Max Field Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 Whenever I do a quick edit job for someone and resolution is brought up, I tell them it's a 2k finish even though half the time I'm just doing 1080p. I've never gotten a complaint from doing this, but I was just wondering how crucial the difference is and if you've ever had a client be a real stickler over it? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perry Paolantonio Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 It depends - do you shoot in 2k, and you're just editing/outputting at HD? In that case, it's possible to export out a 2k file if they want one, and you're good to go. If you're shooting in HD and selling it as 2k, I'd say that's pretty dishonest. While the actual pixel count isn't really that much higher for 2k 16x9, if you're shooting at a different aspect ratio, it can be substantial (an extreme: 4x3 footage, say a film scan, at HD resolution is 1440x1080. That's half the resolution of the same film scanned at 2048x1556. So there's a serious difference there. If it's 2k 16x9 (2048x1150), the difference over full frame HD is about 13% smaller. I'd say that's substantial enough that as a client, I'd be upset, but on a technical level it probably doesn't make that much difference. If you're shooting at 2k and just working at HD, there's really no problem with that, if you're giving them the 2k file. We do that all the time - our grading room is set up for HD monitoring, but we do 4k grades every day on that system. The 4k is downconverted to HD for monitoring. The color space is the same, and there's no real benefit to monitoring in 4k in a small room like ours. The final export is 4k, though, unless otherwise requested. -perry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Drysdale Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 2k is for cinema, HD is for TV and similar, both are 1080p. Unless you're making productions for theatrical release, HDTV 1920×1080 is the way to go not 2048×1080. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted December 12, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 12, 2016 I think anyone doing post work should ask the client to be specific in terms of the delivery format. If they don't know, then you should educate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perry Paolantonio Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 (edited) 2k is for cinema, HD is for TV and similar, both are 1080p. Unless you're making productions for theatrical release, HDTV 1920×1080 is the way to go not 2048×1080. There are very good reasons to shoot at higher resolutions even if you're delivering at HD - oversampling, not having to scale up for future use on higher resolution displays, quality of available cameras, etc. And unless you've been under a rock, well, here: https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN40KU6300-40-Inch-Ultra-Smart/dp/B01DUTL4OI/ref=sr_1_1?s=tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1481570064&sr=1-1&keywords=4k+television That'd be a sub-$500 4k television. In a couple years HD will be the new SD. Edited December 12, 2016 by Perry Paolantonio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Field Posted December 12, 2016 Author Share Posted December 12, 2016 I'm not attempting to justify any dishonesty in asking this, but would it be fair to say a 1080p image would blow up very similarly to a 2K image if projected onto a large screen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted December 12, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 12, 2016 It's all about aspect ratio. If your product is 1.85:1, why not deliver it in 2k? The whole point of the format is to accommodate for that aspect ratio. If the product is 1.78:1, then you'd use 1080 as a delivery format. Televisions are generally 16x9 so if you delivered 2k, there would be bars at the top and bottom to match the 1.85:1 aspect ratio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted December 12, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 12, 2016 Yes, though the scaling from 2K to 1080P or the other direction is not ideal, it's done all the time. But if there is a chance of a 2K DCP being needed, I'd finish for that format and make the 1080P version later because the quality issues are going to be more significant for larger presentations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted December 13, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 13, 2016 Bear in mind that there are formats in the digital cinema spec which are 1998 or 2048 pixels wide, and 1080 pixels high. So, you could describe something as "ten-eighty" and still be (microscopically nearly) 2K wide. Nerd mode cancel, I'll get my coat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Greene Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 1:1.85 "2k" is 1998 x1080 1:2.39 (scope) "2k" is 2048 x858 HD 16x9 1920x1080 2048x1152 16:9 is not DCI compliant although an Alexa will shoot this when set to 2k 16x9 My most common format is 1:2.39 scope. We capture 16x9 (2048x1152 )and crop in post. DCP is 2048x858. For the TV version, we start by cropping the 16x9 to 1920x1080 to avoid scaling. But we do reposition and scale as necessary for shots that don't work with the crop. If the movie is shot 2k, finished to HD 1920x1080, and scaled back to 2k for DCP, it will look soft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now