[Tig] semantics: definition vs. resolution

[Alexis Hurkman]

Since I do a lot of writing about color correction and video, it's  
interesting to contemplate a distinction between the these two terms.  
When writing about video, I myself have used the two terms  
interchangeably (probably using "resolution" more), but then I don't  
typically write very much specifically about film.

The very terms "high definition" and "standard definition" to  
describe video resolutions would support interchangeable use. But at  
the risk of muddying the waters a bit,  there are alternate uses of  
both resolution and definition that point to what your friend is  
mentioning.

I think that the concept of resolution (cited from Dictionary.com) as  
"Optics:  the act, process, or capability of distinguishing between  
two separate but adjacent objects or sources of light, or between two  
nearly equal wavelengths (compare resolving power)" is an important  
concept to keep distinct from simple pixel count. In that context, I  
would take resolution to mean the amount of image detail that can be  
distinguished.

However, "definition" has a similar, er, definition... (also from  
Dictionary.com)  as "Optics. sharpness of the image formed by an  
optical system." What's interesting to me is that the formal  
definitions focus on the optics of a system of reproduction, and not  
the recording format—I'd suspect because photography was in it's  
infancy when the terminology was adopted.

Unless the industry as a whole settles on (and sticks to) separate  
uses for each word, it would appear that both resolution and  
definition could be used interchangeably, both for pixel count, and  
for resolving capability. Sorry, I don't think that was very helpful  
of me at all... ;-)

-Alexis

__________________________________________________________
www.alexisvanhurkman.com | postproduction | 646-415-8669


On May 4, 2007, at 12:22 PM, Rob Lingelbach wrote:

> I have a friend here in Brasil who works in the same field I do
> (colorist).
> In conversation yesterday he defined 'definition' as distinct and
> different
> from 'resolution' when referring to an image reproduced either  
> optically
> (projection) or electronically (video).
>
> I found this perspective, semantically speaking, contrary to my own,
> which
> considers the terms synonymous.  My friend's point was that
> definition applies
> to the image as recorded on film (assuming a film capture), including
> the
> qualities of the optics and the film itself; resolution, on the other
> hand,
> applies only to the post-production process, and can include (for 2
> examples):
> a film shot in 16mm with a top-of-the-line lens, great DoP, and
> perfect exposure
> which translates to 'best available definition' .. but perhaps is
> recorded on
> standard def video, so the end 'resolution' does not match the
> 'definition' of
> the capture medium.  One can easily envision the opposite, where a
> larger format
> of film is used and 'definition' is best but the 'resolution' (if,
> for example,
> is limited to "HD") does not do justice to the 'definition.'
>
> As I'm always interested in perspectives regarding language and
> semantics, does
> anyone else hold this kind of distinction between the terms
> 'resolution' and
> 'definition' ?
>
> thanks in advance.
> Rob