1080 vs. 4K: What is REALLY necessary?

[kidzrevil]

4K is unneccessary imo. I just use it because with cameras like the GH4 and a6500 whatever you get a 1:1 full pixel read out or its downscaled from a 6K+ image versus the line skipped 1080p modes. 4k is a better acquisition format because of this. I then convert it to 4444 10 bit prores or 422 dnxhd 10bit 1080p and grade from there to use in my nle. How im looking at it the game has changed and video content is going mobile thanks to our smartphones or for display in a home theatre. Thats far different than shooting for the big screen and even then they are projecting a 1080p image. 1080p will be the gold standard for delivery for years to come while higher resolution formats are just great for acquisition

[mercer]

2 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

4K is unneccessary imo. I just use it because with cameras like the GH4 and a6500 whatever you get a 1:1 full pixel read out or its downscaled from a 6K+ image versus the line skipped 1080p modes. 4k is a better acquisition format because of this. I then convert it to 4444 10 bit prores or 422 dnxhd 10bit 1080p and grade from there to use in my nle. How im looking at it the game has changed and video content is going mobile thanks to our smartphones or for display in a home theatre. Thats far different than shooting for the big screen and even then they are projecting a 1080p image. 1080p will be the gold standard for delivery for years to come while higher resolution formats are just great for acquisition

Did you get an a6500? I have been toying around with the idea of buying it again. I think the 4K is unmatched at its price point. 

[fuzzynormal]

This discussion thread is still going for a few good reasons.  It touches on an important consideration in film-making.

For instance, I made a short impressionistic travelogue film on the 5DMII 8 years ago.  Shot it with one old 50mm prime lens.  I think it looks great and I'm proud of it.  The fact that it's Canon's ho-hum 1080p is not the reason that film is received well from my targeted audience.  It's the material -- and the fact that what is there appeals to the viewer regardless of resolution.

Also in my library is a simple corporate film from 2009 that used a XH-A1, shot on VideoTape, for goodness sake. The location was an Audi design studio.  The place was illuminated like a giant soft box; looked great, featured a bunch of cool cars, and I made a bunch of weird creative choices in the shooting/editing.  That little vid still generates work for me.  Simply because of the brand name, content, and the overall look of the work.

If we talk about what is really necessary, let's be sensible.  It helps to consider that craft still carries the day.  Always has and will.  As it should.

That said, I shoot 4k when appropriate.  It's there to assist in the craft not define it.

Seeing as this thread is over a year old, I can probably imagine I've posted the same thing on here months earlier!

[jonpais]

Still, whether you're shooting Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji, Nikon, Sony or whatever, if you shoot 4K and downsample to 1080p, the images will be sharper and have less moire and aliasing. All of of these cameras to the best of my knowledge have efficient codecs that don't require unreasonable amounts of storage space. I'm really only familiar with Panasonic. Aliasing and moire are the main reasons I went from the GH3 to the GH4 (as well as focus peaking). So yeah, if you're shooting jobs that require 12TB of RAID storage and so on, maybe 1080p is the way to go, but for the rest of us, provided you have a computer newer than 2011 and more than 1TB of storage, I'd still recommend shooting 4K. Even computers with less powerful systems can edit with proxies (equivalent to 1080p or something like that - not sure, since I've never needed proxies!) and almost any computer should be able to handle that AFAIK. Finally, how many cameras out there for under $2,000 can actually shoot beautiful looking 1080p without aliasing and moire? And is it superior to the same camera's 4K downsampled to 1080p?

Ruben Latre is brilliant, I'd hire him in an instant if I had the dough. But would the showreel be any less powerful if it wasn't in mushy 540p? Because much of what passes for 1080p isn't really even 1080p.

And another one at random, just because I love this guy's work so much.

 

[kidzrevil]

15 hours ago, mercer said:

Did you get an a6500? I have been toying around with the idea of buying it again. I think the 4K is unmatched at its price point. 

Considering it because the 4K resolution of that thing is amazing but is it worth upgrading to from the g85 ? idk they all look ridiculously clean downscaled to 1080p

[odie]

On 6/22/2016 at 8:55 PM, jasonmillard81 said:

The following conversation gave me pause and I am hoping to get a few questions answered by more knowledgeable individuals:

 

 

One of the topics discussed was how these DPs feel that are sort of forced to use digital and many long for the days of film.  In addition they seem to acknowledge the necessity to keep up with the 4K, 6K, and 8K race but that sometimes the preferable image is of a much lower resolution and they spend time trying to achieve that by softening the image up etc. as they (maybe Deakins) feel that the audience finds the optimal image to not be so "realistic".

 

I'm curious on what everyone's opinions are.  If one isn't doing paid work and 4K+ aren't demanded then you still get away with investing in a new product that is 1080P if the image is currently seen as not only acceptable but desirable?

check out a movie called "BABY DRIVER" question is answered 

[Trek of Joy]

On 7/3/2017 at 11:10 PM, User said:

Wrong. It is available in India. And India just overtook China as the world's most populous country.

What "it" are you referring to? I couldn't access a lot of "it" when I was in India for the entire month of March. All of the Netflix shows I watch were "not available in your region." Same goes for Amazon Prime Video, despite being a paying customer from the U.S. And still none of it is available in China which is a far bigger deal.

Population has nothing to do with individual's purchasing power. China has a much, much larger middle class than India - therefore its a much, much more important market. For example, last year almost 29 million vehicles were sold in China. By comparison India was just over 3.6 million, which is a slight increase over 2012 numbers - sales of cars have been flat in India for years because there is little expansion of the middle class. Meanwhile China has gone from 9 million vehicles sold in 2008 to well over 28 million last year. More of everything will be sold in China, regardless of how many people there are in India - especially since the Chinese middle class continues to expand at a breakneck pace. China has more than 700 million mobile phones in use, India around 300 million. I could go on...

[User]

On 7/1/2017 at 2:40 PM, Trek of Joy said:

What anyone's friends are doing is irrelevant as there are 200 million TV's sold annually, anyone's circle of friends is so insignificant compared to the big picture its laughable to even mention them. Plus you have to look at what's happening in China and India - since those two countries account for 2.6 billion people and are the fastest growing markets for most consumables. Netflix, Amazon, Youtube and Vimeo don't even exist in China (blocked by the Great Firewall of China, poof no 4k in the worlds largest market) and most of their content is unavailable in India.

The majority of content of the companies you mentioned is available in India. That you could not access select shows on Netflix & Amazon does not negate their other offerings or the offerings and availability of the others. But I hear you.

[tugela]

On ‎7‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 0:32 AM, Trek of Joy said:

Most don't care about 4k because there's almost nothing being produced in 4k, globally there are very few 1080p broadcasts, much less in 4k. Why would anyone buy a 4k set only to have virtually nothing to watch in 4k? As others mentioned 4k is being pushed by Sony and Panasonic because they have 4k TV's to sell, not because of overwhelming consumer demand.

Most don't care about 4k, because a vast majority of TV owners don't own a 4k set (the number of HD LED/LCD/Plasma sets sold in the last 15 years globally is many, many times higher than UHD) and have no plans to upgrade when it does nothing but drain your bank account since there's virtually no 4k content to watch.

Most don't care about 4k because a vast majority of people shoot photos and videos and never do any editing or anything beyond sharing and filling up phones and hard drives. 1080p looks great on their 1080p TV.

And finally most don't care because a majority of web video content is being viewed on portable devices - phones and tablets - 4k really doesn't do much on a 5" screen.

Its not BS - TV sales tell you everything, HD still accounts for two-thirds of all TV's sold despite the fact that 4k prices have plummeted - people are still buying similarly priced 1080p sets in far greater numbers - and TV sales have flatlined after the flat-panel boom in the mid-2000's. Canon's camera sales, that people here continually bitch about, tell you everything. 4k is great for content producers and I personally love it to death, but for the rest of the world - which makes up a vast majority of camera purchases - 1080p is good enough.

And I'm pretty sure Canon's market research goes a little deeper than "they're too dumb to know 1080p sucks, no 4k for the 6d2"

SMH

Lots of people have Netflix, and there is plenty of content there in 4K.

Most mid to high end TVs currently being sold are 4K sets. Whenever someone needs to replace their current TV, or are in the market to get a new set, they will very likely buy a 4K set. Which, coincidently, also happens to be the right resolution to display any home video they might shoot, which again will probably be 4K (because that is what most mid to high end cell phones and cameras shoot). So there is convergence of what is being shot and the display devices for what is being shot. Also, don't underestimate viewing devices. Most of the high volume "common man" viewing devices are cell phones, and for the most part those are already higher resolution than HD.

If someone has a camera that shoots 4K, and also has a TV that shows 4K, why the hell would they decide to shoot HD instead, just because you think it looks "good enough"? Get real dude. Most people with modern cell phones already have 4K cameras. What do you think they are shooting with those cameras? It is already happening

The reason Canon don't have 4K on their consumer cameras is because the processors they have can't shoot it without using codecs that require very high bit rates. Consumer cameras need to record to media that consumers would be willing to buy, and that is SD. Hence no 4K. That is not going to change until such time as Canon gets processors that are thermally efficient enough to record to consumer media. They are not making some kind of strategic choice because everyone "wants HD only", they are FORCED to do it because of the limitations of the technology available to them. 

[fuzzynormal]

On 7/5/2017 at 9:36 PM, Trek of Joy said:

I was in India for the entire month of March. All of the Netflix shows I watch were "not available in your region."

If you want to access your American Netflix account overseas, use a VPN originating from the States.  At the moment all these services use ip addresses to determine customer "location."  So, tell them you're in NewYork when you're actually in New Deli.

[tugela]

On ‎7‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 0:48 AM, Mattias Burling said:

"When I first got my 4K TV set and had friends come around, and showed them stuff I had shot on my NX1 which I already had at the time, they were all going "OMG! It is so clear!" without exception."

They weren't very clear imo. To bad they have been removed.

I don't recall you ever coming around to my house. 

And what has been removed? Or you making stuff up again?

[Trek of Joy]

19 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

If you want to access your American Netflix account overseas, use a VPN originating from the States.  At the moment all these services use ip addresses to determine customer "location."  So, tell them you're in NewYork when you're actually in New Deli.

Tried VPN, it slowed down my connection too much in India and China, even a simple site like Facebook took a few minutes to load in China, no way I could have streamed or downloaded anything - it was like dial-up internet without the cool noises. 

[tugela]

On ‎7‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 0:40 PM, Trek of Joy said:

 

My TV numbers were from 2016, the most recent year available, forecasts for 2017 are flat - about 1/3rd UHD vs HD. Smart TV are outpacing 4k tv's, people want connectivity, not 4k. That is crystal clear, don't know why some refuse to see it.

 

I suggest going to Best Buy and look at what is being sold in the 60-65" range (the current goto screen size for average buyers). Pretty much all models in that segment are 4K, except for a few old open boxes and refurbished sets. And the reason they are all 4K is because that is what is selling, not the HD sets. To see significant HD sales you need to go down to the old standard size (40"). For those sets there are still a lot of HD models, but that size is being replaced by the larger screens as best affordable option to average buyers.

Looking at what happened in 2016 is misleading, because the market is currently in the process of change. When people with disposable income go out to buy a new set they are going to be mostly looking at something better than the old set they already have (which would be 32-40"). That "better" will be a larger screen, which is where the $2k sweet spot currently is, namely 60-65". Those are all 4K. So, when you start looking at the 2018 numbers for example, you are going to see a very different sales profile compared to even a few years back.

[Mattias Burling]

1 hour ago, tugela said:

I don't recall you ever coming around to my house. 

And what has been removed? Or you making stuff up again?

No making shit up is your thing.. sigh.
I meant your youtube videos from the NX1. You know for example the one of the digger that where demolishing a house.
Granted it had almost half the image lost in blown out highlights but one could still see it wasn't exactly crystal clear. My guess an operator related issue or a potato lens.

[tugela]

8 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

No making shit up is your thing.. sigh.
I meant your youtube videos from the NX1. You know for example the one of the digger that where demolishing a house.
Granted it had almost half the image lost in blown out highlights but one could still see it wasn't exactly crystal clear. My guess an operator related issue or a potato lens.

That was taken on the first week I had the camera, and was shot handheld because I just happened to be passing and thought it was interesting. The lighting was what it was. It is not a house btw, it is an office block. The video is also YouTubed after transcoding, not native video. There was no editing other than stitching, so correction for lighting. The original footage is much better than that. Video after the hack is even better. None of my HD cameras come even vaguely close, including all of the Canons I have. As soon as you show any of that stuff on a big screen 4K TV the differences become pretty obvious.

The videos I posted on Youtube were for specific people to see for specific reasons. None of them have been taken down by me. So you were flat out lying.

[Dave Maze]

On 7/5/2017 at 2:16 PM, odie said:

check out a movie called "BABY DRIVER" question is answered 

Was Baby Driver shot in 1080p?

[TheRenaissanceMan]

It was shot on film (with several scenes on Alexa), so I'm not sure what he's getting at.

My local theater has all new 4K projectors. I can't say I see much of a difference between the films mastered in 2K vs 4K. Maybe on the super high end blockbusters, but that difference in look can also just come down to aesthetic differences between them and many (not as huge budget) 2K films. Maybe my eyes aren't keen enough, or I'm too focused on the films themselves to suss out resolution differences. 

4K content over the web is generally too compressed to look any better than 1080p imo, especially at typical screen sizes and viewing distances.

I worked at Best Buy during the 4K boom. When people are evaluating a new TV, they're generally standing quite close, a distance they'll never watch from in their home. When they get the set back to their living room and sit at the typical 8-12ft viewing distance, the bump in resolution over 1080p is negligible. Imo, 4K display makes way more sense for projectors (large screen size) and computer monitors (short viewing distances) than it does for TVs.

Most real videophiles are rocking either a late model plasma or a new OLED, and neither choice is about resolution.

I myself have a 1080p projector that constantly amazes me. Sizes that large have a hugely different feel to a TV, and really let you enjoy every ounce of resolution. I'll probably pick up a 4K model when someone competes with Sony in the consumer 4K space, or maybe go back to a TV once OLED gets farther along its race to the bottom; Sharp is slated to start making OLED panels for the other manufacturers this year, so we'll likely see prices dip by 2018. 

TV manufacturers also have yet to agree on an HDR standard. Some support HD 10, some Dolby Vision, a slim minority do both. And different streaming services support different standards: Netflix content is HDR10, Amazon Prime is all about Dolby. If you're happy with your current display, get something with universal compatibility or wait for that fight to be decided before you jump in.

That's not even getting into cameras, which I'll post about when I haven't just spent 18 hours on set. 

[mercer]

On 7/5/2017 at 8:14 AM, kidzrevil said:

Considering it because the 4K resolution of that thing is amazing but is it worth upgrading to from the g85 ? idk they all look ridiculously clean downscaled to 1080p

Yeah you are right about that. I've been trying to decide between a 4K camera, but then I look at footage from my film on the 5D3 and I forget about 4K. If you're happy with the G85, then why bother changing?

But the a6500 does make for some seriously good 4K downscaled. For 4K, I am thinking about saving up for a 1DC next year. If I decide to get an interim camera, I may get another a6500, or an X-T20, or a D7500... haha too many choices.

Hell, I'm still pretty happy with the 1080p from my D5500... so as a hobbyist, I am probably set.

Hmm, a6500 or G85 is a tough call. Like you said, most of these cameras look pretty damn good downscaled. The a6500 has better DR and a bigger sensor, but the G85 won't overheat. But if you're not running 5 or 10 minute takes, the a6500 probably won't overheat either.

I liked the the look of the a6500 better than the GX85, but that's subjective. sLog3 is pretty insane, it's probably the closest I have found to Raw on an 8bit camera, but I shoot outside, in the woods or wide open spaces, so the possibility/probability of banding was of real concern... unsure if it would be a problem in the city or if there are settings deep down in the menus to deter the banding. And the sagamut3cinema... or whatever it's called, is gorgeous.

Idk, tough call... if I could get an open box for less than a thousand, I would probably buy another one, it would cure my desire for 4K and IBIS, but for my needs... at 1300, it's a little much.

BH has a great return policy, so you could always buy and try for a week or two. If you don't like it, return it and continue with the G85, or upgrade to a GH5.

[Trek of Joy]

On 7/7/2017 at 11:28 AM, tugela said:

I suggest going to Best Buy

Best Buy sells in the US only, I'd suggest looking at things globally.

As far as sales numbers, 2017 will not be dramatically different from 2016, things shift slowly, all projections are flat. Smart TV's are dominating, most being sold - about 2/3rds - are still 1080p. Last year only 40 million of more than 200 million tc's sold were UHD. Don't know why some of you guys can't seem to understand actual numbers instead of making assumptions based on your opinions.

This discussion is going in circles, I'm exiting it.

Cheers

[jonpais]

Since getting the BMD Video Assist, I had the chance to view a couple of ProRes 1080p clips shot with the G85 (outputting 4K to the recorder), and the images look beautiful on my 2K monitor. So for those looking for the elusive 1080p monster, I'd think pairing a Ninja Blade with the GX80, at under $1,000, would be an economical choice.