====== Why We Reject 4K (By Default) ======

**Purpose:**  
This environment intentionally rejects 4K/UHD content by default. This is not due to technical limitations or lack of appreciation for quality, but a deliberate design choice grounded in **efficiency, scalability, and real-world usability**.

This system is built to serve a growing library with minimal ongoing maintenance — not to curate a boutique, cinephile archive.

---

===== The Reality of 4K =====

4K content introduces significant costs that rarely translate into proportional real-world benefits.

These costs include:
  * 2–4× larger file sizes
  * Increased storage growth rates
  * Higher CPU/GPU requirements for transcoding
  * Reduced client compatibility
  * Greater network bandwidth demands

In many cases, these tradeoffs deliver **marginal visual improvements** on typical viewing setups.

---

===== Storage Efficiency =====

Consider the long-term storage impact:

  * A well-encoded 1080p WEB or Bluray file typically ranges from **4–10 GB**
  * A comparable 4K encode often ranges from **15–40+ GB**

At scale, this results in:
  * Faster disk exhaustion
  * More frequent storage expansions
  * Increased backup and recovery costs

For episodic content, the inefficiency compounds rapidly.

---

===== Playback Compatibility =====

Not all clients handle 4K equally well.

Common issues include:
  * Forced server-side transcoding
  * HDR tone-mapping inconsistencies
  * Audio compatibility mismatches
  * Buffering on remote or wireless clients

1080p content, by contrast, is:
  * Universally playable
  * Rarely transcoded
  * Consistent across devices
  * Easier to stream remotely

---

===== Diminishing Returns =====

On most viewing setups:
  * Screen sizes under ~75"
  * Normal seating distances
  * Mixed lighting conditions

The perceptual difference between a clean 1080p encode and a 4K encode is often negligible — especially once compression, streaming, and client limitations are factored in.

The return on investment simply isn’t there.

---

===== Automation Impact =====

4K complicates automation:

  * More frequent mis-grabs
  * Increased reliance on custom formats
  * Longer processing times in Unmanic
  * Higher failure rates during transcodes

This environment values:
  * Predictability
  * Low-touch operation
  * Long unattended runtimes

4K actively works against those goals.

---

===== When 4K *Might* Make Sense =====

4K is not forbidden — it’s **opt-out by design**.

Exceptions may include:
  * A small, curated set of reference films
  * Dedicated home theater environments
  * Separate libraries with different quality rules

If enabled, 4K should be:
  * Isolated
  * Intentional
  * Manually managed

---

===== Final Position =====

Rejecting 4K is not about settling for less — it’s about **choosing the most efficient point on the quality curve**.

A clean 1080p library:
  * Looks excellent
  * Scales predictably
  * Streams reliably
  * Requires less intervention

For this environment, that balance point is exactly where we want to be.