Understanding 3k compared to HD

[Frank Glencairn]

May I remind you guys, that Avatar was shot in HD, projected on football field size screens and I heard nobody moaning about that low resolution.

just saying...

Frank

 

[Leo Sardello]

Derek,

Both Terry and Michael are right on here- the OP is quite clear about the difference he’s talking about being image not sensor size:

...You can see that the Scarlet image is much larger even though it's coming off a much smaller sensor...

 

[David Rasberry]

May I remind you guys, that Avatar was shot in HD, projected on football field size screens and I heard nobody moaning about that low resolution.

just saying...

Frank

Live action motion capture was shot on HD cameras, but the CGI plates were likely much higher resolution to start with. What I saw on an IMAX screen was definitely not HD resolution.

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

May I remind you guys, that Avatar was shot in HD, projected on football field size screens and I heard nobody moaning about that low resolution.

just saying...

Frank

It would look better shot and projected at 4K, wouldn't it? :bigear:

On a serious note, yes, 1080P is a good delivery format... For now. And I'm sure the football field sized screen was viewed from FAR away, viewing distance and image size affects how much resolution you perceive.

I think that image is a bit misleading and some people will think that Scarlet sensor size is that much bigger than 5D's. You should have added region on the picture that shows the area Scarlet would shoot from the same distance with the same lens.

Sorry If I sound a little rude... But damn, we really need to be noob proof these days. However I would do it just to avoid mindless FUD.

RED is like a hate magnet sometimes.

 

[Kalani Prince]

I think that image is a bit misleading and some people will think that Scarlet sensor size is that much bigger than 5D's. You should have added region on the picture that shows the area Scarlet would shoot from the same distance with the same lens.

I guess it could be if the viewer couldn't READ.

 

[Milan Matschke]

Enough for me even 2k.
I would be 2k and 240 frames per second in RAW even better.
I wonder which area anyway meant for the camera.
Do not get me wrong, I want one!
But certainly not for a film production.
As a Red One would then probably the right choice.
Or an Epic, but not quite Scarlet determined by a 2 / 3 sensor.
I will scale the images 3K always be low.

 

[Anthony Cote]

Can't wait to scale the 3K down to prores 4:4:4:4 1080p and then burn my films to Blu-Ray. Not going to hold a candle to my 7D or my friend's 5D.