Is 4K a resolution or not?
4K represents a number 4 kilo count of pixels measured in pixels per inch (PPI ) in one chip that has 3840 x 2160 ( H:V ) pixels arrangement. That is the screen ratio between max. signal to smalle...
Forum Discussion
It’s just 1080p (1920 x 1080) doubled in both x and y. I guess some marketeer figured out that the number is bigger when you use the horizontal number (ish) instead of the vertical (2160p).
If you want to be picky, I would call it a format. But this Wikipedia article seems happy with the word resolution.
Then there’s the question of whether 4K is 4000 or 4096. 😀
In the world of television format here in the USA we followed the NTSC format but discussed here - format is the way of arrangement of pixels in the horizontal and vertical arrays and no connection to resolution. Then why the seller of TV insist saying " this new tv has 4K resolutions " , because $$$ is the main reason to entice the innocent buyer.
edroksense North America is using ATSC 1.0, and is slowly rolling out ATSC 3.0 (which supports 4K broadcasting). NTSC is the old analog broadcasting standard. We have been fully digital for about 15 years or so now.
So, we’re just talking about the words “resolution” vs “format”, right? I agree format is a somewhat better term. A 4K TV has a 4K format, but resolution expressed in PPI varies based on screen size. And then effective/usable resolution, depends on how far you sit from it as well. For sure, marketing wants to suck in customers, though I’m not really convinced that the word “resolution” sucks in more than “format” as I’m not sure that the average buyer has put a lot of thought into either term. And as I pointed out before, that wikipedia page uses resolution the way I would use format so I don’t think it’s as much marketing as it is the term “resolution” gets used in a broader way than you would prefer.
NTSC was kind of complicated being an analog format. It very clearly specified a number of scan lines (like pixels in the Y direction) but “pixels” (kind of) in the X direction was based on the frequency of the incoming signal and the displaying device’s capabilities. The NTSC format specified a maximum frequency response so that they could pack channels in, (which was later REDUCED to add color, while keeping the same channel spacing) but many home devices didn’t live up to that. However, many years later, some home video devices were actually able to exceed that limit, since tech had improved and since they weren’t bound by broadcasting format rules. For example, ED Beta was capable of displaying 500 vertical lines of resolution, but that didn’t seem to work from a marketing standpoint as they sold very few of them.
Marketing video tech is an interesting subject. For example, when I first become a product manager my marketing guys were always sending me studies to bring the new engineer-turned-manager back down to earth. One of the studies showed that only around half of VCR owners were aware that their VCR had a Record feature. Just one of many results that blew my mind.
The two topics 4K or pixel dots VS Resolution or scan image feature are two different thing. I agree they are connected to each other but different things. Those dots when scanned produces images, and resolution is image formed but with lights adjustment they can be presented in a nice picture to the eyes of the viewer. Sellers in my mind - the 4K and resolution as one thing but looking deeply into it they can never be the same thing because of different uses.
