8K displays

[Keco185]

I decided to do math on what resolution we need displays to get before it's no longer worth upgrading.  What I found is that the human eye can see around 50 pixels per degree of view.  To put this in smartphone perspective, that's 358 pixels per inch needed at around 8 inches away from the screen.

 

A human has a vertical field of view of around 135 degrees and a horizontal field of view of around 180 degrees. If we extrapolate this to a screen that fills a human's vision, the resolution ends up being 9000 x 6750 (60.8MP) which is a resolution actually 2 times higher than 8k at 7680 x 4320 (33.2MP). So assuming you want a screen that fills your field of view, you'll need a step up from 8K to 16K.

 

However, the eye can move. When this happens, we can increase the field of view to 270 degrees horizontal and 170 degrees vertical. This means, one would need a resolution of 13500 x 8500 to get a perfectly crisp image while allowing the eyes to move. This equates to 115MP which would require a 16K screen at 15,360 x 8,640 (132.7MP) to view.

 

So 16K should be the final worth while limit for screen resolution.

[Swndlr]

Meanwhile in 2025...

[Casperian]

I decided to do math on what resolution we need displays to get before it's no longer worth upgrading.  What I found is that the human eye can see around 50 pixels per degree of view.  To put this in smartphone perspective, that's 358 pixels per inch needed at around 8 inches away from the screen.

 

A human has a vertical field of view of around 135 degrees and a horizontal field of view of around 180 degrees. If we extrapolate this to a screen that fills a human's vision, the resolution ends up being 9000 x 6750 (60.8MP) which is a resolution actually 2 times higher than 8k at 7680 x 4320 (33.2MP). So assuming you want a screen that fills your field of view, you'll need a step up from 8K to 16K.

 

However, the eye can move. When this happens, we can increase the field of view to 270 degrees horizontal and 170 degrees vertical. This means, one would need a resolution of 13500 x 8500 to get a perfectly crisp image while allowing the eyes to move. This equates to 115MP which would require a 16K screen at 15,360 x 8,640 (132.7MP) to view.

 

So 16K should be the final worth while limit for screen resolution.

16k is 4x 8k. Also human FOV is ~107 (from memory) for both eyes overlap, anything else is peripheral.

[thekeemo]

at what distance?

[AlexAlcala]

mmm 8k its 4 times 4k (linus said that on the wan show) so i dont think its going to be 16k

[Keco185]

at what distance?

Distance doesn't matter what simply talking about resolution. Distance is important for display size and pixel density.

 

 

16k is 4x 8k. Also human FOV is ~107 (from memory) for both eyes overlap, anything else is peripheral.

 

peripheral vision was included in this because why not.

 

mmm 8k its 4 times 4k (linus said that on the wan show) so i dont think its going to be 16k

Correct, 8k is 4 times the resolution of 4k and 16k is 4 times the resolution of 8k. What I state is hypothetical, there isn't a 16k display being released right now (as far as I'm aware)

[AlexAlcala]

12k maybe, and should be a display curved o some sort of image proyected on a surface aaand linus said (and im supporting this) i dont have the space in my house for that huge ass tv, better grab a VR set with a nice display

[Casperian]

Distance doesn't matter what simply talking about resolution. Distance is important for display size and pixel density.

 

 

 

peripheral vision was included in this because why not.

 

Correct, 8k is 4 times the resolution of 4k and 16k is 4 times the resolution of 8k. What I state is hypothetical, there isn't a 16k display being released right now (as far as I'm aware)

Assuming this monitor can be made to any spec, the outer edges don't need to follow the 50pixel/degree rule. (CostReduction++)

I think I misunderstood you, you were find what res will be the last not what is optimal. I'd say the optimal something in the 21:9 scope

[AresKrieger]

Distance does matter which is why your phone example stated from 8 inches away

[Keco185]

Distance does matter which is why your phone example stated from 8 inches away

I had to say 8 inches for the phone because I stated a pixels per inch factor. I'm talking about pixels per degree of vision when it comes to the raw resolution calculations.

[AresKrieger]

I had to say 8 inches for the phone because I stated a pixels per inch factor. I'm talking about pixels per degree of vision when it comes to the raw resolution calculations.

You can use pixels per square inch and viewer distance to get a more accurate number that will be less than 8k for most people's usually distance between their eye's and monitor, either way 8k is and will remain pointless for a very long time (using a standard monitor size of course)

Edited September 19, 2015 by AresKrieger

[Keco185]

You can use pixels per square inch and viewer distance to get a more accurate number that will be less than 8k for most people's usually distance between their eye's and monitor, either way 8k is and will remain pointless for a very long time (using a standard monitor size of course)

The numbers I came up with above were targeted with things such as VR in mind. It shows how far away resolution in VR headsets are from being "retina" as apple might call it.

[AresKrieger]

The numbers I came up with above were targeted with things such as VR in mind. It shows how far away resolution in VR headsets are from being "retina" as apple might call it.

Oh VR ok that makes more sense

[Guest Strangerbob]

isthisretina.com

[Keco185]

isthisretina.com

Cool site. Retina is the same idea as what I was saying; the site is nice for finding the screen sizes for certain resolutions required.