[Tig] semantics: definition vs. resolution

[Steve Hullfish]

Respectfully Kevin, I don't think those definitions are enough.

Your definitions leave out interlaced or progressive and, more  
importantly, they dismiss any loss of quality due to anything beyond  
pixel count.

What about low quality glass? What about poor quality recording  
devices? What about systems that use a certain pixel count, but  
actually compress to record?
What about various other compression schemes, like HDV?

To be honest, I do not know the answers to these questions, but I  
simply raise the questions. And maybe my questions are part of some  
OTHER answers than resolution and definition. But it would be nice to  
have some words to describe what ultimately means "picture quality"  
and "resolving power." Like a telescope where the quality is defined  
by how close or small two objects can be and still be resolved as  
SEPARATE objects.

I completely agree that the larger issue that we're all probably more  
impressed by, or at least more able to MANIPULATE some gain out of is  
bit depth or contrast ratio. Maybe we need a three dimensional number  
that shows how big the image is in pixels, how deep the image is in  
contrast/color and how "fine" the image is in terms of actual  
resolving power.

On May 5, 2007, at 7:12 AM, Kevin Shaw wrote:

> Thanks to Yuri Neyman (Gamma & Density) for support in 2007.
> Guide to TIG Posting is at
> http://tig.colorist.org/wiki3/index.php/Guide_to_TIG_Etiquette
>  ====
>
>
>
> I think that perhaps within our industry we should treat  
> "definition" as
> being synonymous with "format". For example standard definition is  
> a format.
>
> I have always adhered to a simple rule
>
> Resolution = pixels across
> Format (definition?) = pixels across AND lines/pixels down
>
> Therefore 2K (the format being 2048 x 1556) has similar resolution  
> to HD
> (1920 x 1080) because 2048 is only a few pixels more than 1920.
>
> However 2K is a much larger format, (has more definition) than HD  
> because
> there is more picture area.
>
> I also maintain that we spend a bit too much time worrying about pixel
> resolution and not enough on bit depth, but that would be another  
> topic...
>
> Just my thoughts
>
> Happy Coloring
> Kevin
>
> Kevin Shaw                 colorist, instructor and consultant
> kevs at finalcolor.com          www.finalcolor.com
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>> From: Jim Houston <jdhouston at earthlink.net>
>> Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 15:41:18 -0700
>> To: Alexis Hurkman <hurkman at mac.com>
>> Cc: tig <tig at ns1.colorist.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Tig] semantics: definition vs. resolution
>>
>> Thanks to Yuri Neyman (Gamma & Density) for support in 2007.
>> Guide to TIG Posting is at
>> http://tig.colorist.org/wiki3/index.php/Guide_to_TIG_Etiquette
>>  ====
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the terms come from two different fields.
>>
>> One is the domain of art where definition has always
>> been used to mean the clarity of line, texture and form (how  
>> clearly is
>> it delineated against something else).  The perception of
>> clarity relates to it's definition.  Definition can't be measured.
>>
>> The other is the domain of science where resolution is the ability
>> to separate two fine details from each other.   Resolution is an
>> attribute that can be measured and assigned values based upon
>> sampling theory (as inexact as the results might sometimes be).
>>
>>
>> and just to mix things up a little bit...
>>
>> accutance is the perception of how sharp something is.
>>
>> Anyone on the list from the OED, give me a call and
>> i'll straighten you out. :-)
>>
>> Jim H.
>> Starwatcher Digital
>>
>>
>> On May 4, 2007, at 10:52 AM, Alexis Hurkman wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Resolution - The ability of an optical or video system to reproduce
>>> fine detail. A measure of the 'sharpness' of a picture. Usually
>>> measured in pixels in the horizontal direction and lines or pixels
>>> vertically. Often the horizontal and vertical resolutions are
>>> different."
>>>
>>> "Definition - A description of the sharpness or clarity of a
>>> television picture. High definition pictures portray a lot of  
>>> detail,
>>> while low definition pictures look soft and less clear. See also
>>> resolution."
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> No personal abuse; absolutely no advertising or marketing on the  
>> main TIG
>> mailinglist.  Emergency
>> tig contact address is rob (at) calarts.edu
>> Tig mailing list
>> Tig at tig.colorist.org
>> http://tig.colorist.org/mailman/listinfo/tig
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> No personal abuse; absolutely no advertising or marketing on the  
> main TIG mailinglist.  Emergency
> tig contact address is rob (at) calarts.edu
> Tig mailing list
> Tig at tig.colorist.org
> http://tig.colorist.org/mailman/listinfo/tig

Steve Hullfish
Verascope Pictures
(630) 717 9069 office
(312) 399-4237 cell
www.veralith.com