Those who said you get used to whatever size are correct.
IMO, this whole "
correct screen size vs viewing distance" thing has got out of hand. In the rush to publish some kind of guide, too many websites forget to mention that their size recommendation is based on seeing the extra 4K UHD detail vs 1080p when the source signal is top quality. For most of us, that means
playing a 4K UHD disc, and a really good one at that.
How many people using these guides though
will only ever play stuff from streaming sites? That throws a complete spanner in the works.
The picture quality from streaming 4K UHD isn't as good as 4K disc. Hell, it's not even as good as Blu-ray in a lot of cases. The benefits of HDR aside, streaming carries a lot of compression. And I do mean
a lot. Much of the benefit of 4K UHD then is thrown away in order to keep the bitrate low enough that the data signal can reach the largest reasonable number of subscribers. That drives a horse and carriage right through the middle of any 4K screen size recommendation.
The bottom line here is that you don't need anyone's '
golden seal of approval' to buy a humungous TV screen. We never did when CRT projectors were the pinnacle of home cinema performance. The TV in someone's lounge might have been a 25" or 27" 4:3 CRT, but the projector would make an image on a screen at 84" or 96", that's 7 or 8ft.
Our best source before DVD arrived was Laser Disc. It was miles better than VHS, which is not difficult, but still not a patch on the picture quality of DVD when that arrived.
If you want a really big telly then go out and fill yer boots. It's your money so do as you please. The catch is that you'll see any picture
warts and all.
Back in the late '90s we knew that Laser Disc wouldn't look as sharp on a 7ft image. That was an acceptable trade-off for the huge increase in screen size. Besides, there was nothing else to compare it to. Since then, video resolution has boomed. From 380 line Laser Disc we've gone through 576 line with progressive scan DVD, then 1080p Blu-ray, and now 2160p for 4K UHD. The thing though is that most of the other resolutions are still in circulation. You can have your Sky Q box set to 2160p, but much of the original content is no better than 1080i or even 576i.
I think you have to strike a balance between screen size and screen quality. Within any reasonable TV budget there'll be options between the largest screen possible or going for a slightly smaller screen but stepping up a rung in picture performance. IMO, that second option is the way to go.
I should be up to a 50” one by the time I’m in my eighties lol.
