"Garrett Davis" (GarrettDavis)
06/11/2014 at 19:55 • Filed to: None
5
2|
"Garrett Davis" (GarrettDavis)
06/11/2014 at 19:55 • Filed to: None | 5
| 2 |
That's right, we're droppin 10k resolution up in this bitch. 10,000 x 6,818 to be exact. Why, you ask? Just give me a reason why not. Protip: You can't do it.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
xxxxxx
> Garrett Davis
06/11/2014 at 20:16 |
|
That's not 10k, it's 6818p, I guess you could call it 6.818k
|
Garrett Davis
> xxxxxx
06/12/2014 at 01:36 |
|
You're half right, it actually would be 10k as well as 6818p.
For instance, 1080p is technically 1080 x 1920, or 2k resolution (but no one calls it that). Then, 4k is technically 2160 x 3840, or 2160p (but no one calls it that). The flip flop in terminology little no sense, but when talking (X)k, you are listing the horizontal pixel count, and when saying (XXXX)p you're listing the vertical pixel count.
The reason terms like 1080p and 720i because the distinction between interlaced and progressive pixel formats was an important distinction, but now progressive is pretty much industry standard. Now with much higher resolutions they just list the horizontal value because it sounds more impressive to list the bigger number, when in reality its kind of useless because that value only works if you assume the aspect ratio is 16:9, but that's a whole different topic.
Sorry for the ridiculously long and unnecessary answer, I work in a related industry ;)