Related
I’ve been struggling to get a clear answer from Sony official support team on why when I run a simple screen test by three different applications I get 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi) or less on my E6883. They claim E6883 screen has 2160 x 3840 pixels (~806 ppi pixel density) resolution. That’s what I though we get on Xperia Z5 Premium. 4K was one of the main reasons I bought this phone. In reality, as the actual screen resolution, I get regular HD.
Here is what they (Sony) say:
“Thank you for contacting Sony Xperia™ Online Support.
The information you requested is presented in the link Agent Argelia provided:
http://blogs.sonymobile.com/2015/10...our-4k-display-technology-questions-answered/
Now to talk a little about your question, the resolution on the screen of the Xperia Z5 premium is 2160 x 3840 pixels (~806 ppi pixel density) meaning that this is what the screen is capable of presenting.
Now as explained in the link above, the full 4k resolution is only used for certain content and applications that are able to use this resolution, This means that in normal operation the phone displays content in HD1080 (Home screen, certain images, settings screens, games, screen captures and certain apps).
Now if you open and app that renders in 4k the app will make full use of the native resolution and you will be presented with full 4K images: Certain video streaming apps, YouTube, Streaming video, VR videos and full 4k videos downloaded from sites or with third party apps that are able to download full 4k video from YouTube.
I myself use a third party app called Tubemate that allows me to download 4k video and then play it with the album app in the phone. (4K videos will have a white "4k" mark in the album preview thumbnail. So far the YouTube app still does not have the capability to show 4K video) Although you can view 4k video from YouTube if you open the website in chrome and then in settings (in chrome) you can request for the Desktop version of the YouTube page. (The resolution settings will then let you choose 4k)”.
I could understand all the playback explanations. However, I am talking about displaying 4K on the screen that is ONLY capable to render in 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi) according to the testing apps I tried. How is it possible? I start thinking real 4K resolution in terms of DISPLAYING (not recording) is a faked advertisement. I wonder if someone has come across the same issue. Would be glad to hear your thoughts!
kvasok7 said:
I’ve been struggling to get a clear answer from Sony official support team on why when I run a simple screen test by three different applications I get 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi) or less on my E6883. They claim E6883 screen has 2160 x 3840 pixels (~806 ppi pixel density) resolution. That’s what I though we get on Xperia Z5 Premium. 4K was one of the main reasons I bought this phone. In reality, as the actual screen resolution, I get regular HD.
Here is what they (Sony) say:
“Thank you for contacting Sony Xperia™ Online Support.
The information you requested is presented in the link Agent Argelia provided:
http://blogs.sonymobile.com/2015/10...our-4k-display-technology-questions-answered/
Now to talk a little about your question, the resolution on the screen of the Xperia Z5 premium is 2160 x 3840 pixels (~806 ppi pixel density) meaning that this is what the screen is capable of presenting.
Now as explained in the link above, the full 4k resolution is only used for certain content and applications that are able to use this resolution, This means that in normal operation the phone displays content in HD1080 (Home screen, certain images, settings screens, games, screen captures and certain apps).
Now if you open and app that renders in 4k the app will make full use of the native resolution and you will be presented with full 4K images: Certain video streaming apps, YouTube, Streaming video, VR videos and full 4k videos downloaded from sites or with third party apps that are able to download full 4k video from YouTube.
I myself use a third party app called Tubemate that allows me to download 4k video and then play it with the album app in the phone. (4K videos will have a white "4k" mark in the album preview thumbnail. So far the YouTube app still does not have the capability to show 4K video) Although you can view 4k video from YouTube if you open the website in chrome and then in settings (in chrome) you can request for the Desktop version of the YouTube page. (The resolution settings will then let you choose 4k)”.
I could understand all the playback explanations. However, I am talking about displaying 4K on the screen that is ONLY capable to render in 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi) according to the testing apps I tried. How is it possible? I start thinking real 4K resolution in terms of DISPLAYING (not recording) is a faked advertisement. I wonder if someone has come across the same issue. Would be glad to hear your thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this is just like how Apple do their Retina screen. They upscale the software resolution into the real 4k hardware resolution. so yes it is a real 4k screen, but only rendered 2k most of the time. do you think it's such a waste? maybe, but i'd like to see it as a feature rather than a standard. when you have that 4k video, such feature will be usable. Same as the CPU, you only get most of the core working when you need it on gaming.
kvasok7 said:
...I am talking about displaying 4K on the screen that is ONLY capable to render in 1920 x 1080 (~403 dpi)...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To put it bluntly, you are wrong in your assessment. It is Lollipop that can't display 4K. The Z5P can and does display 4K content within apps. I could type screeds explaining this in detail, but instead, just watch this video. The display and its 4K aspect is covered from 8 minutes and 15 seconds..
nobnut said:
To put it bluntly, you are wrong in your assessment. It is Lollipop that can't display 4K. The Z5P can and does display 4K content within apps. I could type screeds explaining this in detail, but instead, just watch this video. The display and its 4K aspect is covered from 8 minutes and 15 seconds..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great video! A very detailed breakdown! Wish I watched it earlier! TY
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
The App "AIDA64" shows a resolution of 2160x3840 (~ 801ppi)
Black_Focus_X said:
The App "AIDA64" shows a resolution of 2160x3840 (~ 801ppi)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the Dev had to 'fix' the screen resolution properties for the Z5P in the app (check the most recent changelog). It wasn't being detected via the usual checks. This is what causes some people concern or confusion when they investigate.
If you want, I can make you an app that detects 8K, or 16K, or "insert your desired resolution here" K.
All folk need to remember is that the Z5P does have a 4K resolution, regardless of what apps say
nobnut said:
But the Dev had to 'fix' the screen resolution properties for the Z5P in the app (check the most recent changelog). It wasn't being detected via the usual checks. This is what causes some people concern or confusion when they investigate.
If you want, I can make you an app that detects 8K, or 16K, or "insert your desired resolution here" K.
All folk need to remember is that the Z5P does have a 4K resolution, regardless of what apps say
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
kvasok7 said:
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When in doubt, use microscope or something and count.
4k would be 4 times the amount of pixels compared to a 1080p screen. Dividing the pixels on Z5p with a 1080p screen should give us 4, (3840x2160)/(1920x1080)=4
kvasok7 said:
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a much better idea.
Sell your Z5P.
Or learn how to debug and see the wood for the trees.
I'm done trying to reason with you. You're irrational, facts are clearly lost on you.
nobnut said:
I have a much better idea.
Sell your Z5P.
Or learn how to debug and see the wood for the trees.
I'm done trying to reason with you. You're irrational, facts are clearly lost on you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I’ll tell you what, PAL. I got an idea too! Get off this panel with this kinda attitude and don’t come back until you learn the definition of basic “manners”. When you provided some valuable info the first time, we thanked you, which I definitely feel the opposite now.
kvasok7 said:
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It better be, otherwise how does one explain this awful battery life with over 3400mah!! Lol don't doubt it, it's working!
samsmalls said:
It better be, otherwise how does one explain this awful battery life with over 3400mah!! Lol don't doubt it, it's working!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right! I too noticed heavy battery consumption while playing 4K files. TY
kvasok7 said:
Believe it or not, after watching the video you posted earlier, by Erica Griffin, I had a second thought that left me with a bit of a residual doubt. In that video, the only "evidence" of actual screen testing she said was ADB readings when resolution switched from HD to 4K. However, she never SHOWED those reading. Given that her videos are quite professionally shot, I don't see why not show the actual ADB readings to us. Technically we're only left with her words. I guess we have to take them
I'm actually more concerned with the physical screen; does it really have enough pixels to be considered 4K capable of DISPLAYING a 4K content? Still in doubt...
Sent from my E6883 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One could do their own adb and get the readings themselves if you question someones findings. Notice no one has done their own or let alone debunk what she has said. Even MKBHD said in some apps to you see the switch happen. My guess is some apps based on resolution you will see no change at all because the content itself isn't 4K.
Here's some other evidence that the screen is 4K. There's a lot more out there a simple search could find.
http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_z5_premium_4k_display_under_our_microscope-blog-13887.php
Sorry for responding to this thread but let's let it die right now. Yes it has a 4K display.
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
same issue
It seems now the screenshots are in 4K Resolution
Hi guys, I'm considering buying the Z5P to use with a virtual reality HMD (head mounted display) due to it's 4K screen resolution. I'm primarily interested only in using it as a virtual screen (aka private screen, private IMAX) due to the presumed ability (on my part) to display 1080 lines to each eye when using a HMD.
However I'm reading that the Z5P only uses 4K during certain situations but that this can be up to developers to implement.
So I'm assuming using a Z5P in a HMD to get a 1080 line display to each eye is possible in theory but can someone please confirm it for me - and I mean a person who has done it and confirmed it's actually 1080 lines.
I have read a couple of threads about doing this and while they claim it's working I need more reassurance that they aren't seeing a lower resolution while still having a marked improvement due to the high DPI leading to much less "screen door effect".
Thanks!
diji1,
I'm interested in the Z5p for the same reasons and also have a ZU just like you. Hope someone can come along and answer this.
I think to be absolutely sure which I will happily test is to run an overlay script or app that can tell me if the VR apps or games I run is in fact in 4k. So I see there are overlay apps to determine the FPS of a game. It will be nice to know it there is something similar to determine the resolution of the app/game.
One test I did make is to take a screenshot of CMoar Cinema running a movie. The properties of the screenshot says its 4K (3840x2160). But perhaps you can analyse the screenshot file for yourself and determine whether the content is actually true 4k or not. I suggest analyse the interior parts of the cinema and not the actual movie (Force Awakens) shown on screen because I was playing a straight 1080p rip of my blu ray (I dont own any 4k blu rays). Hopefully the original screenshot file here can help you determine. Do let me know if you want me to upload screenshots of other games and apps. I will post this up on the other thread so we can discuss it a bit further given this is strictly a Q&A
https://www.dropbox.com/s/i068i87o91v60si/Screenshot_20160627-225946 (1).png?dl=0
Any word on the s9+ model recording HDR 10 bit color space at 4K 24fps?
24fps = pleb framerate
Expect [email protected], possibly with 10-bit. Both the Snapdragon 845 and Exynos 9810 support 10-bit [email protected] (120fps for the Exynos), but it's up to Samsung to enable it, and it's also up to the camera sensor to support it.
Since there is no consumer screen on the market that fully supports 10bit colors i highly doubt that well be able to record in 10bit...
the hdr thing nowadays is a big marketing thing, the colors are mostly achieved by high brightness and boostes saturation/contrast instead of true 10bit colors
at my uni we had a screen that supported nearly 10bit, it costs 1000€ per inch... i can tell you there is a huge difference between samsung hpone screens and a 30.000€ hdr screen
LG v30 records 10 bit color space.
LG v30 records 10 bit color space. It is true. If s9 does not record 10 bit color space and hdr then it is what it is not because screens cant support it or anything else...it would be because they choose not to.
0alfred0 said:
Since the are is no consumer screen on the market that fully supports 10bit colors i highly doubt that well be able to record in 10bit...
the hdr thing nowadays is a big marketing thing, the colors are mostly achieved by high brightness and boostes saturation/contrast instead of true 10bit colors
at my uni we had a screen that supported nearly 10bit, it costs 1000€ per inch... i can tell you there is a huge difference between samsung hpone screens and a 30.000€ hdr screen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
really? i Like the HDR on S8+
gtaelbordo said:
really? i Like the HDR on S8+
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, I am not saying samsung and other phones have bad screens, but calling the "high brightness and overly saturated mode" hdr is just marketing...
Once you read about what UHD means, you will understand that we are years from true UHD.
Also HDR has so many requirements that are not matched in today's screens.
Anyway: the "HDR" mode on our phones makes the best of our screens. 10bit colors is not something that one can be achieved easily, the screens might be able to display more than 8bit but it highly depends on the manufacturer and it is not close to 10bit (btw 10bit color depth for each color: red green and blue means 4 times as many colors... Don't let the "2bit difference" fool you.)
Since Samsung makes best screens, I think they are the way to go. But don't let them fool you guys, in 5 years we will laugh about what we called HDR in 2018.
0alfred0 said:
I know, I am not saying samsung and other phones have bad screens, but calling the "high brightness and overly saturated mode" hdr is just marketing...
Once you read about what UHD means, you will understand that we are years from true UHD.
Also HDR has so many requirements that are not matched in today's screens.
Anyway: the "HDR" mode on our phones makes the best of our screens. 10bit colors is not something that one can be achieved easily, the screens might be able to display more than 8bit but it highly depends on the manufacturer and it is not close to 10bit (btw 10bit color depth for each color: red green and blue means 4 times as many colors... Don't let the "2bit difference" fool you.)
Since Samsung makes best screens, I think they are the way to go. But don't let them fool you guys, in 5 years we will laugh about what we called HDR in 2018.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i now its just marketing with all these hdr tv's... and i know uhd is no real UHD.
hm okay i want buy an TV but no idea which one.. all are fake hdr and doenst have a 10bit panel.. Poor customers who get fooled
gtaelbordo said:
i now its just marketing with all these hdr tv's... and i know uhd is no real UHD.
hm okay i want buy an TV but no idea which one.. all are fake hdr and doenst have a 10bit panel.. Poor customers who get fooled
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whoa, there guys. Remember that bit depth and color space are different things, and while they overlap bit depth is not how screens and media are calibrated. Also, wide color gamut (WCG) and HDR are COMPLETELY different things; some refer to WCG as "HDR color", and HDR as "HDR brightness" which is why there is so much confusion. Don't cross your streams when talking about these things.
Most PANELS are aimed at SRGB (most phones, 1080p TVs and computer monitors) or DCI-P3 (high-end phones, OLED/Quantum Dot TVs, professional montors). However, most IMAGE PROCESSORS (GPUs, TV processors, monitor drivers) push out whatever the panel is capable of if configured properly. That means even your basic entry-level TVs (say, a Vizio E-series) that is capable of displaying ~80% of DCI-P3 (or 55% of rec.2020/full 10-bit) is still going to be FAR better than your best 1080p TV, gaming monitor or non-flagship phone that is only capable of 65% DCI-P3 or 50% of 10-bit (remember than 10 bit is BILLIONS of colors and 5% of a billion is 50 MILLION more colors). That extra color depth is used by the image processor to do smoother color gradients so every bit helps. Also remember that even if your camera is capable of full 10-bit (hint: it almost certainly isn't), you are going to be mastering that content on a screen that is only capable of displaying less than 80% of the colors the images contain. in fact, most 4k BD movies (the best quality content generally available) are mastered to rec.709 (effectively the same bit depth as DCI-P3) so even if your TV could do more than 80% of 10-bit, it would just end up not using the extra color information or using an algorithm to upscale it.
I have a oneplus 3 phone. Very happy with it, it's just I want to upgrade to a bezel less phone.
I wonder, for xiaomi mix 2 video playback, will there be 100% full screen or there will be two black bars on the left and right edges?
please advise.
Whatever you want, but what do you want
Before anything else, I think you need to realize that if you get a bezeless phone, you are going to have viewing differences then phones with a bezel, as it's a wider viewing area then the ratio most phones take video in (explained in more detail below). However, that does not mean it's changing the video from the way it's currently captured on your bezeled phone to the way it would be captured on a bezeless phone. The only thing that impacts the video capture is hardware such as the camera, megapixels of the camera and recording resolution or in terms of viewing, screen resolution and dpi. Therefore, that is probably what you should make any phone buying decisions based off of and you can use a handy website like gsmarena..com to get full specs on phones from all around the world in addition to a bunch of other useful tools like size comparisons.
With that said, if all your concerned with is cosmetics, then the Mi Mix 2 still has you covered as you literally get a button that says fullscreen. Tap it on, the video stretches to fill the screen, tap it off, it retains its proper ratio in letterbox (black bars). As that feature demonstrates though it's purely for looks, which is why I would caution you from making any decisions based off of it. It's like deciding whether a phone is right for you based on a phone case, which has nothing to do with the fact that your buying a pocket computer and ignores what it's used for or in your case what size pictures/video you want. The Mi Mix 2 takes video in 4k, 3840x2160 at it's highest resolution, that is a 16:9 ratio. Phone sizes are not typically made in 16:9 ratios, they are wider, but 16:9 is the most common ratio used across the entertainment industry from video distributed in movie theaters, TV, YouTube, to video being captured on most phones.. Consequently, any bezeless phone will have a wider viewing area then the video they capture in 16:9, yielding black bars.. However, does that matter? Have you ever decided on buying a computer based on whether you have black bars when watching YouTube in fullscreen, probably not, and most likely you do have black bars at the top and bottom of videos because computers tend to use more square ratios. Therefore, regardless of any cosmetic differences, which can be achieved by stretching a video to fill the screen (a technique often used when broadcasting non standard ratios on TV and even a setting you can trigger on most TVs through the display menu), the Mi Mix 2 captures video in the most widely used and distributed ratio of 16:9. Therefore, if you watch your recorded videos on most TVs, it will fill the entire screen and since the Mi Mix 2 shoots in 4k UHD, the resolution will be pretty good too.
Hope that helps. I own a Mi Mix 2 and honestly it's a fantastic phone all around, although the explanation above is really for any bezeless phone and for anyone making decisions in a similar fashion. Essentially you should decide what you need out of a phone first then judge how things look, which will help inform why they look that way and how much weight you should afford to any cosmetic aspect. I also work in the film industry and realize most people don't know or necessarily pay attention to things like video ratios, so I'm happy to share, but as mentioned above, regardless of your knowledge, you should not take for granted the fact that phones nowadays are massively powerful pocket computers capable of incredible things and instead reduce them to "black bars".
I have been doing some video recordings today and noticed how large the 4k 60fps videos are (about twice as larger as 1080p 60fps recordings).
So I went ahead and did some 1080p recording to compare 4k and 1080p on my 4k LG CX TV.
Tbh, I didn't notice much of a difference.
So I am really wondering if 4k is even worth it considering its file size?
It mostly just depends on the camera used. I guess you used your phone to record. right? Most phones can't do 4K properly, it's just a feature they advertise. If to you 1080p looks fine, I don't see why you would bother with 4K60. Or maybe just try 4K30, in some cases it does end up looking better than 4K60.
i mean twice the size for 4X the resolution is worth it
you need to take into account the finer details and edging in 4K which will show better results.
also most smart tvs including the CX have resolution scaling and other filters to make lower res content look better on 4K panels
also dont forget thats an Oled tv thats gonna look great with whatever you pump into it
Username: Required said:
It mostly just depends on the camera used. I guess you used your phone to record. right? Most phones can't do 4K properly, it's just a feature they advertise. If to you 1080p looks fine, I don't see why you would bother with 4K60. Or maybe just try 4K30, in some cases it does end up looking better than 4K60.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes ofcourse I used the phones camera The google pixel 6 pro camera.
Izy said:
i mean twice the size for 4X the resolution is worth it
you need to take into account the finer details and edging in 4K which will show better results.
also most smart tvs including the CX have resolution scaling and other filters to make lower res content look better on 4K panels
also dont forget thats an Oled tv thats gonna look great with whatever you pump into it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ye but if most TV's (or small screens like our smartphones, or any 1080p screen) won't really show a difference in quality, why even bother with the bigger file size. No one will realistically notice? :S
Utini said:
Ye but if most TV's (or small screens like our smartphones, or any 1080p screen) won't really show a difference in quality, why even bother with the bigger file size. No one will realistically notice? :S
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One advantage would be that you could theoretically crop or zoom the video and still retain acceptable quality on most resolutions on screens. Just like you said, it won't make a big difference on standard FHD displays however it would be noticeable when the video is cropped or zoomed.
Utini said:
Ye but if most TV's (or small screens like our smartphones, or any 1080p screen) won't really show a difference in quality, why even bother with the bigger file size. No one will realistically notice? :S
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i mean by that logic why watch 4k and get 4k tvs in first place. why have a higher res screen.
I mean why get the pro should have got the 1080p panel 6
Theres a lot of content 4K video will shine
even 4k video downsampled to 1080p retains better details than 1080p does.
Sure on a phone screen you wont see the difference but on a tv thats 55inch or higher the gap is noticeably wider its a major difference.
There will be parts you notice also more so. take into the account if you want to focus on specific parts of a video or edit / crop edit
also your content is future proofed
open all the images in seperate tabs to see full resolution.
the latter 2 are 50% res of the original screencaps you can easily see the details are maintained scaled down
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
scale down the content even more say 50% of the cropped image and its still noticeable difference
Izy said:
i mean by that logic why watch 4k and get 4k tvs in first place. why have a higher res screen.
I mean why get the pro should have got the 1080p panel 6
Theres a lot of content 4K video will shine
even 4k video downsampled to 1080p retains better details than 1080p does.
Sure on a phone screen you wont see the difference but on a tv thats 55inch or higher the gap is noticeably wider its a major difference.
There will be parts you notice also more so. take into the account if you want to focus on specific parts of a video or edit / crop edit
also your content is future proofed
open all the images in seperate tabs to see full resolution.
the latter 2 are 50% res of the original screencaps you can easily see the details are maintained scaled down
scale down the content even more say 50% of the cropped image and its still noticeable difference
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Real 4k movie content does look surely better on my 4k TV compared to a 1080p TV / content.
But that is real 4k movie material and not google pixel 6 pro 4k video content.
Are your screencaps from recordings done with the google pixel 6 pro?
Because I am talking only about the P6P recordings, not about anything recorder with smth else.
Utini said:
Real 4k movie content does look surely better on my 4k TV compared to a 1080p TV / content.
But that is real 4k movie material and not google pixel 6 pro 4k video content.
Are your screencaps from recordings done with the google pixel 6 pro?
Because I am talking only about the P6P recordings, not about anything recorder with smth else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no they were not but the point still stands it was just a prime example
regardless i literally did test videos of still objects in my spare room with text from a distance.
in poor lighting conditions its literally dark and the bulbs ****
literally even look at the portrait still in gallery before you even play the video you could see the text on objects was actually legible and also sharper
if you fail to even notice the difference between 1080 and 4k on your tv you may need your eyes checked.
dont forget theres literally rated seating distances for screen sizes, distant seated and also resolurion of display
the closer you are the better the fine details you see
did you stand up and look or did you sit down and look so you basically looking at like a 20inch display
Sounds like you putting the LG CX to waste
it was the exaxt same situation with people when hd 720p and 1080p came out they coudnt tell difference from sd
also people who think FHD and 4K dont make a difference are the type of people who think you can see above 60fps.
One of these is 4k downscaled the other is 1080p downscaled both also limited to poor lighting conditions
Izy said:
no they were not but the point still stands it was just a prime example
regardless i literally did test videos of still objects in my spare room with text from a distance.
in poor lighting conditions its literally dark and the bulbs ****
literally even look at the portrait still in gallery before you even play the video you could see the text on objects was actually legible and also sharper
if you fail to even notice the difference between 1080 and 4k on your tv you may need your eyes checked.
dont forget theres literally rated seating distances for screen sizes, distant seated and also resolurion of display
the closer you are the better the fine details you see
did you stand up and look or did you sit down and look so you basically looking at like a 20inch display
Sounds like you putting the LG CX to waste
it was the exaxt same situation with people when hd 720p and 1080p came out they coudnt tell difference from sd
also people who think FHD and 4K dont make a difference are the type of people who think you can see above 60fps.
One of these is 4k downscaled the other is 1080p downscaled both also limited to poor lighting conditions
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, then again: This is specific to the google pixel 6 pro.
Yes there is a difference between 4k and 1080p.
Yes there is a difference between 30hz,60hz,120hz.
But it also depends on the source equipment and how it is recorded.
I can use a **** camera to record a video in 4k but it won't look any better than 1080p due the camera being so bad. And this is exactly why I am asking this in regards to the google pixel 6 pro.
How good is the camera in videos really and how big is the difference with it in 4k vs 1080p.
Thanks, I know how to setup my TV. And due to my job I have to test my eyes every year.. still getting highest results :>
But if you can see a difference in the thumbnail of your image gallery, then the placebo is really strong with you.
And again:
There is a difference between 720p,1080p, and 4k.. but:
Utini said:
Okay, then again: This is specific to the google pixel 6 pro.
Yes there is a difference between 4k and 1080p.
Yes there is a difference between 30hz,60hz,120hz.
But it also depends on the source equipment and how it is recorded.
I can use a **** camera to record a video in 4k but it won't look any better than 1080p due the camera being so bad. And this is exactly why I am asking this in regards to the google pixel 6 pro.
How good is the camera in videos really and how big is the difference with it in 4k vs 1080p.
Thanks, I know how to setup my TV. And due to my job I have to test my eyes every year.. still getting highest results :>
But if you can see a difference in the thumbnail of your image gallery, then the placebo is really strong with you.
And again:
There is a difference between 720p,1080p, and 4k.. but:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most people who cannot notice a difference either have reduced vision or use a small monitor. I dare everyone that can't make out a difference between 1080p and 4k source material to use a Monitor 40" or bigger. On my LG CX (48") that I use as a monitor the difference is night and day.
It should be noted, though, that the difference is rather minor when video footage has been shot by phones - their sensors are just too small to make out the minute differences, plus they can't take in enough light. If you compare professional video material shot by expensive dedicated gear in 1080p vs 2160p, the difference is HUGE, whilst smartphone camera footage isn't that "obvious".
At the end of the day it's what works for a given person. If 1080p video works then that's a great option, if 4k works then that's a great option.
If the 4k video is really only twice the size then it's because they're being more aggressive in compression. There's no magic bullet to squeeze 4x the data into 2x the space other than throwing data out.
Tangentially related - GoPro's 8/9 and probably 10 set (i.e. limit) the recorded video to 100mbs for higher resolutions. Ergo you get higher quality (less compression) with 4k24 versus 4k30 versus 4k60 because they're all recorded at the same bit rate.
The P6P may have throughput issues that limits just how fast they can write data that results in higher compression in order to reduce the file size at higher resolutions. Or it could be design choice to reduce file use since the most common ones are likely the 128gb versions.
In this case, specifically with the P6P's, the actual end result is that 1080P might be nearly as good as 4K if they're cranking the compression up and loosing the details that are the point of recording in 4k. So bottom line the OP could have a pretty solid case.
I should get mine tomorrow and the holiday coming up should make for some interesting testing.
Ultimoose said:
At the end of the day it's what works for a given person. If 1080p video works then that's a great option, if 4k works then that's a great option.
If the 4k video is really only twice the size then it's because they're being more aggressive in compression. There's no magic bullet to squeeze 4x the data into 2x the space other than throwing data out.
Tangentially related - GoPro's 8/9 and probably 10 set (i.e. limit) the recorded video to 100mbs for higher resolutions. Ergo you get higher quality (less compression) with 4k24 versus 4k30 versus 4k60 because they're all recorded at the same bit rate.
The P6P may have throughput issues that limits just how fast they can write data that results in higher compression in order to reduce the file size at higher resolutions. Or it could be design choice to reduce file use since the most common ones are likely the 128gb versions.
In this case, specifically with the P6P's, the actual end result is that 1080P might be nearly as good as 4K if they're cranking the compression up and loosing the details that are the point of recording in 4k. So bottom line the OP could have a pretty solid case.
I should get mine tomorrow and the holiday coming up should make for some interesting testing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1080p30 is 19.8mb/s at 1080p
4k30 is 42.8mbps
1080p60 is 24mb/s
4k60 is 62mb/s
this was at h265
4k30 h264 is only 48mb/s
4k60 h264 is only 72mb/s
h265 uses a main profile @ 6.1
h264 used a high profile
4k60h265 is only 45.2mbs on my galaxy note 9
For me, the question is do you need 60 FPS over 30 FPS? I do 4K because I want the highest resolution I can get but I do 30 FPS because I don't need that smooth look.
Izy said:
1080p30 is 19.8mb/s at 1080p
4k30 is 42.8mbps
1080p60 is 24mb/s
4k60 is 62mb/s
this was at h265
4k30 h264 is only 48mb/s
4k60 h264 is only 72mb/s
h265 uses a main profile @ 6.1
h264 used a high profile
4k60h265 is only 45.2mbs on my galaxy note 9
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's interesting that the bitrates are on the lower, half the bitrate for 4K30 for example compared to any GP in the last few years. Is this user adjustable is a question.
I'm getting the P6P 512 with the hope that I can ditch the GP's I usually carry. I record VLOG footage during my ultra runs and I carry a phone with me regardless. One less device and its accessories to deal with would be great.
I have a selection of video recorded with my GP 8 and 9's, I can run the same run/route in the same resolution and do an apples to apples comparison of quality. It'll be interesting if nothing else to compare the stabilization quality of each. Hmm, I think I can probably mount both the phone and a GP to the same stick and get direct side by side as well. The wheels are spinning now on how best to compare the final product of each for my needs.
Ultimoose said:
That's interesting that the bitrates are on the lower, half the bitrate for 4K30 for example compared to any GP in the last few years. Is this user adjustable is a question.
I'm getting the P6P 512 with the hope that I can ditch the GP's I usually carry. I record VLOG footage during my ultra runs and I carry a phone with me regardless. One less device and its accessories to deal with would be great.
I have a selection of video recorded with my GP 8 and 9's, I can run the same run/route in the same resolution and do an apples to apples comparison of quality. It'll be interesting if nothing else to compare the stabilization quality of each. Hmm, I think I can probably mount both the phone and a GP to the same stick and get direct side by side as well. The wheels are spinning now on how best to compare the final product of each for my needs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
could be a heavier encoding profile than standard go pros that and action cams in general usually have a large amount of motion so bitrate is needed to compensate and gopros are generally used professionally so editing etc needs that kind of headroom
my akaso v50x uses the same bitrate roughly at 4k30 as the pixel but is perfectly fine in daytime except its cheapness shows in low light performance