This is monumental! Oklahoma City TV stations ought to take advantage of this new discovery that's been there all along ever since 4k sets came out. The only downsides are it won't work on older TVs and not an abundance of 4k programming.

Waiting for 4k to finally come to the OKC ATSC 3.0 stations will probably only in result in all pay TV, such as for 4k sports.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_94q9TCCDY&ab_channel=AntennaMan

This is monumental! Oklahoma City TV stations ought to take advantage of this new discovery that's been there all along ever since 4k sets came out. The only downsides are it won't work on older TVs and not an abundance of 4k programming.

Waiting for 4k to finally come to the OKC ATSC 3.0 stations will probably only in result in all pay TV, such as for 4k sports.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_94q9TCCDY&ab_channel=AntennaMan

Can the Human eye even see 4K?

Can the Human eye even see 4K?

I have an LG OLED 77" TV and an UltraHD blu-ray player, and, yes, there is a *very* noticeable difference between 1080p and 2160p (which is what "4K" is referring to).

Can the Human eye even see 4K?

It depends on the size of your screen and how far you sit away from it.

Traditionally they say 4K really starts being needed of TVs around 72 inches, but it can be told is a crisper image below that, though type of content can matter how much that is.

However if you use a TV for a computer monitor, then anything above 30 inches then 4K is very noticeable better on text.

Cell phones have used pixel densities way higher than 4K for over a decade, partially due to how close you hold them to your face, granted part of that probably was also driven not to have to degrade video quality of the standard 1080p or 720p formats. VR headsets demanded even higher pixel density.

4K is just a pixel count. How are those pixels encoded and how are they delivered? If you get 4000 crappy pixels delivered over a crappy delivery system, then you're gonna get a crappy picture. That's why 4K on youtube can look less than stellar. And as was mentioned earlier, 4K media is still not ubiquitous. So your getting upscaled 1080p or 2K.

But 4K is a number and thus easier to market. 4 is larger than 2 so 4K has to be better than 2K. You're gonna notice more of a difference with a better color gamut and dynamic range. But those aren't as easy to market because they aren't just raw numbers. They come with graphs and charts.

Next comes 8K. But you're gonna need a TV we'll over 100" before you start to see a difference.

Next comes 8K. But you're gonna need a TV we'll over 100" before you start to see a difference.

I saw 8K at a conference in 2014, it was being promoted by NHK, a Japanese broadcast company, and yes, it was in a giant theater and footage from the 2012 London Olympics that was shot in 8K. It looked stunning, you could make out everyone in the crowd.

In regards to 4K, I see a lot of Vloggers on YouTube shoot in 4K and it looks great on my TV, and since so much streaming from Netflix, MAX, and YouTube is now 4K, and even HDR, the once over-the-air broadcast of local stations that looked great as HDTV, now look compressed, fuzzy, and underwhelming compared to freelance video bloggers. Sports especially on over the air on a 70" screen doesn't look that great with over-the-air since they only have 720 progressive to 1080 interlaced lines to work with.

I think with the success (financially $$$) of Amazon Prime Football and the NBC Peacock Pay-Per-View playoff game, we will eventually see even sports and local news move to a streaming model, or at least see networks bypass their affiliates and go straight to OTT streaming apps.