Why Don't people understand what 2k/4K is?

"dabhome" wrote:

"MrAdun" wrote:

The i/p designations had to do with the number of scan lines in broadcast TV. Kinda antiquated at this point but that's why we use lines for TV displays and pixels-across for full digital display. It all mushes together at this point, though. I blame marketing.

The i/p has to do with whether the signal is interlaced or progressive.

I just meant a number followed by one of those letters is the number of lines, in regards to mondo's confusion.

I still blame marketing. For all problems, ever.

Don't even get me started on battery chargers naming, "turbo" chargers are 5 times slower than "fast" chargers and other such shit. Buzzword marketing at it's worst.

Measuring horizontal resolution (2K, 4K) makes a lot more sense in the film world, because the vertical resolution is basically random, depending on the aspect ratio of the particular film. Basically, in film, the horizontal resolution is constant, while the vertical resolution varies. They name the resolution after the part that remains constant.

Measuring by the vertical resolution has a base in television, where broadcasts and displays used a scanline-style system, and the number of lines was the most relevant measure of resolution. When televisions moved digital, the measurement scheme used carried over, as did some of the more annoying aspects of analog television (interlacing).

The mishmash of "K" and "p" that are being thrown together today isn't really so much a marketing thing as it is a reflection of the two measurement schemes colliding. It seems that the 4K and 8K terms will win out (which is fine, they make more sense for modern consumer use, where TV has constant vertical resolution but movies vary), although they're now combined with UHD or UHDTV to form "4K UHDTV" and "8K UHDTV".

2G, 3G and 4G have strict standards and are technical in their own right.

That didn't stop marketing from branding things 3G when they weren't 4G when they weren't, and now LTE is being marketed as FASTER than 4G because that term was already abused earlier.

There was no reason for i/p and K colliding...except marketing.

If you guys hadn't noticed, our marketing department hates me. It's mutual.

"cerebral" wrote:
2k became a colloquial world for 2.5k.
Probably because 2.5k sounded a bit silly.
Get used to this convention. ;)

I vehemently reject this simplification. As there are many more devices with 2k (all full-hd devices) than with 2.5k (27" iMac, Blackmagic cinema camera, etc.) or 2.7k (GoPro), it would be really confusing to use 2k for 2.5k. I advocate a more clean and precise language.

"mrjazz" wrote:

"cerebral" wrote:
2k became a colloquial world for 2.5k.
Probably because 2.5k sounded a bit silly.
Get used to this convention. ;)

I vehemently reject this simplification. As there are many more devices with 2k (all full-hd devices) than with 2.5k (27" iMac, Blackmagic cinema camera, etc.) or 2.7k (GoPro), it would be really confusing to use 2k for 2.5k. I advocate a more clean and precise language.

yeah, i know its a bit silly. Media and whoever are inventing constantly new terms, like quad hd. :roll:

"cerebral" wrote:
yeah, i know its a bit silly. Media and whoever are inventing constantly new terms, like quad hd. :roll:

Quad HD makes sense as the pixel count is exactly 4 times that of HD (3840x2160 vs 1920x1080). But saying 2k to 2.5k is totally off.

I'm just gonna bust out my old 56K modem, since clearly 56K is better than 4K.

Except Quad HD usually refers to 1440p, because its 4X the pixels of 720p, which is what vanilla "HD" refers to. The marketing term for 2160p is the very helpful "Ultra HD".

I literally thought that HD and all other terms like Quad HD, Ultra HD and stuff like that was simply a marketing term and had absolutely no bearing on the resolution.

I always just shopped by looking at the actual numerical resolution and display type.