4k finish?

Joe Riggs May 6, 2016

  1. If one wanted to do a 4k finish with a 2.40:1 aspect ratio, for like netflix what is the exact resolution it should be? 3656x3112? Or is there a universal standard resolution for broadcast 4k?
     
  2. I don't know how you got 3656x3112 for 2.40 broadcast, unless you are thinking anamorphic which does not apply for tv.

    The standard for UHD TV-4k is 3840x2160 and 2.40:1 would be 3840x1600
     
  3. I highly recommend Brad Allen's Aspect Ratio Cheat Sheet:

    unravel.com.au/files/Unravel_Resolution_CheatSheet.pdf
     
  4. Hello,

    I would love to get some input and advice on the best workflow for my first time finishing in 4k.

    Project was shot on a RED Epic
    • 5120x2560
    • Aspect ratio 2:1
    • 23.976 fps

    We would like to edit and finish in a universally acceptable 4K resolution (e.g. Netflix/TV 4k standard), with a 2.40:1 aspect ratio.

    Questions:

    1. Should we finish in 4k or UHD? Is there advantage or disadvantage
    choosing one over the other? With UHD, one gets a little more room to blow up and reframe, right?


    2. In your experience, when finishing in 4k or UHD with a 2.40:1 aspect ratio, does the master file need to be
    4096x2160 or 3840x2160 with blanking or can one deliver 4096x1707 or 3840x1600?
    I'm talking about for Netflix, and other distribution avenues, not DCP.

    3. We will be editing using the original R3ds in Premiere, and yes this does create some issues.
    We could edit in a timeline with the finishing resolution (4k or UHD) or we could edit in
    a timeline that matches the shooting/source resolution 5120x2560.

    In Premiere editing in a timeline that matches your shooting resolution, gives you a few more options and actually makes
    the editing process until picture lock easier. However, once you reach lock, one then has to move the project to a 4k timeline
    and adjust any reframes. By editing in a timeline of the finishing resolution one avoids that extra step after picture lock but the
    actual creative editing is more cumbersome.

    Naturally, when it comes to color, we will be going to resolve and ending up with PR4444 master.
    Thank you
     
  5. 1. We're delivering a show 4096x2160 blanked to 2.40 right now. The difference between that and UHD for blowup/reframing purposes is IMO negligible/non-issue.
    2. If your intent is "universally acceptable 4K resolution" you'd want to stick to 4096x2160 or 3840x2160. Netflix will accept either.
    3. I'm still a fan of doing HD proxies and cutting in a 1080 timeline.. but maybe that's just me. You should be able to translate those reframes from the HD timeline to Resolve without rebuilding things in a 4K timeline if you've got things set up properly..
     
  6. Thanks Brandon,

    Is the storage space for exports in 4096x2160 vs 3840x2160 negligible as well?
    I guess I'm looking for some reason to validate choosing one over the other.
    Was there a reason you went with 4096x2160?
     

  7. Typically 4096 x 2160 is used to deliver to DCP for cinemas, and 3840 x 2160 is used to deliver for television [Netflix, etc.].

    If you're delivering to DCP, choose 4K. If you're delivering to Netflix, choose UHD.
     

  8. At these frame sizes, the file size differences aren't significant.

    There was a small chance the project would go to DCP (at least for limited screenings), so we went 4096x2160.
     
  9. If a project was shot 16x9, and one finishes at 4096x2304 (4k 16x9),
    what does one traditionally do when they want to make a 4k DCP (4096x2160)?
    Just live with the small blanking on the top or bottom of the frame or scale it up slightly to fill the frame?

    Same for UHD 16x9 (3840x2160), if you were to make a 4k DCP, would you live with the pillarbox?

    Thank you
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2016
  10. Jack Jones Colourist

    Jack Jones Colourist Original Member

    565
    262
    0
    A Pan and Scan session to DCI 4K Flat (1.85) sounds like it's in order ;)
     
  11. If you shot at 3840x2160 and are delivering to 4096x2160 without any resizing, the blanking would be on the sides of the frame--pillarboxing.

    Do not scale up to fill the frame. As John "Pliny" Eremic explains: "a small resize factor will only serve to soften your image. You’re stepping on your image. You’re making it worse."

    It's a tough lesson, but you really do have to plan the finishing workflow before anyone touches a camera in production.
     
    Erik Wittbusch and Marc Wielage like this.
  12. Both actions can be done in parallel by using nested sequences.
     
  13. I should have specified that it was shot RED 6k HD (5568x3132) and finishing to 4096x2160.



    Cary, please elaborate, this could save me some time.
     
  14. Oh, then you shouldn't have issues downscaling to either 4K or UHD. You should just go shot by shot during your conform and choose your precise framing for whichever frame size you use.
     
  15. I made a ad hoc video to show what I mean:



    This is a simple example but it also works if you for instance resize the video in the destination format. After all the editing is done you could copy the destination sequence and export it and then copy the source sequence, reset all the offsets by using the Copy and Paste Attributes functionality and export the edited source as well.

    Cntr-Shift-f gets you to the original clip, if you want to go from the source to the destination you can use Cntr-C on the current timecode field, go to the target sequence and paste it in the timecode field.
     
    Joe Riggs likes this.
  16. Not that I disagree, although I do not think it is such a big deal, but we have come a long way in such a short time.

    One to two years ago many people still argued what the point is of 4k since they claimed you can't see that kind of a detail in the theaters and now we are worried about softening when we resize UHD to 4K. :)
     
    Erik Wittbusch and Marc Wielage like this.
  17. I'm finishing girlboss 4096x2160 matted 2.0/1
     

Share This Page