"Scientists at the University of Cambridge and Meta, the company that owns Facebook, have found that for an average-sized living room a 4K or 8K screen offers no noticeable benefit over a similarly sized 2K screen of the sort often used in computer monitors and laptops. In other words, there is no tangible difference when it comes to how sharp an image appears to our eyes."
"If you design or judge display resolution based only on 20/20 vision, you'll underestimate what people can really see, Ashraf said. That's why we directly measured how many pixels people can actually distinguish. The team used a 27in, 4K monitor mounted on a mobile cage that enabled it to be moved towards or away from the viewer. At each distance, 18 participants with normal vision, or vision corrected to be normal, were shown two types of image in a random order."
"One type of image had one-pixel-wide vertical lines in black and white, red and green or yellow and violet, while the other was just a plain grey block. Participants were then asked to indicate which of the two images contained the lines. When the lines become too fine or the screen resolution too high, the pattern looks no different from a plain grey image, Ashraf said."
For an average-sized living room, 4K or 8K displays provide no noticeable sharpness benefit compared with similarly sized 2K screens. The resolution limit of the human eye was measured using a 27in 4K monitor mounted on a movable rig to vary viewing distance. Eighteen participants with normal or corrected vision viewed pairs of images: one with one-pixel-wide vertical lines in various color combinations and one plain grey block, and indicated which contained lines. When line spacing became finer than detectable at a given distance, the patterned image appeared indistinguishable from grey. Beyond a certain pixels-per-degree threshold, adding pixels yields no perceptible increase in image sharpness.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]