Is your TV good enough? Human limits of vision.

[MediumRare]

UK researchers have demonstrated the maximum resolution necessary for a TV, based on human limits of detecting pixels. The article discusses tiny UK TVs but the calculator from the researchers covers larger TVs and 4k and 8k resolution.

I need a new TV!

Ultra-HD televisions not noticeably better for typical viewer, scientists say

Research shows 4K or 8K screens offer no distinguishable benefit over similarly sized 2K screen in average living room

www.theguardian.com

Computer Laboratory – Projects: Display resolution calculator

 

[masterhw]

since the calculator is getting the hug of death

 

[JSmith]

Not to be negative at all... but this is not new and has always been the case, based on visual acuity.

The higher the true resolution the closer one needs to be to see the extra detail.

That said there are other benefits that often come with higher res panels, such as wider colour gamut, peak brightness etc. which can be easily noticed and apparent in side by side comparisons.


JSmith

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Better pixels (wider colour gamut, faster refresh, higher dynamic range) are far better than more pixels in almost all cases

 

[nerdstrike]

Viewing distance is long established. What these scientists actually did:

The researchers found the human eye can resolve more detail than commonly thought, revealing the average was 94 PPD for greyscale images viewed straight on, while for red and green patterns it was 89 PPD. For yellow and violet patterns it was lower, at 53 PPD.

I think it's really interesting that our accuity for yellow and violet is 60% of peak, presumably relating to wavelength sensitivity of our cone cells.

I also love just how close you'd need to sit for 8k TV content.

 

[KenMasters]

I also love just how close you'd need to sit for 8k TV content.

Quite easily reached if you follow the cinematic viewing guideline of a >40 degree viewing angle.

 

[respice finem]

My TV (UHD 65", 2m distance) is more than OK for my vision (58 years old, wearing glasses for 55 years now).

As a German saying goes: I'm good at hearing bad, but bad at seeing good
(schlecht hören kann ich gut, nur gut sehen kann ich schlecht)

Such is life.

 

[olds1959special]

I'm not visually oriented, have always been near-sighted, and now in my older age am becoming far sighted too! I wear glasses to watch TV. I don't care what kind of TV I have, as long as it doesn't make any sounds when it's turned on (my LG buzzes a little, unfortunately.)

 

[Snarfie]

UK researchers have demonstrated the maximum resolution necessary for a TV, based on human limits of detecting pixels. The article discusses tiny UK TVs but the calculator from the researchers covers larger TVs and 4k and 8k resolution.

I need a new TV!

Ultra-HD televisions not noticeably better for typical viewer, scientists say

Research shows 4K or 8K screens offer no distinguishable benefit over similarly sized 2K screen in average living room

www.theguardian.com

Computer Laboratory – Projects: Display resolution calculator

Got that impression about 15 years ago when I bought a smooth-viewing Panasonic HD plasma TV looked amazing then, still does in memory.

Two years ago I replaced it with a 50"
TCL Qled smart TV; sure, the colors are more intense (had to drop the contrast to 63%), but that’s about it. My 4K cable setop box? Still in its box. The TCL’s smart interface does everything apps, streaming, all plug & play except play 4K. And honestly? I couldn’t care less.
The real upgrade? Power draw from a 300-watt 40 inch plasma heater to a 68-watt 50 inch QLED. Calculated in another 6 months the TCL (cost 399,- euro) is earnd back Shocking,

 

[mcdn]

Quite easily reached if you follow the cinematic viewing guideline of a >40 degree viewing angle.

That would make the screen width roughly equal to the viewing distance. Unlikely for home use?

 

[KenMasters]

That would make the screen width roughly equal to the viewing distance. Unlikely for home use?

Depends on how seriously you take your audio-visual entertainment, in much the same way people approach audio.

I sit about 2.2m from my 83”

 

[LTig]

Depends on how seriously you take your audio-visual entertainment, in much the same way people approach audio.

I sit about 2.2m from my 83”

3.8 m from 117" screen (FHD beamer)
0.7 m from 32" 4K monitor
0.25 m from 14.6" tablet

 

[TheKoC]

Viewing angle of close to 40 degrees works great for movies, for gaming I have to move it back, or I get nauseous.

 

[Oddball]

Depends on how seriously you take your audio-visual entertainment, in much the same way people approach audio.

I sit about 2.2m from my 83”

About the same for 83". 2.5 m from 98" in a second setup. Anything closer for these sizes and one would need 8K TV.

While the article digs a bit deeper into various aspects of image, it has been no secret that in most setups people actually get HD resolution at best.

 

[masterhw]

While the article digs a bit deeper into various aspects of image, it has been no secret that in most setups people actually get HD resolution at best.

Right, while we can theorize over what is or isn’t at the threshold of visibility, compression artifacts remain plainly visible in the majority of consumer content. The obvious path toward improved experiences is through bitrate and delivery spec, the displays are already almost perfected at the high end. But this involves delivery costs, rather than hardware profits. Obvious which one the industry prefers selling customers on.

 

[Talisman]

In my home theater, 2.5 meters from a 110-inch screen, I watch in 4K, but even when I watch in Full HD, the lower resolution doesn't bother me; in 720p, it starts to get annoying.
Personally, I believe that 4K is the limit beyond which a further increase in resolution makes little or no sense. Increasing the screen size, however, almost always has a significant impact on the enjoyment of watching a film.
Every now and then, I see theaters with huge tower speakers, multiple subwoofers, surround sound, and Atmos, and then a 60-inch TV and a sofa 3 meters away. This always seems to make little sense to me.

 

[Oddball]

Right, while we can theorize over what is or isn’t at the threshold of visibility, compression artifacts remain plainly visible in the majority of consumer content. The obvious path toward improved experiences is through bitrate and delivery spec, the displays are already almost perfected at the high end. But this involves delivery costs, rather than hardware profits. Obvious which one the industry prefers selling customers on.

Agreed. With all of the living costs skyrocketing in the recent years I think there is in general not much interest in the higher cost streaming services with higher bit rate. But as a measure of good business sense, streaming services should offer such options. I for one would be a subscriber .

Also, we are still dealing with the Hollywood anxiety syndrome. I live in a decent EU country and in Dubai, but still can't really get the premium content (both bit rates and titles) like US or the UK. Lived in both US and UK and loved it, but not planning to go back just to get the hi-def treat...

 

[masterhw]

Agreed. With all of the living costs skyrocketing in the recent years I think there is in general not much interest in the higher cost streaming services with higher bit rate.

I mean one of the largest sporting events of the year wasn’t even 4K, a full decade after the ATSC 3.0 spec. https://streaminglearningcenter.com...w-for-super-bowl-2025-an-engaging-debate.html

I do actually understand the argument for higher bitrate 1080p vs 4K, but it still feels like things are moving at a glacial pace.

 

[EasyC]

OLED 55" 4K at 2,5m. Big enough. If it's less than 4K it's certainly visible. It's a shame about the extra cost to get that (with surround sound) with the streaming services. There's a lot of quality differences with tv-stations (Europe). BBC is very good but their programming is less interesting nowadays.
But you should calibrate the screen when it's new - they're always on the 'showroom setting' which means unnatural colours and all kinds of filters etc. Apple TV has a nice way to do it with your iPhone.

 

[Barrelhouse Solly]

55" 1080p TV viewed more or less straight on at about 8'. I'm 20/20 at that distance. I doubt that an increase in resolution would be an improvement. I also watch streaming video on a 15" 1080p monitor from a little over 2'. I'm very happy with it.