Yep.
But related to refresh rates as the panel can only refresh quick if the pixels respond fast.
At least this is what I remember from researching when buying my TV 12 months ago.
A TV panel expert I am not.
The Tokyo Olympic games will be transmitted in 8K. They've been planning it since they won the right to host the games. Domestically 8K in Japan 2020. The West 2021. Maybe.Not natively. The PS4 Pro doesn't even do 4K natively in most cases. We're talking 16x the resolution of a 1080P screen, or 33 million pixels.
AFAIK, there's very few companies producing 8K content right now. The Russo brothers filmed both Avengers 3 and 4 with IMAX/ARRI cameras that don't hit true 8K. Film companies are driving demand because an 8K camera can still produce better 4K content, but honestly, unless you're running a setup as big as this 98-inch Sony screen, you're not really going to notice a difference between 4K and 8K. 4K is still a hard sell for most folks — there's not a lot of content out there that's genuinely made for it — so good luck to any company trying to push for 8K to be remotely common place in the next decade.
...That said, I'm sure it's stunning to witness.
Just out and out PC snobbery. Completely untrue of course.
In fact, the 24 fps is actually the absolute minimum framerate where most people would perceive the frames as continuous motion. Somehow people took an absolute minimum, and started saying it's the absolute maximum perceivable.
I was talking about VR with eye tracking. Once the device knows where you are looking, it won't have to render the entire display at the highest resolution. Foveated rendering would also work for flat displays with eye tracking. Most of what is rendered is never seen by your eyes.
That's not just focusing on the center. A 40 degree viewing angle means the tv takes up 40 degrees of your field of view. The highest resolution you can ever perceive is 200 pixels per degree in the fovea. 40*200 is 8K. (Although technically 8K tv is only 7680 pixels)
Vision is mostly recognition anyway. It's always interesting watching someone play a game for the first time, not knowing the visual language of that game yet. They see exactly the same thing right in front of them, yet at first it's all very overwhelming and hard to tell the difference between static background and interactive items. Same reason universal symbols are used everywhere.
The human eye sees very little, the mind makes up the rest. However it can perceive a lot more color than current displays. Current displays aim for 100% DCI-P3 coverage, which is only 54% of vision. Rec.2020 is next covering 76% of vision. Of course it varies per person and if you want to enjoy more color you should have been born female. Women also have a 2% to 3% chance at superior color vision (tetrachromats) with extra cones between green and red, 4 distinct cones instead of the regular 3.
And of course humans have 2 eyes. VR is still far from the real thing as it doesn't allow for variable focus. Eye tracking can help with that as well. Prototypes have already been build to simulate correct depth of field based on what you are looking at, as well as adjusting the focal plane based on your pupils. The alternative is holographic displays which are very costly to render.
Human vision is quite fascinating
I was talking about VR with eye tracking. Once the device knows where you are looking, it won't have to render the entire display at the highest resolution. Foveated rendering would also work for flat displays with eye tracking. Most of what is rendered is never seen by your eyes.
That's not just focusing on the center. A 40 degree viewing angle means the tv takes up 40 degrees of your field of view. The highest resolution you can ever perceive is 200 pixels per degree in the fovea. 40*200 is 8K. (Although technically 8K tv is only 7680 pixels)
Vision is mostly recognition anyway. It's always interesting watching someone play a game for the first time, not knowing the visual language of that game yet. They see exactly the same thing right in front of them, yet at first it's all very overwhelming and hard to tell the difference between static background and interactive items. Same reason universal symbols are used everywhere.
The human eye sees very little, the mind makes up the rest. However it can perceive a lot more color than current displays. Current displays aim for 100% DCI-P3 coverage, which is only 54% of vision. Rec.2020 is next covering 76% of vision. Of course it varies per person and if you want to enjoy more color you should have been born female. Women also have a 2% to 3% chance at superior color vision (tetrachromats) with extra cones between green and red, 4 distinct cones instead of the regular 3.
And of course humans have 2 eyes. VR is still far from the real thing as it doesn't allow for variable focus. Eye tracking can help with that as well. Prototypes have already been build to simulate correct depth of field based on what you are looking at, as well as adjusting the focal plane based on your pupils. The alternative is holographic displays which are very costly to render.
Human vision is quite fascinating
Of course it looks like trash, PSVR does not have eye tracking, it doesn't change the center point of the high resolution area when you don't look straight ahead. Besides that, PSVR is already below 10 pixels per degree out of the center. It's at the minimum for peripheral vision.
Btw Robinson the Journey and Driveclub VR did not use foveated rendering. Robinson the Journey renders at a higher resolution on ps4 pro. I did the comparison myself. The lower resolution contributes to more distortion at the edges.
What you see is the effect of de-warping the image. The nature of the lenses puts more pixels in the center of the image than the outside. It's sort of like foveation, yet only if you loom straight ahead. The pro super samples the image, which means a sharper image in the center where it gets zoomed in while converting the image for the headset optics.
Driveclub VR renders at the same low resolution on both base and pro. The only thing added on pro are a few minor lighting effects.
Resident evil 7 did use a crude form of foveated rendering on the base ps4. Very crude. It had an outer rectangle where the game renders at half resolution. It was very visible when you look at the edges in the headset. On pro it kept the resolution the same and switched to a higher resolution when not moving too fast.
Foveated rendering will become effective once the base resolution goes up. PSVR is at less than 10% of what the human eye is capable of seeing, comparable to about 320x360 in the center part, viewed at a 30 degree viewing angle.
I work on flight simulators for a major US airline. We have to have at least 90 fps on the visual systems or the pilots will get nauseous and throw up. I’m the past we have had way worse visuals than Microsoft FS because that amount of data running on fulll size visual systems was very hard to do at 90 FPS.
