• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

IGN: The naked eye cannot perceive the difference between 1080 and 720 before 50in

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nokterian

Member
ElTorro said:
ibiJhn448xVrcs.gif
Click to expand...

Oh man fantastic!
 
H

hwateber

Member
Beyond is a sony themed podcast, it's not just there to be a fanboy haven for sony jabronies.

Anyway, regarding the resolution debate, how about not going by "what you heard" or "what you understand"? Can you not just go by what you see? You have eyes so use them. Resolution makes a big difference
 
J

Jonboy

Member
It's not just ign. Cnet has reported almost the exact same thing for years.

Digital trends says similar but takes viewing distance into account.

"Generally speaking, if you sit more than 10 feet away from your TV, and your display isn’t bigger than 50 inches diagonally, you won’t be able to tell the difference between 720 and 1080."

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-t...rence-between-hdtv-resolutions/#ixzz2u5W7XOuw

Edit: looks like this has been mentioned already.

I believed it for years until I upgraded an old 720p plasma to one with 1080p. To be fair though, my tv is 50in.
 
E

Eusis

Member
werks said:
200ppdengleski.png


They are just regurgitating this chart. If you notice, its from AVS forum and is talking about movies. Things that are "rendered" in infinite resolution because its real life. You are not going to see a huge differences between anything recorded with perfect image quality between 720p and 1080p.

BUT you can't use the same chart for video games. Video games are rendered in realtime in its native resolution and that resolution makes a huge difference in image quality. The fact that these guys work for IGN and can't see the difference should be stunning.
Click to expand...
Incidentally this doubles (moreso perhaps) for FPS, just as anti aliasing helps to recreate that "infinite resolution" (really more about the source material as a DVD won't look as sharp as a proper blu-ray though it will upscale nicer usually) motion blur recreates the fact film just kind of blurs each frame together that helps make film look smoother than it actually is, while games rendering at the same FPS without motion blur will be notably less smooth looking.
 
P

PreyingShark

Member
I have a 768p display on my laptop.

I can tell the difference between 720p and 768p on this display simply because upscaling is the devil.
 
J

Justin-the-human

Neo Member
Really though? like really?? I feel like this is a ridiculous statement. Just go to Best Buy and look at the TV's. You can tell a difference from 1080p and 720 on most screens. I just upgraded to a 1080p 47in from a 720p 40in and its extremely noticeable. Bunch a dinguses.
 
P

Pachinko

Member
Even with movies I'd disagree a fair bit, spout all the math and science you want, 480p/SDTV content such as DVD and standard cable broadcast only looks good from about 30 feet back from my 55 inch TV. Even from that distance, going from SDTV to HDTV still looks demonstrably better. The colors pop more and everything just has more definition to it.

Games are a bit of a different story due to the framerates typically being higher , even on my computer monitor , running something at 720p versus 1080p the difference is immediate even if I stand 20 feet away.

Another way to look at it is this- watch content exclusively in 1080p for a month and then switch down to 720p. It WILL look fuzzier no matter what the content is.

Many would take the above to mean that I fully support the switch up to 4K content but in fact I am emphatically against it - nothing runs in 4K right now outside of photographs (and even at that a 4K image is only 8.2 megapixels which your cellphone can generate) and theatrical print runs which display on a 300 foot screen (or bigger). 99% of your content will simply be pixel doubled both length and width wise to basically waste 75% of the on screen pixels for nothing.


In short - more resolution is better except when it isn't.
 
M

MavFan619

Banned
I switched the FF XVI beta to 720p today to check something and the clarity of picture took a major hit. I'm on a 22" monitor, and don't consider myself to have a great eye for technical stuff, it was a huge difference.
 
R

rjinaz

Member
rjcc said:
You didn't read what I said. The difference between a Blu-ray and a broadcast is a lot more than just the resolution. You cannot compare them. You can't compare them by playing a Blu-ray on a 720p TV either.
Click to expand...

Ok so apparently it is incredibly hard to compare the two. Or maybe I've just never seen a straight 720p or 1080p resolution. I'll take your word for it I'm not an expert all I know and care about is that when something is labeled 1080p, be it TV, cable broadcast, movie, or game, it looks better to my eyes than if it were labeled 720p.
 
K

kick51

Banned
well, Microsoft was going for the "turn your brain off, brah" market. Not surprised some members of that market are game writers. but they tried to turn their brains on here and it still didn't work....womp womp
 
HORRORSHØW

HORRORSHØW

Member
fucking embarrassing. although it may just be the opinions of the ocularly-impaired, it also sounds like a little bit of damage control on behalf of MS.
 
Q

Qassim

Member
6dmqHE2.png


I assume he is talking about the information in this thread that can validate this claim. If you include the vitally important variable of viewing distance. Which was completely ignored in their statements.
 
B

benny_a

extra source of jiggaflops
SuperSonic1305 said:
Wow just wow. This is a new low for gaming journalism.
Click to expand...
I think we should move past this painting of all games press because of a certain publication or a certain author making a comment you think is dumb.

This is IGN's Xbox Podcast that unanimously agrees that there is no difference between 720p and 1080p*. This has no bearing on whatever Kotaku or Giant Bomb does.

* Before 50inches
 
P

Phatosaurus

Member
You know that scene in Little Nicky where Nicky's brothers take over the Mayor and the Bishop?
You know when the Bishop declares "LET THE SIN, BEGIN!"

Can somebody .gif that with the caption "LET THE SPIN, BEGIN!" to accurately portray statements like this? Thanks.
 
B

BigDug13

Member
Pachinko said:
Even with movies I'd disagree a fair bit, spout all the math and science you want, 480p/SDTV content such as DVD and standard cable broadcast only looks good from about 30 feet back from my 55 inch TV. Even from that distance, going from SDTV to HDTV still looks demonstrably better. The colors pop more and everything just has more definition to it.

Games are a bit of a different story due to the framerates typically being higher , even on my computer monitor , running something at 720p versus 1080p the difference is immediate even if I stand 20 feet away.

Another way to look at it is this- watch content exclusively in 1080p for a month and then switch down to 720p. It WILL look fuzzier no matter what the content is.

Many would take the above to mean that I fully support the switch up to 4K content but in fact I am emphatically against it - nothing runs in 4K right now outside of photographs (and even at that a 4K image is only 8.2 megapixels which your cellphone can generate) and theatrical print runs which display on a 300 foot screen (or bigger). 99% of your content will simply be pixel doubled both length and width wise to basically waste 75% of the on screen pixels for nothing.


In short - more resolution is better except when it isn't.
Click to expand...

Well in this example, there's more to it than that. DVD's are mastered with the NTSC-limited color scheme which has far more muted colors than blu-ray and high def, because it is a standard that still has to support black and white TV's. So that discussion is throwing more variables into the mix than simple resolution.
 
B

B.O.O.M

Member
I see few people saying that this is click bait..I don't think so at all. I refuse to believe a site as successful as IGN needs to stoop this low just for click bait...no this is just fanboys who pretend to be journalists at work doing propaganda work for free

pathetic
 
A

Askherserenity

Member
Wonder why people keep defending this stuff. Even some people on here. It's ridiculous.

Xbox ign team, you got stuck having to talk about the underpowered system this gen. Just deal with it. Stop trying to deny shit. If you can't at least admit that there is a difference, you're just being stupid at this point.
 
B

Blinck

Member
What worries me the most is that these games supposedly earn their living by playing videogames.
How the fuck can they say something like this?
I just don't really understand it..holy shit.
 
B

BigDug13

Member
Qassim said:
6dmqHE2.png


I assume he is talking about the information in this thread that can validate this claim. If you include the vitally important variable of viewing distance. Which was completely ignored in their statements.
Click to expand...

Hahaha so he's sitting inside reading this thread, then tells us all to go outside and enjoy the day? Whatever.
 
T

Tripon

Member
I just find it funny that Marty Silva, the 4th guy, and who I considered to be pretty level headed kept his mouth shut during this discussion.

When you have nothing good to say, you say nothing. =P
 
A

ANDS

King of Gaslighting
Responses in this thread are a bit overboard. That podcast was fairly. . .fair, in regards to the issue that MS is in with it's resolutions not quite able to hit parity with SONY yet. I do think it's humorous to hear the wait and see approach in regards to eSRAM since it sounds nothing like the "Cell is ridiculous to program for - " we heard with the PS3.

That said, they probably should have qualified their off the cuff comments a bit better. I am fairly certain they meant "At a certain distance. . ." when making the comment about being able to tell the difference in resolutions. Obviously if your nose is up against the monitor you can pixel count. However if you are sitting a proper distance away, w/o a frame of reference, I would how many people would actually pass a pixel-taste-test on a sub 40 inch television or less 7/8 feet away.
 
eso76

eso76

Member
According to viewing distance they might even be right.
Like, sitting 10 mt away from the TV yeah, maybe.
But talking about screen size and not factoring in viewing distance doesn't make sense.
I suspect it might even work the other way round in real life scenarios, since with smaller screens you'd want to sit closer.
 
M

MavFan619

Banned
And apparently Mitch knows the distance I play games from at all times. I don't think it's that big a deal but I can see the difference and obviously prefer the higher native resolution when I can get it end of story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom