Erik Gils Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Hi there, I assume some readers/writers to this forum have actualy seen the screening during IBC !? The thing i miss in the previous posts/threads is an oppinion how it looked like quality wise ........
Mike Brennan Posted September 13, 2006 Posted September 13, 2006 Hi there, I assume some readers/writers to this forum have actualy seen the screening during IBC !? The thing i miss in the previous posts/threads is an oppinion how it looked like quality wise ........ It looked very very detailed. Not artificailly sharp in the traditional digital sense, just bags of detai without a strong texture that was mixed up with digital projector noise. Overall very clean noiseless balcks, Jim Jannard stated that was no post noise reduction. Hard to judge contrast ratios of course. I was impressed with a flag that was in shot, it was very clsoe to a light and highlight detial held. Flame on cigar lighter burnt out but without knowing subject lighting level that is a useles piece of information. Sharper than 2/3 inch ccd cameras for sure. Nothing was faked or staged to decieve, as far as I could tell, it had the look of a quick test with a few mates. Not a huge amount of fine detail across a broad area to judge how the codec works, compressing say a forest or lawn on a panning shot. It had a subtle look, this was at least partially due to the subject and cinematographers lighting style. I'd like to see some punchy colours in the next test, exteriors, snow capped mountains blue sky and forest would do the trick. While the camera is still in development, call the Red camera truck the Bread van :) Mike Brennan
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted September 13, 2006 Premium Member Posted September 13, 2006 It looked very very detailed. Not artificailly sharp in the traditional digital sense, just bags of detai without a strong texture that was mixed up with digital projector noise. Overall very clean noiseless balcks, Jim Jannard stated that was no post noise reduction. Hard to judge contrast ratios of course. I was impressed with a flag that was in shot, it was very clsoe to a light and highlight detial held. Flame on cigar lighter burnt out but without knowing subject lighting level that is a useles piece of information. Sharper than 2/3 inch ccd cameras for sure. Nothing was faked or staged to decieve, as far as I could tell, it had the look of a quick test with a few mates. Not a huge amount of fine detail across a broad area to judge how the codec works, compressing say a forest or lawn on a panning shot. It had a subtle look, this was at least partially due to the subject and cinematographers lighting style. I'd like to see some punchy colours in the next test, exteriors, snow capped mountains blue sky and forest would do the trick. While the camera is still in development, call the Red camera truck the Bread van :) Mike Brennan Hi Mike, I think you summed up the screening very well. Stephen
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted September 13, 2006 Premium Member Posted September 13, 2006 Hi, Thirded. Despite all the BS, there's really nothing much wrong with the pictures, at least subjectively. Phil
Jim Jannard Posted September 14, 2006 Posted September 14, 2006 You guys are too much. After all the grousing, it sounds like you support the footage. How about I buy you all a beer when we get together? Jim
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted September 14, 2006 Premium Member Posted September 14, 2006 You guys are too much. After all the grousing, it sounds like you support the footage. How about I buy you all a beer when we get together? Jim Hi Jim, Sure Stephen
Daniel Stigler Posted September 14, 2006 Posted September 14, 2006 How about I buy you all a beer when we get together? If you are still in Europe i invite you to meet me at the CINEC at the GripDepot booth. Beer supply is taken care for....
Jim Jannard Posted September 14, 2006 Posted September 14, 2006 I'm in Prague (unreal city) but heading back tomorrow to OC to do some dynamic range testing. :-) Thanks for the offer. Jim
Erik Gils Posted September 14, 2006 Author Posted September 14, 2006 "Not a huge amount of fine detail across a broad area to judge how the codec works, compressing say a forest or lawn on a panning shot." Does this imply they already used their own codec!?. Or did they record it differently ? Erik
Mike Brennan Posted September 14, 2006 Posted September 14, 2006 Does this imply they already used their own codec!?. Or did they record it differently ? Erik Good question Erik, I dont recall them saying what codec was used, I may have missed it... Jim? Mike Brennan
Graeme Nattress Posted September 14, 2006 Posted September 14, 2006 The 4k cinema demo was fully uncompressed until it hit the Quvis server. The demo on a viewsonic "4k" medical LCD in the tent was showing a REDCODE prototype. The finished REDCODE will be superior, but I don't think anyone saw any nasties in the demo. I'd reckon that the Quvis codec is probably more brutal to the image than REDCODE, so I'd suggest that what you saw in the cinema would be pretty representitive of final quality in that regards. Obviously, we're got a fair way to go to get the sensor fully dialed in, but we're off to a good start.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now