Amazon's Original Programming Will Be Shot in 4K

Status
Not open for further replies.

CDdude55

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2011
29
0
18,590
That's great, but it's a matter of worth while content. Especially with little people actually having a 4k display. Shows like "Betas" aren't going to entice people to adopt expensive TV's.
 

inthere

Distinguished
Jul 28, 2006
32
0
18,580
I'm on a 39" Seiki 4k tv that cost $449 on Amazon....there's a TCL 50" 4k tv also on Amazon that's less than $700. Cheap enough?
 

typicalGeek

Honorable
Jun 24, 2013
2
0
10,510
Why does it seem that every article that refers to UHD say that it is "more than 4 times that of HD resolution". Taking the numbers given in the above article, UHD is 3840 x 2160, or a total of 8,294,400 pixels. Actually, that is EXACTLY four times the resolution of HD's (1920 x 1080) 2,073,600 pixels. No more, no less.
 

CDdude55

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2011
29
0
18,590
I see no such things, all 4K resolution screens at least on Amazon are at the least $650 for a new non-open box TV ,still to expensive considering the the lack of current programming. You have to weight the expense with the usage which is arguably still lacking.
 

CDdude55

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2011
29
0
18,590
I see no such things, all 4K resolution screens at least on Amazon are at the least $650 for a new non-open box TV ,still to expensive considering the the lack of current programming. You have to weight the expense with the usage which is arguably still lacking.
 

rayden54

Honorable
May 14, 2013
12
0
10,560
What sort of internet connection do you have to have for 4K streaming anyway? I can't even manage "normal" HD--not that I have a good internet connection.
 

joditas

Honorable
Feb 28, 2013
2
0
10,510
"Why does it seem that every article that refers to UHD say that it is "more than 4 times that of HD resolution". Taking the numbers given in the above article, UHD is 3840 x 2160, or a total of 8,294,400 pixels. Actually, that is EXACTLY four times the resolution of HD's (1920 x 1080) 2,073,600 pixels. No more, no less."

If it's the true and original 4K format (4096x2160) used in digital cinema, that is actually true, however people just follow whatever what other people said and use 4K and UHD interchangeably and at same time become confused, just like this article.

In general, the term 4K shouldn't be used, it's not hard to know 3840 is not yet 4000, it should just stick the term UHD. People didn't call FHD as 2K back then, so why it's now all of sudden use the cinema format and called 4K? Only because when it was introduced there was no erroneous media use the term to tell general public, once it's stuck, it's hard to break.
 

WithoutWeakness

Honorable
Nov 7, 2012
40
0
10,590
"Why does it seem that every article that refers to UHD say that it is "more than 4 times that of HD resolution". Taking the numbers given in the above article, UHD is 3840 x 2160, or a total of 8,294,400 pixels. Actually, that is EXACTLY four times the resolution of HD's (1920 x 1080) 2,073,600 pixels. No more, no less."

"HD" is 1280x720. 1920x1080 is known as "FHD" or "Full HD". 4K is much more than 4xHD. It is exactly 4xFHD as you point out.
 

fimbulvinter

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2011
40
0
18,580
The Alpha wolf study was discredited as flawed science over 20 years ago and people still site it as somehow applicable to humanity. Way to be shitlords, Amazon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.