Brilliant haha

He was wrong on a couple points. However most of it was on point. 

Seemed like common knowledge, so I skipped through most of it, but luckily I caught the bit were he commented on how ones ability to perceive high framerates was depending on ones arousal level, which was followed by a Quagmire *GIGGETY* sound que..  made me laugh :lol:

Couldn't be bothered to sit through all this but this but i assume this is about movies? There is a really noticeable difference using 4k for applications & games unless you are sitting 6ft away from your monitor or have a really small monitor. 

Wildt said:

ones ability to perceive high framerates was depending on ones arousal level

That may explain after living with someone for long enough, you start to perceive them like an old Ray Harryhausen stop-motion monster.

Would you F me.
Id F me!

Interesting video, and the science and math appeared correct, but his conclusion is wrong. If you play a game in 4K, especially on a large screen, there is an obvious increase in quality. I see the video is about 1 year old, but there is a lot of 4K content. Pretty much any PC game from the last 10 years can be played in UHD, and there are a growing catalog of 4K Blu-Rays. Granted, not all of those discs are great, mainly because they may have been mastered at 2K or had the digital effects done at 2K, but even old movies on film can be remastered and can look good. But look at some 4K demo content (which can be much higher quality than full movies) and it looks absolutely amazing and clearly much better than 1080p. I do understand what he's trying to say, at least in terms of diminishing returns compared to the cost or power needed to drive 4K, but to say you can't see a different is hogwash.

He also misses a critical point about resolution. Yes, a 4K screen may have more pixels than we have cones in our eyes, but what matters is the detail level where we happen to be looking. He starts to talk about the fact that our cones are not uniformly spread out but rather are concentrated in the centre, but he fails to follow through to the conclusion that this makes the detail level of 4K matter--so we can see high detail where we're focusing our attention.

Digikid1 said:

General rule of thumb.

If display is <50 inches then 4K is an absolute WASTE.  If it's >50 inches then it will be great.

This is not accurate either.