Posted on by

Back to Camera...

Are you sure you want to delete this?

You should ask Netflix if 4K is really necessary!

I have always maintained that a 35mm film print taken off a duplicate negative is never really a full 4K in resolution. That is what audiences watch when they are not seeing a show print off an original negative! Was it and is it enough? It seemed to be enough for 100 years.

Nowadays a digital negative is made from the original film negative so full resolution can be maintained. But is it? Not all films are transferred at 4K. Most releases are still done at 2K, whether they originate on film or are digital capture.

A camera may claim to be able to capture an image at 4K, 6K or even 8K and that may be true. But it is also true that many cameras compress that image before it gets down the pipeline.

What to believe? Your eyes! One of my first films was shot on Super 16mm. A very highly regarded editor contested that with me. 'No way was that 16mm' he said. He never did believe me. 'O Brother Where Art Thou' was one of the first films to go through a DI process. I believe the resolution of that film was somewhere around 1.8K.

So, is it necessary? Beats me!

Back to Camera...