[SOLVED] Does 4k make a difference in movies?

[Dimitri001]

I've seen people question how much of a difference there is going from 1080p to 4k. I've never actually seen a 4k image so I'm unable to judge myself, but I'm now faced with buying a new monitor so I have to decide whether to go 4k.

I don't game and where image matters to me the most is in movies, so how much of a difference does it make in movies?

 

[Gam3r01]

Resolution is resolution, no matter the content displayed.
So if you have 4k media (games, photos, or video) it will look better* on a proper 4k panel simply because you will see the full resolution of the feed.
The more important question is what size are you looking for? The resolution and size have a relationship that needs consideration for the best value.

 

[BFG-9000]

It sure does make a big difference, as it lets you see how ugly the actors really are. It helps to remove some of the mystique and grandeur surrounding cinema similarly to how high framerate (HFR) and the lack of motion blur does, or even worse--interpolation (see "soap opera effect"). This harsh ultra-realism is pretty much the opposite of old soft-focus classic Hollywood and really a matter of taste.

I will say that 1080p movies will scale perfectly into a 4k monitor even if you don't like it, so there's nothing to lose in going with a 4k monitor and you'll even gain some desktop real estate.

 

[lvt]

Your eyes have to work 4 time harder

 

[Dimitri001]

Resolution is resolution, no matter the content displayed.
So if you have 4k media (games, photos, or video) it will look better* on a proper 4k panel simply because you will see the full resolution of the feed.
The more important question is what size are you looking for? The resolution and size have a relationship that needs consideration for the best value.

Do you mean because of pixel density?

I haven't decided on that yet, but I've noticed there's quite a lot of variation in size in 4k monitors, so I HAVE wondered about pixel density when you see sizes as different as 27" vs 32" at the same resolution.

Instinctively, my inclination is to go for the biggest I can get for my modest budget of around $350-$400, but is that the wrong way to think about it given the pixel density matter?

What difference would I see (apart from obviously size) between a 28" and 32" 4k?

 

[Gam3r01]

Pixel density is the primary concern, mostly because at a certain size 1440p is "good enough" so 4k wouldnt have as much "pop" at a smaller size.
In terms of specifics, 27"-32" is the sweet spot for 1440p. anything 32" or greater will see benefit from 4k.

 

[kanewolf]

Pixel density is the primary concern, mostly because at a certain size 1440p is "good enough" so 4k wouldnt have as much "pop" at a smaller size.
In terms of specifics, 27"-32" is the sweet spot for 1440p. anything 32" or greater will see benefit from 4k.

"will see benefit from 4K" may be a bit of an overstatement. Watching original 480p DVDs might actually look worse in 4K. There is just that much more pixel replication that has to happen. The upsampling alg is as important as the screen.
Additionally the viewing distance is important. At 30 feet, there will be no visible difference to someone viewing a 1080p and a 4K 60 inch screen. Human eyes can't resolve the difference.

 

[Endre]

I've seen people question how much of a difference there is going from 1080p to 4k. I've never actually seen a 4k image so I'm unable to judge myself, but I'm now faced with buying a new monitor so I have to decide whether to go 4k.

I don't game and where image matters to me the most is in movies, so how much of a difference does it make in movies?

The difference is huge!
Not only in movies, but also when watching 4K content on YouTube.
4K wallpapers are amazing too!

 

[hotaru.hino]

I don't game and where image matters to me the most is in movies, so how much of a difference does it make in movies?

I'm in the camp that it's definitely noticeable going from 1080p to 4K.

Do you mean because of pixel density?

I haven't decided on that yet, but I've noticed there's quite a lot of variation in size in 4k monitors, so I HAVE wondered about pixel density when you see sizes as different as 27" vs 32" at the same resolution.

Instinctively, my inclination is to go for the biggest I can get for my modest budget of around $350-$400, but is that the wrong way to think about it given the pixel density matter?

What difference would I see (apart from obviously size) between a 28" and 32" 4k?

What monitor size to get depends on the viewing distance. If you have a deep desk and you want to shove the monitor against the wall, a bigger monitor is better. But if you have a shallow desk or like the monitor more closer to you, a smaller monitor is better. Though this is mostly because I think the less you have to move anything (eyes, head, etc), the better.

I'm also in the camp that likes higher PPI. Things look sharper.

 

[Dimitri001]

Pixel density is the primary concern, mostly because at a certain size 1440p is "good enough" so 4k wouldnt have as much "pop" at a smaller size.
In terms of specifics, 27"-32" is the sweet spot for 1440p. anything 32" or greater will see benefit from 4k.

But why would there be no benefit to 4k at 27" relative to 1440p? You'd still get more pixels and, consequently, a sharper, more defined image, no?

 

[punkncat]

It is absolutely according to how big a monitor and how close you are to it.
Sitting across the room from a large TV and for the majority of the content it is extremely difficult to tell the difference until you get close.
In particular a lot of content that you would be watching from a PC is not going to be "real" 4K anyway.
I don't say that to mean that 4K isn't an experience worth paying for....

 

[Windows22]

Do you mean because of pixel density?

I haven't decided on that yet, but I've noticed there's quite a lot of variation in size in 4k monitors, so I HAVE wondered about pixel density when you see sizes as different as 27" vs 32" at the same resolution.

Instinctively, my inclination is to go for the biggest I can get for my modest budget of around $350-$400, but is that the wrong way to think about it given the pixel density matter?

What difference would I see (apart from obviously size) between a 28" and 32" 4k?

While I agree with the insignificant differences, does the same issue come into play with the curved tv screens or even the pane glass screens?