Comment by theonlybutlet

3 years ago

Each pixel is 7.5 microns. Assuming RGB, that's 22.5 microns. Thats at the maximum limits of detail an eye can see.

I have 2 4k screens in front of me right now. I can close one eye, and without moving my head make out the entirety of both screens. They cover most of the non-peripheral horizontal field of view, but you could easily fit in another 4k screen on top of each vertically. I can make out individual pixels (when there is a gradient, like with a small font) on the screens. Higher resolution screens of the same size at the same distance would let me read slightly smaller fonts.

That is, at a resolution in which pixels are still perceptible, I can make out more than 33,177,600 pixels (4 4k screens, equivalently 1 8k screen) per eye. This device has less than that. Less than half that per eye. It's not "at the maximum limits of detail an eye can see" even assuming they just have no wasted pixels in your peripheral vision.

7.5 microns means nothing without knowing what lenses it goes through.

That said, I think it might be enough pixels to be useful for reading text. Unlike the index I own, where that is just unpleasant.

That's not enough information. It's behind a lens that spreads it across your entire field of view.

  • Assuming they're square. Roughly calculating (23 million pixels between the two with no space between 7.5 microns,) that's 25.432mm^2. they've said they're the size of postage stamps. This ties in.

    I think it's near safe to assume there's no real gap between pixels and thus indiscernible. The lag might be a thing.

    • Once again, the absolute size is irrelevant - postage stamp or otherwise. It's optically scaled to fit your field of view - essentially under a microscope. There are VR devices with 4k screens already, and it's still not enough to be indiscernible to the eye - especially for things like text.

    • Not having visible gaps between pixels is a necessary but woefully insufficient condition for high visual fidelity.