Doesn’t film have a definition roughly equivalent to 2K?
Not sure why they didn’t just do a digital transfer to 2K.
Comment on James Cameron gives a response to the negative comments on the 4Ks of Aliens and True Lies
GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 5 weeks ago
He and his great team did a bad job. 4k is dumb anyway but I want a high Def version of a movie to look like the film being projected directly.
reverendz@hexbear.net 5 weeks ago
xyzzy@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
No. 8 mm is roughly equivalent to 2K. 16 mm 4K, 35 mm around 5-6K, and 70 mm around 6-12K. 35 mm is the most common.
GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 5 weeks ago
I don’t really think going higher than 1080p really does much for a movie, after that point the finishing returns start to set in unless you have an absolutely giant TV or you’re sitting super close to a still pretty big TV. Maybe for vidya games or something it could make a difference or something filmed in native 4k could potentially look a bit better but especially for something being digitized from a film negative, it can be a choice between keeping analog grit or smoothing it all out digitally and I’d prefer a movie shot on film to continue to look like it was shot on film.
UKFilmNerd@feddit.uk 5 weeks ago
Why is 4K dumb?
ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 5 weeks ago
They used AI upscaling. Not only it completely defeats the point of a release like this, it looks like a shimmery mess.
GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 5 weeks ago
Too many Ks. Unless you have a really really huge TV or you sit super close to it, and also have absolutely no vision problems, there’s a pretty good chance you’re not gonna tell the difference between 1080p and 4k.
xyzzy@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
Optimum viewing distance, optimum viewing angle—these are defined things. In my experience, most people are clueless about how to properly set up a TV. So yes, I expect if a TV isn’t set up correctly, the difference between 1080p and 4K wouldn’t be as noticeable. Transfer quality and TV quality also matter.
GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 5 weeks ago
So your saying it doesn’t matter for normal people
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
I watch my DVD collection on my 50 inch 4k television, and you know what? they’re okay. It’s a 16:9 television, so I get to choose between letterboxes with widescreen releases or pillarboxes with pan n’ scan releases, but we all do. I’m not worried about 4k content. Honestly I’d be fine with a 1080p panel there.
A computer monitor is a different story; you typically sit a lot closer to it, so pixel density is more significant. I can genuinely tell a difference between my 27" 1080p monitor and my 34" 1440p ultrawide monitor. The latter takes up more of my visual field while retaining about the same PPI. I still don’t think I need 4k here though.