Jump to content

IBC FOOTAGE: HOW DID IT LOOK LIKE


Erik Gils

Recommended Posts

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...