|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: 2K vs 4k
|
|
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 11-29-2015 02:07 AM
I've seen both and worked with both and it's a "meh" thing.
What 4K does (and this was SONY), is to allow the people see a sharper image on the screen sitting about 5 rows back from the screen, where 2K, the sharpest was close to 8 rows back from the screen. 35mm could get closer.
We have both and, in all due actuality, it's not a ticket seller since we rarely get patrons asking if the feature is 4K or not.
Some 2K content can look as good as if it was 4K content firing through a 2K projector.
The latest "Mad Max" feature, even though it was 2K, looked great to look like it was 4K.
Once again, it's all up to the post production on how you want it to look on the screen.
Now, if you've got 35mm scope and a 70mm Ultra Panavison of the same feature, you will definitely noticed the difference how it looks on the screen and it will win the extra ticket sales.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 11-29-2015 11:16 AM
While the overall 4K picture definitely looks better...in the DLP world...4K comes with the unintended lowering of contrast. So not all things are improved.
The realities are that as technology allows, the tendency is going to be towards higher resolutions (even the home is moving to 4K though I'm still at a loss for the content and I don't see the home user really pushing this or demanding it...I don't see them throwing away their HD systems for 4K...just buying 4K because that is what is being offered more an more).
The cost of upgrading a 2K system to 4K is rarely a good deal. Depending on your server it may just be a configuration change, a license fee to activate the 4K processing or a hardware change to get a suitable IMB based system on line. However, the real cost is on the projector side...the 4K upgrades are typically in the $20K range (give or take a couple thousand) and often there is a very small core charge in there and only for units that are under 2-years, typically. When you add up the cost of the upgrade(s) versus moving the 2K system (or selling it) and buying a new 4K system, the deal starts looking worse. You all being a single would rule out just moving it and you may not get good resale value on selling. So...is it worth up to $25K for you to make the "jump" to 4K? Will you need a new lens (different throw ratios on the larger imager). Is your 2K system even upgradable?
Note, at this point, for singles, I do normally recommend just starting with 4K...it future proofs you a bit more but when 4K was more of the new kid...I wasn't as big on it...the amount of content was VERY small (and that is definitely changing now) and the overall costs were higher for little benefit. That is definitely changing at this point. For typical "mall" cinemas, 2K is going to serve them well still with no business downside demonstrable except maybe in their largest screens.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006
|
posted 11-29-2015 02:21 PM
Just a personal observation:
Several months ago I screened the same movie in two different screening rooms,
on two consecutive days. One show was 2K and the other was 4K.
The screen size was about the same, give-or-take a foot or two. Knowing I was
going to be doing this, I had made some 'mental notes' of certain scenes so I
could make some comparisons of the two.
Quite frankly, if I didn't know which was which, I probably wouldn't have
noticed any real difference. However, as one might expect, there was
if you compare the two, there was more detail available in the 4K.
For example, I recall one scene that took place in a penthouse office with
large plate glass windows. Other buildings were visible outside the windows.
In the 2k version, you could tell that some of the other buildings were
brick-faced and had Venetian blinds. In the 4K version, you could actually
SEE the individual slats in the blinds and count the bricks.
But these buildings were 50 feet or more away in the background of the shot.
Was the extra resolution important to the scene or story? - in this case, "NO".
In fact, most of the differences I noticed between the two versions
were really inconsequential based on my observations that day.
>Disclaimer: I was watching these on 'screening room' sized screens, about
25 feet wide, and sitting in the rear of the room.
I'm sure some differences between 2K & 4K would have been more obvious if
I were watching them on bigger screens, or sitting right up front.
But would the higher res have made a difference in my enjoyment of the movie?
IMO, "no", but others are free to disagree.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 11-29-2015 03:53 PM
If the projected image is dialed in sharp enough to reveal at least some of the pixel grid viewers will be able to see the difference between 2K and 4K if they're sitting close enough or watching the movie on a really big screen. Textures on fabric, strands of hair and details on technical looking objects will be better resolved. On screen type and graphics will look better in 4K than 2K.
If the projected imagery is soft at all no one is going to see any difference between 2K or 4K regardless of viewing distance.
I can sure tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p content on UHDTV monitors. The pixels are physically built into those screens and not prone to any of the optical limitations that can be present in a d-cinema projection setup.
quote: Monte L Fullmer
We have both and, in all due actuality, it's not a ticket seller since we rarely get patrons asking if the feature is 4K or not.
Given the way movies are advertised by studios and theater chains there is no way for any casual customer to incidentally find out a movie is in 4K. The information is just not there. I've never seen anything regarding 4K on a movie poster, in a movie's credits or in any studio-related advertising. I can't recall ever seeing 4K mentioned in any theater directory ad anywhere on a title-specific basis. At best, some theaters might mention 4K vaguely. But they never say if a specific movie is shown in 4K. Why even bother going from 2K to 4K if it's never going to be mentioned?
I can only find out if a movie had its digital intermediate rendered in 4K and shipped 4K DCPs by visiting here or looking something up at Internet Movie Database -and the info at IMDb can be kind of iffy with its accuracy. There's no way for me to find out if a certain movie theater is equipped with 4K resolution projectors unless I can actually see what's in the booth. Calling theater staff or management is no guarantee. Some will tell the truth, some will just tell you what they think you want to hear and others won't say anything as if they're protecting some sort of secret.
quote: Steve Guttag
While the overall 4K picture definitely looks better...in the DLP world...4K comes with the unintended lowering of contrast. So not all things are improved.
I wonder if Texas Instruments and various projector manufacturers have thought about making the DLP chip sets bigger to improve color and contrast quality. That is something which is happening with digital cinema cameras. The sensor in the Arri Alexa 65 is 3 times larger than the sensor in a standard Alexa camera. Red's new Weapon Dragon 8K camera features a larger 40.96mm X 21.6mm sensor, which is a little bigger than a full frame sensor in a 35mm style DSLR camera. Their previous camera sensors have used smaller 30.7mm X 15.8mm "Super35" sized sensors. The Alexa 65 sensor has a 54.12mm x 25.58mm active area, but requires larger lenses designed for 5-perf 65mm cameras.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic