1990osu said:
negative1 said:
we are saving the 4k scans, for future proofing the video when the time
comes. that is what we are using as our source, not 1080p or 2k.
we've done some quick tests with 4k video and
resampling it down to 1080p, and did not notice an
improvement over just using the 2k/1080p downsamples.
Now I'm completely confused.
much like the problem with kb, KB, Mbyte , and megabytes.
resolutions are confusing.
approach 1
-----------------
the camera is 8mega PIXEL.. we capture the frames at 3500x2200
or something like that.... we then downscale the images down
to 1080p, which is 1920x1080 and then render it to video
True 4k is actually 8.8 megapixels
depending on how you define it:
-------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution
digital cinema standards
standard resolution DAR pixels
-------------------------------------------------------
digital cinema 4k - 4096x1714 - 2.39:1 7,020,544
digital cinema 4k - 3996x2160 - 1.85:1 8,631,360
academy 4k - 3656x2664 - 1.37:1 9,738,584
full aperature 4k - 4096x3112 - 1.32:1 12,746,752
====================================
QFHD is quad full HD, which doubles the 1080p,
which is closer to what we are using.
QFHD (3840x2160)
Quad Full High Definition (QFHD), at 3840 x 2160 (8.3 megapixels), doubles the 1080pHDTV standard (1920 x 1080 or 2.1 megapixels) in both the vertical and horizontal dimensions.
approach 2
========================================
or we can render video at this resolution, but we can't see
it at this native resolution, so we take this QFHD video,
and downscale it to 1080p and compare... there wasn't much
of a difference..
here's more on digital cinema specs:
==========================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cinema
later
-1