• Alphane Moon@lemmy.worldOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 days ago

    Not to be that guy, but I believe for monitors 8K might be the end of the line in terms of practical improvements. At the distances that monitors are used, resolutions beyond 8K cannot be differentiated by the human eye.

    Please correct me if I am wrong. :)

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 days ago

      One place I can see needed expansion beyond 8k is displays in VR goggles. Think about trying to emulate a virtual monitor experience of 2k (1080p) using 8k displays at a distance. As in, think about sitting at a desk in VR and looking at a “monitor” in VR. The actual physical displays producing the image are 8k, but must take your entire field of view. So only a subset of that 8k can be used to reproduce the “virtual 2k monitor” in VR. Here’s an image for reference:

      Now move your face close enough to your lemmy viewer that that picture is taking up your entire field of view. Now look how big that 2k block is. Now imagine you want that level of detail at normal “monitor distance” in VR. That’s going to take more than an 8k physical display in your VR goggles.

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      I think 8K is overkill for normal consumer use. Apart from something like photo/video editing or CAD on a large monitor, there are not a lot of uses where it will make much of a difference. Even movie theaters only use 2K and 4K resolutions for digital projection.