A new study published in Nature by University of Cambridge researchers just dropped a pixelated bomb on the entire Ultra-HD market, but as anyone with myopia can tell you, if you take your glasses off, even SD still looks pretty good :)
A new study published in Nature by University of Cambridge researchers just dropped a pixelated bomb on the entire Ultra-HD market, but as anyone with myopia can tell you, if you take your glasses off, even SD still looks pretty good :)
Isn’t 2k and 1080P basically the same thing?
1920x1080 vs 2560x1440
Not crazy higher but a noticeable increase
It’s not 2k, it’s 2.5k
2k is about double of 1080p and 4k is double of 2k
If 4k is 4k because the horizontal resolution is around 4000, so you’d think 1080p, with its 1920p-long lines would be 2k. It’s fucked that it isn’t.
“4k” is supposed to be a term for cinema widescreen resolution, but got taken over because it’s short and marketable because “4k is 4x as many pixels as 1080p”
What makes it worse is that then 1440p becomes 2k because “it’s 2x as many pixels”
The flip flop irks me
It’s all just marketing speak at this point.
1080p is 2k, the commenters above are just wrong.
Yeah. They went from counting pixels by rows to columns. A 16:9 widescreen 1080 display is 1920×1080, and most manufacturers are happy to call 1920 “2K”.
Ah yes, my 1920x1080 monitor with a resolution of 2560x1440