I’ve seen a couple film blogs asking – do we really need 8k?
As someone who has shot a documentary let me say: absolutely, yes.
But not for the reason you think.
Most of the debate over 8k has been focused on – does the resolution difference matter that much? Answer: no. The human eye can’t actually see past 8k. Our eyes don’t have resolution that good. But still, I’d like to see a camera that goes up to 20k.
Why? Reframing.
Picture this – imagine you’re shooting a documentary scene. Two people are talking. You only have one camera, and you’re shooting from a distance on a telephoto lens, so they’re not distracted by the presence of the camera. If you were shooting 8k, you could output at 4k or even 2k, and punch in to get individual close-ups of each person and cut between them.
If you were to get a high enough resolution, you could shoot documentary scenes from a distance, and get all your coverage from that angle in one shot. You could also stabilize handheld shots to an absurd degree. You could almost create shots that didn’t exist.
Of course eventually, you’ll have a 360 camera that records the distance of objects, puts them into VR, lets you reshoot your whole film in post from any angle, and that output at 8k. Or as a VR experience.
People who ask “do we really need this” are thinking about cameras from the perspective of how we currently make films, and not anticipating how new technology will create a totally new way of making films.
For other examples, see also: mini-dv, CG, DSLR cameras, After Effects, non-linear editing systems, and social media.
Speaking of films, I’m currently in post-production on a documentary. You can learn more about it here.
