Dennis, thanks for the article, enjoyed reading it...
Dennis or others, being less technical than some here let me see whether or not I can summarize some of the key points:
1. 4K with a lower frame rate will produce a softer image than 2K with higher frame rates...in other words, we would be better off focusing on higher frame rates over a higher pixel count.
2. 4K (with a given frame rate) will not generate a noticeable better image than 2K (with the same frame rate) unless one sits closer which, the author argues, likely is not going to happen.
3. 4K (with a given frame rate) will not generate a noticeable better image than 2K (with the same frame) even were one to sit closer unless the lens and other components are up to the task.
The point being that one needs to think through much more simply the pixel density before considering a change.
With that the follow up items I am interested in are:
1. Is my understanding correct?
2. How does one determine whether the move from 2K to 4K is warranted based on the other components because unlike Panavision, there is little opportunity to do a side by side comparison or, better yet, even rent projectors for evaluation.