you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 20 points 11 months ago (5 children)

They are not impressive, they were extremely expensive, and there was no standard for distributing 3-D movies.

Finally. Everyone got over their craze for three movies and instead I was more interested in 4K.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Yeah, nowadays I only watch movies in 4K and it's night and day over Full HD and I don't know why anyone would say otherwise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    Honestly 2k is fine for most tvs, I wish that became standard. Imo 4k should be reserved for computer screens and the like, that are less than a metre from you, most people can't really see the difference anyway, it all depends on screen size and distance. From memory a 60inch at 2m will not look any different in 1080 or 4k.

    Also side rant, drives me mad when people are more worried about resolution than bitrate (not directed at anyone here) . I have a friend who "can't stand watching things in 1080p" but half the 4k streaming content is compressed to hell.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    but half the 4k streaming content is compressed to hell.

    You can up that to 80%. Almost anything coming from Netflix in 4k is severely bitrate starved.

    Then there is the opposite extreme, like the Arcane blu-rays that put animated content in a 100 Mbit/s stream. Completely overkill but I love it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    1080 is quicker to download an easier to store than 4K. There is a difference between them, but it's not a huge deal if youvd got good quality full HD. Leaves me plenty of space on my home server for other data hoarding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment