What is the point of 4k?

[Damphousse]

Of course, the commercial looked better...

There you go. You answered the OP. What's the point of 4k? It looks better.

[jax_rox]

There you go. You answered the OP. What's the point of 4k? It looks better.

I guess I should have prefaced that by saying - downscaling 4k RED footage to HD looked better on a cinema screen than if I had shot it in HD on RED from the start.

However, it really is camera dependant - I'd rather shoot HD on Alexa than 4k on the GH4. I'd rather shoot 4k on the GH4 than HD on a Canon SLR.

It's not as simple as just '4k looks better' because it isn't necessarily. As others have said - all things being equal, you could make an argument that 4k is 'better' but then there's the argument that it is more likely to bring out flaws in makeup, sets, costumes etc.

Colour and dynamic range are more important to me - and tangible things that I can actually see. I like to watch images projected on to cinema screens to make my mind up about what I like. You can have the best specs in the world, but it doesn't mean you have the best looking image in the world - and that's really what matters. The F65 has an 8k sensor, which it uses to create what Sony calls a 'true' 4K image.
Yet I still like the Alexa image better.

I could get good results out of the F65, but I prefer the look of the Alexa, despite the fact that the Alexa doesn't have the same kind of resolution.

We're not living in a world where 'all things (cameras) are equal' with the exception of resolution.

[Damphousse]

However, it really is camera dependant...

I have a pretty solid science background so I always assume when someone speaks about one parameter or another they mean, "all things being equal." It's weird because I've never seen anyone on this forum say I prefer this 4k camera over an Alexa. I mean I really wish our discussions moved beyond that. In science when you want to study one variable you hold all the others stable. It's just common sense.

So I am 100% with you on that. Honestly if my BMPCC was putting out Alexa quality video I would be too busy shooting to have any penis envy about 4k. The problem I think for these lower end cameras is the best way to get rid of moire/aliasing and get Alexa like detail is to go up to 4k and downscale. If you have an Alexa you don't need to go through that exercise.

[Axel]

Honestly if my BMPCC was putting out Alexa quality video I would be too busy shooting to have any penis envy about 4k. The problem I think for these lower end cameras is the best way to get rid of moire/aliasing and get Alexa like detail is to go up to 4k and downscale. If you have an Alexa you don't need to go through that exercise.

 

This!

 

In the right hands, a GH4 makes wonderful video. It's just that by their arguments you can tell that many owners don't have the right hands. Lamenting 'unsharp' images for instance. 

 

Welcoming better resolution should be a no-brainer. Meaning, we shouldn't even discuss it. We should do as those old DoPs do. Shrug and just keep following our goal to make 'fantastic images'. And admit (if we can) that resolution contributes little to this goal, compared to every other aspect.

[GMaximus]

In science when you want to study one variable you hold all the others stable. It's just common sense.

Doesn't work in quantum mechanics and camera discussions ))
---

Simply put: camera sensors usually only capture 1/3 the resolution. So 4K is closer to 1080, but still isn't actually 1080.

True, image capturing process doesn't allow a 100% resolution, but in general, regarding modern consumer stills cameras, a 30% oversampling provides a perfectly acceptable detalization. That's about 5.3k, close to what nx1 is doing.