4K Resolution in Cameras is Needed, Not Needed.

In my line of work, quality of images is king. The construct of what makes a great visual image is complex, but it’s one of the greatest confusions that many amateur cinematographers, producers and directors have is surrounding the specific importance of 4K resolution in cameras.

4K is the size of the house, not the quality of the build.

To make it very simple, when creating a budget for a house you start to ask yourself what is most important, such as the age of the house, number of bedrooms, square footage, who the builder was, the builder’s history, energy efficiency, etc.

Resolution is very similar. Just because a house is large doesn’t mean that you’re going to want to live in it. Or, better yet, even if at first glance the house looks stunning, but if there’s a blizzard, the leaks, the damage, or worse collapse, can be compounded if the integrity of the house isn’t looked after during construction.

These house issue analogies manifest in post production when trying to color correct, save highlights, save shadows, push in digitally, etc. 4K is highly dependent on the capability of the camera’s foundation, such as Quality of Compression, which is dependent on CPU capability, which is dependent on how the data is written, and to what media, in what format, etc, and this generates heat, which can affect durability if heat isn’t siphoned off properly.

As cameras become cheaper and 4K more prolific, always look at the specs, and know that the developer of said camera is always making trade offs to keep the price down, and that 4K is merely a buzzword that is largely less meaningful than resolution ever has been in the past. This all being said, it’s easier to ask yourself where did the manufacturer try to save money on making this product, which will lead you to some discerning and maybe disgruntled users.

Hope this helps!

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Drew Maw, MFA.’s story.