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)
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. 22.214.171.124 (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)
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.
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)
- 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)
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 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
List of 4K content
- Hey Austimal! I am not sure, it could look too promotional... Cheers, Zalunardo8 (talk) 16:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)