"4k" Stupidest name ever, Should be 2160p

Forums › Home Theatre (including HTPC and EPG Collector) › "4k" Stupidest name ever, Should be 2160p

1 | 2 | 3

plambrechtsen

1948 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 459
Inactive user

#827314 28-May-2013 20:41

davidcole:
macuser: First off, I think you're confused by horizontal/vertical width. 4096 is the horizontal width of a frame, 2160 is the vertical height.

There is also a 2k standard which refers to a frame that is 2048px wide, that is cropped down in post production to create a 1920px wide frame (1080P).

If someone was trying to say that 4K meant 2160, they're wrong, or probably referring to the vertical height of frame.

The 4k standard will revolve around two widths, 4096 and 3840 px wide. Sony is selling TV's now that are 3840x2160.

But yea - pretty confusing how they changed from vertical to horizontal in their branding...probably because all the pro film camera's call it 4k, not 2160p.

No I'm saying it shouldn't be called 4k at all. We should either stick with names, ie HD (720p) Full HD (1920x1080) Ultra HD 3840x2160 and Whatever they will call next next one, super maxi HD?!?! 7680x4320 (this correct? I multiplied 1080 x 4)

And yes I know that broadcast/production use 2, 4 and 8k for the widths as they have never standardised on a vertical resolution. But I think production has been, and probably should be divorced from the consumer market in terms of naming.

Didn't you just fall foul of your same argument (720p vs 1920x1080?) :)

I personally think 1k, 2k, 4k etc.. is all just easier for the average punter to understand. The HD/Full HD, Ultra HD, Uber HD... Sounds silly and specifying the resolution just takes up space... but that's just me.

dns15

8 posts

Wannabe Geek

#827415 28-May-2013 22:33

fahrenheit:
dns15: Didn't like the name before but it started to make sense to me.

4K means 4 x the pixels of 1080p, hence it's 4x 1080 = 4k that's how I explain it tomyself.

I'm Dyscalculic and even I have better math-sense than that.

Please tell me more

ilovemusic

1472 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 309

#828394 30-May-2013 16:56

davidcole: So was watching a podcast the other day (home Theatre Geek) and there was a chap there who actually explained 2160p (I refuse to call it 4k now).

I liken it to calling 1080p 2k - which noone does. Since they seem to have latched onto 4k as a term by taking the horizontal resolution (and applying some generous rounding).

4k to me should be 4196p.

Anyone else think this, or am I just being a pedant?

agree 1000% !

using 4k for domestic video is plain wrong.

if you need convincing checkout this very informative video by a real expert

:)

http://youtu.be/0ZqhA3iIHm4

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3317

Trusted

#828413 30-May-2013 17:51

One marketing term I always disliked was "HD ready." Ready for what???

Whatifthespacekeyhadneverbeeninvented?

1080p

1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user

#828431 30-May-2013 18:47

His main point is that it is tough to master content from 4096 to 3840 well (already the case for the 2048 to 1920 transition) and wants to make sure the video industry is reminded of the care required for mastering.

Those who do good video production already know the difference and how to accommodate it. Those who master video badly are unlikely to do a better job because the standards have different names.

The real problem is the new HDMI standard not supporting true 4k.

davidcole

6112 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1476

Trusted

#828454 30-May-2013 19:49

ilovemusic:
davidcole: So was watching a podcast the other day (home Theatre Geek) and there was a chap there who actually explained 2160p (I refuse to call it 4k now).

I liken it to calling 1080p 2k - which noone does. Since they seem to have latched onto 4k as a term by taking the horizontal resolution (and applying some generous rounding).

4k to me should be 4196p.

Anyone else think this, or am I just being a pedant?

agree 1000% !

using 4k for domestic video is plain wrong.

if you need convincing checkout this very informative video by a real expert

:)

http://youtu.be/0ZqhA3iIHm4

Yeah that was probably the episode i watched.

It was interesting about the hdmi - ie needing 4 of them effectively, and with the hdmi 2.0 spec most likely not accomodating the bandwidth.

Previously known as psycik

Home Assistant: Gigabyte AMD A8 Brix, Home Assistant with Aeotech ZWave Controller, Raspberry PI, Wemos D1 Mini, Zwave, Shelly Humidity and Temperature sensors
Media:Chromecast v2, ATV4 4k, ATV4, HDHomeRun Dual
Server Host Plex Server 3x3TB, 4x4TB using MergerFS, Samsung 850 evo 512 GB SSD, Proxmox Server with 1xW10, 2xUbuntu 22.04 LTS, Backblaze Backups, usenetprime.com fastmail.com Sharesies Trakt.TV Sharesight

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

Hobchild

624 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 34

#828529 30-May-2013 23:08

They could go down the camera path and use megapixels to keep it simple. Though I think you would have a few "non-geeks" wondering why an 8mp TV is $30,000 and yet their $200 camera is 14mp. I've got to be honest though I prefer 4k to 2160p.

1 | 2 | 3