Details in 8K images in the reviews

I’m somewhat surprise with lack of details in the zoomed example images showed in the reviews

more bizarre is their some kind of dithering effect like for example:

Floyd–Steinberg dithering - Wikipedia<img src="/uploads/default/original

Taken from Martin review

1 Like

The Pimax 5K+ image isn’t as smooth.


Yes but so much details are lost the wrinkles below the eyes are almost not visible on the 8k


The details on the 8K would probably be visible if the quality (supersampling) was increased. The “bizarre” dithering appears to be a form of mura on the 5K+, which is something which makes me more likely to stick with the 8K.

@deletedpimaxrep1, is there any way to correct for the 5K+ mura in software? This would probably need to be done via a display calibration step at the factory.

the strange in this image is that the 5k seems to have less sde than 8k… its very hard this way to know what to choose.


Yeah, pictures through the lens can’t really show the SDE and that’s the problem for people to choose

1 Like

I think the problem with through the lens pictures is also the distance between the camera and the display and getting the right focus and the same position on the lens. This is really hard. I wouldn’t compare from one picture.

SweViver did a lot of pictures and I would decide upon the whole impression. I think the impressions from reviewers talking about the sde is also a very important point. For me even more important than through the lens pictures…

P.S.: Anyways, taking all these pictures must have taken ages. @SweViver, this is awesome… Thanks.

1 Like

It’d be nice if one of the testers could try super sampling at a crazy high setting on both the 5k and the 8k to see if the softening is improved. @Heliosurge If it is improved, people may want to stick with the 8k after all. The eye tracking module could enable us to super sample at very high settings while still maintaining good frame rate.


Surely approve that!!! I have eared many people saying that with adequate SSA the Pimax “Clarity” is equivalent to the 5K+ but none of the photos captured shows this on Martin, Sebastien and Thomas reviews. On every photos that I have seen the 8K are one more blurry than the 5K+ ones.

For me : No debate that SDE is better on the 8K. No debate that the 8K is required to achieve almost unnoticeable SDE, No debate also that those 2 are the best affordable headsets on the market today.

But saying that you can’t take the capture images thru the lens for a indication of “something” is ludicrous. By some magical means the 8K wouldn’t be photogenic?

When the SDE is in focus and no distortions are visible the capture is good enough to compare headset LCD instrinsic qualities and the image should be similar in theory. It’s not perfect but we can’t have the headsets…

1 Like

I’m tired of trying to decode my fellows backers comments could we please use in this thread some common vocabulary from wiki!

Perceived sharpness is a combination of both resolution
and acutance: it is thus a combination of the captured resolution,
which cannot be changed in processing, and of acutance, which can be so

Pixel resolution
The term resolution is often considered equivalent to pixel count in digital imaging,


In photography, the term “acutance” describes a subjective perception of sharpness that is related to the edge contrast of an image. Acutance is related to the amplitude of the derivative
of brightness with respect to space. ( read abrupt change produce sharp edges)
Due to the nature of the human visual system, an image with higher acutance appears sharper even though
an increase in acutance does not increase real resolution.

Spatial resolution
Spatial resolution in radiology refers to the ability of the imaging
modality to differentiate two objects. Low spatial resolution techniques
will be unable to differentiate between two objects that are relatively
close together. ( Look the 2 photos linked here it’s a little like an 8K vs 5K+ comparison)

1 Like

If I resume what I’ve read here to the best of my knowledge:

the 8K has a better pixel resolution than the 5K+ but the 5k+ has a better spatial resolution in the screen captures we seen from our reviewers. Acutance for small distant objects can be better on the 8K because of the pixel density and better SDE.

A seriously doubt that Spatial resolution can’t be increase be choosing a better super sampling setting because SSA is related to Acutance.

The question that remains for me is why the 8K seems to have a so lower spatial resolution vs the 5K+

1 Like

That’s why Sweviver confused me. He said 8k has more details. But how can it be more details if you can’t see a damm thing in the background LOL. I am sorry, but i think details and clarity should go hand in hand. And this seem only apply to the Pimax 5K+, not 8K.

1 Like

Not sure if you have had much experience in VR (and forgive me if you have) but even with definitions needing to be tightened up, it bears mentioning that the static shots of the 8K can still be grainier while the perceived visuals are sharper in motion.

Flying in DCS is a good example. If you are tracking a plane in the distance, it may only be a few pixels across- but as it moves those pixels are changing shape and are surrounded by slightly lighter pixels. When the whole thing is in motion, you brain does some amazing image processing and the faint little blur can indeed be understood to be a plane in the distance. You can take a few still photos and it will never fully convey those little nuances completely.

The same goes for text. If you were to remain still as a statue, yes all of the jaggies around the text would look just like the photos. But in reality your head is kinda bobbing around- even if by milimeters- and that’s enough for the text to smear around pixels.

The 5K will do that less, but for things up close, that will make them much crisper. In the distance, the 5K’s lower res display will totally run out of legs.

Hope that helps, and wasn’t too pedantic :stuck_out_tongue:


I don’t know what to believe. I guess this is something you have to experience. And yes i have play VR with the VIVE on Project Cars and hate the SDE in the distance. In a perfect world, you want to have better SDE and clarity but if Sweviver can prove that if you can increase the rendering and get the picture to be as sharp as 5K+…then it makes sense to upgrade your graphic card.

1 Like

Fully agree for tiny moving objects but in the case of cockpit instruments showed in some capture motion is less.a factor and on the 8k they are not readable period… the shot is not of of focus we clearly see the pixels structure.

One thing to consider is that if your brain processing increase to resolve the scene this could increase vr sickness or fatigue. Don’t want to sound like @Sjef :sunglasses: but something just don’t add up in those captures…

People, those are MOBILE PHONE PHOTOS of tiny dot grids, heavily compressed and shown shrunken on different mobile phone screens with their own grids and resolutions. There’s bound to be lossy artefacts and mura. NOT A PROBLEM OF THE 5K! Trust me.


This sounds reassuring! I think I go for the 5k+. (Just until I change my mind again tomorrow…) :smiley:


Sounds like an OK theory. If we had some side-by-side video through the lens we could see the results for ourselves.

because you have seen both headset I’m interested in your comment about the apparent lack of spatial resolution of the 8K vs the 5K+ in some pictures. unlike some other artifact we can’t dismiss because of the type of setup or camera we clearly seen the pixel structure with no distortion it’s in focus.