Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BelgianMadCow

(5,379 posts)
20. I should find the formula
Tue Sep 17, 2013, 09:16 AM
Sep 2013

here's a good part that explains what I'm on about:

To fully understand the implications of high resolution and high definition vs size, we must first understand something called acuity of vision. The Dictionary of Visual Science defines visual acuity as "acuteness or clearness of vision, especially form vision, which is dependent on the sharpness of the retinal focus within the eye, the sensitivity of the nervous elements, and the interpretative faculty of the brain." What this means is our eyes have a resolution limit. Increased image resolution is simply an technical exercise, beyond our ability to see it, and does not play any part in improving the viewing experience. Our visual acuity is unambiguous and relatively simple to measure.

The most common vision measuring tool is called the Snellen chart. An optometrist will ask you to read from a chart standing 20 feet (or six meters) away from it. The smallets number you can read defines your acuity of vision. This is expressed as a fraction. A normal vision is supposed to be 20/20. 20/10 means that a subject can read, from a distance of twenty feet, the line that a subject with "normal" vision could only read from ten feet. 20/10 vision is therefore twice as good as 20/20. In comparison, 20/40 is twice as bad.

Coming to video display, the human eye’s resolution (acuity) is directly proportional to the size of the elements of the image and inversely proportional to distance from the elements. This relationship is best expressed in degrees.

In simple terms, we can see things that exist within a known angle with the apex being our nose. If you stare straight ahead, you will have a stereoscopic field of view of about 100 degrees, or about 50 degress to the left and right of your nose. We also have a lower limit to our field of view. Scientists express this as an angle as well, but it is less than a degree, and is expressed differently, For angles smaller than 1 degree we use arcminutes and arcseconds as a measurement. An arcminute is equal to one sixtieth (1/60) of one degree. "Normal" visual acuity is considered to be the ability to recognize an optotype (letter on the Snellen chart) when it goes down to 5 minutes of arc. Taking this to displays, the average person cannot see more than two pixels separated by less than 2 arcminutes of angle.

A 42 inch screen is the minimum size, where the pixels are seperated by 2 arcminutes of angle, if you sit some 6 feet away from it. In smaller screens, the pixels are closer. Though they can also display images with 1080p resolutions, the eye will not be able to appreciate that as compared to say 720p even if you sit very near the screen. Both will look the same.

Last comment in this thread: http://www.hifivision.com/television/1604-whats-difference-between-hd-ready-full-hd.html

By the way, plasma is just a technology, and you can have a HD ready or full HD plasma.

Anyway, to each his own, and if you're happy, you're happy. I just question the everlasting tech drive for "more" when we don't use or need it.
Ugh Blue_Adept Sep 2013 #1
Sturgeon's Law especially applies to TV. hobbit709 Sep 2013 #2
Thanks for the morning chuckle. Gormy Cuss Sep 2013 #32
Thank you!!!!!!' madinmaryland Sep 2013 #7
This. nt sufrommich Sep 2013 #8
Yeah, but where's the smug superiority in admitting that there's good TV? Silent3 Sep 2013 #12
I'm sure there is some good TV Skittles Sep 2013 #46
This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Sep 2013 #13
Agwee ananda Sep 2013 #15
Most excellent cartoonist Clay Bennett should be credited. Atman Sep 2013 #51
Except of course that there is more high quality television programming now than ever before. Warren Stupidity Sep 2013 #3
Actually they have different aspect ratios Boom Sound 416 Sep 2013 #4
And then there's 4K... onehandle Sep 2013 #5
and anyone sitting a normal distance from a normal size screen will NOT see the diff 1080/720p BelgianMadCow Sep 2013 #6
Bull madokie Sep 2013 #10
you're sitting how far from which size screen? BelgianMadCow Sep 2013 #14
12-14 feet from a 47 inch depending on where I sit madokie Sep 2013 #17
I should find the formula BelgianMadCow Sep 2013 #20
It's twice the diagonal screen size sir pball Sep 2013 #26
Using a site that wants to sell HDTVs, but which uses the formula, you need 720p BelgianMadCow Sep 2013 #25
That link you're referring to is comparing 720p with 1080p. egduj Sep 2013 #18
Yes, and that is the choice consumers are making now. Full HD or HD-ready BelgianMadCow Sep 2013 #21
"HD-Ready" is not 720. sir pball Sep 2013 #27
thanks for the clarification BelgianMadCow Sep 2013 #28
I think "HD Ready" is a 720 panel and "HD Ready 1080" is a 1080 panel sir pball Sep 2013 #29
I can now see if I'm on HD or regular right away, Greybnk48 Sep 2013 #22
It's a big difference... krispos42 Sep 2013 #54
Just going from one room to the other I can see that madokie Sep 2013 #60
Sorry, but that is simply not true, egduj Sep 2013 #11
720P is not HD-Ready... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #30
Total nonsense. Atman Sep 2013 #52
No Belgian is right MattBaggins Sep 2013 #62
No, 1080p has twice the resolution of 720p. Atman Sep 2013 #64
BTW, Belgian's reference speaks of a specific screen size. Atman Sep 2013 #65
I like DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #9
I gotta laugh. safeinOhio Sep 2013 #16
I grew up in the same time frame madokie Sep 2013 #19
Same age group here, rabbit ears, 3-4 channels tops, Greybnk48 Sep 2013 #23
I rarely ever use my HD channels. sinkingfeeling Sep 2013 #24
I love my HD channels, and sound is just as important for me to enjoy a show. Betty88 Sep 2013 #35
I never use the standard channels. Atman Sep 2013 #53
Scuba Diclotican Sep 2013 #31
I love my LCD HD TV for its crystal clear pic. The quality of content is another issue.... Scuba Sep 2013 #33
Scuba Diclotican Sep 2013 #38
I seem to remember normal channels being much better than it is now. Xyzse Sep 2013 #34
Want to see some nasty video? Betty88 Sep 2013 #36
That's true. Xyzse Sep 2013 #40
Noticed that too. freebrew Sep 2013 #37
Yeah... I do notice that too Xyzse Sep 2013 #41
I think this is a matter of keeping the orignal aspect ratios Betty88 Sep 2013 #43
Nah, it's the difference between an HD channel and a non-HD channel Xyzse Sep 2013 #45
You're just wrong. Atman Sep 2013 #57
You may be right Xyzse Sep 2013 #61
That's crazy talk. Atman Sep 2013 #55
And yes Xyzse Sep 2013 #63
I have been without a TV for five years now. SheilaT Sep 2013 #39
OK, that is pretty funny there. ryan_cats Sep 2013 #42
We have a high definition television, but no satellite or cable. hunter Sep 2013 #44
tag for later reading HolyMoley Sep 2013 #47
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Sep 2013 #48
I honestly can't tell the difference when I watch TV. X_Digger Sep 2013 #49
If only we had progressive TV. sakabatou Sep 2013 #50
Anyone elses eyes hurt when looking at the first pic? darkangel218 Sep 2013 #56
I like TV. I don't have HD tv, but I have cable and get a load of channels. MADem Sep 2013 #58
I was involved in the transition from broadcast to HTDV. xfundy Sep 2013 #59
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The difference between no...»Reply #20