Grégory LEROY Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 When less than 15% of the people have Full HD screen? http://gs.statcounter.com/screen-resolution-stats http://gs.statcounter.com/screen-resolution-stats/desktop/worldwide Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tugela Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Because we don't live in the third world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 40 minutes ago, tugela said: Because we don't live in the third world. Aren't you from Canada? ? Justin Bacle, EthanAlexander and OliKMIA 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeman Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 I noticed with my gh4 stuff that if I shot in 4k and exported at 1080p it looked "crisper" than if I shot it in 1080. and sometimes a punch in ability is nice, but I'm not really shooting 4k to then be watched in 4k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted August 10, 2017 Super Members Share Posted August 10, 2017 43 minutes ago, mercer said: Aren't you from Canada? ? EthanAlexander, OliKMIA and mercer 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tugela Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 1 hour ago, mercer said: Aren't you from Canada? ? The numbers he is citing are world wide, which means that it includes all of the TV sets in the developing world, which for the most part could be expected to be pretty basic. Most people world wide live in shacks, if you want to use the OPs argument you might ask why we need to build modern houses if that is so. By his apparent thinking there is no real demand so why do it. Obviously, we build modern houses in the first world because first world residents by and large don't live in shacks. This should be clear to anyone who gives this any sort of thought at all, so it always bemuses me why technical sophisticated people who frequent forums like this need to have it explained to them over and over again. People here are not shooting for that demographic, which he should be well aware. In the developed world most TVs offered for sale are 4K (as any trip to an electronics store will demonstrate) and that is why people want to shoot in 4K. You want to produce product for the consumption of people who have money to spend, and those people are buying into 4K. Who cares what sort of TV set the average resident of Burkino Faso (or where ever) has, it is completely irrelevant to first world shooters. That is not their market. As to why the OP would make such a post, best ask him that. I assume that he just does not want to shoot in 4K and is trying to rationalize it using statistics that are not relevant or are misleading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Shooting init, doesn't mean you export init. Even then there's many reasons to still do your project in 4K. If you don't, that's perfectly fine too, though. Actually wish there was something in-between from 1080p to 4K, for many reasons you might benefit from having a bit more than 1080p, but 4K might not at all be necessary. With GoPro there were a couple of different resolutions. Blackmagic had a 2.5K camera as well. Alexa sensors aren't 4K either. Guess those who offer ultra high 4K/UHD or C4K as the up from 1080p/FHD must have their reasons. One additional benefit I think shooting in higher than 1080p/smaller than 4K resolutions has that you can probably up the framerate. 4K60p is cool, but what about 2K@100? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Seems to me we just had a twenty page discussion about 4K... and there've already been numerous others in these forums as well... they're all starting to resemble each other... I was talking with a young woman from the countryside who's lived in Saigon for three years now... she's not been to a movie theater once in her life... watches movies on her iPhone 6... has no interest in going to the cinema... time for my first coffee of the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbp Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Haha yes, this topic might be more done to death than any on the camera forums. It down samples to 1080p nicely, and it does allow for some post reframing. It is nice, but I'm still quite happy with good (keyword) 1080p. I do get a bit annoyed when it's implied that anything less than 4K is junk, and I think there are increasing diminished returns in viewer experience past 1080p. But it is better, so what the heck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 You're right, if you want 28,321,819+ views you gotta shoot SD! (shot on the 5D Mark 3 & green screen ) kaylee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted August 11, 2017 Super Members Share Posted August 11, 2017 No-one watches in 4K but if you want to use it go ahead. Most TVs on shelved in stores are 4K but no one uses it and TV sales in total have been declining for years anyway. Here is a fun experiment! Lets all ask 10 people among our friends and neighbors if they regularly watch 4K. And don't ask fellow nerds like us, ask regular people. Ask your parents. If its more than 2 people Im gonna declare a revolution The 4K evangelists yelled at me already three years ago and said 4K as a world standard was just around the corner, "look at TV sales idiot!". Sigh.. Im still waiting. They claimed no later than 2015 Also, not all cameras downscaled 4K looks better. Some cameras do a better job of that them selves so shooting HD on them makes total sence. Imo, 4K is still just "nice" not "need". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Just how many of us are producing content for television anyhow? And among those who do watch SD or HD televised shows on a 40" or smaller screen, how many wouldn't prefer the experience of viewing UHD content on a 65 inch HDR screen? Just because a billion viewers around the world are watching cat videos on their 5 inch smartphones each day, does that mean we should be shooting in 720p? Most people listen to music on their cellphones too - does that mean it wouldn't sound better on a pair of Magnepans? Simply because most people around the world shoot pictures with their smartphones rather than cameras, does that mean we should too? And which mirrorless cameras shoot HD video that is superior to UHD? Sony? Olympus? Panasonic? Fuji? None of them, to the best of my knowledge. 1080p isn't even 1080p, and 4K isn't 4K. It's been shown time and again that 4K downsampled to 1080p is crisper than shooting at 1080p. If you're capturing for web delivery, 4K offers better image quality than 1080p. Just a few years ago, my 1080p videos shot with the GH3 were plagued with aliasing and moire. Shooting 4K with my Fuji or Lumix G85, it's barely if ever even noticeable. If I capture in 4K, I can still deliver in HD. Or downscale and record with a SmallHD, Atomos, Video Devices or BMD recorder at 4:2:2 or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzynormal Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 Because it looks better. jonpais 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enny Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 craft is much more important than the specs, the way you light your scene, frame it, grade it. That's what people really see. A well graded HD footage is really enough for most of big screens. Unless you want to be seen on Imax, but I'm not even sure our work will ever be shown on theater. If you ask me, I prefer to put as less money as possible on the camera, you can find today some HD raw capable cameras with good dynamic range for less than 3000$, that's all you need, and keep your money for good glass lights, that's what matters most in my opinion byTom Chabbat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 10 minutes ago, enny said: craft is much more important than the specs, the way you light your scene, frame it, grade it. That's what people really see. A well graded HD footage is really enough for most of big screens. Unless you want to be seen on Imax, but I'm not even sure our work will ever be shown on theater. If you ask me, I prefer to put as less money as possible on the camera, you can find today some HD raw capable cameras with good dynamic range for less than 3000$, that's all you need, and keep your money for good glass lights, that's what matters most in my opinion byTom Chabbat good HD for less than $3,000? I only paid $700 for my G85. But yes, even a well-shot SD showreel is superior to a mediocre 4K one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbp Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 2 hours ago, Mattias Burling said: The 4K evangelists yelled at me already three years ago and said 4K as a world standard was just around the corner, "look at TV sales idiot!". Sigh.. Im still waiting. They claimed no later than 2015 I've been hearing this on forums since 2007. A decade! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enny Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 6 minutes ago, jonpais said: good HD for less than $3,000? I only paid $700 for my G85. But yes, even a well-shot SD showreel is superior to a mediocre 4K one. i man you can get a nice camera for 3000 does not have to be 4k. You can get full BMCC for under 3k. I just seen few frames of a dp this frame was captured on BMCC 2.5k raw notice cinematography not 4k 6k 8k i mean it looks beautiful (http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?20700-Frames-from-short-film-I-m-Dping) mercer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 9 minutes ago, enny said: i man you can get a nice camera for 3000 does not have to be 4k. You can get full BMCC for under 3k. I just seen few frames of a dp this frame was captured on BMCC 2.5k raw notice cinematography not 4k 6k 8k i mean it looks beautiful (http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?20700-Frames-from-short-film-I-m-Dping) So how are you liking your BMCC so far? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enny Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 41 minutes ago, jonpais said: So how are you liking your BMCC so far? I think camera is really nice not perfect no such camera exist. But again its just a tool but camera is capable of beautiful images its not run and gun needs light cinematography ect. What Bm did with this camera is just amazing when it comes to color science dynamic range range. I remember beige in film school and thinking one day i will buy DVX100A and now 2017 cameras that we have my god. But yeah i love my BMCC my comp can handle 2.5k raw just fine. I was thinking URSA you know leates and greatest but then i would have to change my entire workflow new pc new io card, storage ect ect. And who watches in 4k and who own a 4k monitor? not many people. To me Dynamic range color reproduction is more important then 4k or what ever k. Just my 2 cents Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 18 minutes ago, enny said: I think camera is really nice not perfect no such camera exist. But again its just a tool but camera is capable of beautiful images its not run and gun needs light cinematography ect. What Bm did with this camera is just amazing when it comes to color science dynamic range range. I remember beige in film school and thinking one day i will buy DVX100A and now 2017 cameras that we have my god. But yeah i love my BMCC my comp can handle 2.5k raw just fine. I was thinking URSA you know leates and greatest but then i would have to change my entire workflow new pc new io card, storage ect ect. And who watches in 4k and who own a 4k monitor? not many people. To me Dynamic range color reproduction is more important then 4k or what ever k. Just my 2 cents Looking forward to seeing some of your footage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.