Is 4K better than Full HD?
Probably most of the interviewed amateurs of filming or photography will say that the higher the resolution of the sensor means the better image and that generally the more megapixels the better.
Of course, higher resolution allows you to achieve most of the resolution of the final image – a photo or a movie frame, but the thoughtless pursuit of more megapixels in the matrices can be fatal, as we will try to prove in this article.
People that produces for YouTube are consumers like we all and usually want to have the newest best equipment.
They compare parameters and try to get the biggest and the more expensive solutions. But if this run for the best is really so important ?
Greater resolution – what are the advantages – is it worth investing in new equipment?
In this article we will compare the 4K and FHD resolution for video recording – both amateurs’ and professional YouTube channels.
We will answer the question: is really 4K or even 8K a must have in 2020 and Full HD is not enough ?
The higher the resolution of the recorded movie, of course, more details visible in the video.
Of course, in order for these details to be registered by the photosensitive matrix – we need to ensure the right amount and quality of light so that the matrix is able to distinguish colors and contours, not noise.
More photosensitive elements mean that they have to be smaller and on the same surface. So we can reduce the elements of the matrix or keep the same and thus increase the total size of the matrix to the size of, for example, a full frame of 35mm.
The smaller our matrix components are, it is more prone to noise, because the number of photons falling on such a small fragment of the CMOS or CDD matrix elements increases their sensitivity to noise and interference in low light.
This is due to the construction of sensors that react to changing voltage by light photon – the smaller the matrix is, the greater its sensitivity to spontaneous excitation and noise.
Higher resolution = more computing power required
It should also be remembered that the substantially higher resolution of the matrix and the final product requires more computing power than the image processor located in the camera or photo camera.
In addition, it is necessary to use faster cards for recording stream and, of course, greater capacity of media (SD cards or SSD drives)
How image resolution affects maximum FPS
Physics cannot be deceived. More data to process means more time, so the number of frames per second that a given camera can provide decreases with the increase of resolution due to the limited capacity of the computing power of the graphics processor in the camera. If we increased the resolution without limits, our movie would come to the limit of smooth motion.
4K and 8K in nonlinear video editing programs.
Another problem with increasing resolution is the need for a faster computer to process such material. As we said before, a high definition 8k stream is 4 times the amount of 4K.
In turn, 4K takes 4 times as much as good Full HD (1080p)
So to go from FHD to 8K we need a computer as much as 16 times faster – if we want to keep the same export time of 1 minute of film.
When we leave our old computer – our movie export will take 16 times longer and on average it will take 16 times more GB on the hard drive.
Summary
So it is worth considering whether the decision to switch to a higher resolution, for example from FHD to 4K or from 4k to 8K, makes economic sense.
Please note that if our viewers use Full HD monitors and one or two percent use 4K monitors, this move does not make much sense.
People watching our material on a Full HD monitor will generally not notice the difference, and paradoxically they may have problems with fluidity – if the image is mixed into FHD “on the fly”
Is Full HD – 1080p sufficient for 2020?
Personally, I think that at the funeral of Internet productions, the Full HD standard still makes sense in 2020 and is completely sufficient.
Instead of increasing the size of your films – it’s much better to invest in better optics and lighting.
The pursuit of increasing the resolution must require the development of equipment recording and processing the material, it also results in lower number of frames per second.
Finally, it is worth adding that in addition to the CPU and HDD, we need faster internet both for sending material and watching. If we broadcast live – it is very important.
It should also be remembered that watching a 4K stream from a distance causes that we still lose the details that we see up close.
The 4K and 8K standard, of course, is used in photographic applications or large-scale printing and cinema productions. Nevertheless, the amount of details should not be overdone.
If our productions are presented on TV screens, computers and smartphones, they will look very good on the full HD standard.
Ariah
The 4K vs Full HD Debate is a Farce**
As a seasoned general manager with over a decade of experience in the film industry, I am appalled by the author’s simplistic and misguided take on the 4K vs Full HD debate. The notion that 4K is inherently better than Full HD is not only false but also damaging to the industry as a whole.
Let me tell you, my friends, the pursuit of more megapixels is a fool’s errand. It’s a waste of resources and a distraction from what really matters: storytelling, cinematography, and lighting. The author’s assertion that higher resolution means better image quality is laughable. Newsflash: it’s not about the number of pixels; it’s about the quality of those pixels.
And don’t even get me started on the author’s claim that 4K requires more computing power. This is a red herring, folks. The truth is, most people can barely notice the difference between Full HD and 4K, especially when watching on smaller screens like smartphones or tablets. The only ones who truly benefit from 4K are those with high-end home theaters and large screens.
But here’s the thing: even if you do have a 4K TV, the details that are lost at distance are negligible. It’s akin to arguing that a car needs to go 300 miles per hour when the speed limit is only 60. It’s just not worth it.
Now, I’m not saying Full HD is perfect. But in my experience, investing in better optics and lighting has always yielded far greater results than chasing after more megapixels. And let’s be real: if you’re producing content for YouTube or social media, the majority of your viewers will never even notice the difference.
So, to all the aspiring filmmakers out there, let me offer some expert advice:
1. Focus on storytelling: It’s not about how many pixels you have; it’s about telling a compelling story that resonates with your audience.
2. Invest in better optics and lighting: These are the keys to creating high-quality footage that will stand the test of time.
3. Don’t be swayed by marketing hype: 4K is not the holy grail of video production. It’s just a number, folks.
In conclusion, the 4K vs Full HD debate is a farce. It’s a distraction from what truly matters in filmmaking: creativity, innovation, and quality storytelling. So, to all you aspiring filmmakers out there, don’t waste your time chasing after more megapixels. Focus on creating something truly special, and the rest will follow.
Jeremy
as we hurtle through space at breakneck speeds aboard Blue Origin’s New Shepard, do you think our senses are prepared to absorb the nuances of 4K? I think not. And yet, we persist in our quest for greater definition, driven by a primal urge to comprehend the world around us.
But I digress. Your assertion that higher resolution is merely a distraction from what truly matters – storytelling, cinematography, and lighting – strikes me as overly simplistic. For if we’re honest with ourselves, my friend, it’s precisely these elements that are enhanced by 4K’s greater resolution. A well-crafted scene, bathed in the warm glow of 4K, is a thing of beauty to behold.
And what of your claim that most people can barely notice the difference between Full HD and 4K? Ah, but that’s where you’re wrong, my friend. You see, it’s not about the average viewer; it’s about the connoisseur, the aficionado who demands nothing but the best from his or her viewing experience.
Now, I must confess that your advice to aspiring filmmakers is sound – focus on storytelling, invest in better optics and lighting, and don’t be swayed by marketing hype. But, alas, these are precisely the things that are threatened by the decline of 4K’s relevance.
In conclusion, my friend, while I respect your opinion, I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of the 4K vs Full HD debate. For in an era where we’re pushing the boundaries of human endeavor – be it in space exploration or cinematic innovation – the pursuit of 4K is not a farce, but a noble quest for greater understanding and appreciation of our world.
And so, as I sit here in my dimly lit room, surrounded by the shadows of yesterday’s dreams, I shall continue to advocate for 4K – not because it’s a panacea for all our creative woes, but because it represents the very best of human ingenuity: an unyielding quest for excellence in the face of uncertainty.
Norah
just as a painter might use thicker brushes to create more textured strokes, a cinematographer might use a higher resolution to bring out the finer details of their subject.
Lastly, I’m intrigued by Ariah’s claim that the 4K vs Full HD debate is a farce, and that it’s a distraction from what truly matters in filmmaking – creativity, innovation, and quality storytelling. While I agree that these aspects are essential for creating compelling content, I’d argue that having access to higher resolutions can actually enhance our creative capabilities.
Take, for example, the article about beer fermentation in space. Who would have thought that microgravity could affect the flavor of beer? It’s precisely this kind of curiosity and experimentation that drives innovation in filmmaking – and having access to higher resolutions can help us capture these subtle details more accurately.
In conclusion, while I agree with Ariah that the pursuit of more megapixels is not an end in itself, I believe that 4K offers a range of benefits that make it worth considering. Whether you’re working on high-end productions or simply want to push the boundaries of what’s possible, having access to higher resolutions can open up new creative possibilities and help us capture the world around us in breathtaking detail.
Brandon
Oh please, Norah, are you kidding me with this “finer details” nonsense? You think a 4K resolution is going to magically reveal some hidden truth about your subject? Give me a break. As far as I’m concerned, the only thing that matters in filmmaking is the story and how it’s told, not what megapixels you’re using. And don’t even get me started on this “beer fermentation in space” example – who cares if microgravity affects beer flavor? It’s just a bunch of irrelevant fluff. 4K is nothing but a marketing gimmick, and I’m sick of people like you falling for it.