“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 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Strangle@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

1920 x 2 = 3840 (4K UHD)

That’s what he’s talking about.

[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 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 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 4 points 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 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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

[–] Strangle@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It’s obviously talking about horizontal lines, not pixels

[–] IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Strangle@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

I think the point is that it’s ducking hard to talk about lmao 🤣

[–] dudewitbow@lemmy.ml 3 points 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 2 points 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.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

I don't know that it's THAT confusing, since by definition we're talking consumer grade products, not professional grade.

Amd that's a distinction consumers have been making for years.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a36125131/2022-hyundai-santa-cruz-pickup-revealed/

I mean, yeah, technically it's classified as a pickup truck... but nobody will ever confuse it for:

https://www.kbb.com/ford/f250/

[–] MortyMcFry@aussie.zone 1 points 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.