Comment on Study Claims 4K/8K TVs Aren't Much Better Than HD To Your Eyes

• SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  And publish it in Nature, a leading biomedical journal, and claim boldly.

  source
• richardwallass@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  With 44 inch at 2,5m

  source
• the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Sounds like a waste of time to do a study on something already well known.

  source

  • Soup@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Literally this article is about the study. Your “well-known” fact doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

    source

    • the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      The other important detail to note is that screen size and distance to your TV also matters. The larger the TV, the more a higher resolution will offer a perceived benefit. Stretching a 1080p image across a 75-inch display, for example, won’t look as sharp as a 4K image on that size TV. As the age old saying goes, “it depends.”

      literally in the article you are claiming to be correct, maybe should try reading sometime.

      source

      • Soup@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        Yes, but you got yourself real pissy over it and have just now admitted that the one piece of criticism you had in your original comment was already addressed in the article. Obviously if we start talking about situations that are extreme outliers there will be edge cases but you’re not adding anything to the conversation by acting like you’ve found some failure that, in reality, the article already addressed.

        I’m not sure you have the reading the comprehension and/or the intention to have any kind of real conversation to continue this discussion further.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • JigglySackles@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    So I have a pet theory on studies like that. There are many things out there that many of us take for granted and as givens in our daily lives. But there are likely equally as many people out there to which this knowledge is either unknown or not actually apparent. Reasoning for that can be a myriad of things; like due to a lack of experience in the given area, skepticism that their anecdotal evidence is truly correct despite appearances, and on and on.

    What these “obvious thing is obvious” studies accomplish is setting a factual precedent for the people in the back. The people who are uninformed, not experienced enough, skeptical, contrarian, etc.

    The studies seem wasteful upfront, but sometimes a thing needs to be said aloud to galvanize the factual evidence and give basis to the overwhelming anecdotal evidence.

    source