[Blu-rayNut51]

I hope that everyone here has a very Merry, and safe, Christmas!

Sorry if I've annoyed some folks with my long posts. But in that spirit of peace on earth, and good will toward others (that I hope we all wish for), this post will avoid any sarcastic statements, (that I later regretted) & instead, state some basics which are hard to dispute.

1. Almost all Americans, when choosing TVs to place in the typical sized living rooms found in American homes, consider 65 inch flat panels to be quite large TVs. (though I don't)

2. So, if choosing TVs of the 65 inch size for their living rooms, almost without exception, people install those TVs at a distance of least about 9 feet, or further, from where their viewers will be seated.

3. People replacing 65" 1080p TVs with 65" UHD 4k TVs, almost always locate the new 4k units in the EXACT SAME places that the older 1080p TVs were located. (But they should put the newer UHD units closer to the viewing area, so at least SOME of 4k's higher resolution can be seen!)

4. According to studies from The University of Iowa, a low 30 percent of the population even has vision as good as 20/20, uncorrected. (So, even better 20/15 vision, is unusual.)

5. Joe Kane is the man who personally developed the video parameters that calibrators of video displays, as well those testing video displays for reviews, all use as their standards for adjusting those displays to reach their top performance. Mr Kane who created the Video Essentials tool that allows home video enthusiasts to adjust their displays to get high performance from them, is the person who is almost universally regarded as being THE expert on video display quality. Mr Kane's column in WIDESCREEN Review has also shown him describing how various aspects of video display performance, sure need to be improved by TV makers to allow the creation of even better displays than today's current 8k TVs.

6. One aspect of video performance, resolution, is a performance area that Mr Kane feels will offer no benefit for users of home video displays, if it is increased ABOVE 4k. Because Joe Kane agrees with the research done by Sony (which, for marketing reasons, Sony no longer publicizes) in which the company's researchers found that people with 20/20 vision need to be within 4 feet of a 65 inch UHD 4k TV to be able to see the maximum level of very fine detail that native 4k video material can present. That indicates, beyond ANY doubt, that people watching 65 inch UHD displays at a 9 foot distance, simply can't approach seeing the finest details that native 4k video can display. So Mr Kane laughs at the idea that even people with 20/15 vision, will see any added detail with native 8k material, compared to the level of detail that native 4k can present, if both 8k and 4k versions of the same video, are viewed on 65 inch displays, placed side by side, at the same 9 ft distance. Because viewing tests using native 4k video, have shown, that even a person with 20/15 vision, loses sight of the smallest details that native 4k can present on a 65 inch screen, when that viewer is still a few feet short of that 9 ft distance. So basic common sense leads to the undeniable conclusion that when a person is at a distance where he can no longer see the smallest details that 4k can present to him, he will certainly be incapable of seeing the EVEN SMALLER details of 8k, which are the details which define 8k resolution as being superior to 4k.

People will simply REFUSE to sit at distances close enough to 8k displays to allow them to see smaller details in 8k motion videos, than they are capable of seeing with 4k versions of those same videos, when seated at the same distance, using the same size video display.

Well guys, that's it, but I attempted here to avoid presenting as complicated of a case, as was certainly done, in a few of my previous posts.

But someone here did request that we use common sense in our arguments, so I tried hard here, in this post, to present as solid an example of common sense & logic, as was possible with this controversial subject. (Though IMO, tests previously done with real people, viewing videos of various resolutions, already should have turned 8k into a non-controversial subject, quite a while ago.)

I mean, unless someone argues that the bounds of human perception still permit people to have almost unlimited ability to notice fine detail, regardless of distance (a silly claim that I think, NO one has been making here), then, without trying to get particularly political, it seems to me that my contention that very few Americans will ever seat themselves close enough to 8k displays to see a significant detail advantage compared to native 4k, is a claim which basic testing and human experience have already shown to be an argument that possesses unimpeachable common sense & logic.

Anyway, as I indicated before, I regret it if my expression in a previous post, or posts, was tinged with a note of sarcasm, because that's beneath the way that I can communicate.

But as I sincerely expressed before, I hope that everyone on this thread (as well as all of the people maintaining, and using, Blu-ray.com) will enjoy having a most Merry, and safe, Christmas, with their friends and loved ones. Take care folks.