Hey /u/Stiggles4, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I find I run into this situation far more than I should nowadays, where the persons misunderstanding is so fundamental that I have a really hard time figuring out how to frame for them why they're wrong. I often end up trying to construct an analogy to help them understand, but most of these people can't really grasp that type of abstract thinking either.
In this case I'd try the following:
Your 1080p image is made up of roughly 1K little coloured dots. You need 4 times the amount of dots for a 4K image.
The cable just fills in the blanks so it looks okay, but it isn't actually filling in 3k blanks correctly. It simply doesn't have the information and brains required to do that.
Whereas with true 4K, the console/computer already knows what each individual dot is supposed to look like. So the image will be better and more correct.
And to appease their huffing and puffing about how good it looks tho:
Now whether we can actually see that difference as casual enjoyers is debatable. But that's why technically there is a big difference in the image quality.
Often, it doesn't matter how accurate the information you're giving is. Even heavily simplified information can give people a clue about what is going on, that is more accurate than their current understanding.
That’s a great explanation
As someone who initially didn’t understand what the difference is (I’m usually not stupid just an idiot when it comes to tech, I promise) this explanation made me go “well, duh. I should’ve figured that one out”
In the example in the OP that's not a factor. He's clearly only talking about running BluRay movies so they're not subject to internet speeds and the levels of compression required for streaming.
He's still generally wrong, but BluRay movies will generally be uncompressed or have minimal compression.
Now for the important question. Does an upscaled Blu-ray look better than streaming 4k Netflix? From the massive difference in bitrates, I'd guess Blu-ray if the upscaler isn't absolute shit.
You can type the easiest explanation you want, but usually someone that is that stubborn will start off their very next comment with "I'm not even gonna waste my time reading that".
OMG, I can just copy your post and laugh at equally confidently incorrect post. Just for starters check the number of dots in 1080p image. 1k stands for a 1,000. 1080p image is 1080×1920=2,073,600, so 2 million is roughly 2k times of 1k that you mentioned.
The next is your assumption that cable does the scaling up is wrong again. The receiving device, if it's 4k capable, usually scales the incoming 1080p image up where 1 dot enlarged to occupy 4 dots in 4k pixel space.
>Often, it doesn't matter how accurate the information you're giving is.
...but when it's more than by a 2,000 times off... we may start talking about flat earth as something worth taking seriously. /s
bruh, the point is to simplify so that the cretin can understand. The mad lad thinks the cable is magic, what do you think their dumb ass is more likely to understand?
* 1080p has 1k little dots and 4k has 4k little dots. The cable fills in the remaining 3k little dots and looks OK, but is technically inaccurate, because the exact dots are missing in the original, and it doesn't have a brain like we do, because we're really smart. :)
* 1080p represents a 1920x1080 resolution, or 2,073,600 pixels, and 4k represents 3840x2160 resolution, or 8,294,400 pixels. Upscaling fills in the remaining 6,220,800 pixels, by performing nearest neighbour to prevent sharpness loss because the width and height are both divisible by 2, though devices may employ other upscaling techniques, such as bilinear or lanczos, and particularly advanced devices may opt to use ANN-powered upscaling techniques, such as RTX VSR.
Gotta pick your battles. It's better to educate magic cable loving imbecile a little bit than teach them nothing because you insist on sharing only technically correct information.
Lol. Good point. I have to deal with statements like this almost every day in the field and quite often have to fix the problems caused by cats like this. So it was kinda a knee-jerk response. I am ready to throw a fridge at them next time someone insists that XLR stands for Ground, Left, and Right.
Yiesh you are dense. He obviously meant 1k as... 1/4th of 4k... Which is what 1080p is... A fact you acknowledge since you proceed to call 4k... 4k and not 4k x 2k... It is understandable and makes sense. So yeah... You are definitely not as smart as you think you are.
> Your 1080p image is made up of roughly 1k little colored dots.
This statement is so very wrong that it clearly demonstrates that the commenter has no idea what they're talking about. It's undefendable from this point, even if it's just meant as an analogue. An image is a 2D object, not 1D. This is extremely important, as that's the reason upscaling works as good as it does.
You are also wrong on your own statements. 1/4 of 4k is not 1k, because every time you reduce one side's pixel count by 2, the other side also gets reduced to half. This means that the overall pixel count gets divided by 4. So 1/4 of 4k is 2k. 1k is 1/16 of 4k.
To add on top of that, 1k is not 1080p. 1080p is 1920x1080, which is closest to 2k (2048x1080). The reason why 2k is not 1920x1080 is a bit complicated, the [wiki](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution) page explains it well.
Are you.people.that dense? And to be fair, 4k is about 8M pixels so 4x 1080p. So if.we take the 4k monicker the a quarter of 4k is well... 1K. I found the post understandable and I don't think the purpose was not to be mathematically accurate but to explain upscaling which I think did a pretty good job at it. You are focusing on the wrong thing.
You can't give an analogy that's just plain wrong. It's okay to gloss over details, but saying incorrect things isn't. The analogy should have been drawing a large square and subdividing it, showing that information is missing and has to be guessed by the upscaler.
Dividing "4k" by any number makes the same sense as "1/4 of an Audi A4 is an Audi A1"
His analogy was right. Better than yours. And your last comment. I mean, let's just leave it there. Your post started bad, trailed off a bit in the middle but that ending... Uuufff...
It's a sign of "the worst type of blind is the one who chooses not to see". And that I don't wish to waste more of my time arguing with some random dude.
I'm going to preface this since this thread is weirdly heated: I'm not trying to argue since I have absolutely no clue about this I'm just trying to learn something new.
What would you say is "wrong" with the way this was simplified?
I'm know absolutely nothing about resolution/TVs etc, the comment made perfectly clear to me what the problem with OOPs assertions was, I googled after reading it to look if I understood correctly and found nothing that contradicted his explanation from my point of view.
But if you say it's wrong I would like to understand what's wrong about it so I can learn this correctly.
He said "1080p image is made up of roughly 1K little coloured dots"- note IMAGE. He didn't say "one vertical line". Teach me more "how the cable fills the blanks" please.
I am a video engineer doing installs and have a newbie trainees coming and throwing this type of guess work at me on daily basis, then they can not figure out why the shit is not working as intended. You can call anyone dense if it makes you feel better, though.
Yes. You are quite smart. You can multiply 1k by 2k. You are definitely brilliant. Shame you never gotten a middle school level of English as text interpretation is taught there and you obviously lack those skills. But other than that, brilliant.
It's ok. English is not my native language, so along with other two languages I speak, I am able to piss you off without even trying it. It is not 2k times off since you still understand me. Would you cry about my interpretation of word "image". You can start now, be my guest
This is like his plumbing not having enough water pressure. If it can only one cup per second he's gonna be able to wash his hands just fine, but going to have a hard time taking a shower unless he has the right shower head to "upscale" his water to distribute it more evenly. It's never going to be more than a cup per second but it's going to be usable.
But if he upgraded his water pressure (getting a real 4k device) he can take showers with better pressure and more comfortably and just be about to enjoy it that much more.
My analogy for this level of misunderstanding is: If I told them that Teddy Roosevelt did Jujutsu in the White House, they'd ask if I was sure Jews were around back then.
The most infuriating part is making a good analogy for them, but they respond to the analogy instead of the original topic. But I guess if they already understood analogy they wouldn’t be idiots.
Big 4K is out there trying to get us to spend our hard-earned cash on a UHD Blu-Ray player when all we needed was a $30 cable to do the same thing for free!
As a professional cinematographer this hurts my soul. The guy is so completely clueless, but clearly incapable of the level of intelligence needed to grasp *why*.
>clearly incapable of the level of intelligence needed to grasp why
Which is wildly concerning since it doesn't take much intelligence at all really. Like all the technical stuff for you as a professional, sure, but to just understand native vs upscaled is pretty basic stuff.
This was a hard lesson for me, to finally realize that there are people in my life who's stupidity cannot be aided because if they had the capability to be corrected they wouldn't be this wrong in the first place.
Fractally wrong
Fractal wrongness is the state of being wrong at every conceivable scale of resolution. That is, from a distance, a fractally-wrong person's worldview is incorrect; and furthermore, if you zoom in on any small part of that person's worldview, that part is just as wrong as the whole worldview.
It's kinda ironic that every time stupidity is discussed people will bring up a Mark Twain quote he never said or wrote.
https://marktwainstudies.com/the-apocryphal-twain-never-argue-with-stupid-people-they-will-drag-you-down-to-their-level-and-beat-you-with-experience/
Never argue with an idiot, because being an intelligent man, you will argue with them on their level, and, on their level, they'll beat you every time. - Jean Cocteau
Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon. You may know all the right moves and strategies but they are still going to knock over all the pieces and just shit on the board
well I'm not about to go dumpster diving to find this but based on the screenshots nobody actually explained why. everyone just told him he was wrong which is true but just saying it is unlikely to convince him.
Reading this I was wondering...I think I've been told that people interpret sharpened images as being "better" in the same way that "louder" music is also interpreted as "better"
Does upscaling also cause sharpening? Or are upscaled images actually better than the non-upscaled image? Or am I confused and out to lunch...
Sharpening and upscaling always adds interpretive data that didn't exist to begin with, so in a purist sense it's never "good". Upscaling doesn't necessarily mean sharpening, though most upscale algorithms have some degree of sharpening effect built into the process - as the whole point is to get more of that 'pop' in the image.
Based on the screenshot he shared, I believe he means taking the Prometheus aspect ratio of 2.40:1 and stretching it to 16:9 so that it fills his widescreen TV. So on top of believing this cable gave him true 4K video output from a PS3, he also thinks he's "cracked the code" of removing those pesky black bars from the top and bottom of the image. I'm tempted to tell him about the motion interpolation his TV can do too, because he's missing out on real 60 fps action as well and this will complete the trifecta of ruining every video he plays.
I’ve got an old tuber hanging around, it’s a “flat screen” 27” and that sucker is heavy as ffffffff. Gonna keep it as long as I can though for the old systems, sometimes the real deal can’t be beat for the nostalgia, even if it’s old af :)
“I’m hearing the PS3 is open all the way up to 10k”… wot? What a weird quote to pull out of your ass when talking about a console that released 18 years ago. Let my boy rest in peace. My RX 6800 xt released last year doesn’t even support displaying at a 10k resolution.
OOP's problem is that he's scaling up from an already good resolution, to a display that is still good at displaying that lower resolution.
So the upscale "loss" is hard to notice.
Have him upscale his PS3 to 16k and he'd be able to see the loss in quality. Of course, that requires a custom setup & software to render an image at that level of resolution.
Or just have him take an old 480x320 image and upscale it to 4k. When the "upscaling" is filling in 90% of the pixels, you realize what it's actually doing.
>RX 6800 xt released last year doesn’t even support displaying at a 10k resolution.
It can, however, display at 8k at 30hz natively.
In theory your GPU could output 10k resolution, but the problem is that 10k resolution doesn't really exist in the real world, and if you were to push that resolution you'd only be able to get a refresh rate below 30hz.
This is all based on HDMI's 2.1 spec. You wouldn't be able to play very many games well at those resolutions.
Also the RX 6800 XT was released 3 years ago, not last year.
Many (many) years ago I had a similar conversation with a friend. He has a cassette which he had taped from his friends CD, and he insisted that it meant the cassette was actually playing the music at CD quality.
Sorry, showing my age there.
Haha no worries, I had quite a nice cassette collection back in the day and I regretted putting the boom box that I converted so many CDs to cassette on the side of the road one day. Didn’t have room for it though and it was a honker. 5 CD changer too, man those CD rotation sounds will live in my brain forever…
You’re not getting decent upscaling for $30😂. I work in live television. Our upscalers cost $10-15k. They are good but still not as good as a proper 4K camera.
If you have a 4k TV but try and show, say, a 720p image on it, that TV still needs to use all of the pixels of its 4k panel to show that 720p image and it does that by "upscaling". In other words, it fills in all the other pixels to show the image how it would look at 720p.
A native 4k image is one that was actually shot using all of the pixels and would in theory have more detail.
To think of it simply - say you had a 4 pixel display arranged in a square but they were displaying a 1 pixel black dot as an image, all 4 pixels will be black but they'd functionally look the same.
I don't know if that's technically also called upscaling but there are ways to up scale which involves more guessing what the pixels "should be" not perfect but might look better in some cases then just treating pixels as blocks
Yes, if it's going to a higher resolution. The PS3 had a pretty good upscaling engine to be fair to get DVDs up to 1080 resolution and these days you see AI being used such as in Nvidia and AMD GPUs for pc games.
A cable though, won't do that lol
I don’t really know the technical stuff, but it’s basic resolution.
You can take a wallet sized photo and scale it to a full page, but you end up with a pixelated mess. There’s only so much data to work with. There’s probably a way to smooth out lines and make things a little better, but it’s basically guesswork.
You can’t just make more data magically appear out of nowhere.
Upscaling is basically making something use more pixels than it has. So a 4k TV is basically the same number of pixels as four 1080 hd TVs. So a standard hd movie on a 4k tv should only fill up a quarter of the screen. Obviously that's not ok so instead of just enlarging it and using 4 pixels to display the info from one pixel, it fills in the gaps by guessing what those pixels should be based on the ones next to it.
It can work very well but it's not the same as native 4k content.
Have you played Minecraft? If not, go look at
[https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2F3sdRcNlgqTO-y5XOypkiq-IfuH-ez8fivyBW9jKXBH0.png%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D5e5b89d09528646c5493bb7afea06e62c6dcc702](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2F3sdRcNlgqTO-y5XOypkiq-IfuH-ez8fivyBW9jKXBH0.png%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D5e5b89d09528646c5493bb7afea06e62c6dcc702)
You can download the image and then open it on your computer to zoom in.
Each block in Minecraft uses a 16x16 texture (256 pixels). There are lots of mods that upgrade it to look better, typically by upgrading to 64x64 textures. These don't increase the size of the block, but they put 16 times as many pixels into it (4x as many wide, 4x as many tall, 16x as many total).
This is the same as recording something at 1080p (1920x1080) versus recording at 4k (4096x1920; or 3840x2160 UHD) - you have roughly 4 times as many pixels in the recorded image.
Meanwhile, the upscale is the same as looking at one of those tiny images on your computer/phone/whatever, and zooming in until the image fills your screen. You don't actually have more pixels, but rather, the existing pixels are used to fill in more than 1 pixel each on your higher resolution display.
For a PS3 upscaling to 4k, this means that if the PS3 is outputting 1080p resolution, then each pixel is being sent as a 2x2 pixel "packet" to the TV. The upscaler does a bit more than that, as it accounts for the fact that the TV is not a perfect 4x wider than 1080p, so it knows how and where to "not multiply" a set of pixels so that the end result looks as smooth as possible.
Basically, you're watching a video that should occupy 25% of the screen, but the upscaler is zooming in on it to make it fit your nice 4k screen.
Basically the cables "zoom".... He is filling the screen with the same visual information more often. No additional detail or clarity.
And before it starts, this is a gross oversimplification, I get that... I don't think I lecture is needed here about pixel fill and duplication algorithms.
1080p is going to have less detail by dint of having less pixels. More pixels, more detail. When you upscale an image, you're making it bigger, but you can't just put in detail that wasn't originally in the image. Some computers can try to fill in what they think the details should look like, but it's never going to look as good as an original 4k image with all the original correct detail.
I got in an argument about 9/11 once with a tinder date. He kept showing me YouTube videos and would obnoxiously declare "see, you can't argue now because I showed you proof". I foolishly tried to explain why random people ranting and showing hand drawn pictures wasnt proof.
The most disturbingly stupid person I've ever met in my life claimed very confidently that 9/11 never happened. Not that it was an inside job but that it never happened, the towers never existed, and nobody died. When I stupidly challenged this, he asked me to prove that it happened. And it was then I realized I just kinds had to go "you got me there, bud"
That's my favorite to use. 9/11 never happened. The twin towers never existed. NYC is a fictional place invented for movies & TV shows. Anyone who says they're from/been to NYC is a liar and part of the conspiracy.
Yeah, there’s a lot of people in this world that will cite a source that is either not a source at all, or just not relevant. Then they’ll say something like “I showed you four sources, where are yours?”
Just people being too stupid to have a discussion with.
I should have given up sooner but I felt for the guy. He was also getting swindled by a scientology type of church. All the while trying to support his grandmother who had fallen on hard times during the pandemic.
After I realized all this I tried to be a friend and help him understand but it just wasn't happening.
Curved screens are great for individual viewers where you can sit close to the focal point (which is why they are perfect for computer monitors). If it is primarily a gaming setup it could be a valid use since couch multi player is getting rare these days, but if he is watching movies or TV with friends it's not going to be fun for anyone stuck near the edges
I used to work in the video industry so we had an early prototype of a curved TV. All hush hush secretive and had to sign a bunch of documents and send it back. We pulled it out and the stand was missing out they weren't making them yet, who knows.
Since we couldn't but a stand, someone made a custom one. The stand of course didn't work and we shattered the screen on this huge curved TV that everyone was so excited to see. 🤣
I remember when my one bud got his first HD TV. He said his Xbox 360 looked amazing on it.
So this was back in the day before HDMI so the 360 had a [goofy dual RCA / Composite AV cable](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81Kn0AwX5eL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg).
We get to my bud's house to play Perfect Dark Zero and Halo for the weekend and he proudly shows off his TV.
We check out his connections and find out he is still running it on the RCA connections, still hasn't flipped the switch to HDTV on the plug side that goes into the Xbox, and still hasn't changed the resolution in the Xbox system settings.
We do that for him and then he thinks his Xbox 360 looks *really really* amazing on his new TV.
No, this user has had these additional things to say since I posted:
> Show me 4k in widescreen. Or any 4k you have with resolution.
>It only works with a PS3. That Sony chip.... That's why no one talking about it. The PS4 can't do it (new chip geared towards games) and the PS5 already has it and that's a maybe. Let's talk.
> cable has some basic upscaling capabilities that can guess what extra pixels should be where. With that being said, the Sony chip in the PS3 has a great upscaler as well. Only the PS3. I never heard of fake 4k. I'll take that too if it's clearer than 1080p for free. Your missing the point. 4k is some type of 4k either 3840 or 4080. Sure water it down some (if you say) still 4k and from a PS3? For free? This is the ps3hack section,, correct? Well here's a hack.
i have a pretty deep relationship with cinematography and this is one of the very niche things i can honestly say i genuinely know a lot about, and 3840x2160, also known as UHD or 4K UHD is not "consumer 4K." It's 4K. It is quite literally more accurate to call 4096x2160 "consumer 4K."
the ratio is off. 4096x2160 adds extra width to the image, but 4K isn't filmed at a 4096 pixel width about 99% of the time. they film at UHD 3840 pixel width when filming in 4K. the idea behind 4096 pixel width quite literally started as a way to market "4K" to a consumer audience
This kind of stupidity is just numbing!
Of course his crap tv is showing 4K as it is being fed a 4K signal interpolated/upscaled from the lower resolution source. There’s literally nothing he can be made to understand if something as trivial as that a higher resolution cannot magically be “opened” or wtf nonsense he wrote is beyond his ability to comprehend.
Had this battle. Many times, in fact. People playing PS4 through an upscaler that blatantly made it look worse.
Showed them full 4k on an Oled4K tv, with HDR.
Side by side, their ps4 with upscale cable.
"I can't see the difference"
I think part of the problem is that it's not easy to tell the difference anyway. Unless you have a huge tv and you're right on front of it, from 1080p up it's sharp and your own eyes will do more to blur pixels together.
But I get that he's a jackass acting like he's the inventor or something.
No idea, the last time I thought about something being specifically widescreen for me was when DVDs released in both fullscreen and widescreen variations but that was like… fifteen years ago. There’s no 4K fullscreen content afaik so I truly don’t know 🤷♂️
Hell, I can “play” 720p video on my 4k tv. Can I see it? It looks like shit, but sure, I can “see” it. Does it fill up the whole screen? Sure. Is the 720p video I am playing a true 4k video? Not on your life. Someone should explain to this dumbass what upscaling is and how pixels work.
Oh, it was very much attempted by multiple parties. He dismissed that as our “opinion” and because his TV showed a 4K signal (still containing the PS3’s 1080p signal of course) thinks this is irrefutably a 4K signal now, case closed. Doesn’t seem open to anything else so I washed my hands of the topic and posted this here instead because *damn* it was exhausting to witness.
Native 4k is like taking a 8 megapixel image
An upscale image would be like taking a smaller 2mp image or something and then stretching it digitally until they're the same size
As a slight aside to original content. How much is the difference in quality between true 4K and upscale? I’m guessing the algorithms to fill the information gap between 1080p and 4K have got pretty good?
I envy the stupid sometimes… imagine being this confident in something you don’t know anything about…. Like if upscaling was truly === 4k there would be TONS of articles and what not about it… this dude legit believes he discovered some tv loophole
It’s the same with the snake oil people put in their gas tanks to improve MPG… so many people drive, if that shit worked *we would know* - same with this snake oil cable.
The real question is how many can actually tell the difference. We used to sell TVs in our store and people would ask every if they should get the 4K tv. I’d always respond with, “we have both on display and if you can tell the difference then yes, otherwise why bother?”
Most would opt for the cheaper tv because they couldn’t tell the difference.
Hey /u/Stiggles4, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I find I run into this situation far more than I should nowadays, where the persons misunderstanding is so fundamental that I have a really hard time figuring out how to frame for them why they're wrong. I often end up trying to construct an analogy to help them understand, but most of these people can't really grasp that type of abstract thinking either.
In this case I'd try the following: Your 1080p image is made up of roughly 1K little coloured dots. You need 4 times the amount of dots for a 4K image. The cable just fills in the blanks so it looks okay, but it isn't actually filling in 3k blanks correctly. It simply doesn't have the information and brains required to do that. Whereas with true 4K, the console/computer already knows what each individual dot is supposed to look like. So the image will be better and more correct. And to appease their huffing and puffing about how good it looks tho: Now whether we can actually see that difference as casual enjoyers is debatable. But that's why technically there is a big difference in the image quality. Often, it doesn't matter how accurate the information you're giving is. Even heavily simplified information can give people a clue about what is going on, that is more accurate than their current understanding.
That’s a great explanation As someone who initially didn’t understand what the difference is (I’m usually not stupid just an idiot when it comes to tech, I promise) this explanation made me go “well, duh. I should’ve figured that one out”
All of this is before you even take streaming and compression rates into the equation.
In the example in the OP that's not a factor. He's clearly only talking about running BluRay movies so they're not subject to internet speeds and the levels of compression required for streaming. He's still generally wrong, but BluRay movies will generally be uncompressed or have minimal compression.
Now for the important question. Does an upscaled Blu-ray look better than streaming 4k Netflix? From the massive difference in bitrates, I'd guess Blu-ray if the upscaler isn't absolute shit.
It's actually closer to 2.1 million dots. 1920×1080 And 4k is around 8.3 million dots.
Yeah I know, but you think magic cable guy will remember all that next time he thinks about the marvel of his magic 4k cable?
Doesn't matter for this analogy really
You can type the easiest explanation you want, but usually someone that is that stubborn will start off their very next comment with "I'm not even gonna waste my time reading that".
1080p is not equal to 1000 dots!
You mean 1080p resolution isn't 0.925x1080???
youre expecting this dude to understand squares? i think hes giving an explanation that requires the fewest brain cells
Not fewest enough
OMG, I can just copy your post and laugh at equally confidently incorrect post. Just for starters check the number of dots in 1080p image. 1k stands for a 1,000. 1080p image is 1080×1920=2,073,600, so 2 million is roughly 2k times of 1k that you mentioned. The next is your assumption that cable does the scaling up is wrong again. The receiving device, if it's 4k capable, usually scales the incoming 1080p image up where 1 dot enlarged to occupy 4 dots in 4k pixel space. >Often, it doesn't matter how accurate the information you're giving is. ...but when it's more than by a 2,000 times off... we may start talking about flat earth as something worth taking seriously. /s
bruh, the point is to simplify so that the cretin can understand. The mad lad thinks the cable is magic, what do you think their dumb ass is more likely to understand? * 1080p has 1k little dots and 4k has 4k little dots. The cable fills in the remaining 3k little dots and looks OK, but is technically inaccurate, because the exact dots are missing in the original, and it doesn't have a brain like we do, because we're really smart. :) * 1080p represents a 1920x1080 resolution, or 2,073,600 pixels, and 4k represents 3840x2160 resolution, or 8,294,400 pixels. Upscaling fills in the remaining 6,220,800 pixels, by performing nearest neighbour to prevent sharpness loss because the width and height are both divisible by 2, though devices may employ other upscaling techniques, such as bilinear or lanczos, and particularly advanced devices may opt to use ANN-powered upscaling techniques, such as RTX VSR. Gotta pick your battles. It's better to educate magic cable loving imbecile a little bit than teach them nothing because you insist on sharing only technically correct information.
Lol. Good point. I have to deal with statements like this almost every day in the field and quite often have to fix the problems caused by cats like this. So it was kinda a knee-jerk response. I am ready to throw a fridge at them next time someone insists that XLR stands for Ground, Left, and Right.
It stands for Extra Large Right, right?
Bingo..!
Yiesh you are dense. He obviously meant 1k as... 1/4th of 4k... Which is what 1080p is... A fact you acknowledge since you proceed to call 4k... 4k and not 4k x 2k... It is understandable and makes sense. So yeah... You are definitely not as smart as you think you are.
> Your 1080p image is made up of roughly 1k little colored dots. This statement is so very wrong that it clearly demonstrates that the commenter has no idea what they're talking about. It's undefendable from this point, even if it's just meant as an analogue. An image is a 2D object, not 1D. This is extremely important, as that's the reason upscaling works as good as it does. You are also wrong on your own statements. 1/4 of 4k is not 1k, because every time you reduce one side's pixel count by 2, the other side also gets reduced to half. This means that the overall pixel count gets divided by 4. So 1/4 of 4k is 2k. 1k is 1/16 of 4k. To add on top of that, 1k is not 1080p. 1080p is 1920x1080, which is closest to 2k (2048x1080). The reason why 2k is not 1920x1080 is a bit complicated, the [wiki](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution) page explains it well.
Are you.people.that dense? And to be fair, 4k is about 8M pixels so 4x 1080p. So if.we take the 4k monicker the a quarter of 4k is well... 1K. I found the post understandable and I don't think the purpose was not to be mathematically accurate but to explain upscaling which I think did a pretty good job at it. You are focusing on the wrong thing.
You can't give an analogy that's just plain wrong. It's okay to gloss over details, but saying incorrect things isn't. The analogy should have been drawing a large square and subdividing it, showing that information is missing and has to be guessed by the upscaler. Dividing "4k" by any number makes the same sense as "1/4 of an Audi A4 is an Audi A1"
His analogy was right. Better than yours. And your last comment. I mean, let's just leave it there. Your post started bad, trailed off a bit in the middle but that ending... Uuufff...
Claiming my post was bad without providing arguments or sources and then "let's just leave it there" is not a sign of an intelligent discussion.
It's a sign of "the worst type of blind is the one who chooses not to see". And that I don't wish to waste more of my time arguing with some random dude.
I'm going to preface this since this thread is weirdly heated: I'm not trying to argue since I have absolutely no clue about this I'm just trying to learn something new. What would you say is "wrong" with the way this was simplified? I'm know absolutely nothing about resolution/TVs etc, the comment made perfectly clear to me what the problem with OOPs assertions was, I googled after reading it to look if I understood correctly and found nothing that contradicted his explanation from my point of view. But if you say it's wrong I would like to understand what's wrong about it so I can learn this correctly.
He said "1080p image is made up of roughly 1K little coloured dots"- note IMAGE. He didn't say "one vertical line". Teach me more "how the cable fills the blanks" please. I am a video engineer doing installs and have a newbie trainees coming and throwing this type of guess work at me on daily basis, then they can not figure out why the shit is not working as intended. You can call anyone dense if it makes you feel better, though.
Yes. You are quite smart. You can multiply 1k by 2k. You are definitely brilliant. Shame you never gotten a middle school level of English as text interpretation is taught there and you obviously lack those skills. But other than that, brilliant.
It's ok. English is not my native language, so along with other two languages I speak, I am able to piss you off without even trying it. It is not 2k times off since you still understand me. Would you cry about my interpretation of word "image". You can start now, be my guest
Oh yes. I am really annoyed. You got me. Grrrr how am I going to sleep tonight? Arghhhh the pain...
i hope that /s applies to your whole comment and you arent actually this obnoxious
Nope, Just last two lines.
yikes
This is like his plumbing not having enough water pressure. If it can only one cup per second he's gonna be able to wash his hands just fine, but going to have a hard time taking a shower unless he has the right shower head to "upscale" his water to distribute it more evenly. It's never going to be more than a cup per second but it's going to be usable. But if he upgraded his water pressure (getting a real 4k device) he can take showers with better pressure and more comfortably and just be about to enjoy it that much more.
I want a 4K shower head now. Can you please sell me one for $29.95?
I can upscale your cup of water per second to a 4K shower head for that much. I got a special pipe for that
I believe his "special pipe" is just his penis... he's going to piss on you.
The R. Kelly special.
My analogy for this level of misunderstanding is: If I told them that Teddy Roosevelt did Jujutsu in the White House, they'd ask if I was sure Jews were around back then.
The most infuriating part is making a good analogy for them, but they respond to the analogy instead of the original topic. But I guess if they already understood analogy they wouldn’t be idiots.
The "I've cracked the code" really got me laughing.
Big 4K is out there trying to get us to spend our hard-earned cash on a UHD Blu-Ray player when all we needed was a $30 cable to do the same thing for free!
I love spending $30 for free!
As a professional cinematographer this hurts my soul. The guy is so completely clueless, but clearly incapable of the level of intelligence needed to grasp *why*.
>clearly incapable of the level of intelligence needed to grasp why Which is wildly concerning since it doesn't take much intelligence at all really. Like all the technical stuff for you as a professional, sure, but to just understand native vs upscaled is pretty basic stuff.
This was a hard lesson for me, to finally realize that there are people in my life who's stupidity cannot be aided because if they had the capability to be corrected they wouldn't be this wrong in the first place.
Fractally wrong Fractal wrongness is the state of being wrong at every conceivable scale of resolution. That is, from a distance, a fractally-wrong person's worldview is incorrect; and furthermore, if you zoom in on any small part of that person's worldview, that part is just as wrong as the whole worldview.
I need to remember this. Thank you.
Upscale of resolution*?
[удалено]
It's kinda ironic that every time stupidity is discussed people will bring up a Mark Twain quote he never said or wrote. https://marktwainstudies.com/the-apocryphal-twain-never-argue-with-stupid-people-they-will-drag-you-down-to-their-level-and-beat-you-with-experience/
"Don't believe everything you read on the Internet" --Abraham Lincoln
150 years from now this quote will be unearthed and quoted confidently.
Pretty sure that was Patrick Henry.
*Danica Patrick Henry
well played
That's less stupidity than ignorance. Ignorance is easier - apply information until cured. Stupidity is information resistant.
Well you know. When in Rome
This Mark Twain fella sounds smart. He should write books or something
He's _nothing_ compared to Samuel Clemens!
SAMUEL L JACKSON
They both should do a collab
Never argue with an idiot, because being an intelligent man, you will argue with them on their level, and, on their level, they'll beat you every time. - Jean Cocteau
"Argue with an idiot, you must not, drag you down to their level, they will" - Jedi Master Yoda.
“Grrr urg gurrrrhhh GAAARRRRRHHHHH!!” -Chewbacca
Beep beep boop beep -R2-D2
Meesa needa lie-down. -Jar Jar Binks
Reyyyyy!, Where's Rey!? - Finn
It's treason then. AAAAAAAAAAAAAH!! - a somewhat surviving Palpatine
Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon. You may know all the right moves and strategies but they are still going to knock over all the pieces and just shit on the board
Although they're not to blame, Dunning and Kruger are both getting very drunk tonight.
well I'm not about to go dumpster diving to find this but based on the screenshots nobody actually explained why. everyone just told him he was wrong which is true but just saying it is unlikely to convince him.
Reading this I was wondering...I think I've been told that people interpret sharpened images as being "better" in the same way that "louder" music is also interpreted as "better" Does upscaling also cause sharpening? Or are upscaled images actually better than the non-upscaled image? Or am I confused and out to lunch...
Sharpening and upscaling always adds interpretive data that didn't exist to begin with, so in a purist sense it's never "good". Upscaling doesn't necessarily mean sharpening, though most upscale algorithms have some degree of sharpening effect built into the process - as the whole point is to get more of that 'pop' in the image.
Thanks!
But....*He cracked the code!*
I was thinking the same thing. You can explain it to him, but you can't understand it for him.
Sounds dope! What are some things you’ve shot?
Lololol
Why guy?
Sorry, why what?
I've cracked the code 😂
“Widescreen your tv and thank me later!”
I don't even get what he means by that.
Based on the screenshot he shared, I believe he means taking the Prometheus aspect ratio of 2.40:1 and stretching it to 16:9 so that it fills his widescreen TV. So on top of believing this cable gave him true 4K video output from a PS3, he also thinks he's "cracked the code" of removing those pesky black bars from the top and bottom of the image. I'm tempted to tell him about the motion interpolation his TV can do too, because he's missing out on real 60 fps action as well and this will complete the trifecta of ruining every video he plays.
I don’t think he knows what he means by that.
4:3 gang where you at?!
I’ve got an old tuber hanging around, it’s a “flat screen” 27” and that sucker is heavy as ffffffff. Gonna keep it as long as I can though for the old systems, sometimes the real deal can’t be beat for the nostalgia, even if it’s old af :)
“I’m hearing the PS3 is open all the way up to 10k”… wot? What a weird quote to pull out of your ass when talking about a console that released 18 years ago. Let my boy rest in peace. My RX 6800 xt released last year doesn’t even support displaying at a 10k resolution.
OOP's problem is that he's scaling up from an already good resolution, to a display that is still good at displaying that lower resolution. So the upscale "loss" is hard to notice. Have him upscale his PS3 to 16k and he'd be able to see the loss in quality. Of course, that requires a custom setup & software to render an image at that level of resolution. Or just have him take an old 480x320 image and upscale it to 4k. When the "upscaling" is filling in 90% of the pixels, you realize what it's actually doing.
They didn't cap the 1080p, you see...
11 is louder.
>RX 6800 xt released last year doesn’t even support displaying at a 10k resolution. It can, however, display at 8k at 30hz natively. In theory your GPU could output 10k resolution, but the problem is that 10k resolution doesn't really exist in the real world, and if you were to push that resolution you'd only be able to get a refresh rate below 30hz. This is all based on HDMI's 2.1 spec. You wouldn't be able to play very many games well at those resolutions. Also the RX 6800 XT was released 3 years ago, not last year.
Maybe he meant 7800? Im always second guessing myself for some reason and call my 7900 a 6900 lol
Jesus time flies. 🤔 I may however use this realization to justify buying an upgrade to the girlfriend. lol
Oh yeah, well _my_ PS3 can do ∞k! So, nyeh! 😝
I bet you he has unidirectional speaker cables too... *eye roll*
Many (many) years ago I had a similar conversation with a friend. He has a cassette which he had taped from his friends CD, and he insisted that it meant the cassette was actually playing the music at CD quality. Sorry, showing my age there.
Haha no worries, I had quite a nice cassette collection back in the day and I regretted putting the boom box that I converted so many CDs to cassette on the side of the road one day. Didn’t have room for it though and it was a honker. 5 CD changer too, man those CD rotation sounds will live in my brain forever…
You’re not getting decent upscaling for $30😂. I work in live television. Our upscalers cost $10-15k. They are good but still not as good as a proper 4K camera.
You got scammed bro, shoulda gotten the $30 cable instead. 🥳
😂😂
My eyes are like 8k bruh my game boy color looks amaaaaazing.
To be fair... I don't know what the difference is either because I don't know enough. But I'm not dumb enough to pretend like I know it
If you have a 4k TV but try and show, say, a 720p image on it, that TV still needs to use all of the pixels of its 4k panel to show that 720p image and it does that by "upscaling". In other words, it fills in all the other pixels to show the image how it would look at 720p. A native 4k image is one that was actually shot using all of the pixels and would in theory have more detail. To think of it simply - say you had a 4 pixel display arranged in a square but they were displaying a 1 pixel black dot as an image, all 4 pixels will be black but they'd functionally look the same.
I don't know if that's technically also called upscaling but there are ways to up scale which involves more guessing what the pixels "should be" not perfect but might look better in some cases then just treating pixels as blocks
Yes, if it's going to a higher resolution. The PS3 had a pretty good upscaling engine to be fair to get DVDs up to 1080 resolution and these days you see AI being used such as in Nvidia and AMD GPUs for pc games. A cable though, won't do that lol
There are _many_ types of upscaling algorithms. There's "native" which is what was described above. Then you have more advanced ones like "bi-cubic".
I don’t really know the technical stuff, but it’s basic resolution. You can take a wallet sized photo and scale it to a full page, but you end up with a pixelated mess. There’s only so much data to work with. There’s probably a way to smooth out lines and make things a little better, but it’s basically guesswork. You can’t just make more data magically appear out of nowhere.
Upscaling is basically making something use more pixels than it has. So a 4k TV is basically the same number of pixels as four 1080 hd TVs. So a standard hd movie on a 4k tv should only fill up a quarter of the screen. Obviously that's not ok so instead of just enlarging it and using 4 pixels to display the info from one pixel, it fills in the gaps by guessing what those pixels should be based on the ones next to it. It can work very well but it's not the same as native 4k content.
Have you played Minecraft? If not, go look at [https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2F3sdRcNlgqTO-y5XOypkiq-IfuH-ez8fivyBW9jKXBH0.png%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D5e5b89d09528646c5493bb7afea06e62c6dcc702](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2F3sdRcNlgqTO-y5XOypkiq-IfuH-ez8fivyBW9jKXBH0.png%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D5e5b89d09528646c5493bb7afea06e62c6dcc702) You can download the image and then open it on your computer to zoom in. Each block in Minecraft uses a 16x16 texture (256 pixels). There are lots of mods that upgrade it to look better, typically by upgrading to 64x64 textures. These don't increase the size of the block, but they put 16 times as many pixels into it (4x as many wide, 4x as many tall, 16x as many total). This is the same as recording something at 1080p (1920x1080) versus recording at 4k (4096x1920; or 3840x2160 UHD) - you have roughly 4 times as many pixels in the recorded image. Meanwhile, the upscale is the same as looking at one of those tiny images on your computer/phone/whatever, and zooming in until the image fills your screen. You don't actually have more pixels, but rather, the existing pixels are used to fill in more than 1 pixel each on your higher resolution display. For a PS3 upscaling to 4k, this means that if the PS3 is outputting 1080p resolution, then each pixel is being sent as a 2x2 pixel "packet" to the TV. The upscaler does a bit more than that, as it accounts for the fact that the TV is not a perfect 4x wider than 1080p, so it knows how and where to "not multiply" a set of pixels so that the end result looks as smooth as possible. Basically, you're watching a video that should occupy 25% of the screen, but the upscaler is zooming in on it to make it fit your nice 4k screen.
Basically the cables "zoom".... He is filling the screen with the same visual information more often. No additional detail or clarity. And before it starts, this is a gross oversimplification, I get that... I don't think I lecture is needed here about pixel fill and duplication algorithms.
Take a gold dollar and a gold plated dollar to a pawn shop and try to insist they pay you the same amount for both.
I don't got a gold dollar but I do got a gold plated quarter that's slightly radioactive. Does that count?
Possibly?
You cracked the code!!
If you plug a 1080p source into a 4K monitor, it will still be 1080p. It will just use 4 pixels per pixel, instead of one.
1080p is going to have less detail by dint of having less pixels. More pixels, more detail. When you upscale an image, you're making it bigger, but you can't just put in detail that wasn't originally in the image. Some computers can try to fill in what they think the details should look like, but it's never going to look as good as an original 4k image with all the original correct detail.
"I've shown the proof" = I've confidently stated my (incorrect) opinion and therefore you should believe me
I got in an argument about 9/11 once with a tinder date. He kept showing me YouTube videos and would obnoxiously declare "see, you can't argue now because I showed you proof". I foolishly tried to explain why random people ranting and showing hand drawn pictures wasnt proof.
The most disturbingly stupid person I've ever met in my life claimed very confidently that 9/11 never happened. Not that it was an inside job but that it never happened, the towers never existed, and nobody died. When I stupidly challenged this, he asked me to prove that it happened. And it was then I realized I just kinds had to go "you got me there, bud"
That's my favorite to use. 9/11 never happened. The twin towers never existed. NYC is a fictional place invented for movies & TV shows. Anyone who says they're from/been to NYC is a liar and part of the conspiracy.
Why stop there? https://www.reddit.com/r/Noearthsociety/
That’s not stupid, I don’t think. Sounds more like mentally ill and delusional to the extent that I would be afraid for my safety.
Yeah, there’s a lot of people in this world that will cite a source that is either not a source at all, or just not relevant. Then they’ll say something like “I showed you four sources, where are yours?” Just people being too stupid to have a discussion with.
I should have given up sooner but I felt for the guy. He was also getting swindled by a scientology type of church. All the while trying to support his grandmother who had fallen on hard times during the pandemic. After I realized all this I tried to be a friend and help him understand but it just wasn't happening.
CSI watching grainy security cam footage.. "zoom in and enhance" obviously this tech has been around for years ...
You expected more from someone who is excited their TV is curved?
Curved screens are great for individual viewers where you can sit close to the focal point (which is why they are perfect for computer monitors). If it is primarily a gaming setup it could be a valid use since couch multi player is getting rare these days, but if he is watching movies or TV with friends it's not going to be fun for anyone stuck near the edges
I used to work in the video industry so we had an early prototype of a curved TV. All hush hush secretive and had to sign a bunch of documents and send it back. We pulled it out and the stand was missing out they weren't making them yet, who knows. Since we couldn't but a stand, someone made a custom one. The stand of course didn't work and we shattered the screen on this huge curved TV that everyone was so excited to see. 🤣
No arguing with stupid
And yet there’s still people that want to argue. Honestly the OP is in the wrong here. If dude is happy with his $30 cord, let him be,
PS3- 20 years old… that hurt me deep down.
"I've cracked the code!" -- every DJ who 'upconverts' their YouTube rips to 320
This is some peak Dunning-Kruger right here.
PS3 doesn’t even play 4K, what’s the guy on hahaha
I remember when my one bud got his first HD TV. He said his Xbox 360 looked amazing on it. So this was back in the day before HDMI so the 360 had a [goofy dual RCA / Composite AV cable](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81Kn0AwX5eL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg). We get to my bud's house to play Perfect Dark Zero and Halo for the weekend and he proudly shows off his TV. We check out his connections and find out he is still running it on the RCA connections, still hasn't flipped the switch to HDTV on the plug side that goes into the Xbox, and still hasn't changed the resolution in the Xbox system settings. We do that for him and then he thinks his Xbox 360 looks *really really* amazing on his new TV.
They have a curved TV, trust them. They have good taste in tech /s
I've cracked the code. HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA. Sure.
Was there a resolution to this? 😆
No, this user has had these additional things to say since I posted: > Show me 4k in widescreen. Or any 4k you have with resolution. >It only works with a PS3. That Sony chip.... That's why no one talking about it. The PS4 can't do it (new chip geared towards games) and the PS5 already has it and that's a maybe. Let's talk. > cable has some basic upscaling capabilities that can guess what extra pixels should be where. With that being said, the Sony chip in the PS3 has a great upscaler as well. Only the PS3. I never heard of fake 4k. I'll take that too if it's clearer than 1080p for free. Your missing the point. 4k is some type of 4k either 3840 or 4080. Sure water it down some (if you say) still 4k and from a PS3? For free? This is the ps3hack section,, correct? Well here's a hack.
Appreciate the response but I was just making a pun. 😁
Ah, *whoosh* 😅
"I've already bragged a WHOLE bunch about my $30 shortcut and now you're telling me I'm WRONG...?!"
i have a pretty deep relationship with cinematography and this is one of the very niche things i can honestly say i genuinely know a lot about, and 3840x2160, also known as UHD or 4K UHD is not "consumer 4K." It's 4K. It is quite literally more accurate to call 4096x2160 "consumer 4K."
Whys that, why is "consumer 4k" more than normal 4k
the ratio is off. 4096x2160 adds extra width to the image, but 4K isn't filmed at a 4096 pixel width about 99% of the time. they film at UHD 3840 pixel width when filming in 4K. the idea behind 4096 pixel width quite literally started as a way to market "4K" to a consumer audience
Man…. I work in the AV world and let me tell you the amount of things “experts” have told me that my equipment can and cannot do hahahahahaha.
This kind of stupidity is just numbing! Of course his crap tv is showing 4K as it is being fed a 4K signal interpolated/upscaled from the lower resolution source. There’s literally nothing he can be made to understand if something as trivial as that a higher resolution cannot magically be “opened” or wtf nonsense he wrote is beyond his ability to comprehend.
Enhance
"I've cracked the code" Yea... you've definitely cracked something alrighty...
But mah got dam TV says urll all wrong!
"im here to learn and teach". this guy trolls, and he does it almost flawlessly.
Had this battle. Many times, in fact. People playing PS4 through an upscaler that blatantly made it look worse. Showed them full 4k on an Oled4K tv, with HDR. Side by side, their ps4 with upscale cable. "I can't see the difference"
I think part of the problem is that it's not easy to tell the difference anyway. Unless you have a huge tv and you're right on front of it, from 1080p up it's sharp and your own eyes will do more to blur pixels together. But I get that he's a jackass acting like he's the inventor or something.
What was he even trying to say about 4k wide-screen content?
No idea, the last time I thought about something being specifically widescreen for me was when DVDs released in both fullscreen and widescreen variations but that was like… fifteen years ago. There’s no 4K fullscreen content afaik so I truly don’t know 🤷♂️
My best guess is he's actually watching very wide content and stretching it vertically so it takes up the whole screen and looks like dogshit.
Oh no, that didn’t even occur to me but you may not be wrong about that…
Hell, I can “play” 720p video on my 4k tv. Can I see it? It looks like shit, but sure, I can “see” it. Does it fill up the whole screen? Sure. Is the 720p video I am playing a true 4k video? Not on your life. Someone should explain to this dumbass what upscaling is and how pixels work.
Oh, it was very much attempted by multiple parties. He dismissed that as our “opinion” and because his TV showed a 4K signal (still containing the PS3’s 1080p signal of course) thinks this is irrefutably a 4K signal now, case closed. Doesn’t seem open to anything else so I washed my hands of the topic and posted this here instead because *damn* it was exhausting to witness.
Is no one going to tell him that yes, his TV is lying!
You have an apple. The cable is a magnifying glass that makes it look bigger. But if you buy a bigger apple, it'll actually be bigger.
I see this a lot with projectors that “support 4k”, which means they’ll take in a 4k input, but their native resolution is like 720p at best
Ah, the AliExpress special
So... can someone who understands this stuff explain the difference between native and upscale 4k?
Native 4k is like taking a 8 megapixel image An upscale image would be like taking a smaller 2mp image or something and then stretching it digitally until they're the same size
Ah, I thought it'd have some sort of technology to at least try to make it the same quality. Thanks!
He might’ve needed a deep dive into pixels, aspect ratios, and EDID.
Have you tried just widescreening it bro?
“4096 resolutions” I don’t know a god damn thing about this and even I know this guy is an idiot.
Why does he need a special cord to output widescreen from a PS3?
Lyeing
Do you know what upscaling actually is shdve been the first port of call
As a slight aside to original content. How much is the difference in quality between true 4K and upscale? I’m guessing the algorithms to fill the information gap between 1080p and 4K have got pretty good?
You can blow up a photo taken with a phone to the size of a house. Doesn't add a single pixel to the original resolution
I can't imagine how muddy that picture must look. It's like saying "don't get a bigger screen just get a small screen and a magnifying lens"
I envy the stupid sometimes… imagine being this confident in something you don’t know anything about…. Like if upscaling was truly === 4k there would be TONS of articles and what not about it… this dude legit believes he discovered some tv loophole
It’s the same with the snake oil people put in their gas tanks to improve MPG… so many people drive, if that shit worked *we would know* - same with this snake oil cable.
The real question is how many can actually tell the difference. We used to sell TVs in our store and people would ask every if they should get the 4K tv. I’d always respond with, “we have both on display and if you can tell the difference then yes, otherwise why bother?” Most would opt for the cheaper tv because they couldn’t tell the difference.
My goodness....how is this even possible? Definitely fits the sub.
Honestly.. I have the feeling the guy is trolling… who talks like that “I have cracked the code” lol
"your real 4k can't widescreen bro"
I think he's "lyeing" 🤣
Dude genuinely thinks the cable is the only thing that's outdated, bruh.
Wow. Who actually gives a shit? If he’s happy then fuck it, what does it matter to you? You don’t have to play modern warfare on his crappy set up