I'm new, hello
- Thread starter Genoess
- Start date
A general question about resolution. I posted this on r/videography and got zero responses. Maybe my question(s) is too hard, or too stupid? I don't know lol.
The max resolution for Instagram Reels is 1080 x 1920, would capturing the video in 4K then downsizing it improve quality or do nothing at all?
If display device resolution is the same resolution as video resolution, say a display resolution of 1920 x 1080 displaying a Full HD video (1920 x 1080), would that mean that's the maximum display resolution which which will still be able to display that video resolution at it's optimal appearance? In other words, if you go with a larger (higher resolution) display, image quality would suffer, to bring it back up to optimal you'd have to use 4K video but you would notice no difference in quality going down in display resolution.
Resolution has always confused me. I understand the basics, but there's some areas I'm uncertain. When you have a sensor of a certain resolution, say Full HD (1080 x 1920) I guess that means the sensor has 1080 individual sensors (pixels) across one dimension and 1920 across the other? This would mean the actual physical sensor size could vary depending on individual sensor size (pixels) even though the resolution would remain the same. Basically better tech would have smaller individual sensors (pixels)?
Does 4K make a difference for Instagram Reels?
Technical/Equipment Help and InformationThe max resolution for Instagram Reels is 1080 x 1920, would capturing the video in 4K then downsizing it improve quality or do nothing at all?
If display device resolution is the same resolution as video resolution, say a display resolution of 1920 x 1080 displaying a Full HD video (1920 x 1080), would that mean that's the maximum display resolution which which will still be able to display that video resolution at it's optimal appearance? In other words, if you go with a larger (higher resolution) display, image quality would suffer, to bring it back up to optimal you'd have to use 4K video but you would notice no difference in quality going down in display resolution.
Resolution has always confused me. I understand the basics, but there's some areas I'm uncertain. When you have a sensor of a certain resolution, say Full HD (1080 x 1920) I guess that means the sensor has 1080 individual sensors (pixels) across one dimension and 1920 across the other? This would mean the actual physical sensor size could vary depending on individual sensor size (pixels) even though the resolution would remain the same. Basically better tech would have smaller individual sensors (pixels)?
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
4k is 1920 upright so usually you can crop an insta file from the middle third of a 4k aquistion.
Any size of sensor with 1920*1080 pixels is a a1080 sensor.
Bigger chip areas will have bigger pixels, biggelr pixels catch more photons making them have a better s/n ratio.. ie be more light sensitive. this is usually considered to be better.
A big chip with have less DOF for a given FOV and Fstop, many like the resulting thin DOF as it may bring attention to the subject.
To little DOF is not considered to be good by all as the perception of what surrounds the subject may be lost.
Any size of sensor with 1920*1080 pixels is a a1080 sensor.
Bigger chip areas will have bigger pixels, biggelr pixels catch more photons making them have a better s/n ratio.. ie be more light sensitive. this is usually considered to be better.
A big chip with have less DOF for a given FOV and Fstop, many like the resulting thin DOF as it may bring attention to the subject.
To little DOF is not considered to be good by all as the perception of what surrounds the subject may be lost.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
If you shoot hd lansscape you are getting 1080 upright pixels which is not rhe 1920 you need. If you shoot with the camera portrait an hd you get the 1920 uprught resolution hou need.. but cant repurpose the shot as landscape.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
If you hang here you will find i make many errors 2160 and 1920 for exampme.. because they are basically the same “2k”
NorBro
Major Contributor
So this is a question that has multiple answers...and to really understand why you have to have a decent knowledge of camera history (last 15 years) and understand how they were made and limited.
In short, if you used a camera from 10 years ago that pixel-binned and line-skipped its 1080p, but had less processing of its 4K (even in a lowly 8-bit 4:2:0 format), you absolutely would see a difference between the two resolutions, regardless if you were watching on a 1080p monitor or 4K monitor.
The 1080p modes were hindered badly back then (besides in the more expensive models).
So with a camera like that, you would want to shoot in 4K to get the extra detail and a visibly more pleasing IQ, no matter if the final product was cropped or in a lower-resolution and compressed delivery on the Internet.
___
If you're using a modern camera that shoots great 1080p (good processing, 10-bit, 4:2:2, the vertical social media mode inside the camera is elite, etc), 99% of people would see very little difference between that HD footage and the 4K footage on IG.
Both look great and the extra pixels won't make a difference (in most cases, for most people).
___
BUT, many people still like to shoot in the highest-quality possible to not only crop and move around the videos in a lower-resolution timeline but also to have some 'future-proofing'. One day, IG will have higher-resolution reels (video uploads, in general) and even though there's a small chance you'll ever use that old footage again, at least you'll have it in a higher-resolution 10-20-30 years later.
___
For sensors, there are likely no cameras left in the world that have 1920x1080 chips...they all have higher-resolution 4K-6K-8K sensors that offer lower resolutions in a few different ways.
In short, if you used a camera from 10 years ago that pixel-binned and line-skipped its 1080p, but had less processing of its 4K (even in a lowly 8-bit 4:2:0 format), you absolutely would see a difference between the two resolutions, regardless if you were watching on a 1080p monitor or 4K monitor.
The 1080p modes were hindered badly back then (besides in the more expensive models).
So with a camera like that, you would want to shoot in 4K to get the extra detail and a visibly more pleasing IQ, no matter if the final product was cropped or in a lower-resolution and compressed delivery on the Internet.
___
If you're using a modern camera that shoots great 1080p (good processing, 10-bit, 4:2:2, the vertical social media mode inside the camera is elite, etc), 99% of people would see very little difference between that HD footage and the 4K footage on IG.
Both look great and the extra pixels won't make a difference (in most cases, for most people).
___
BUT, many people still like to shoot in the highest-quality possible to not only crop and move around the videos in a lower-resolution timeline but also to have some 'future-proofing'. One day, IG will have higher-resolution reels (video uploads, in general) and even though there's a small chance you'll ever use that old footage again, at least you'll have it in a higher-resolution 10-20-30 years later.
___
For sensors, there are likely no cameras left in the world that have 1920x1080 chips...they all have higher-resolution 4K-6K-8K sensors that offer lower resolutions in a few different ways.
The 4k display can rescale the 1080 image to fit the length and width of the full panel. This is called upscaling because the display contains more pixels than the image. Upscaling involves adding pixels to the image that did not exist. The upscaler usually does this very well by interpolating new display pixels from adjacent image pixels. If upscaling is not used, the image pixels can be displayed 1 for 1 with the display pixels but the image size will not fill the screen. The full image will display as a smaller, windowed picture but is natively shown in its best actual resolution that it can be. When the image is upscaled, it is expanded to a larger image that fills all the display area pixels with both native and interpolated pixels. It's not entirely actual, not as good as a native 4K image would be but usually more satisfactory than viewing the smaller windowed crop from the same distance.
The other type of rescaling is down-sampling. This is when the 4K image is scaled to fit a 1080 display which doesn't contain all the pixels necessary to match 1 for 1 with the image. If this type of scaling is used, image pixels that can't correspond with display pixels are discarded. The 4k resolution becomes 1080. If this scaling is not used, the 1080 display can show an enlarged crop with actual 4k details.
Peter C.
Veteran
In content creation what's most important is your personality and something that separates yourself. No one cares how it was shot. The biggest advantage of 4k it allows you to crop to the proportions you need to deliver. Most people have a regular job and do this as a hobby until they have a meaningful following. Buying the camera is the easiest part, all the rest is hard.
Zachadoodle
Well-known member
Though I will say, having to get to being this far in filmmaking where you're making it as a career is like winning the lottery. Very few make it. It's not impossible, but it's not easy either. Usually with being a filmmaker people who tend to be charismatic make it. For example, does the person in front of the camera feel comfortable with the person behind it? You can have all the technical knowledge in the world, but if you can't make people feel comfortable on camera, there's a bit of an issue.
Last edited:
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
With me .. the person in front of the camera is always happy. and comfortable . But when someone else behind the camera is 'advising me' on how to be with the person in front of the camera they can get a sharp response from me.. so my challenge is not really from me to subject it can be from boss to me!
CharlesPapert
Director of Photography
Cue clip reel of Kubrick berating Shelly Duvall, David O. Russell screaming at Lily Tomlin, etc.
As much as it is desirable to have everything on set feel like one big fluffy family, it's not always how it goes. We've all heard and some of us have seen contentious relationships between director and actors, but the net result can still be a great film that advances everyone's careers.
On the way up, it's more important that people be likeable so they are granted opportunities, sure. But once they succeed and gain power, it's not uncommon for them to "change" (I personally maintain that people are who they are, and they are just covering up their dark side when they are ascending and ripping off the mask once they get there).
Last edited: