DS Forums

 
 

Do larger TVs have bigger pixels?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31-07-2016, 18:13
Karis
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,299

Was discussing today and realised I don't know the answer, and it might be out there on the Internet but I sure couldn't find a definitive answer.

Sooo...40 and 50 inch 1080p TV. They both have exactly the same number of pixels, but one is around 10 inches larger. What is going on with those 10 inches and how come they both have the same number? Are the pixels just larger?
Karis is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 31-07-2016, 18:17
emptybox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Scottish Borders
Posts: 11,989
Was discussing today and realised I don't know the answer, and it might be out there on the Internet but I sure couldn't find a definitive answer.

Sooo...40 and 50 inch 1080p TV. They both have exactly the same number of pixels, but one is around 10 inches larger. What is going on with those 10 inches and how come they both have the same number? Are the pixels just larger?
Your answer is already in your question.

ETA: I mean, I know what you are getting at. You are wondering if there was maybe a standard size pixel that just got surrounded by space the larger the screen. But that wouldn't work, as it would affect the picture.
emptybox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-07-2016, 18:20
Helmut10
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,039
Yes in that case, it is that simple, the pixels are larger and so is the pixel pitch on the larger "diagonal size panel".
Helmut10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-07-2016, 18:23
Karis
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,299
Yes in that case, it is that simple, the pixels are larger and so is the pixel pitch on the larger "diagonal size panel".
That's sooo confusing. So the pixels are larger on a larger telly, which means you get a less clear image at the same distances?

It's all very confusing... I do understand is, but with a bigger TV you have to sit further away - LOL. Stupid technology!

Thanks for the replies! Still confounded.
Karis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-07-2016, 18:30
emptybox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Scottish Borders
Posts: 11,989
That's sooo confusing. So the pixels are larger on a larger telly, which means you get a less clear image at the same distances?

It's all very confusing... I do understand is, but with a bigger TV you have to sit further away - LOL. Stupid technology!

Thanks for the replies! Still confounded.
But that's essentially why they've developed higher resolution sets (4k = 3840x2160 pixels), because of the trend towards larger screens.
emptybox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-07-2016, 18:39
d'@ve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,728
That's sooo confusing. So the pixels are larger on a larger telly, which means you get a less clear image at the same distances?

It's all very confusing... I do understand is, but with a bigger TV you have to sit further away - LOL. Stupid technology!

Thanks for the replies! Still confounded.
So if you sit close enough to see the dots, you need a TV the same size with more pixels, or sit further away. Personally, my plasma TV dots don't bother me at all if I sit close enough to see them.
d'@ve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-07-2016, 18:45
Helmut10
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,039
The "clarity" is the same. Same number of pixels. At the same viewing distance the larger one has a larger area, so will appear slightly more pixelated.

You would have to be close enough to discern pixels in that case, that's too close.

Sat further away you just have a larger area with exactly the same.

If you sat further from the 50" such that it was the same visual size as the 40" then there would be no difference.
Helmut10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-07-2016, 20:00
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,783
Was discussing today and realised I don't know the answer, and it might be out there on the Internet but I sure couldn't find a definitive answer.

Sooo...40 and 50 inch 1080p TV. They both have exactly the same number of pixels, but one is around 10 inches larger. What is going on with those 10 inches and how come they both have the same number? Are the pixels just larger?
As has already been said, the answer is already in your question - obviously it has larger pixels, because it has the exact same number in a larger screen.

The point of a larger screen is so you can view it from further away, although to be fair at 1080 you can't see the pixels at any remotely sensible viewing distance.
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-07-2016, 20:16
technologist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 7,514
You can just about see HD pixels at 3 times picture height
And Uhd 1 pixels at 1.5 H .....
But most in the uk view at over 5 H
See Katy Nolands bbc white paper http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/w...les/WHP287.pdf
technologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2016, 00:22
gemma-the-husky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,852
I think this is similar to the bitness of mobile phone camera sensors. The size of the sensor is as important, or more important than the number of pixels
gemma-the-husky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2016, 07:51
Tassium
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: It's Grim
Posts: 24,403
Because most people view their TV from quite a distance away there really won't be much difference between 40" and 50"
Tassium is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2016, 23:47
crofter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,816
That's sooo confusing. So the pixels are larger on a larger telly, which means you get a less clear image at the same distances?

It's all very confusing... I do understand is, but with a bigger TV you have to sit further away - LOL. Stupid technology!

Thanks for the replies! Still confounded.
Basically if you can't see the pixels then you can't see the detail - it is the pixels that give you the extra detail in the first place ... that is why there is little point having a 4K TV below 50".
crofter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 10:13
anthony david
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,457
That's sooo confusing. So the pixels are larger on a larger telly, which means you get a less clear image at the same distances?

It's all very confusing... I do understand is, but with a bigger TV you have to sit further away - LOL. Stupid technology!

Thanks for the replies! Still confounded.
Not stupid technology, basic simple physics.
anthony david is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2016, 16:02
spiney2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 24,092
Kell Factor, anyone ?
spiney2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2016, 18:02
anthony david
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,457
Kell Factor, anyone ?
Interesting that it applies to all analogue, digital and even mechanical sampled systems. Kell discovered it while working on mechanical TV systems I think in the 30's

If you really want to open a can of worms ask the Hi Fi world about its relevance to the frequency response of CDs.
anthony david is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2016, 20:03
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,783
Interesting that it applies to all analogue, digital and even mechanical sampled systems. Kell discovered it while working on mechanical TV systems I think in the 30's

If you really want to open a can of worms ask the Hi Fi world about its relevance to the frequency response of CDs.
Must say I've never heard of the 'Kell Factor', and presumably HiFi people wouldn't have either?, but WOULD have heard of the 'Nyquist Frequency'
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 10:26
anthony david
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,457
Must say I've never heard of the 'Kell Factor', and presumably HiFi people wouldn't have either?, but WOULD have heard of the 'Nyqvist Frequency'
Kell noted that if you point a camera with a vertical resolution of say 100 lines at a chart with 100 alternate black and white lines the chart will be resolved but if you pan down by half a line you just get a grey field as the camera is seeing half a white and half a black line on each of its scanned lines. For real pictures the vertical resolution is therefore lower and the same applies to the horizontal resolution on digital systems that are of course sampled. The Kell effect can be clearly seen on the vertical resolution part of the standard SMPTE test pattern used for telecine alignment and I used to use it to explain it to junior staff, the horizontal section was good for explaining PAL cross colour years ago.

All textbooks happily show the Nyquist limit at the point where the two half cycles of a sine wave can be measures with two samples. However if you move the sine wave by a quarter of a cycle the o/p is zero simply due to dear old Kell's factor.

Whether it matters or not is a matter of opinion, we don't look at test charts and frequencies above say 15kHz on CDs are likely to be the tizz of cymbals and so on, but if you want to upset some know all Hi Fi nut it's a great conversation stopper. I do wonder if the improved benefits that some people can hear on wide bandwidth sources are due to the wider frequency response or the higher sampling frequency moving any Kell effects out of the range of human hearing. Personally I'm too old for such improvements to be audible to me.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kell_factor
anthony david is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:17.