I want to water my 50 acre lawn. You recommend taking a water hose and spraying it directly into the air, that'll solve my problem. I say that doing that will only water the dead center of my lawn, and the rest of the lawn will still have big problems. You say "See! You just admitted my solution will water your lawn!" and think you have a point.
You said, many times:
All your posts have indicated a belief that screen door effect will be solved by a resolution increase. This is objectively wrong. You can solve screen door effect today, without increasing the resolution. And further, merely increasing the resolution would not solve the problem. It is not the resolution of the display causing the screen door effect, and thus it is not the resolution that needs adjusting. It's the pixel density, as in the pixel density as calculated for VR.
I'm still waiting for you to defend this line of reasoning you have provoked in my thread. Your analogy up there is completely botched and pointless. I pretty much laid out bare facts on dot pitch and PPI, which you so far have not even begun to tear apart because you can't. They are facts.
Resolution is the clear guiding factor in reducing SDE. Not the only factor, but the main factor. I find it ever so slightly annoying you made all those posts saying resolution has nothing to do with it, and then finally said oh yeah it will actually make the SDE better in dead center, which is also not right, as the SDE will become naturally better EVERYWHERE as the pixels get smaller and smaller.
You literally went from saying resolution has nothing to do with SDE, to now making ridiculously insipid analogies about garden hoses that suit your opinion as you continue to move goalposts.
That comparison you laid out of 64 pixels and 8 pixels was also illogical because it was too simplistic. Yes, lenses and auxiliary features can and will improve how the image is projected, but when the display stays the same the resolution must be increased for more detail. You cannot get truly photorealistic environments unless you can completely fool the eye. This is going to take at least 8K per eye by most opinions considering decent eyes. Have you seen an 8K display at 6-10 inches? Do you have any idea on the dot pitch of an 8K display?
That is not how modern displays work within each manufacturer in any traditional sense. On the same amount of space, pixels do not suddenly get ridiculously larger distances between each other. It's the exact opposite. As pixels shrink, the space between them gets smaller and smaller. If you cannot see the pixel, you sure as heck cannot see the space between pixels lol.
Resolution will make the SDE better on every facet of the experience. Why? Because pixels shrink and so along with shrinking pixels you have less edge per pixel in the same space. I actually called up one of my tech professors at the U and he completely agrees with me as well. Resolution and display size determine PPI. Overall PPI is the main factor in reducing SDE, and it EXACTLY is made from RESOLUTION AND DISPLAY SIZE. PIXEL PITCH is the only other factor in this regard, and it too gets smaller and smaller in general.
Pixel density increases with resolution. You can't walk around this. Pixel Density is literally the PPI of your display, and it controls everything you want to do with that display. It doesn't matter that optics will distort your display, you are still working with a contained amount of pixels, which is ultimately where the detail comes from. It does not matter that VR auxiliary tech calculates things differently, as you are still working with a FIXED DISPLAY. If you have one million pixels, and then another with 16 million pixels, you aren't going to have better dot pitch on the 1m display LOL. This is where your argument completely falls apart.
You talked a lot about the spaces between pixels, and used a lot of technical rhetoric to confuse people, but in the end resolution is still king when it comes to any display.
The space between pixels... can not be seen by sight on a 16K per eye screen if the display is small enough. I don't think it is possible. Your SDE is gone. What changed if the optics stayed the same, the display size stayed the same, you just shoved millions and millions more pixels into the space? That would make the pixels smaller, hence it would make the dot pitch smaller, hence the space between pixels somehow MAGICALLY got smaller. This logically disproves your claim completely, thoroughly, and it is not even up for debate as far as I am concerned.
You called my response objectively wrong, while also now admitting that--before resolution had nothing to do with SDE--it does in fact affect the "dead center." No, it affects the entire screen. You are wrong, and I don't trust your opinion on this matter, especially because you are trying to sell poor logic to me, someone versed in logic. It's weird you are calling any of these responses objectively wrong. Show me the literature, because your opinion is flip-flopping, and you stand on shaky ground.
You claim to have credentials and claim to be an expert in the field. But you simply have not proven that even slightly in this thread. In fact, your entire post history in this thread is ludicrous. That does not mean you are not an expert, it just means you are seriously confused in this thread.
1st Claim: Resolution has nothing to do with SDE
2nd Claim: Resolution will improve the dead center area of the display
Random Claim: Pixel Density is one of the most important factors in reducing SDE
The first two claims do not match. The third claim is completely redundant as Pixel Density inherently is connected to resolution. Not arguable.
Furthermore, dot pitch gets better and better with increased resolution per display size. This is factual. At 16K per eye resolution will have made the pixels so small you cannot see anything including a screen door on a VR device. Fact. The limits of the eye are around 16K. What happened to your SDE? It must have been the optics!
"It is not the resolution of the display causing the screen door effect, and thus it is not the resolution that needs adjusting."
This is a factually wrong statement. Not only are you rude, this is an embarrassing post you made. You honestly cannot believe anything you just wrote. What are your credentials? No one that knew anything about display devices would make such a silly claim. The screen door effect is absolutely, literally, the space between pixels, which is minimized and mitigated with higher resolutions on the same size of display. Anyone familiar with dot pitch knows this.
The Sharp Aquos 8K LC-70X500 has a dot pitch of .2018mm! But oh you say that display further down has better dot pitch. The Sharp is 70 inches large. And it almost has better dot pitch than a 17 inch 1920x1200 display LMAO. So much for resolution not helping SDE.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot_pitch
1920×1200 (
WUXGA)
Size Dot Pitch PPI
15.4 0.173 146.8
17 0.191 132.9
23 0.258 98.4
24 0.270 94.0
25.5 0.287 88.5
27 0.303 83.8
3840×2400 (
WQUXGA)
22.2 0.125 203.2