OPINION: Do you need 4K (narrative) to have shot at Distribution?

[Waggish]

​Waggish, It is different. Downrez 4K to 1080p footage...will ALWAYS be superior to native 1080p.

Bolex 1080p in my opinion was dead on delivery except in very. very few niche situations (aka, money)

If you're only going to be watching your movie on the web, it really doesn't matter. 

For any chance at a cinema release , it's 4K only.

"It is different." -- It? Are you referring to 'internal' 4k against the 1080p of the A7s? If so, I'm just going to have to disagree and push back a little, and who knows maybe you'll educate me.

I feel like a lot of the specs people get hung up on at sites like this are not really what the image is about at all. The early Alexa was 1080p and Deakins cropped it even further when he first used it on In Time to get the 2.40 aspect ratio, but it's still a much nicer camera than the consumer-grade 4k being thrown out there now. Likewise, I think the full sensor readout of the A7s in 1080p looks nicer than downrezing 4k from the GH4. If I'm missing something here will you explain what I'm missing more specifically?

Re: Bolex, my point wasn't that a D16 is a good idea. Let's say he has a story that he wants to tell. For that story, he thinks black and white is the best way to go. When going to do black and white he wants to go with the D16M and vintage lenses to get better tonality, avoid debayering, get the appropriate feel for his work compared to all that digital color-graded stuff out there. If it's an incredibly good film with good performances I don't think the lack of 4k would affect his ability to get it into a top-end festival. I really don't. But my point is that it's only a limited case with a specific choice made for a specific reason.

Re: "it's 4k only" ...yeah, that's what I was saying. We know where the market is heading. That's the nice thing, actually. The expectations will be topped out at 4k for the next five years at least, so you can safely invest in 4k gear now. If you're going to make a movie, do it in 4k to future-proof it, because that'll be the safe option for the foreseeable future.

[lafilm]

We're now coming in to Spring 2016.

The answer is YES.

[Zak Forsman]

I just finished working on Triple 9... mastered and released in 2K.

[Mattias Burling]

4K is nice but far from a need. Many years left until its a must.

[jgharding]

No! One could argue you don't even need a good film, regardless of resolution ? Luck will help though... And contacts...

[M Carter]

My first month with the NX1, I shot everything 4K unless it was higher frame rates. The image is pretty extraordinary; if you have a planned project and are lighting, it's an impressive image with some usual compromises (limited DR and sensor skew); if you're doing doc work and using available light, it's still pretty amazing, and I haven't had to NR more than a handful of shots, even at 1600 and up.

After buying 8 more terrabytes of drives (could have bought a decent lens for that money) I've been more selective; at least with the NX1, rolling shutter is better at 1080, and the image is still really nice. I shoot 4K if I want to reframe (for 1 man band interviews, reframing with 4K is pretty much a life changing experience), if I know I'll be doing motion tracking or keying, or if the shot is complex or special (did a bunch of night stuff with HMI moonlight and a crane last week). But I'm delivering 1080. Hell, I mostly deliver a 720 render of a 1080 master since most of my stuff goes on line and the corporations I deal with have IT guys and SEO staff who feel 1080 is overkill.