Bruce,
I am glad that it was helpful to you, even if such an indirect way.
:-)
I had seen a more detailed article earlier, probably in 2014. That was
more technical, comparing more details, and essentially showing that 4k is
mostly good for still images as opposed to the action videos.
I couldn't find that link today, but AFAIR, the conclusion was that
doubling the refresh rate was a better improvement for a video than
going 1080p -> 4K.
Cheers,
Igor
PS. I just read the updates on the older story on the topic of 4k TV by
the same auhtor:
http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupid/
I think those updates are somewhat indicative of how opinions of the
"experts" can change with time.
Bruce Walker Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:31:55 -0700 wrote:
Thanks for that link, Igor. I'm idly considering upgrading my
projector and I wasn't up on these specmanship games going on. Now I
am. :)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
