4K Blu-ray content on the horizon? - Blu-ray Forum

Penton-Man · 03-20-2012, 09:12 PM

I think it’s GREAT that people are debating how sharp the resolution is of the new Ipad as compared to upcoming 4K flat panel displays and projectors used for *conventional* TV and movie watching. I’m not about to intervene. All I’ll say is that you can’t do direct ppi comparisons with tiny viewing screens to that of larger screen sizes (like, for instance, proclamations that 300 ppi is always better than 250 ppi - no matter what size the display is). It doesn’t work like that. The larger a display is, the further one will view it from, and thusly, the effective resolution is based upon angular resolution rather than the linear ppi resolution for the display. So, that is something which people should consider when they try to extrapolate ppi numbers from the modestly sized new IPad to conventional TV sizes on the order of 55”, 65”, etc. on up to screens for front projectors.

Believe it or not, there are higher pixel density (~ 2900 ppi) professional products useful and available (http://www.microoled.net/about-us/who-we-are) than that of Apple’s new Ipad but, most consumers have never heard about them and they’re for ‘displays’ on the order of 0.6 inches in size.

To take the idea to even further extreme, eye care professionals have a test for visual acuity called ‘PAM’ which, for some, is more accurate than the Snellen chart (that people are familiar with as reading from a distance on a Doctor’s wall), in which a miniaturized Snellen chart is projected directly on the patient’s retina and the eye professional can accurately quantify visual acuity in terms of 20/10, 20/20, 20/40, etc. that way. Those eye guys and gals actually make surgical decisions based on that PAM test.

The important thing is that Apple is paving the way to widespread consumer consciousness to the notion that there are benefits to effective higher resolutions than folks currently have now (1080p) at home, whether one desires to quantify resolution (and visual acuity) in terms of ppi, dpi, K’s, or cpd (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...pd#post5922985 )

The key point for this thread is that screen size is not the limiting factor…as long as one doesn’t see artifacts like pixels with ‘immersive viewing’. And as Deci and others have said, ‘immersive viewing’ is what serious home theater enthusiasts strive for as they try to replicate the theatrical experience.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

03-20-2012, 09:12 PM	#29
Penton-Man Retired Hollywood Insider Member since:Apr 2007	I think it’s GREAT that people are debating how sharp the resolution is of the new Ipad as compared to upcoming 4K flat panel displays and projectors used for conventional TV and movie watching. I’m not about to intervene. All I’ll say is that you can’t do direct ppi comparisons with tiny viewing screens to that of larger screen sizes (like, for instance, proclamations that 300 ppi is always better than 250 ppi - no matter what size the display is). It doesn’t work like that. The larger a display is, the further one will view it from, and thusly, the effective resolution is based upon angular resolution rather than the linear ppi resolution for the display. So, that is something which people should consider when they try to extrapolate ppi numbers from the modestly sized new IPad to conventional TV sizes on the order of 55”, 65”, etc. on up to screens for front projectors. Believe it or not, there are higher pixel density (~ 2900 ppi) professional products useful and available (http://www.microoled.net/about-us/who-we-are) than that of Apple’s new Ipad but, most consumers have never heard about them and they’re for ‘displays’ on the order of 0.6 inches in size. To take the idea to even further extreme, eye care professionals have a test for visual acuity called ‘PAM’ which, for some, is more accurate than the Snellen chart (that people are familiar with as reading from a distance on a Doctor’s wall), in which a miniaturized Snellen chart is projected directly on the patient’s retina and the eye professional can accurately quantify visual acuity in terms of 20/10, 20/20, 20/40, etc. that way. Those eye guys and gals actually make surgical decisions based on that PAM test. The important thing is that Apple is paving the way to widespread consumer consciousness to the notion that there are benefits to effective higher resolutions than folks currently have now (1080p) at home, whether one desires to quantify resolution (and visual acuity) in terms of ppi, dpi, K’s, or cpd (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...pd#post5922985 ) The key point for this thread is that screen size is not the limiting factor…as long as one doesn’t see artifacts like pixels with ‘immersive viewing’. And as Deci and others have said, ‘immersive viewing’ is what serious home theater enthusiasts strive for as they try to replicate the theatrical experience.

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals