That site makes assumptions that I don't think are true.
With correction, I have 20/20 vision, and on a 150" 1080p projected image, sitting 10ft away, I can see the narrow gaps between the pixel rows. I think 4k at 100" is still a visible improvement, and UHDTV at 200" is probably still a visible improvement. I've seen the NHK UHDTV demo on a 300" screen. The funny thing is that it had a single stuck pixel.
I think this assumption "Based on the resolving ability of the human eye (with 20/20 vision it is possible to resolve 1/60th of a degree of an arc)"
Is based on the ability to see that two different shapes that size are indeed different (a square from a circle), which means that 20/20 human vision can probably resolve about 1/120th of a degree.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
That site makes assumptions that I don't think are true.
With correction, I have 20/20 vision, and on a 150" 1080p projected image, sitting 10ft away, I can see the narrow gaps between the pixel rows. I think 4k at 100" is still a visible improvement, and UHDTV at 200" is probably still a visible improvement. I've seen the NHK UHDTV demo on a 300" screen. The funny thing is that it had a single stuck pixel.
I think this assumption
"Based on the resolving ability of the human eye (with 20/20 vision it is possible to resolve 1/60th of a degree of an arc)"
Is based on the ability to see that two different shapes that size are indeed different (a square from a circle), which means that 20/20 human vision can probably resolve about 1/120th of a degree.