Talk:4K resolution/Archive 1

4k res video sample
What is the purpose of having a "4k resolution video sample" in a small box in the corner of the article? Even for anyone who might actually be viewing it on a 4k resolution monitor, it's not actually an example of 4k resolution unless it's uploaded that way (which would result in a full screen picture on a 4k resolution monitor.) So it doesn't really serve as an example, but might confuse people who don't understand the logistics of monitors, and the difference between native resolution vs. displayed resolution. Dancindazed (talk) 13:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Why are we calling it 4K resolution? Does that means 1080 resolution is now 2K? Is 720 resolution 1k? Are we measuring columns instead of lines now? Or, is somebody going to call Hollywood out on this lie and call this resolution what it is? 2160p. 50.130.9.4 (talk) 14:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You're just talking about the difference between counting the horizontal or vertical pixels. The reason counting the horizontal pixels is preferred by some is because when you go to a wider image, the vertical pixel count is the one that gets sacrificed. And being that the full 4k video standard is 4096 x 3072 (a 4:3 ratio) that would actually be 3072p. When it gets cropped down to 16x9 it would be 2304p. That's why it actually is less B.S. to just count the pixels horizontally, and smarter. Just a different terminology, there's no lie or calling out needed. Dancindazed (talk) 23:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Youtube
It seems that Youtube no longer supports 4K.  - G. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glups (talk • contribs) 22:03, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

This is not true, You Tube's player is still perfect capable of outputting a 4K resolution, the 2048X1536 mentioned is not the true resolution of the video, it is mostly likely an issue with flash. The following video was encoded and processed at around 2048x426 (48:10 aspect ratio, it's a Surround / Eyefinity video) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QjcYwDcWvM and this one was encoded and uploaded at around 4096x853 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1iMW0FrExI. Both videos where encoded down from a 5040x1050 resolution, the important thing to note is the text at the bottom left, that text is 1 or 2 pixels wide, at a resolution of 2048 it becomes heavily blurred, while at 4096 it is still relatively clear.

I have removed the relevant section from the main article to reflect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.174.152.110 (talk) 17:33, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

List of 4K content
Would be nice to add a current list of 4K films --Autismal (talk) 22:34, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey Austimal! I am not sure, it could look too promotional... Cheers, Zalunardo8 (talk) 16:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Convert 4K page to Ultra HD?
Based on the fact that the Consumer Electronics Association has now for all purposes renamed 4k to be Ultra High Definition(http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57535570-221/ultra-high-definition-officially-replaces-4k/), should this page be renamed/reworked/disambiguated? Tostie14 (talk) 19:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)


 * People recognise 4K more then UHD, on Wikipedia we name things as what most people recognise it as. So now this page should not be renamed.
 * Also 4K and UHD are not the same, UHD covers 4K and 8K, this is defined as 4K UHD and 8K UHD. Once people recognise 4K UHD better then we will rename (Most likely when consumer grade 4K screens being selling)
 * --  Spazturtle  !DERP/3/PiM Talk 23:08, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Also, the question arises whether the article should be called UHD (not likely a good candidate), Ultra HD, Ultra High Definition, Ultra HD TV, Ultra High Definition Television, UHDTV or one of these with dashes in between. Besides, there already is an article Ultra high definition television so it's not a matter of converting or transferring, only merging is an option. It seems more appropriate to keep them separate with cross-references. The Seventh Taylor (talk) 23:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Sony F-35
Shouldn't the F-35 camera also be listed. In 2010, a cameraman told me it was even better than the RED on the production they were shooting. MMetro (talk) 02:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't confuse "better" with "more pixels" since they have nothing whatever to do with each-other.  The F35 is a 1080p camera. Jmcontra (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Sound system
The article currently states "Currently all 4K UHD televisions use a standard 5.1 sound system". How so? a standard 5.1 surround sound system uses a more or less circular speaker configuration. How can that be achieved in a TV set? Do they come bundled with multiple external speakers? Is 'virtual surround sound meant? The statement currently sounds nonsensical so I suggest to remove it. The Seventh Taylor (talk) 21:38, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

No commentary?
I'm sure the details here are useful, but I came here hoping to find some sort of overview of 4K tv from a consumer's perspective. Dougweller (talk) 12:37, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Standardized resolutions
I've removed all the non-existent or rarely supported resolutions from the table of common/standard resolutions. If you want to add other resolutions to the table, explain why here.--Father Goose (talk) 05:55, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

List of 4K monitors and projectors
I am separating individual models into separate rows since having a single row per manufacturer creates a list that is essentially non-sortable. Also, I will slightly alter the "device type" column entries such that projectors, monitors, and TVs are the first word. I will put the editorially inspired "professional"/etc part in parens to the right...

If you have any objections, please revert. If you revert though, please cite what rule was violated so that I don't make that mistake again... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.145.102.186 (talk) 20:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I think its time to split the list into its own article. There are a range of new 4k monitors, tvs and projectors hitting stores and if the list expands it would make the article more unbalanced. - Shiftchange (talk) 15:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Avoid use of "next-generation network" and similar
Addressing this removal as requested. The vague term "next-generation network" doesn't mean anything in this context (are they just talking about bitrates? migrating cable channels onto IP, as the term actually implies? something else?), and the linked article has been tagged as outdated since 2009. The article implied that you can't do 4K without such a network, which is clearly incorrect. (I imagine this is fairly clear from the new info you added noting the actual bitrates involved, which is much better.) ToBk (talk) 13:21, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect image
The image showing the different resolutions is off. The size of the 6K and 4K rectangles are correct, but the rest of the rectangles are too small. The 1080p rectangle is about 1010 pixels high instead of 1080, which makes the 4k resolution look more than twice the height of 1080p. I suppose the issue is that 2K and 1080p are the same thing, but instead the 1080p rectangle (and 720 and DVD) have all been reduced in size. Quinzer (talk) 15:49, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Correct. It is misleading 146.115.129.15 (talk) 01:33, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Agree. Incorrect image. I will try to make one myself and update here. Arkrishna (talk) 15:49, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

If 4k is intended to be the horizontal resolution, why does the image show it as vertical? Also, I think 1080 res is acturally a vertical standard, it shows on the image as horizontal. Someone needs to check all this again and remake the image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.31.152.46 (talk) 23:52, 4 October 2015 (UTC)


 * The image is correct. The 2K and 4K text is just placed vertically because it doesn't fit horizontally. The 1080p and 720p are shown in the most common 16:9 aspect ratio, making them 1920x1080 and 1280x720 respectively. Lonaowna (talk) 16:53, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Comparing to change to 1080p
It's not a completely fair comparison, in fact it's almost apples to oranges because the change to 1080p also entailed a change from bulky projection and direct-view tube TVs to flat panels, which make older technologies look barbaric (there were "1080p" signal accepting-CRTs etc but they did not actually display 1920x1080 pixels). This would give the original HD a huge advantage as it was a complete change in tech, not just a single spec, and makes the 4K takeoff surprising. This could relate to a more connected society and may have implications in other subjects worth noting. B137 (talk) 23:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Untitled
Most of the 4k video material I've seen (in an academic context, see www.cinegrid.nl or www.cinegrid.org) was 4096 x 2160 pixels at 24 fps. See http://staff.science.uva.nl/~grosso/Publications/AmsCineGridExchange.pdf. I was curious why this format is not mentioned (is it not standardized or uncommon?) Macfreek (talk) 14:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Can someone tell me what "K" in 4K stands for? Thanks. 78.2.100.220 (talk) 15:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

The "K" means "thousand". So together it means 4 thousand which is obviously referring to the resolution. (108.87.19.31 (talk) 09:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC))

Thought the sources this article refers to speak of a horizontal resolution of 2160 pixels. (http://www.ultrahdtv.net/the-ultimate-guide-to-4k-and-8k-ultra-hd/). So the article now contradicts it source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.234.11.154 (talk) 22:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, the K means "thouand" as in "kilolines" (in this case, referring to roughly how many vertical lines there are instead of how we're used to using the number of horizontal lines for the nomenclature as with the lower resolutions, for some reason. It's basically the same as the K in "kilobyte" (except that those are in multiples of 1024). 75.162.203.43 (talk) 07:41, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

4K vs 4k
Does anyone know what the definitive term is? Most sources use 4K including this article, but a few use 4k and 4k matches the SI unit for kilo. --Dee Earley (talk) 13:08, 8 October 2014 (UTC)


 * The standard seems to be to have it capitalized. It looks better from a marketing perspective, I have no idea if it has anything to do with SI. B137 (talk) 04:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is short for "kilo," as in... "kilolines," heheh... But yeah, most of them are capping it (the k; not the 4 :-D ...). It's basically the same as the K in "kilobyte" (except that those are in multiples of 1024). 75.162.203.43 (talk) 07:45, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Section build (signatures may not play usual talk page role)
Despite rapid price drops beginning in 2013 for viewing devices, the home cinema digital video projector market saw little expansion, with only a few manufactures (only Sony ) offering limited 4K-capable lineups, with native 4K projectors commanding five-figure price tags well into 2015 before finally breaking the US$10,000 barrier. This despite criticisms that at normal panel size and viewing distances, the extra pixels of 4K are redundant at the ability of normal human vision. On the contrary, home cinema employs much larger screen sizes without necessarily increasing viewing distance to scale. JVC has used a technique known as "e-shift" to extrapolate extra pixels from 1080p sources to display 4K on screen through upscaling or from native 4K sources at a much lower price than native 4K projectors. This technology of non-native 4K entered its fourth generation for 2016. [this ref suffices for mere existence] JVC used this same techcology to provide 8K flight simulation for Boeing that met the limits of 20/25 visual acuity.

Finding refs was pretty easy, for now things ref'ed elsewhere will remain for now without inlines. B137 (talk) 14:01, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

5K
Why is WHXGA (5120x3200) mentioned instead of HXGA (4096x3072)? 4096/3840 is 4k width. 5120 is (theoretically) 5k width. This is especially confusing as Youtube specifically calls HXGA (4096x3072) 4k. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.17.173.158 (talk) 12:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


 * 4K is 4 * 1024 or 4096. 5K is 5 * 1024 or 5120. 40.129.236.30 (talk) 22:37, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I suggest that the article 2160p be merged with this one.

There is simply no reason to have 2160p as an article since its information can be used here in a section. 14.202.222.129 (talk) 09:00, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

4096*2560
I heard that this is the actual 4K res, which still has a nice 16:10 ar. But there's no mention of it in TFA. Can anyone confirm/deny the existance of this res in relation to "4K"? Zoef1234 (talk) 18:50, 10 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Actual how? I see some computer monitors exist. But we won't be buying 16:10 TVs anytime soon, as this aspect ratio is not defined in current Widescreen signaling. --84.209.119.158 (talk) 21:26, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, 4K requires 4K pixels in at least one dimension. The screen makers are not doing customers a service by telling them non-4K screens are 4K. 40.129.236.30 (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


 * 4096x2560 is "proper" 4k. 3840x2160 is Ultra HD, but it's called 4K since 3840 rounds up to 4000. 14.202.222.129 (talk) 09:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Framerate
2160@400 or 2160@120, a new topic is in place here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.80.157.6 (talk) 19:08, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

UHD-2
I have removed a line about the 8K standard UHD-2, since it seemed like off-topic trivia. If anyone wants to add the info to 8K resolution or elsewhere, it was as follows (after editing):

—67.14.236.50 (talk) 08:14, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 4K resolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130514073746/http://digitalmediazone.ryerson.ca/blog/canadian-serial-entrepreneur-to-launch-first-4000-pixel-television-signal-bulb-tv/ to http://digitalmediazone.ryerson.ca/blog/canadian-serial-entrepreneur-to-launch-first-4000-pixel-television-signal-bulb-tv/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

More accurate description of horizontal pixel edge, etc...
I recently modified several muddy sections on this page; to start with, here is the original opening of the article:

'4K resolution, also called 4K, refers to a horizontal screen display resolution in the order of 4,000 pixels.'

And here is the citation:

'Goulekas, Karen (2001). Visual Effects in a Digital World. Morgan Kaufmann. p. 587. ISBN 9780080520711. 4K resolution: A general term referring to any digital image containing an X resolution of approximately 4000 pixels.'

So for clarity I recently changed the text to read:

'4K resolution, also called 4K, refers to a monitor display (TV, PC, cellphone, etc) with a display resolution of roughly 4,000 pixels along the horizontal (long edge in landscape view) border of the screen.'

While I made the mistake of calling this a 'minor edit', this information and verbiage adds (IMO) clarity and context to the issue at hand.

However someone reverted it to the original text, stating: 'Not an improvement, and the new definition does not match the cited source (4K does not refer to the monitor display).'

Guess all I can say is... For real? What type of citation can one possibly be looking for? A citation for 'landscape'? A citation for the term 'border of the screen'?

With the advent of 4k in all types of devices, it seems important for average cellphone users, or say, GoPro product users (who may have 4k imaging or screens) to know and understand that though they hold their phone/device in a vertical (portrait) position, that in such position the horizontal (short side) is not the edge which contains roughly 4,000 pixels. For a large and ever-growing number of people, 'horizontal' depends on how you hold the device. 'Horizontal' unfortunately does not automatically imply the 'long' or 'longer' edge/side.

Gstanley123 (talk) 02:50, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I suggest you actually read both the objection and the cited source. Your version was simply wrong. It contradicted the cited source, which is unacceptable. 4K does not refer to the monitor display. It refers to a digital image or resolution. Furthermore, your edit was generally poorly written (like "4k" instead of "4K", "accuity" instead of "acuity" etc.) It simply wasn't an improvement.&mdash;J. M. (talk) 14:39, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Rewrite needed on this part
First, to confirm DCI (movie theaters) is 4096×2160, while "true" 4K is 3840×2160, talking a slight difference in aspect ratio, rather than a significant difference in resolution. In traditional displays, such as LCD or OLED, talking 3840 pixels across the screen - with each pixel being 1/3840th of the screen width. They do not overlap - if they did, detail would be reduced. The diameter of each is basically 1/3840th of the screen width or 1/2160th of the screen height - either gives the same size pixel.

That 3840×2160 works out to 8.3 megapixels, the official resolution of 4K UHD (and therefore Blu-ray UHD discs).

But the 4K UHD standard doesn't seem to care how large the pixels are, so a 4K UHD projector (Optoma, BenQ, Dell, others) counts, because these projectors have a 2718×1528 pixel structure. Those projectors process the true 4K of data, and figure out the best way to handle it with overlapping pixels, which is what pixel shifting is all about. Unfortunately, each of those pixels is far larger, each one has 50% more area than true 4K. Those pixel shifting projectors fire a pixel, shift it up to the right, by a half diameter, and fire it again, with modified data, but that second firing overlaps the first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.202.60.18 (talk) 22:07, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed, the whole home video projection section is quite poor and sounds like it was written by a 12-year-old or a non-native English speaker with a bit of their own opinion thrown in — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:0:80F:0:0:0:5C (talk) 01:00, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Definitions Section
The article mentions that there are 3 main 4K standards: 3840 × 2160, 4096 × 2160, and 3840 × 1600. There seems to be some ambiguity as to what the word "standard" and "definition" mean here. 4096 × 2160 and 3840 × 2160 are the resolutions of two 4K formats defined in standards documents (from DCI and ITU respectively). 3840 × 1600 is not defined by any standard, it is just a resolution that has been used in some monitors. The article should be changed to either be about commonly used 4K resolutions, or 4K formats defined by standards documents. It should not be titled "Definitions" and then list some formats defined by standards, mixed with some items which are simply resolutions that have been used on some monitors. I can make the changes if there are no objections. GlenwingKyros (talk) 16:39, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

3840 × 2160 name, and "4K" term usage
"UHD-1" is the name of DVB's plan to roll out 4K resolution to broadcast television. It isn't simply a name for 3840 × 2160 resolution. ITU doesn't define any official names for each format in BT.2020 (the UHDTV definition). They simply refer to them as "the 3840×2160 system of UHDTV" and "the 7680×4320 system of UHDTV". Outside of the standard itself, they tend to refer to it as "the 4K UHD system" or "the 4K system of UHDTV" or something like that. That being the case, I think "4K UHD" or "4K UHDTV" would be an acceptable term to use as the name for this format here, not "UHD-1".

In addition, the statement "the term 4K is traditionally reserved for the cinematic, DCI resolution" is false. Of the three sources cited at the end of the sentence, only one is relevant (the other two are examples of manufacturers using the term "UHD", for a earlier part of the sentence). The only source relevant to the quoted statement about 4K usage is the ExtremeTech article, which is written by a consumer with no apparent expertise in this area (the article also holds that 4K refers uniquely to 4096 × 2160, and that 3840 × 2160 is not a 4K resolution). I submit that this is not an authoritative source. Here is a better one, from CEA (original report is a paid document, but there's a transcript available here)


 * "The term “4K” is generally used by content and production companies to refer to horizontal display resolution of 3,840 pixels or greater."


 * "“4K” generally refers to video resolutions at least 3,840 pixels in horizontal width."

In the modern day of course the term 4K is certainly not reserved for 4096 × 2160, as it is very commonly used to mean 3840 × 2160. However, even "traditionally" in the cinematography industry, before 4K TVs came to the masses, that has never been true. 4K (in the traditional usage) is simply a blanket term, a category of sorts, for any resolution roughly 4000 pixels wide. For example, here is a discussion about 2K and 4K resolutions from 2004, which is before the DCI standard even existed.

I have people on the HDMI page trying to replace all instances of "4K" in reference to 3840 × 2160 to say "2160p" instead because they believe that the term "4K" was coined by DCI and refers exclusively to the DCI format. My impression is that this is a fairly common belief, due to articles written by consumers with inadequate research, like the ExtremeTech article. I believe it would be helpful if this page were made more clear and accurate regarding this topic. We can start by removing the aforementioned statement about "traditional usage" of the term 4K. GlenwingKyros (talk) 17:29, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Linear?
This article includes the phrase "4K linear channel". It needs a definition and/or link. David Spector (talk) 21:51, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

1.$\overline{77}$∶1
Why overline ? What does mean this kind of number with overline ?

Thanks.

--AXRL (talk) 12:15, 7 October 2018 (UTC)


 * https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_decimal#Notation GlenwingKyros (talk) 18:57, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * JVC DLA-X550R (4K projector).jpg

Ultra wide television - wrong math
5120:2160 does NOT equal 21:9, but 5040:2160 does. This is an obvious inconsistency for flat screens, but can make sense for curved ones, because 5120 pixels can be actually seen as 5040 pixels, depending on the distance from the screen. Any ideas? 85.193.211.244 (talk) 11:51, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


 * That resolution equals 21.3:9, so approximately 21:9. It is just rounded for convenience by the manufacturer. This is also done for flat screens, and has nothing to do with curved screens. This is also explained in 21:9. Lonaowna (talk) 13:05, 7 October 2015 (UTC)


 * This is because this article lacks of linking 16:9 aspect ratio, 16:10 aspect ratio and 21:9 aspect ratio, as some editor feels that those edits are "not terribly useful". As no reliable source can be seen on using "999:540", I just use "37:20", as shown in Ultrawide formats. UU (talk) 07:24, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * You can feel free to link pages if you want, it was your other edits I didn't feel were constructive. In the future, if you disagree with an editor, you are always free to start a discussion and present your reasoning if you believe you have convincing reasons for doing things a certain way. There is no need for any kind of passive aggressive nonsense or sitting in the corner simmering waiting for a chance to "strike back". Seen it too many times, so please don't be one of those people :) GlenwingKyros (talk) 09:54, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * So you ONLY remove those edits that are "not terribly useful", okay? But you actally remove ALL of my edits, indeed! I have seen many hypocritical guy in this freaking stupid Wiki! UU (talk) 15:08, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

You made a number of edits all over the page, and it wasn't really worth the time to go through and manually revert your edits one by one, since the only one that made sense was a simple page link or two, which can be added back in a few seconds if you really feel it's important. Also, having edits reverted is a quite normal thing, it happens to me too sometimes. If you can't handle it and discuss in a calm manner, this may not be the place for you. GlenwingKyros (talk) 18:09, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Aspect ratios typos?
What's with all the aspect ratios having 'x∶1' instead of simply the colon? 90.80.208.242 (talk) 16:45, 12 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Someone changed the template:ratio page. I've reverted the change. GlenwingKyros (talk) 16:53, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Home video projection section
This section reads a bit like advertising copy, particularly the explanation of pixel shifting, "unlike Sony's home offerings"

No citations either past the first paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by -αβοοδ (talk • contribs) 14:04, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Comparison of common broadcast resolutions
What does exactly that image represents? I only see bigger sizes but for which constant feature? --Backinstadiums (talk) 17:12, 13 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Constant pixel size. GlenwingKyros (talk) 19:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)