Similaar Foto tutorials
English
- Espaņol
Equipment
recommendations
Flaat
Picture Styles
Lens tests
Sharpness
- Bokeh

How many megapixels can I see?
An empirical approach


 
HOME
 


 
Foto tutorial (English)
Foto tutorial (Espaņol)
 


 
Equipment recommendations US-ES
 


 
Flaat for Canon
Flaat for Nikon
Flaat for the BMC
Flaat for NEX-5N
Old Picture Style Tests
 


 
LENS TESTS
a7s stills
a7s video
550D stills
550D video
550D video lineskip
5D2 stills
5D2 video

Conclusions
APS-C vs Full Frame
ND filters
Other filters


BOKEH TESTS
Summary
Alternative scenarios
 


 
Badly assembled lenses and image quality
Lens mount compatibility chart
ISO on different cameras
High ISO on the 5D3
DIY: DR test chart
RGBWK Bayer sensors


DoF/FoV CALCULATOR
Notes on DoF-FoV
Notes on crop-DoF-FoV


Custom Cropmarks for Magic Lantern on the Canon 550D


How many megapixels do I want?
How many megapixels can I see?


Quick Monitor Calibration Chart


MY VIDEOS


Random rants


Search engine


There's always a debate on whether we prefer more resolution or just a nicer picture (more latitude, more color information, etc) at a decent resolution, say 1080p (2 megapixels).

So, let's see: what's the point beyond which more resolution doesn't matter because my eyes just can't see it?

I created this 1920x1080 video with a 50% grey background and a single different pixel (first 60% grey, then 40% grey) that moves around the screen, and this 960x540 video of the same thing. I checked on my 2 TVs (Samsung 32" and Sony 52", both with PVA panels) to see how far I had to be from the screen in order to be completely unable to follow any of the two pixels (dark, or light):

1080p - 32" --> 85cm
540p - 32" --> 170cm
1080p - 52" --> 190cm
540p - 52" --> 340cm

And my conclusions from these measurements are:
* Not all screens are the same: the Sony 52" shows more detail (not surprising, I already knew it had much better color).
* In my living room (350cm from eyes to screen) I'd need a screen larger than 96" to start seeing any benefits from resolution beyond 1080p (52*350/190=96); if it's not a really sharp screen, it needs to be 132" or larger for me to get any benefits from resolution beyond 1080p (32*350/85=132).

So, I don't think my eyes can benefit from video resolution beyond 1080p, given that in my living room 96" is already huge: ratio of distance-to-eyes over diagonal-distance equal to 1.44, kind of last-row at the cinema but huge by living room standards. Yes, I'm quickly getting used to bigger and bigger screens, and once they add a button for me to watch the news in just the central part of the screen, surrounded by black, I may get more forgiving towards really huge screens, but really: 96" at 350cm? well, let me get back to you in 5 years...




please visit my equipment recommendations


















Copyright Similaar 2011 -- similaar.feedback@gmail.com -- @Similaar
Similaar is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, two affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com and amazon.es.