# The Truth About 2K, 4K & The Future Of Pixels



## Alan Brown (Jun 7, 2006)

This is an excellent article on several principles of imaging science theory and practice:
http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/the-truth-about-2k-4k-the-future-of-pixels 
The author makes clear again how resolution should not be at the top of anyone's list for determining image quality. It also reveals how the insidious propensity for marketing exaggeration is present even on the pro side of the motion imaging industry. Note the links to additional info in the body of the article.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants Affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"


----------



## Dave Upton (Aug 4, 2009)

Fascinating read! Thanks Alan.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Amen to that article. Though the hard core proponents of the "look" of film will likely be cringing at the thought of higher frame rates and lower resolution. Thanks again, Alan.

Maybe we should start a "red herring" forum identifying how so many marketing and psuedo-technical assumptions lead people down the wrong path.


----------



## Alan Brown (Jun 7, 2006)

lcaillo said:


> Amen to that article. Though the hard core proponents of the "look" of film will likely be cringing at the thought of higher frame rates and lower resolution. Thanks again, Alan.
> 
> Maybe we should start a "red herring" forum identifying how so many marketing and psuedo-technical assumptions lead people down the wrong path.


The key to spotting a counterfeit is to master the genuine, not try to master all the possible deviations from the genuine. We would see less confusion and erroneous conclusions if there was more education about fundamentals in the consumer marketplace. The Imaging Science Foundation doesn't get their mission fronted by the consumer tech media like they once did. Their mission has always included both professional and consumer education, not just training display calibrators. Once again, much of the key to successful implementation of video technology rests with an understanding of human perceptual factors. 

Too many people get caught up in comparing numbers, and/or become easily distracted by marketing trends and popular fads. Frankly, I don't expect that will ever change much. Not even in forum communities like this one, where there is a greater concentration of consumers seeking deeper understanding. Many AV hobbyists still prefer to rely on natural urges and intuition, rather than technical expertise and science.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Nonetheless, Alan, we do keep banging our heads agains the wall of displays and mis-information that are presented to most consumers...and professionals.


----------



## Alan Brown (Jun 7, 2006)

If all displays could produce an accurate picture, would there still be plenty of room for differentiation between models? If so, how?


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Could and would are two different things. In either case, there are feature differences which are more meaningful to most users than accuracy anyway. There are also service potential, installation differences, the manner in which one must manipulate the set to get accuracy, options for other preference settings other than accurate reproduction of a source, and many other reasons that are currently valid in distinguishing one product from another.

Manufacturers come up with all manner of creative ways to distinguish products that perform poorly. I have no doubt that they could find ways to muck up an accurate display to make it more marketable. They do it already.


----------



## Alan Brown (Jun 7, 2006)

If you have not yet checked the links in the article, this 8-part video presentation is well worth the time to work through: http://media.panavision.com/ScreeningRoom/Screening_Room/Demystifying_Part1.html . At the end of each segment, just hit your back button to access the next one.

The presentation goes into much more detail behind points made in the article, and explains much about MTF, resolution, sharpness, lenses, dynamic range, human perception, image acquisition/processing/conversion, scaling, projection, etc. I now understand much better why there is so much difference in the overall appearance of one video program versus another, one display type versus others, how better lenses can make such a substantial difference at both the camera end and the projector, etc. Highly recommended!


----------

