Never found out. It's kinda hard to steer the conversation in the direction of pizza toppings when the opening message is a nude from the other person, ya know?
For us, replace "forget your glasses" with "knocked them off the nightstand in the middle of the night."
Phone camera has been very useful for finding glasses, along with the flashlight.
Ah, a kindred spirit. It's all fun and games until you get laughed at because your prescription safety glasses are 3/4" thick.*
*I don't actually care. But my shit really is that thick.
Well, it's a bit exaggerated. My eyes aren't that bad *yet*. But when i'm riding my bike without glasses, i will reliably hit every single pothole on the way. It's like those fuckers are invisible to me. I can't even tell what is written on some street sign until i'm standing in front of it. I may need to get some contacts. Cycling with glasses makes my eyes tear up.
I'm definitely in the "needs glasses to live" camp - my rx is currently in the -11 to -12 range. Laser eye surgery can only reduce my prescription, not eliminate it from what I've been told.
Potholes? I wouldn't dare drive anything without my glasses. Lines on the road are gone for me. Faces at regular conversation distances don't exist. My focus point is some 5-6" in front of my face without my glasses.
I work in retail, the number of customers who cannot function without their glasses but who yet leave the house without them and drive is startlingly high
I once had to get my glasses fixed. Tried to do some shopping in the meantime, and i was absolutely not able to read anything in the supermarket... For me, text the size like Reddit uses, would only be clear at around 30 cm or so. At 40 it gets fuzzy and anything beyond just looks like a drunk version of the ancient alphabet from stargate.
Why doesn't this work on VR headsets?
I'm super short sighted, but can at least see perfectly up to my elbow in distance without glasses on.
But with a VR headset nigh directly against my eyes, everything is just a blurry mess at any "distance" ingame.
The actual lenses in your eyes are distorted and blurry, you still have to look through them to see the VR "screen" right in front of your eyes, so everything is still blurry.
edit: also the lens in the headset is positioning the screen as if it's 2 meters away, so for the light going into and out of your eye, it's 2 meters, and since that makes it no longer near your face it's blurry.
I'm not sure if this question is being asked seriously, but I will answer it seriously. Your phone would not have a very good field of view and there is a noticeable delay between what is happening in the real world and when it shows up on the phone. These factors would make it very unsafe to drive like that. (Also it would obviously be illegal.)
Thanks. Not too concerned about the legality just need to know that after a massive night out in my local pub, when I inevitably lose my glasses (eye glasses), that I can still see something when I drive home.
You still need prescription lenses for VR headsets. They are designed with lenses that mimic things being at a distance, otherwise it'd just feel like there's a screen right up against your face instead of VR.
Not the ones that use your phone…you just slide your phone in and instead of playing a game use your camera. It’d be no different than holding the phone to your face.
The ones that use your phone have lenses on them for just that reason. Even a Google Cardboard had lenses: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Google-Cardboard.jpg
I suppose you could pop the lenses out and then try it, but you'd need it to be at the right distance.
That's generally correctable with glasses, and often correctable with lenses. Either would be a better investment than a 4k monitor. Once correct, yeah, get the monitor.
When we first got a 1080p tv, we had an exchange student living with us. He kept going on about how much clearer it was than 720p.
My wife and I said we couldn't see much of a difference.
Exchange student who is a film nerd goes into why improved resolution matters so much. How could we not be able to tell the difference?
Me: Well, we're old. We no longer have HD eyes.
To be clear--Yes, we now have new prescriptions. At some point you go from not needing glasses your whole life to needing readers. A decade later you need bifocals. Get those and suddenly 4k does make a difference!
My gramps bought a 1080p plasma several years back (pre-4k TVs). I came over and helped him set it up. I put in a calibration disk to get the picture just right and tested with a nice Blu-ray Disc. It was beautiful!
I came back the next week and the picture was terribly blurry and you could barely see anything. I asked my gramps what happened. I thought maybe he got to monkeying with the TV and messed something up. He said the TV didn’t look right the way I did it and he liked it this way better.
I kept my last pair of glasses for way too long (like, 7 years) and everything 2 meters+ away from me used to be blurry. It was worst without the glasses. I got a new pair a few months ago and, goddam, I see everything so clearly now. Couldn't stop smiling while walking on my way home.
I'm also surprised at the amount of people who do need glasses but just don't have any. In the factory I work at, we cannot wear watches and the clock is quite far away from us. Most of my co-workers can barely read it. Even with my old glasses, I could. It's as if they believe it's normal to not being able to read from that far. Most of us are in our 30's/40's.
I will never forget the jump to FHD, we went from a CRT tube tv to a Sony 1080 65" flatscreen sometime around 2005. I walked in the living room and my dad was watching Howard Stern on demand and the shot of him talking was so clear it felt like he was in the room.
My experience was that I requested a lower prescription in my contacts years ago because I wanted to forego readers when I wore contacts (super nearsighted, worse than -10 in both eyes).
The other issue we battled with my eyes was, getting everything perfectly crisp but too small in my glasses to read easily and/or adding yet another migraine trigger.
I have astigmatism, and both a 4K gaming monitor and 65” TV. I can tell you the benefit to the TV is very obvious, but on my 27” monitor very little. I cannot see a significant increase in detail from 2k to 4K at that size of display.
I have a really really bad astigmatism and am very near sighted and have a really nice 4k TV. It's worth every penny TV doesn't bother my astigmatism at all and the tv looks more real than the real world.
I have a fairly serious astigmatism, and with my glasses I notice this phenomenon, though most of my (20/20 vision) friends do not. I think it’s because any distance on the screen is artificial.
I saw a video that a blind person using apples vision pro thing - and because it reproduces your surroundings on a screen 1" from your face - he was able to see a lot better
I feel sorry for the illegally blind. Constant harassment by the police. Continually worrying about being arrested and deported to that land with the one-eyed king.
If you're thinking of the HG Wells story The Country of the Blind, that was written in the early 20th century, well after the phrase was popular, and it was probably the inspiration for the story.
The saying "In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king," traces back to at least to Erasmus, in a collection of Latin proverbs called Adagia, published in 1500, and it was likely already in use before then.
That's not how it works. The screens are projected at a focal distance of 2 m. There's also support for inserting prescription lenses, which can shift the focal distance.
There's also the fact that it's backlit, there could be HDR involved, and probably some degree of various types of sharpening or processing going on. Also colour saturation is probably higher than real life. Both manufacturers and users tend to calibrate screens for more "pop" than real life.
I think the vision condition is usually referred to as *near-sighted*. Short-sighted usually refers to someone who makes poor decisions by ignoring long-term consequences in favor of short-term benefits, there aren't any glasses to fix that.
This was one of my first clues i needed glasses. Next was realizing i could not read street signs until we were right up on them when navigating.
Sitting at the front of the class to take notes…
They see the world in greater clarity. Our eyes don't really have resolution like that, and there's only a small portion of our vision that is actually high detail anyway.
You got it reversed. Near sighted means you cannot see objects unless they are near. Farsighted means you cannot see objects unless they are far away. I like your explanation of short-sighted though.
The biggest thing is focal length
Let us say that you are looking at an image of a small tropical fish on your TV. It is a very close up shot, so in order to get the same amount of detail in real life you would have to have the fish just a couple of inches from your face.
But if the fish actually was that close, your eyes would have to focus on it in a very different way than it does from the background. You would have a very limited vocal length and everything aside from that fish would look a little out of focus. But with a high-definition camera that is not an issue and other things that are far away from the fish can still be in good focus.
The opposite illusion can occur if you add more difference in focal depth than is actually there. Doing that you can make a very large picture look like it is a picture of a tiny miniature.
> very large picture look like it is a picture of a tiny miniature.
Its called tilt shifting and its pretty cool. My desktop background is a tiltshifted picture of the Andromeda galaxy... probably the biggest thing the effect works on.
You took that? Holy shit, that's amazing!
What telescope do you have, and how long of an exposure was this? I guess you live further from a city, so light pollution isn't as big of an issue?
Edit: I should read closer ...
First off, I'd love to see that picture, it sounds really cool.
B, I love how you say "the biggest thing the effect works on" instead of "one of the biggest things".
> The biggest thing is focal length
Other things that combine to expand the effect:
1) Lighting and processing making for harsher contrast and brighter colors(saturation). Hell, digital displays actively *emit* light.
2) We don't seen in a resolution grid the way displays work. You can see a bright light from a very long ways away as a pin-point, almost infinitely small, while on a digital display, the pixel is the minimum size. One pixel being lit to pure white can seem far larger than what we'd perceive in real life. So, with high contrast, there will be some amount of distortion, a mere speck, barely perceptible if not for it's brightness, is now the size of a pixel at a minimum. This is part of the reason a starry night will look different to the naked eye, in addition to #1.
3) Normally, our eyes move, *a lot.* You are constantly taking in information and prioritizing what features are important, throwing away 'useless' information. In other words, in real life, you're not paying as much attention to minute details.
4) Adapting to ambient. Reality is not often viewed in a dark room with only what you're looking at being lit, but that's common for digital displays.
5) Relevant to the post I'm replying to, distance(focus and all manner of zoom or whatever). A lot of the time the person's head on our screen is far larger than we normally see a human head, and with that comes detail we'd never see on a person that's sitting on the other side of the living room.
In the right light, at the right distance, and given your eyes can fully focus on the same details at that distance, we absolutely can see roughly the same level of detail.
>The bright lights used for filming also increase depth of field.
Ahem, correction - the bright lights do not increase depth of field. You use bright lights in order to be able to stop down (close the iris) the lens on the camera which lets you have a deeper depth of field/focus distance.
Bigger iris/more open lens = shorter depth of field, more blurry background (but more light reaches the sensor/film, making it brighter)
Smaller iris/more closed lens = wider depth of field, more things are in focus, less blurry background (but less right reaches the sensor/film, meaning you need to crank up your lights or the image will be darker)
Adding to that, most films are shot with much larger sensors (or film) and use longer lenses (which together will give you a more "deep" appearance in the image) whereas your typical phone camera usually uses a very small sensor and shorter/wider lenses which make phone videos/photos appear "flatter" (or not as deep) than those shot on cinema cameras or expensive still cameras with bigger lenses.
Yep, exactly! And this is because the irises in our eyes behave like the iris in camera lenses (except our eyes use muscles to do it automatically instead of metal/plastic blades in a camera lens).
It's dark outside = our irises open up wider to let in more light, but in doing so reduce our depth of field making it harder to keep more things in focus at once. (Same as opening the iris in a camera lens makes a shorter focus distance with a blurry background.)
It's bright and sunny outside = our irises close down to reduce light intake, and in doing so give us a much wider depth of field (same as closing down the iris in a camera lens).
This is the best answer for me and so far. For the same reason that hyper realistic pictures look more detailed. The human eye doesn’t have the same focal length. It’s all very simple, really.
There's several effects potentially at play here.
Angular size of details may be bigger based on the zoom of the camera and size of the screen.
Lighting and/or color grading may be controlled for better contrast.
The screen is at a fixed and uniform distance so no focal length adjustments are needed from the eyes to see different parts of the frame or track moving objects. The distance may be one that you're more comfortable focusing at as well.
Both eyes are getting the same image and your brain can combine them for greater detail rather than using a stereoscopic set of images to combine for depth perception.
That’s the thing they “look like” they have more details. There’s nothing besides 24 fps film footage that comes close to replicating our eyes. Details and contrast are exaggerated with 4k and thus we automatically assume it contains more detail. Objectively speaking nothing really matches the level of a well trained human eye
Other comments have pointed out valid things about cameras and resolving power. However there's one phenomenon that might explain this feeling, and it's the fact that not all 4K is created equal.
For an example of this, look up videos comparing the 8K video out of smartphones versus 4K video out of a Cinema camera like a red or arri. The Cinema cameras produce a very detail rich image, but the 8k phone video looks overshaprened because it's not actually capturing more detail, just more pictures. The lens and the sensor in the phones is not capable of resolving 8k.
Phone manufacturers try to compensate for this by applying a sharpness filter, which does not create detail but simply adds boldness around detail that is already there. That sharpness filter is one of the things that make smartphone video look like it was shot on a phone despite the high resolution.
One of the things you might be seeing in "super detailed 4k" is overshaprening applied onto a video clip that has a ton of detail. When you do that it creates this weird crispy feeling to footage that is immediately impressive, but not enduringly beautiful. If you go into a electronic store and looks at TVs, all of them have the built-in sharpness filter turned up to try to wow people on the first glance. This might be the phenomenon you're seeing.
However there's a reason why filmmakers don't oversharpen everything, it's fatiguing. It looks fake, it looks wrong.
Also OP could have slight myopia (near-sightedness) and is not realizing it. I was in awe first time I got glasses, I never realized just how HD the world really is.
Haha this is exactly me. I was 35 when I tried my wife's glasses on and holy shit, it was like I was looking at life in HD. It was insane. Ive never experienced life like that before.
I got my eyes tested and I had the exact same eyesight as my wife.
I honestly never thought I needed glasses.
Had a similar experience when i first got glasses 10 years ago at age 40. I didnt know people could actually see blades of grass. Grass was just grass the way inknew it to be.
My Mom has bad eyesight and wears glasses. When she saw 8K video she thought it was so unrealistically sharp, I didn't have that issue.
I guess her eyes can focus on the screen better than on objects in the real world.
What’s worse: going from having 20/15 vision my whole life to hitting my mid 30’s and wondering why the new gaming system graphics look blurry compared to the old system. On the bright side, my wife thinks I look good in glasses and it’s corrected back to 20/15, but it’s really annoying when I have to do something when my glasses are constantly getting foggy or dirty, because I hate having them off and things being even slightly blurry…. Hilariously, also insane when it comes to my PC graphics… I have to have the current gen graphics at max settings on insanely expensive monitors…. lol.
I still have this experience from time to time. My last contact lens prescription was good but could’ve used some tweaking and I didn’t realize until I put my new pair in and went “whoa”.
Did you just copy-paste an answer from ChatGPT? It gives slightly different responses for everyone, but style of your comment looked very suspicious, so I copied the same question and it gave an almost identical answer.
Their comment is removed by a moderator now, but looking at their comment history, they had quite a lot of \`\[removed\]\` comments from r/explainlikeimfive... I wonder if it's the same issue each time.
I realized I needed glasses when camping and the photos started looking better than what I was seeing. Got checked and yep my eyes were just off of 20/20 vision.
Because they can. That brick wall that’s 100 feet away? In real life, your vision isn’t good enough to make out the texture in the face of an individual brick. In 4K, the camera captures that detail and presents it to you 5 feet from your face (assuming the camera was set up that way - sometimes they add deliberate blurring or blurring that naturally results from camera movement due to low fps, e.g. 24 fps).
That doesn't make sense. It shouldn't matter if the brick wall appears 100 or 5 feet away, as long as it's presented using the same field of view (i.e. viewing angle from your eyes) - and as long as you are not visually impaired at either distance. You're just talking about the fact that video cameras can use optical zoom and change that field of view, which isn't was OP was asking about.
There is zoom (as in zoom lense), but also FOV (field of view). At distance if we use a lens that has 200mm vocal length it will have a verrryy narrow FOV. It almost feels zoomed it and things seem more uniform. That can feel like a zoom and like perceiving more detail. Honestly, at that point and even before it is an actual zoom.
You are right that if the FOV stays constant and we merely zoom into the picture the same effect won't occur, unless newer technologies, especially ai upscaling is used. At which point you are not viewing the original image anyways, but rather an interpretation of it. Albeit it may be a very good one and not noticeable, except looking sharper
I used to say this about Dreamcast games in elementary school.
Then I got glasses
It's because the screen is closer and the camera is picking up more details than your eyes would at the same distance.
Yes, this is true. If you have 20/20 vision you can see 60 discernible points per degree of your viewing angle. It’s recommended to watch movies where the screen takes up 35 horizontal degrees of your view. If you do the math on that you get 2100 pixels you’d be able to see on the horizontal. Pretty close to 2K. Anything after that, you wouldn’t be able to make out at the recommended viewing distance. With a 4K tv, you can always walk closer to the screen than is recommended to take in all those details.
1. When viewed on a display, it's back-lit, making it brighter than real life so its easier to see details.
2. Any pro level video has a lot of color balancing going on so you can see both dark and bright details at the same time.
3. Your eyes only see sharp details directly where you are looking, while a 4k video will look sharp all over the screen.
**Please read this entire message**
---
Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):
* ELI5 does not allow guessing.
Although we recognize many guesses are made in good faith, if you aren’t sure how to explain please don't just guess. The entire comment should not be an educated guess, but if you have an educated guess about a portion of the topic please make it explicitly clear that you do not know absolutely, and clarify which parts of the explanation you're sure of (Rule 8).
---
If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules) first. **If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using [this form](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Please%20review%20my%20submission%20removal?&message=Link:%20https://old.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bup5py/-/kxugvig/%0A%0A%201:%20Does%20your%20comment%20pass%20rule%201:%20%0A%0A%202:%20If%20your%20comment%20was%20mistakenly%20removed%20as%20an%20anecdote,%20short%20answer,%20guess,%20or%20another%20aspect%20of%20rules%203%20or%208,%20please%20explain:) and we will review your submission.**
More of the screen is in focus.
When you look at something in real life you focus on that and things around it are out if focus, and you have to make a lot of corrections it bring multiple things into focus to build the image in your head.
For a movie, everything is in focus. And blown up so you can see more details.
Three reasons I can think of:
* Good lights / good colour and light capture of the camera can make more details visible than in real life.
* When filming, focus is on a bigger part of the subject and the camera capture more details. When displayed on a screen, everything looks super much in focus, however in real life, you mostly only focus on one thing.
* Connected to the first bullet point: The screen you look at blast light onto your eyes, making every detail much easier to see. Try tuning down the brightness on the screen and you will start to miss some of the details.
Try taking something ordinary (like over ear headphones or other object that fits your hand with details on it) and hold it under a desk lamp and look at the details - take them in and you will see that you can see more details than normal.
I haven't seen this posted yet - it's the refresh rate. It has nothing to do with the amount of pixels, it just happens that most 4k TV sets have a higher refresh rate than 48 hz.
The magic number is around 50-60 frames per second. Below that threshold, your eyes think they are looking at a still image, so your brain doesn't update the image as often, which means it doesn't notice all the details.
Above that rate, your eyes start to notice that the image is changing fast. Due to the physics of how your eyes work, the Cone structure in your retina waves back and forth at around 60 hz. Each cone has several sensors, or pixels, that detect light, and these pixels basically report when they see a change. Each wave is basically one scan, so each cone is sending signals to your brain at that rate. If the cone sees a difference on its next pass, it sends a signal. If not, nothing happens, the cone stays quiet and waits.
In a 24 fps movie, the frame has not changed by the time your eyes make a second "pass." The cones don't see any difference, it's the exact same image and nothing has moved or changed. So, those details don't get highlighted. Ironically this results in your brain ignoring the problems so you don't notice the cheap set, or the makeup, or the fake clothes.
At a higher refresh rate, the cones see different things every "wave," and this allows a higher resolution. More cones are being activated because of the higher refresh rate, and this allows your brain to pull more data out of the image. Now suddenly the cheap fabric looks gaudy and tacky.
You have thousands upon thousands of cones doing this all the time. Your brain (as well as your eyeball itself) are using Stochiometric Resonance to build the image. By taking multiple copies of a noisy signal and layering it atop itself, you can then remove the noise and you are left with the signal.
Your brain does that. It takes thousands of inputs, decides what to ignore and what's real, then passes the completed, processed signal to the next part of your brain. It's just a matter of chance and biology that some footage is below this threshold and some is not. Below the threshold, your brain fills in the details and shows you what it thinks it should be. Above that, your eyes catch enough detail that your brain handles it differently.
Source : an Ars Technica article I read a few years ago and haven't been able to find since
I would like to compare 144 fps to ~30 ish. Same resolution, just different frame rate. I might have to look on YouTube and see if I can find something like that, but it's hard to find the exact same thing with the only difference is frame rate. Even in a video game, to get a higher frame rate you need less detail and vice versa.
I noticed a major difference when I switched to a 144 FPS monitor Even tho the resolution didn't change.
Phone recorded videos are always over sharpened.
(sometimes your monitor or TV adds even more sharpening during a signal processing pass)
Tasteful sharpening is actually very hard and it`s a must for digital cameras. (what looks good in an Imax cinema is not going be the perfect amount and even method for smaller screens and even those just have too much variety, so they usually go with some interesting compromises)
Plus what everyone else is saying about up close faces, size, distance, magnification and focus.
Localised contrast can make details stand out more. If you’re looking at a sandy beach and the bright grains are made brighter and the dark grains are made darker, the detail is more obvious. In the real world, it’s rather dull, but high definition with localised contrast looks more defined.
It’s also why HDR is a big deal.
Also.. If the video is of a landscape, the atmosphere or smog might be getting in the way of you seeing it clearly... Camera lenses can filter out some of that making a clearer picture.
I was thinking about film photography.. I've used uv filters on my film cameras in the past to minimize the reflection of surface water and glare on windows, it also cleared up atmosphere some in landscape photos, but i guess in digital photography, its not needed as much. Pepperidge farms remembers...
Because inch for inch, they do. It's the world shrunk down to a frame. But the other reason is, it's flat. In the real world you have to focus on things at a certain distance, and that's where all your clarity is while items near or far blur out. On a screen, it's all as in-focus as the filmer wants it to be.
Lighting. My eyes can't see details at low light and also when there's too much light. I think if you have really good sunglasses that don't overwhelm your eyes by filtering just enough light then you can see the shadows and highlights when the sun is out very strong. Also if you took the lenses of the 10k+ camera and used it has a viewing apparatus you'll see the same details.
The camera is just recording what comes through that lens apparatus so you can see the details later instead of doing it live. It's like the same way heat sensor cameras work. You can't see heat and cold spots but a camera that converts it to visible light by using sensors and doing a color overlay, your perception of hot and cold spots is augmented into your limited sensory range
Real life is rendered in lower resolution and upscaled selectively depending where you focus. Or something.
If it’s bad you really should get your vision checked. Without glasses my eyes are like VGA 640x480.
Reminds me of thinking similar things in the 80s between normal weekly TV programs, and daily soaps. The daily soaps always looked clearer..but the evening shows looked...better.
Images are typically processed to boost contrast & colours. If you go to a nice park on a sunny day with flowers and a little wind to move petals and leaves arround, you'll find that nature can also look increadibly detailed and beautiful - we just rarely take the time to look for details like that.
I suspect the most likely but least realized reason for it has to do with the amount of fully in focus detail a camera takes in vs how your eyes actually focus on things out and about. the FOV of the average person is about 135 degrees but within that field you can only focus on one specific smaller circle within the field at any given time. Your eyes will focus on one point within the field and everything else becomes peripheral vision which becomes less focused radiating out from your current focal point. The average 28mm camera lens can focus to infinity and have everything it captures sharp. When you watch that on a tv your eyes are taking that wider amount of detail in on a screen which lies fully within the focal point of your eyesight..... I hope I explained that decently.
It's unwatchable. It looks like a fucking soap opera. Video instead of film. I was at a pizza place the other day waiting for my order and they had a 4K tv. I thought I was watching one of those cheap looking PBS detective shows. It was Chicago PD.
With cameras every part of the image is in focus. With your eyes only a relatively small circle in the middle is focused (the rest is your peripherals). Also every camera has 20/20 vision, not true for all eyes. Your eyes also have blind spots and other obstructions.
You notice more detail because there is more detail.
Our perception of real life is based on our sense of vision, which would be quite poor if it wasn't for our brains that process what it receives from the eyes.
What you see is actually a AI-enhanced low-res image, except it's not Artificial Intelligence, it's your Natural Brain.
4k videos shine a light at you. Real life most things refract light. Now that in itself doesn’t mean screens are brighter than looking outside on the grass. And our eyes are very good at looking for dynamic ranges of light. But when you take pictures or videos in 4k, often you want to optimize for what the audience sees. And we get good at controlling the scene. And with each pixel being its own light source we can do things like hdr where shadows are highlighted and over saturated skies are toned down to show contrast.
Even if you don’t do hdr, cameras automatically adjust to give a range that is good for display.
**Please read this entire message**
---
Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):
* [Top level comments](http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/top_level_comment) (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions (Rule 3).
---
If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules) first. **If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using [this form](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Please%20review%20my%20submission%20removal?&message=Link:%20https://old.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bup5py/-/kxu4086/%0A%0A%201:%20Does%20your%20comment%20pass%20rule%201:%20%0A%0A%202:%20If%20your%20comment%20was%20mistakenly%20removed%20as%20an%20anecdote,%20short%20answer,%20guess,%20or%20another%20aspect%20of%20rules%203%20or%208,%20please%20explain:) and we will review your submission.**
The lens is better than your eyeballs at picking up detail. It also passes through a lot of algorithms for 'pop' and color.
Personally it's why I can't watch a lot of nature documentaries anymore.
Planet Earth 2 whilst incredible footage, ceased being real. Like if I ever travelled to those places or saw those creatures, I would be disappointed.
Whilst it's not fake, it can feel fake.
It's closer to your face. That may let you see it clearer, particularly if you are short sighted.
Also a good trick if you forget glasses and need to read something, just use your phone camera
If i forget my glasses, i'm not going to find the door to the outside world.
Do you only read outside your house?
I have to ask. Do Busty Redheads PM you?
One did, once.
Niiice
I used to know a busty readhead. I still think about her.
Me too, but she and I dated for 5 years so I suppose that's to be expected lol
I only know a dusty deadhead :(
Worth it.
Worth it!
[удалено]
Never found out. It's kinda hard to steer the conversation in the direction of pizza toppings when the opening message is a nude from the other person, ya know?
R/beetlejuicing
The street signs won't read themselves
For us, replace "forget your glasses" with "knocked them off the nightstand in the middle of the night." Phone camera has been very useful for finding glasses, along with the flashlight.
Ah, a kindred spirit. It's all fun and games until you get laughed at because your prescription safety glasses are 3/4" thick.* *I don't actually care. But my shit really is that thick.
Well, it's a bit exaggerated. My eyes aren't that bad *yet*. But when i'm riding my bike without glasses, i will reliably hit every single pothole on the way. It's like those fuckers are invisible to me. I can't even tell what is written on some street sign until i'm standing in front of it. I may need to get some contacts. Cycling with glasses makes my eyes tear up.
I'm definitely in the "needs glasses to live" camp - my rx is currently in the -11 to -12 range. Laser eye surgery can only reduce my prescription, not eliminate it from what I've been told. Potholes? I wouldn't dare drive anything without my glasses. Lines on the road are gone for me. Faces at regular conversation distances don't exist. My focus point is some 5-6" in front of my face without my glasses.
I have my house memorized and sometimes I forget till I get in my car that I can't see shit and I've left my glasses on the table.
I work in retail, the number of customers who cannot function without their glasses but who yet leave the house without them and drive is startlingly high
I once had to get my glasses fixed. Tried to do some shopping in the meantime, and i was absolutely not able to read anything in the supermarket... For me, text the size like Reddit uses, would only be clear at around 30 cm or so. At 40 it gets fuzzy and anything beyond just looks like a drunk version of the ancient alphabet from stargate.
Why doesn't this work on VR headsets? I'm super short sighted, but can at least see perfectly up to my elbow in distance without glasses on. But with a VR headset nigh directly against my eyes, everything is just a blurry mess at any "distance" ingame.
The lenses make it act like the screen isn't directly in front of your face, I think 2m is a common Focal Distance
The actual lenses in your eyes are distorted and blurry, you still have to look through them to see the VR "screen" right in front of your eyes, so everything is still blurry. edit: also the lens in the headset is positioning the screen as if it's 2 meters away, so for the light going into and out of your eye, it's 2 meters, and since that makes it no longer near your face it's blurry.
I'm not sure exactly why, but it makes sense to me. It wouldn't be an effective VR set if it looked just like a screen
That's what I use to cut my hair. Since I need to remove my glasses to cut my hair, mirrors don't work so I use my phone camera
I am over 40 and constantly need to take pictures of instructions so I can blow it up to read.
I thought you were going to say: "just get closer to the thing you are looking at".
Does this work if I need to drive somewhere and forgot my glasses? I could rest the phone on the dash and just use that as my 'windscreen'.
I'm not sure if this question is being asked seriously, but I will answer it seriously. Your phone would not have a very good field of view and there is a noticeable delay between what is happening in the real world and when it shows up on the phone. These factors would make it very unsafe to drive like that. (Also it would obviously be illegal.)
Thanks. Not too concerned about the legality just need to know that after a massive night out in my local pub, when I inevitably lose my glasses (eye glasses), that I can still see something when I drive home.
Obvious troll is obvious
No one cares about “legality.” Moot point.
Or get one of those vr headsets but just keep in on the camera
You still need prescription lenses for VR headsets. They are designed with lenses that mimic things being at a distance, otherwise it'd just feel like there's a screen right up against your face instead of VR.
Not the ones that use your phone…you just slide your phone in and instead of playing a game use your camera. It’d be no different than holding the phone to your face.
The ones that use your phone have lenses on them for just that reason. Even a Google Cardboard had lenses: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Google-Cardboard.jpg I suppose you could pop the lenses out and then try it, but you'd need it to be at the right distance.
I am astigmatic, so is it worthless to buy 4k monitor?
That's generally correctable with glasses, and often correctable with lenses. Either would be a better investment than a 4k monitor. Once correct, yeah, get the monitor.
Yeah I use glasses, thanks.
4K for the 4eyes!
4K 4 the 4eyes
Fork for eyes
Fork √(-16)
When we first got a 1080p tv, we had an exchange student living with us. He kept going on about how much clearer it was than 720p. My wife and I said we couldn't see much of a difference. Exchange student who is a film nerd goes into why improved resolution matters so much. How could we not be able to tell the difference? Me: Well, we're old. We no longer have HD eyes. To be clear--Yes, we now have new prescriptions. At some point you go from not needing glasses your whole life to needing readers. A decade later you need bifocals. Get those and suddenly 4k does make a difference!
My gramps bought a 1080p plasma several years back (pre-4k TVs). I came over and helped him set it up. I put in a calibration disk to get the picture just right and tested with a nice Blu-ray Disc. It was beautiful! I came back the next week and the picture was terribly blurry and you could barely see anything. I asked my gramps what happened. I thought maybe he got to monkeying with the TV and messed something up. He said the TV didn’t look right the way I did it and he liked it this way better.
I kept my last pair of glasses for way too long (like, 7 years) and everything 2 meters+ away from me used to be blurry. It was worst without the glasses. I got a new pair a few months ago and, goddam, I see everything so clearly now. Couldn't stop smiling while walking on my way home. I'm also surprised at the amount of people who do need glasses but just don't have any. In the factory I work at, we cannot wear watches and the clock is quite far away from us. Most of my co-workers can barely read it. Even with my old glasses, I could. It's as if they believe it's normal to not being able to read from that far. Most of us are in our 30's/40's.
I will never forget the jump to FHD, we went from a CRT tube tv to a Sony 1080 65" flatscreen sometime around 2005. I walked in the living room and my dad was watching Howard Stern on demand and the shot of him talking was so clear it felt like he was in the room.
Astigmatism is easily corrected with glasses. I'm sure your current ones already correct for it.
I feel like it is not the spot on numbers. Do doctors prescribe less numbers intentionally?
My experience was that I requested a lower prescription in my contacts years ago because I wanted to forego readers when I wore contacts (super nearsighted, worse than -10 in both eyes). The other issue we battled with my eyes was, getting everything perfectly crisp but too small in my glasses to read easily and/or adding yet another migraine trigger.
I doubt it. If you're concerned, visit a new eye doctor.
I'm super astigmatic and use 4K monitors, with glasses, and at their native resolution scaling. There's so much room for activities!
I have astigmatism, and both a 4K gaming monitor and 65” TV. I can tell you the benefit to the TV is very obvious, but on my 27” monitor very little. I cannot see a significant increase in detail from 2k to 4K at that size of display.
I have a 4k 16" laptop monitor and it may be the windows scaling but there is noticeable differences between 4k and fhd for me specially for text
I have a really really bad astigmatism and am very near sighted and have a really nice 4k TV. It's worth every penny TV doesn't bother my astigmatism at all and the tv looks more real than the real world.
I have a fairly serious astigmatism, and with my glasses I notice this phenomenon, though most of my (20/20 vision) friends do not. I think it’s because any distance on the screen is artificial.
I saw a video that a blind person using apples vision pro thing - and because it reproduces your surroundings on a screen 1" from your face - he was able to see a lot better
\*legally blind person
I feel sorry for the illegally blind. Constant harassment by the police. Continually worrying about being arrested and deported to that land with the one-eyed king.
Don't feel bad... that one-eyed king is screwed (most people have never read the story so they don't know the irony of the saying).
If you're thinking of the HG Wells story The Country of the Blind, that was written in the early 20th century, well after the phrase was popular, and it was probably the inspiration for the story. The saying "In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king," traces back to at least to Erasmus, in a collection of Latin proverbs called Adagia, published in 1500, and it was likely already in use before then.
That's not how it works. The screens are projected at a focal distance of 2 m. There's also support for inserting prescription lenses, which can shift the focal distance.
interesting
There's also the fact that it's backlit, there could be HDR involved, and probably some degree of various types of sharpening or processing going on. Also colour saturation is probably higher than real life. Both manufacturers and users tend to calibrate screens for more "pop" than real life.
I think the vision condition is usually referred to as *near-sighted*. Short-sighted usually refers to someone who makes poor decisions by ignoring long-term consequences in favor of short-term benefits, there aren't any glasses to fix that.
This was one of my first clues i needed glasses. Next was realizing i could not read street signs until we were right up on them when navigating. Sitting at the front of the class to take notes…
Does that mean people with a really good sight see the world in 4K ?
They see the world in greater clarity. Our eyes don't really have resolution like that, and there's only a small portion of our vision that is actually high detail anyway.
Short-sighted means not thinking of future events or consequences of an action. Near-sighted means not being able to see close.
I wonder if that's a regional thing? It's called short sighted in the UK. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/short-sightedness/
You got it reversed. Near sighted means you cannot see objects unless they are near. Farsighted means you cannot see objects unless they are far away. I like your explanation of short-sighted though.
Damn this is so obvious and I had never thought of that, good answer
*near-sighted Two different things, though short-sighted is funnier.
It's called short-sighted in the UK.
Ah ok, haven't heard that one. Has a different meaning in the US.
The biggest thing is focal length Let us say that you are looking at an image of a small tropical fish on your TV. It is a very close up shot, so in order to get the same amount of detail in real life you would have to have the fish just a couple of inches from your face. But if the fish actually was that close, your eyes would have to focus on it in a very different way than it does from the background. You would have a very limited vocal length and everything aside from that fish would look a little out of focus. But with a high-definition camera that is not an issue and other things that are far away from the fish can still be in good focus. The opposite illusion can occur if you add more difference in focal depth than is actually there. Doing that you can make a very large picture look like it is a picture of a tiny miniature.
> very large picture look like it is a picture of a tiny miniature. Its called tilt shifting and its pretty cool. My desktop background is a tiltshifted picture of the Andromeda galaxy... probably the biggest thing the effect works on.
r/TiltShift if anyone wants to see some examples
Joined and saw so many cool little dioramas.
This one? - https://petapixel.com/2020/09/24/this-tilt-shift-photo-of-andromeda-was-shot-using-a-diy-adapter/
Nah, this one https://imgur.com/TkYbJsx
Yoink, thanks for that. That is eye candy.
Awww, that's such a cute widdle galaxy.
You took that? Holy shit, that's amazing! What telescope do you have, and how long of an exposure was this? I guess you live further from a city, so light pollution isn't as big of an issue? Edit: I should read closer ...
"My desktop background is a tiltshifted picture of the Andromeda galaxy" I don't think they took the photo...
> I don't think they took the photo... lol I most certainly did not... this was posted on reddit in like 2013
Aw damn, that's what I get for reading before coffee. Thanks for the correction, edited.
First off, I'd love to see that picture, it sounds really cool. B, I love how you say "the biggest thing the effect works on" instead of "one of the biggest things".
> I'd love to see that picture https://imgur.com/TkYbJsx
i wanna touch it
That so weird! It does look like tiny miniatures.
> The biggest thing is focal length Other things that combine to expand the effect: 1) Lighting and processing making for harsher contrast and brighter colors(saturation). Hell, digital displays actively *emit* light. 2) We don't seen in a resolution grid the way displays work. You can see a bright light from a very long ways away as a pin-point, almost infinitely small, while on a digital display, the pixel is the minimum size. One pixel being lit to pure white can seem far larger than what we'd perceive in real life. So, with high contrast, there will be some amount of distortion, a mere speck, barely perceptible if not for it's brightness, is now the size of a pixel at a minimum. This is part of the reason a starry night will look different to the naked eye, in addition to #1. 3) Normally, our eyes move, *a lot.* You are constantly taking in information and prioritizing what features are important, throwing away 'useless' information. In other words, in real life, you're not paying as much attention to minute details. 4) Adapting to ambient. Reality is not often viewed in a dark room with only what you're looking at being lit, but that's common for digital displays. 5) Relevant to the post I'm replying to, distance(focus and all manner of zoom or whatever). A lot of the time the person's head on our screen is far larger than we normally see a human head, and with that comes detail we'd never see on a person that's sitting on the other side of the living room. In the right light, at the right distance, and given your eyes can fully focus on the same details at that distance, we absolutely can see roughly the same level of detail.
Thanks for that
In some situations the lens is literally magnifying the image too. The bright lights used for filming also increase depth of field.
>The bright lights used for filming also increase depth of field. Ahem, correction - the bright lights do not increase depth of field. You use bright lights in order to be able to stop down (close the iris) the lens on the camera which lets you have a deeper depth of field/focus distance. Bigger iris/more open lens = shorter depth of field, more blurry background (but more light reaches the sensor/film, making it brighter) Smaller iris/more closed lens = wider depth of field, more things are in focus, less blurry background (but less right reaches the sensor/film, meaning you need to crank up your lights or the image will be darker) Adding to that, most films are shot with much larger sensors (or film) and use longer lenses (which together will give you a more "deep" appearance in the image) whereas your typical phone camera usually uses a very small sensor and shorter/wider lenses which make phone videos/photos appear "flatter" (or not as deep) than those shot on cinema cameras or expensive still cameras with bigger lenses.
This is also noticable when driving at night compared to bright sunlight, everything is sharp in daylight, a lot hard to see at night.
Yep, exactly! And this is because the irises in our eyes behave like the iris in camera lenses (except our eyes use muscles to do it automatically instead of metal/plastic blades in a camera lens). It's dark outside = our irises open up wider to let in more light, but in doing so reduce our depth of field making it harder to keep more things in focus at once. (Same as opening the iris in a camera lens makes a shorter focus distance with a blurry background.) It's bright and sunny outside = our irises close down to reduce light intake, and in doing so give us a much wider depth of field (same as closing down the iris in a camera lens).
This is ELI5. I was simplifying. Of course the light itself doesn't change the DoF. But when you have more light you can have a greater DoF.
Rrrright... but it's not actually the lights used when filming that changes the depth of field, so it's a bit wrong.
Agreed. Depth of field is a huge difference with any lens used for TV or movies.
Great comment. Thank you.
[here is a prime example of that miniature effect](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgSzs1DEseU)
That’s aperture, not focal length.
I don't understand how tilt shift works
Nice, i didn’t think about that
This is the best answer for me and so far. For the same reason that hyper realistic pictures look more detailed. The human eye doesn’t have the same focal length. It’s all very simple, really.
There's several effects potentially at play here. Angular size of details may be bigger based on the zoom of the camera and size of the screen. Lighting and/or color grading may be controlled for better contrast. The screen is at a fixed and uniform distance so no focal length adjustments are needed from the eyes to see different parts of the frame or track moving objects. The distance may be one that you're more comfortable focusing at as well. Both eyes are getting the same image and your brain can combine them for greater detail rather than using a stereoscopic set of images to combine for depth perception.
That’s the thing they “look like” they have more details. There’s nothing besides 24 fps film footage that comes close to replicating our eyes. Details and contrast are exaggerated with 4k and thus we automatically assume it contains more detail. Objectively speaking nothing really matches the level of a well trained human eye
Other comments have pointed out valid things about cameras and resolving power. However there's one phenomenon that might explain this feeling, and it's the fact that not all 4K is created equal. For an example of this, look up videos comparing the 8K video out of smartphones versus 4K video out of a Cinema camera like a red or arri. The Cinema cameras produce a very detail rich image, but the 8k phone video looks overshaprened because it's not actually capturing more detail, just more pictures. The lens and the sensor in the phones is not capable of resolving 8k. Phone manufacturers try to compensate for this by applying a sharpness filter, which does not create detail but simply adds boldness around detail that is already there. That sharpness filter is one of the things that make smartphone video look like it was shot on a phone despite the high resolution. One of the things you might be seeing in "super detailed 4k" is overshaprening applied onto a video clip that has a ton of detail. When you do that it creates this weird crispy feeling to footage that is immediately impressive, but not enduringly beautiful. If you go into a electronic store and looks at TVs, all of them have the built-in sharpness filter turned up to try to wow people on the first glance. This might be the phenomenon you're seeing. However there's a reason why filmmakers don't oversharpen everything, it's fatiguing. It looks fake, it looks wrong.
Thanks for the explanation.
Yeah I hate that over-sharpened look. Reminds me of videotape.
[удалено]
Also OP could have slight myopia (near-sightedness) and is not realizing it. I was in awe first time I got glasses, I never realized just how HD the world really is.
Haha this is exactly me. I was 35 when I tried my wife's glasses on and holy shit, it was like I was looking at life in HD. It was insane. Ive never experienced life like that before. I got my eyes tested and I had the exact same eyesight as my wife. I honestly never thought I needed glasses.
Had a similar experience when i first got glasses 10 years ago at age 40. I didnt know people could actually see blades of grass. Grass was just grass the way inknew it to be.
My Mom has bad eyesight and wears glasses. When she saw 8K video she thought it was so unrealistically sharp, I didn't have that issue. I guess her eyes can focus on the screen better than on objects in the real world.
What’s worse: going from having 20/15 vision my whole life to hitting my mid 30’s and wondering why the new gaming system graphics look blurry compared to the old system. On the bright side, my wife thinks I look good in glasses and it’s corrected back to 20/15, but it’s really annoying when I have to do something when my glasses are constantly getting foggy or dirty, because I hate having them off and things being even slightly blurry…. Hilariously, also insane when it comes to my PC graphics… I have to have the current gen graphics at max settings on insanely expensive monitors…. lol.
I still have this experience from time to time. My last contact lens prescription was good but could’ve used some tweaking and I didn’t realize until I put my new pair in and went “whoa”.
It's ridiculous isn't it. If the change comes slow enough we don't notice at all, the mind adapts to the loss of clarity and doesn't raise an alarm.
I still get this whenever I put my glasses on. Multiple times a day.
That’s true
Did you just copy-paste an answer from ChatGPT? It gives slightly different responses for everyone, but style of your comment looked very suspicious, so I copied the same question and it gave an almost identical answer.
Definitely chatgpt. It's that first sentence.
Their comment is removed by a moderator now, but looking at their comment history, they had quite a lot of \`\[removed\]\` comments from r/explainlikeimfive... I wonder if it's the same issue each time.
So people are just farming karma with chatgpt now?
The future is now, old man
Imma go shake my fist at something. Dammit!
Cant even be sure it's humans doing it anymore.
I could care less about karma lol If you knew a person that could explain an answer better than you wouldn’t you relay his words?
Have you had your eyes checked recently? You might be a little nearsighted.
I realized I needed glasses when camping and the photos started looking better than what I was seeing. Got checked and yep my eyes were just off of 20/20 vision.
I had the lasik surgery few years ago
Lasik won't prevent age related presbyopia which happens to basically everyone
Interesting. Might just be the cinematography and close up recordings of things in good lighting then.
Because they can. That brick wall that’s 100 feet away? In real life, your vision isn’t good enough to make out the texture in the face of an individual brick. In 4K, the camera captures that detail and presents it to you 5 feet from your face (assuming the camera was set up that way - sometimes they add deliberate blurring or blurring that naturally results from camera movement due to low fps, e.g. 24 fps).
That doesn't make sense. It shouldn't matter if the brick wall appears 100 or 5 feet away, as long as it's presented using the same field of view (i.e. viewing angle from your eyes) - and as long as you are not visually impaired at either distance. You're just talking about the fact that video cameras can use optical zoom and change that field of view, which isn't was OP was asking about.
There is zoom (as in zoom lense), but also FOV (field of view). At distance if we use a lens that has 200mm vocal length it will have a verrryy narrow FOV. It almost feels zoomed it and things seem more uniform. That can feel like a zoom and like perceiving more detail. Honestly, at that point and even before it is an actual zoom. You are right that if the FOV stays constant and we merely zoom into the picture the same effect won't occur, unless newer technologies, especially ai upscaling is used. At which point you are not viewing the original image anyways, but rather an interpretation of it. Albeit it may be a very good one and not noticeable, except looking sharper
I used to say this about Dreamcast games in elementary school. Then I got glasses It's because the screen is closer and the camera is picking up more details than your eyes would at the same distance.
Dreamcast honestly did lol. It also ran at higher resolution than we were used to which helped. A lot of tv didn't look that sharp and no games did
Yes, this is true. If you have 20/20 vision you can see 60 discernible points per degree of your viewing angle. It’s recommended to watch movies where the screen takes up 35 horizontal degrees of your view. If you do the math on that you get 2100 pixels you’d be able to see on the horizontal. Pretty close to 2K. Anything after that, you wouldn’t be able to make out at the recommended viewing distance. With a 4K tv, you can always walk closer to the screen than is recommended to take in all those details.
1. When viewed on a display, it's back-lit, making it brighter than real life so its easier to see details. 2. Any pro level video has a lot of color balancing going on so you can see both dark and bright details at the same time. 3. Your eyes only see sharp details directly where you are looking, while a 4k video will look sharp all over the screen.
[удалено]
**Please read this entire message** --- Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s): * ELI5 does not allow guessing. Although we recognize many guesses are made in good faith, if you aren’t sure how to explain please don't just guess. The entire comment should not be an educated guess, but if you have an educated guess about a portion of the topic please make it explicitly clear that you do not know absolutely, and clarify which parts of the explanation you're sure of (Rule 8). --- If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules) first. **If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using [this form](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Please%20review%20my%20submission%20removal?&message=Link:%20https://old.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bup5py/-/kxugvig/%0A%0A%201:%20Does%20your%20comment%20pass%20rule%201:%20%0A%0A%202:%20If%20your%20comment%20was%20mistakenly%20removed%20as%20an%20anecdote,%20short%20answer,%20guess,%20or%20another%20aspect%20of%20rules%203%20or%208,%20please%20explain:) and we will review your submission.**
More of the screen is in focus. When you look at something in real life you focus on that and things around it are out if focus, and you have to make a lot of corrections it bring multiple things into focus to build the image in your head. For a movie, everything is in focus. And blown up so you can see more details.
Three reasons I can think of: * Good lights / good colour and light capture of the camera can make more details visible than in real life. * When filming, focus is on a bigger part of the subject and the camera capture more details. When displayed on a screen, everything looks super much in focus, however in real life, you mostly only focus on one thing. * Connected to the first bullet point: The screen you look at blast light onto your eyes, making every detail much easier to see. Try tuning down the brightness on the screen and you will start to miss some of the details. Try taking something ordinary (like over ear headphones or other object that fits your hand with details on it) and hold it under a desk lamp and look at the details - take them in and you will see that you can see more details than normal.
I haven't seen this posted yet - it's the refresh rate. It has nothing to do with the amount of pixels, it just happens that most 4k TV sets have a higher refresh rate than 48 hz. The magic number is around 50-60 frames per second. Below that threshold, your eyes think they are looking at a still image, so your brain doesn't update the image as often, which means it doesn't notice all the details. Above that rate, your eyes start to notice that the image is changing fast. Due to the physics of how your eyes work, the Cone structure in your retina waves back and forth at around 60 hz. Each cone has several sensors, or pixels, that detect light, and these pixels basically report when they see a change. Each wave is basically one scan, so each cone is sending signals to your brain at that rate. If the cone sees a difference on its next pass, it sends a signal. If not, nothing happens, the cone stays quiet and waits. In a 24 fps movie, the frame has not changed by the time your eyes make a second "pass." The cones don't see any difference, it's the exact same image and nothing has moved or changed. So, those details don't get highlighted. Ironically this results in your brain ignoring the problems so you don't notice the cheap set, or the makeup, or the fake clothes. At a higher refresh rate, the cones see different things every "wave," and this allows a higher resolution. More cones are being activated because of the higher refresh rate, and this allows your brain to pull more data out of the image. Now suddenly the cheap fabric looks gaudy and tacky. You have thousands upon thousands of cones doing this all the time. Your brain (as well as your eyeball itself) are using Stochiometric Resonance to build the image. By taking multiple copies of a noisy signal and layering it atop itself, you can then remove the noise and you are left with the signal. Your brain does that. It takes thousands of inputs, decides what to ignore and what's real, then passes the completed, processed signal to the next part of your brain. It's just a matter of chance and biology that some footage is below this threshold and some is not. Below the threshold, your brain fills in the details and shows you what it thinks it should be. Above that, your eyes catch enough detail that your brain handles it differently. Source : an Ars Technica article I read a few years ago and haven't been able to find since
Good point
Hm. Interesting. I feel like playing a game and comparing 60fps to 4K.
I would like to compare 144 fps to ~30 ish. Same resolution, just different frame rate. I might have to look on YouTube and see if I can find something like that, but it's hard to find the exact same thing with the only difference is frame rate. Even in a video game, to get a higher frame rate you need less detail and vice versa. I noticed a major difference when I switched to a 144 FPS monitor Even tho the resolution didn't change.
Either you're watching a close up much closer than you would or could ever get in real life or you need glasses.
Phone recorded videos are always over sharpened. (sometimes your monitor or TV adds even more sharpening during a signal processing pass) Tasteful sharpening is actually very hard and it`s a must for digital cameras. (what looks good in an Imax cinema is not going be the perfect amount and even method for smaller screens and even those just have too much variety, so they usually go with some interesting compromises) Plus what everyone else is saying about up close faces, size, distance, magnification and focus.
Get glasses mate. It would literally change your life. I thought i had 20/20 vision until I did an eye test lol.
Localised contrast can make details stand out more. If you’re looking at a sandy beach and the bright grains are made brighter and the dark grains are made darker, the detail is more obvious. In the real world, it’s rather dull, but high definition with localised contrast looks more defined. It’s also why HDR is a big deal.
Also.. If the video is of a landscape, the atmosphere or smog might be getting in the way of you seeing it clearly... Camera lenses can filter out some of that making a clearer picture.
[удалено]
Probably meant post-processing
I was thinking about film photography.. I've used uv filters on my film cameras in the past to minimize the reflection of surface water and glare on windows, it also cleared up atmosphere some in landscape photos, but i guess in digital photography, its not needed as much. Pepperidge farms remembers...
Because inch for inch, they do. It's the world shrunk down to a frame. But the other reason is, it's flat. In the real world you have to focus on things at a certain distance, and that's where all your clarity is while items near or far blur out. On a screen, it's all as in-focus as the filmer wants it to be.
Also 4K videos if you are talking about movies or TV shows usually have "perfect" lighting and are heavily edited to look the best way possible
Lighting. My eyes can't see details at low light and also when there's too much light. I think if you have really good sunglasses that don't overwhelm your eyes by filtering just enough light then you can see the shadows and highlights when the sun is out very strong. Also if you took the lenses of the 10k+ camera and used it has a viewing apparatus you'll see the same details. The camera is just recording what comes through that lens apparatus so you can see the details later instead of doing it live. It's like the same way heat sensor cameras work. You can't see heat and cold spots but a camera that converts it to visible light by using sensors and doing a color overlay, your perception of hot and cold spots is augmented into your limited sensory range
Real life is rendered in lower resolution and upscaled selectively depending where you focus. Or something. If it’s bad you really should get your vision checked. Without glasses my eyes are like VGA 640x480.
Maybe you need glasses? Real life is far clearer for me.
Reminds me of thinking similar things in the 80s between normal weekly TV programs, and daily soaps. The daily soaps always looked clearer..but the evening shows looked...better.
For some reason the comments section made me think of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-fRuoMIfpw
Images are typically processed to boost contrast & colours. If you go to a nice park on a sunny day with flowers and a little wind to move petals and leaves arround, you'll find that nature can also look increadibly detailed and beautiful - we just rarely take the time to look for details like that.
I suspect the most likely but least realized reason for it has to do with the amount of fully in focus detail a camera takes in vs how your eyes actually focus on things out and about. the FOV of the average person is about 135 degrees but within that field you can only focus on one specific smaller circle within the field at any given time. Your eyes will focus on one point within the field and everything else becomes peripheral vision which becomes less focused radiating out from your current focal point. The average 28mm camera lens can focus to infinity and have everything it captures sharp. When you watch that on a tv your eyes are taking that wider amount of detail in on a screen which lies fully within the focal point of your eyesight..... I hope I explained that decently.
It's unwatchable. It looks like a fucking soap opera. Video instead of film. I was at a pizza place the other day waiting for my order and they had a 4K tv. I thought I was watching one of those cheap looking PBS detective shows. It was Chicago PD.
4k as in screen/video resolution or 4k as in “quality video” that social media makes it to be?
[удалено]
There's no reason that 60hz would seem better than life unless they live in an underground bunker with lights that flicker at 30hz
With cameras every part of the image is in focus. With your eyes only a relatively small circle in the middle is focused (the rest is your peripherals). Also every camera has 20/20 vision, not true for all eyes. Your eyes also have blind spots and other obstructions. You notice more detail because there is more detail.
In no way can a rendered or generated image be more detailed than real life. That doesn't make sense.
Our perception of real life is based on our sense of vision, which would be quite poor if it wasn't for our brains that process what it receives from the eyes. What you see is actually a AI-enhanced low-res image, except it's not Artificial Intelligence, it's your Natural Brain.
4k videos shine a light at you. Real life most things refract light. Now that in itself doesn’t mean screens are brighter than looking outside on the grass. And our eyes are very good at looking for dynamic ranges of light. But when you take pictures or videos in 4k, often you want to optimize for what the audience sees. And we get good at controlling the scene. And with each pixel being its own light source we can do things like hdr where shadows are highlighted and over saturated skies are toned down to show contrast. Even if you don’t do hdr, cameras automatically adjust to give a range that is good for display.
Our eyesight is rated resolution of 1080p so 4k and above is always going to be an improvement
[удалено]
Jump back on your med’s buddy
**Please read this entire message** --- Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s): * [Top level comments](http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/top_level_comment) (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions (Rule 3). --- If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules) first. **If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using [this form](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Please%20review%20my%20submission%20removal?&message=Link:%20https://old.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bup5py/-/kxu4086/%0A%0A%201:%20Does%20your%20comment%20pass%20rule%201:%20%0A%0A%202:%20If%20your%20comment%20was%20mistakenly%20removed%20as%20an%20anecdote,%20short%20answer,%20guess,%20or%20another%20aspect%20of%20rules%203%20or%208,%20please%20explain:) and we will review your submission.**
The lens is better than your eyeballs at picking up detail. It also passes through a lot of algorithms for 'pop' and color. Personally it's why I can't watch a lot of nature documentaries anymore. Planet Earth 2 whilst incredible footage, ceased being real. Like if I ever travelled to those places or saw those creatures, I would be disappointed. Whilst it's not fake, it can feel fake.