First Outdoor Framegrab... Take Two

[Gavin Greenwalt]

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=76900

 

*Sigh* Still no 12 bit original, but a second 8 bit incarnation with... less clipping.

[Stephen Williams]

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=76900

 

*Sigh* Still no 12 bit original, but a second 8 bit incarnation with... less clipping.

 

Hi Gavin,

 

Looks much better! Any reason that 8 bit is thought to be good enough?

 

Stephen

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Hi Gavin,

 

Looks much better! Any reason that 8 bit is thought to be good enough?

 

Stephen

 

Maybe they just don't care about our opinion. And when I say "our" I don't mean you and me, I mean the human race. It is a possibility. It could be the only logical conclusion. Perhaps it's not so much they're witholding something, as just not being bothered to show us?

 

- Gavin

[Nate Downes]

Looks better according to both the wife and I. But, only 8 bit? Hell, the DSLR I'm buying this winter is 22 bit.

[Häakon]

Looks better according to both the wife and I. But, only 8 bit? Hell, the DSLR I'm buying this winter is 22 bit.

Say it with me now: p r e - p r o d u c t i o n s a m p l e. . .

 

And, "hell," the DSLR world has always been a step ahead of digital motion picture for obvious reasons. You also know that RED shoots better than 8 bit; they haven't released any direct RAW footage yet. Take a deep breath.

[Stephen Williams]

Say it with me now: p r e - p r o d u c t i o n s a m p l e. . .

 

And, "hell," the DSLR world has always been a step ahead of digital motion picture for obvious reasons. You also know that RED shoots better than 8 bit; they haven't released any direct RAW footage yet. Take a deep breath.

 

Hi Häakon,

 

Red have asked for feedbck from us here, so why are people so negative when we give it?

 

Stephen

[Guest]

Hi Häakon,

 

Red have asked for feedbck from us here, so why are people so negative when we give it?

 

Stephen

 

Stephen,

 

That's hitting the nail on the head to say the least!!! BINGO!

 

If they didn't want any negative feedback they could have kept the entire project under wraps until it was 100% complete and sitting on the store shelves.

 

R,

[Chris Kenny]

While I'd also be really interested in seeing the 12-bit 4K original image, it's understandable that RED might not be comfortable with people seeing it yet. The demosaicing software, etc. is still in (apparently very active) development; there's no dead pixel correction, noise reduction, etc. If they post 8-bit downscaled JPEGs, it makes it very clear to everyone they shouldn't be drawing too many conclusions about the final output. It lets them show people something without having to put all their cards on the table before they're ready.

[Graeme Nattress]

Chris is right about active development (and late nights). We're still doing a lot of fine tuning on the RAW conversion software, hence the much better image Jim posted after people said "um - nice, but what's up with... " etc. on the original. We're very happy to take constructive criticism, but people have got to remember it's a project in development. Sure it would be lovely for us to give out RAW 12bit images, but it's just not practical for us to do that, for many reasons. Similarly, no other camera company gives even the level of early imagery that we've managed to get out. Usually, the first time you see moving images is when the camera is complete and it's in the hands of a reviewer.

 

So, yes the original RAW data is 12bit. But I must take to task the comment about a 22bit DLSR. I'm sorry, but it doesn't exist. The best medium format backs still only give out 14bit data (probably embedded in 16bits).

 

Graeme

[Sam Wells]

Hi Häakon,

 

Red have asked for feedbck from us here, so why are people so negative when we give it?

 

Stephen

 

 

It seems they re graded it based on comments made here though :D

 

 

-Sam

[Guest]

Chris is right about active development (and late nights). We're still doing a lot of fine tuning on the RAW conversion software, hence the much better image Jim posted after people said "um - nice, but what's up with... " etc. on the original. We're very happy to take constructive criticism, but people have got to remember it's a project in development. Sure it would be lovely for us to give out RAW 12bit images, but it's just not practical for us to do that, for many reasons. Similarly, no other camera company gives even the level of early imagery that we've managed to get out. Usually, the first time you see moving images is when the camera is complete and it's in the hands of a reviewer.

 

So, yes the original RAW data is 12bit. But I must take to task the comment about a 22bit DLSR. I'm sorry, but it doesn't exist. The best medium format backs still only give out 14bit data (probably embedded in 16bits).

 

Graeme

 

Graeme,

 

I thought Jim announced that DVX was the official forum for Red?

 

I'm not trying to provoke you, don't get upset, I'm just asking a simple question based on what I thought he said.

 

R,

[Stephen Williams]

Graeme,

 

I thought Jim announced that DVX was the official forum for Red?

 

I'm not trying to provoke you, don't get upset, I'm just asking a simple question based on what I thought he said.

 

R,

 

Richard,

 

Thats right, but as Sam pointed out they are listening to what we are saying.

 

FWIW I spent half a day yesterday visiting other forums in search of more Red knowledge, my conclusion was the best place for real information was here!

 

Stephen

[Tenolian Bell]

Similarly, no other camera company gives even the level of early imagery that we've managed to get out.

 

Its statement like this that fuel heavy speculation and criticism.

 

Stop marketing it to us, let it speak for itself.

[Gunleik Groven]

Its statement like this that fuel heavy speculation and criticism.

 

Stop marketing it to us, let it speak for itself.

 

Yup. Pretty much agree.

But it boils down to:

Do we want to see work in progress _always_ labeled as such and muse over the progress, or do we not?

 

The developing team has all the arguments as stuff is "yet not finished", and frankly I think that's quite ok. I would much rather see samples of work in progress, than not.

 

And these statements particulary fuel critisism when one does not manage to read the "warning, this is not yet finished" signs that have been over most (if not all) of the posts I've seen from the developers.

 

Is it marketing?

Do they build a David vs Goliath sales myth?

Are these a gang of people with some record on other fields than building cameras, but have never actually done that before?

Do they portrait the image of a cool gang basically having fun, smoking cigars, driving nice cars and being served by beautifull females?

 

Sure!

I'm on the list!

Hooray.

 

But please show me a company that is not hyping their products. AND having success.

 

Have they ever made any promises except for the return of a deposit?

Not AFAIK

 

And even though I'd like to think that I'd become a bilionaire and a friend of cool guys through buying the camera, I seriously doubt that this is going to be the case. So what?

 

Given that the images we've seen so far actually comes from Frankie (which I think is the case), it shouldn't be too hard to look beyond this marketing hype and see that these guys actually work hard. If the image "only" gets on par with a decent DSLR like the D1, - or even the D-200 (Heck I'd settle for D50-like images from a digital video cam! I guess that means that I'm exposed!) I - for one - shall not complain .

 

They are enthusiastic and portray themselves as a "mad gang" and certainly they're very concious on the good marketing value in the "doing the undoable" story. Combined with hip images of Jim and funny images of his and Oaklys possesions (not to mention the totally unheard of images of good looking girls and not so good looking website owners doing ridiculous childish stuff in front of cameras)

 

But seriously: They're letting us in on the fun, and as long as they let us understand and we understand that this is a tricky road towards what might be a good tool - if it ever wraps, we can either choose to look at those images with all reservations attatched, or we can choose to ignore them untill the finished product is here... or they're run out of business.

 

AFAIK all options are open to this day.

 

Jim Jannard is not the first, second or third coming of whomever.

But he dares to stick his neck out and he's obviously good at hiring people.

 

For the Red

 

I think it's gonna show up. Hopefully next year.

But that's only my 2c, and I know it has not been promised to me.

 

Gunleik

Edited November 3, 2006 by Gunleik Groven

[Gunleik Groven]

Doublepost. Sorry!

 

Gunleik

Edited November 3, 2006 by Gunleik Groven

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I just want to clarify: I wasn't criticizing the RED Team for *not* posting 12bit footage. I can completely understand a team not wanting to spread prototype footage. But the more information they give us, the more helpful we can be. As far as I see it RED doesn't "owe" me anything, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

 

- Gavin

[Graeme Nattress]

Jim is monitoring dvxuser.com, dvinfo.net and working directly with the likes of Warner Bros., David Fincher, Peter Jackson, David Stump and Otto Nemenz for direction and feedback. There is no "official" RED board.

 

One of the nice things about taking feedback from the raw conversion, is that we can show how RAW works - so much nicer to decide how to process that image in post, rather than make a mistake in camera and burn in a certain look.

 

Graeme

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Jim is monitoring dvxuser.com, dvinfo.net and working directly with the likes of Warner Bros., David Fincher, Peter Jackson, David Stump and Otto Nemenz for direction and feedback. There is no "official" RED board.

The first part we already knew, the second one, we could guess but these names are really good and last news.

[Eirik Tyrihjel]

The first part we already knew, the second one, we could guess but these names are really good and last news.

I am not suprised, great talent will always want to be on the edge of development.

[Emanuel A Guedes]

I am not suprised, great talent will always want to be on the edge of development.

Like I said, we could guess but I agree.

[Nate Downes]

But I must take to task the comment about a 22bit DLSR. I'm sorry, but it doesn't exist. The best medium format backs still only give out 14bit data (probably embedded in 16bits).

 

Graeme

The Pentax K10 has a 22-bit A/D conversion system for it's CCD. That is what I am talking about. While it's down-sampled to 12-bit for final conversion, knowing Pentax I would not be surprised if they release a firmware update to unlock the full potential of the pipeline in the future.

[Graeme Nattress]

And if that camera had a 132db SNR, I'd believe you! If it's downconverts to 12bit, which I would be a reasonable figure for such a CCD camera, it would have a SNR in the range 66 to 72db, which is quite reasonable. To quote DPReview - "How relevant this '22 bit ADC' is to the final image quality is yet to be proven." - ie, unless this camera is essentially noiseless under practically all circumstances, which is what a 132db SNR would imply, that 22bit claim is utterly pointless marketspeak.

 

Graeme

 

The Pentax K10 has a 22-bit A/D conversion system for it's CCD. That is what I am talking about. While it's down-sampled to 12-bit for final conversion, knowing Pentax I would not be surprised if they release a firmware update to unlock the full potential of the pipeline in the future.

[Nate Downes]

And if that camera had a 132db SNR, I'd believe you! If it's downconverts to 12bit, which I would be a reasonable figure for such a CCD camera, it would have a SNR in the range 66 to 72db, which is quite reasonable. To quote DPReview - "How relevant this '22 bit ADC' is to the final image quality is yet to be proven." - ie, unless this camera is essentially noiseless under practically all circumstances, which is what a 132db SNR would imply, that 22bit claim is utterly pointless marketspeak.

 

Graeme

 

Right. The proof is in the pudding, in the end. I'm waiting to see how the camera performs before making a final decision. I own lenses for Nikon, Canon, Pentax and Sony already, so it's a real toss up for me.

[Graeme Nattress]

Nate, be interesting to hear from you when you get to try the Pentax. One thing I noticed is ISO only up to 1600 - if they were as noise free as to warrant 22bit, I'd have expected a higher max ISO rating? Anyway, it's all spec-ulation until we get to play with one and see how it performs. Thanks,

 

Graeme