1080P - 1440P - 4K - 8K Why the change?

[Avcn42]

I'm just trying to understand a misconception of a new standard they are using now.

 

The way they put it on paper makes it confusing where they doubled the number and called it 4K. If 1080 was called 2K all this time then 4K would make a lot more sense to some people (including me).

Remember calculating the area of a rectangles, for example, in school? This is the same thing. If you have a figure that is 4m wide and 5m tall, you've got yourself 20m of area. if you double that 5 meters to 10 meters, that's 40m. And when you double that four AND the 5, it's 8x10, which is 80, which is FOUR TIMES the original area. 

 

4x5=20

8x10=80

 

You double one side and it's double the area (the pixel number, in this case). You double both, and it's FOUR TIMES the original area.

This is the "basicest" of basic math, sir.

[EmeraldFlame]

Ok now I get what some are saying and it does make sense. But my original topic is why they changed the standard all of a sudden.

 

They really didn't change the standard, they are just using a different standard. Professional video equipment has used the term 4k for years, and has refereed to things by horizontal resolution for a long time. Resolutions that were approximately 1080p was typically referred to as 1080p in the professional world. The only reason that 1080p was used instead of 2k in marketing is because there were also 1080i tv's, which had the same pixel count, but were only able to refresh half the screen per frame. The 2k-4k nomenclature has no way of differentiating this, so they made new nomenclature up that did. Now that interlaced tv's have pretty much disappeared we no longer need it, so they are returning to the 2k-4k terminology.

So in reality it was 720p/1080p that changed and went against the standards. 4k is merely the return to the older standards from the professional environment in a lot of ways.

[Unhelpful]

Sorry about that.

It's all good was just a little annoying at the time

 

They changed for easier marketing. But as a result made it more stupid, since about 3 or 4 different resolutions fall under "4k"

[Sauron]

It's marketing. You can call it 2160p, nobody'll stop you

[Sauron]

3840 is the one that is 4 times 1080 perfectly, which is why it is being pushed as the standard for tv, and 4096 is being pushed as full 4k to be used in cameras and theaters. I think at this point it would be a step backwards for promotion to call UHDtv as 2160p, because people will see it as a smaller number and they will ask for 4k. It seems stupid to me to have 2 different standards with the same name (both referred to as just 4k), especially if it means more black bars when watching movies.

 

I hope movies come out in UHDtv, otherwise my pb287q might be a bottleneck D: and so would all the current UHD tvs on the market...

[Bensemus]

is 4k 4x 720p????

4K is 4x 1080p. 1440p is 4x 720p. they have 4 times the area when compared to to lower resolution 

[-TesseracT-]

it is not 4x the amount it is 2x the amount. if you need to windows has a calculator built in.

Excuse me? It is 2x the vertical and 2x the horizontal pixel count, but together that's 4x the pixels.

[-TesseracT-]

You forgot 5k and we go by "p" on 16:9 monitors due to home theater finally having something comparable to a pc monitor

Unfortunately 5k doesn't scale well with 4K though... So let's say you wanted to play 1080p or 4K games on your 5K monitor, or watch a movie, it would look bad. That's why I'm not really liking the idea of 5K. Would rather upgrade to 8K after 4K.

That's what I love about the whole transition from 1080, 2160p to 4320p. They all scale perfectly

[-TesseracT-]

I hope movies come out in UHDtv, otherwise my pb287q might be a bottleneck D: and so would all the current UHD tvs on the market...

Yes, 4K blu-ray is on it's way, with other improvements as well like higher color depth. For streaming, Netflix will support more and more 4K content in the future. Many films have been shot in 4K so we'll see many not so new movies as well in 4K, without doubt.

[Sklo]

I first thought of 4K I started to think that it was 4X the 1080 until I saw the numbers witch is just a double up of the current 1080P standard.

got really exited about that

[Sauron]

Yes, 4K blu-ray is on it's way, with other improvements as well like higher color depth. For streaming, Netflix will support more and more 4K content in the future. Many films have been shot in 4K so we'll see many not so new movies as well in 4K, without doubt.

 

Yeah but what I meant is " will we get them in 3840x2160 instead of 4096x2160"

[-TesseracT-]

Yeah but what I meant is " will we get them in 3840x2160 instead of 4096x2160"

I really hope 3840. 4096x2160 pixels won't arrange correctly with UHD displays, it would look blurry. I really really really hope they'll go with 3840x2160.

[TheProfosist]

I really hope 3840. 4096x2160 pixels won't arrange correctly with UHD displays, it would look blurry. I really really really hope they'll go with 3840x2160.

Stuff will get adjusted for UHD from cinema just as it did in the past for vhs, dvd, and bd.

[TheProfosist]

Unfortunately 5k doesn't scale well with 4K though... So let's say you wanted to play 1080p or 4K games on your 5K monitor, or watch a movie, it would look bad. That's why I'm not really liking the idea of 5K. Would rather upgrade to 8K after 4K.

That's what I love about the whole transition from 1080, 2160p to 4320p. They all scale perfectly

And that matter why? 5K isnt going to make it to home theater its just going to be for PC. Its 4x 1440p so even better for those of us used to 1440p@27in. Im waiting until something equivalent to the PA279Q is available in 4-5K for sub $1000.

[Grrizz]

I would speculate that it might have had something to do with 2Kp/2Ki not being as nice sounding as 1080p or 1080i, now that interlacing has finally been put to rest 2K and 4K are a lot "cleaner" sounding. Also if I remember right the 720/1080 moniker comes from a TV standard whereas 4K is a cinema standard so it might in part represent the shift of TVs moving from the traditional TV experience to more of a cinematic one... then again its probably just marketing because 4K's a much bigger number then 1080

[TheProfosist]

I would speculate that it might have had something to do with 2Kp/2Ki not being as nice sounding as 1080p or 1080i, now that interlacing has finally been put to rest 2K and 4K are a lot "cleaner" sounding. Also if I remember right the 720/1080 moniker comes from a TV standard whereas 4K is a cinema standard so it might in part represent the shift of TVs moving from the traditional TV experience to more of a cinematic one... then again its probably just marketing because 4K's a much bigger number then 1080

Also it should be noted that you shouldnt have to worry about i and p when it comes to 4K/UHD as everything will be digital and progressive.

[Grrizz]

Also it should be noted that you shouldnt have to worry about i and p when it comes to 4K/UHD as everything will be digital and progressive.

That's what I meant when saying interlacing has finally been put to rest

[TheProfosist]

That's what I meant when saying interlacing has finally been put to rest

Didn't see that. And actually it'll probably still be used for 3D.

[Hansell]

You are so certain of yourself and you couldn't be more wrong.  You have been providing a great demonstration of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

 

Anyway, for 1080p, there are 1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels (multiply 1920 by 1080)

For 2160p (4K) there are 3840x2160 = 8,294,400 pixels (multiply 3840 by 2160)

 

8,294,400 / 2,073,600 = 4

 

2160p (4K) has 4 times as many pixels as 1080p.

 

This is a common mistake people make when dealing with multiple dimensions.  If you double the lengths of each side of a rectangle, you quadruple (2^2) the area.  If you double the lengths of each side of a cube, you octuple (8 or 2^3) the volume.  If you're dealing with 4 dimensional space, it's 16 (2^4), and so on for each dimension you add.

This is my friend.....

1 Post to bring us to the light