keep mentioning monitors and small text. I was talking about viewing TV channels on a monitor. The 4k benefit would only be reduced because of your viewing distance, not because the screen is smaller. 4k is 4k. 4k doesn't magically get better because the screen is bigger.
How have I underestimated HDR? I mentioned it once saying my phone has it, but I mentioned the resolution was good as the picture was crisp. I know how good HDR is, but I wasnt talking about HDR.