Dear God,

I hope they sack this “journalist” quickly.

  • MortyMcFry 🇦🇺@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It really shows how bad the marketing of these higher resolutions are. We always advertised the vertical lines and then we switched to horizontal lines.

    You can’t expect a video game journalist to understand basic display principles. EDIT: /s

      • Strangle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s pretty confusing

        “UHD features a 16:9 aspect ratio and is twice the resolution of full HD. In other words, two times 1080p, two times 1920 x 1080 pixels, that is 3840 x 2160 pixels. Having the same 16:9 aspect ratio means it is backward compatible with other HD derivates. However, both 4K and UHD can be shortened to 2160p to match the HD standard and therefore, companies use the terms interchangeably.”

        “If you think 4K and UHD are one and the same, I don’t blame you. I blame the companies that LOVE to use them interchangeably all the time. You pick up a Blu-Ray movie disc of a 4K movie and you will most definitely see an Ultra HD label on it. 4K is actually not a consumer display and broadcast standard but UHD is. 4K displays are used in professional production and digital cinemas and feature 4096 x 2160 pixels”

        • SaltySalamander@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          UHD features a 16:9 aspect ratio and is twice the resolution of full HD

          Heh, no. 4k is exactly four times the resolution of 1080p.

            • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Yeah but that would only be an increase in the horizontal resolution… you’d have 3840 x 1080.

              So you gotta double the vertical resolution too, which means you’ve now doubled both horizontal and vertical resolutions, which is equal to 4 times the initial resolution

          • WestwardWinds@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            It is double the resolution, because resolution is expressed as an x,y pair. It is 4 times the pixel density for the same screen size.

            • Richard@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Actually, display resolution refers to exactly what you call pixel density, and NOT the pixel dimensions. This error is so common that the term resolution has practically been redefined outside of the professional (science and engineering) space, but technically, display resolution and pixel density are the same thing.

        • IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          UHD is 4x Full HD resolution. The person who wrote that can’t even do math. That’s like saying 4m^2 = 2 x 1m^2 because 2 x 1 x 1 = 2 x 2

            • IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              No they specifically say

              UHD features a 16:9 aspect ratio and is twice the resolution of full HD.

              According to Wikipedia resolution is:

              The display resolution or display modes of a digital television, computer monitor or display device is the number of distinct pixels in each dimension that can be displayed

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution

              Resolution is the number of pixels in both dimensions, so they are wrong

            • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Its pixels, why do you think QHD (Quad HD) is called that. Because its 4x the pixels of HD(720p)

              You cant talk about only horizontal because you open up the chat to ultrwides and deceptive marketing, such as AMD using “8k” to show off their new GPUs, when in fact they intentially used a ultrawide and marketed it as 8k.

            • snooggums@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              How is it obvious that they are talking about horizontal when they also include vertical in the same calculation?

              They just don’t know the difference between pixels and lines.

      • MortyMcFry 🇦🇺@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I thought the term “basic” would hint the sarcasm but I failed.

        It really isn’t that hard to grasp, unless you are trying to frame your article a certain way.

    • Dandroid@dandroid.app
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I get not wanting to call it “2160p” because that’s a lot of syllables. But you’re right, it was really dumb to switch which lines we are referring to. I’m sure a better name could have been come up with. Even UHD was better imo.

      The one that really irks me are the people who call 2560x1440 2K. I have always known 2K to mean 2048 x 1080. But it has picked up so much traction that it has pretty much been redefined at this point.

      • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        2k is the term i refuse to use in my linguo. Ill yake QHD, or 1440p, but not 2k. 2560 doesnt even round to 2000 in the thousands place.

      • CheezyWeezle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        2K is supposed to refer to a 2048x2048 square 1:1 aspect image, same with 4K being a 4096x4096 image. This term is correctly used a lot when referring to texture sizes. A 4K texture is 4096x4096 texels.

        I think the term started getting mixed up with people discussing what resolutions benefit from texture size increases. Generally, if you are running, say, 4K textures, you would really only always benefit from that if you have a 2160p screen, just because lower resolutions dont have the definition to actually display those texels. So, people start inter changing “4K screen” and “4K-benefitting screen” and we end up where we are now.

    • Kalash@feddit.ch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can’t expect an video game journalist to understand basic display principles.

      Yes you can.