Jump to content

RED ONE footage


Emanuel A Guedes

Recommended Posts

> Is this sort of advertising any different than Panasonic passing the HVX200 off as a 1080p camera?

 

No, and that's just as silly. Or Silicon Imaging calling it a 2K camera.

 

> Or what about Canon calling their new 1Ds Mark III a 21 megapixel camera?

 

If you look back up in the thread that's exactly what I said - customary use has been to specify Bayer sensors in megapixels and 3-chip blocks in dimensions. I have no problem with the idea that a Red is a 12 megapixel camera, that's absolutely fine, because everyone understands what that means. What you can't do is start using the metric that has been used in one field to describe developments in another.

 

> Also, it's looks to me like there's more than 2k of resolution here... maybe not true 4k, but obviously more than 2k.

 

...which is exactly what I've been saying all along. You're not the first person to demonstrate this.

 

Phil

 

 

Phil, that's NOT what you've been saying all along. It's what you've been saying recently, but not all along. And funny, I haven't seen you repeatedly accuse SI of LYING.

 

Posted on: Nov 5 2006, 11:58 PM

 

It's a 2K camera at best. Deal with your disappointment, people.

 

Does "at best" mean that it could have more? You tell me.

 

 

Posted on: Nov 1 2006, 09:01 PM

 

- The timeframe they've claimed for aspects of production such as sensor fabrication are known to be at best optimistic and incomplete; we don't like being lied to.

- It isn't a 4K camera. It's a 2K camera. It's a Bayer sensor. Calling it a 4K camera is like calling a DSR-570 HD. This is also lying.

This is nothing to do with some vive-la-revolution destruction of a technophobic autocracy; it's about truth and transparency. It is not reasonable, no matter who you are, to perpetrate falsehoods then show offence when called out. The heat will go off Red when they stop being evasive and deceitful and start answering questions with real facts.

 

Does 2k mean "more than 2k"?

 

 

Posted on: Sep 9 2006, 05:07 PM

 

You have to be careful about comparisons with Viper because of the way it handles pixel binning; you're averaging either three or four pixels vertically depending on the mode you're in. But then you do get true, no compromises, 4:4:4 HD.

 

If you want true, full whack, no holds barred 4:4:4, Red is a 1K camera!

 

Try keying at 4K with it and see how well you do!

 

But that's the point. The sensor doesn't HAVE to have full whack, no holds barred rgb 4:4:4 to count as 4k. It just needs to provide over 4000 DISCRETE samples along the horizontal width of the sensor. Even if the sensor only captured black and white, it would count as 4k. Artifacts such as chroma smearing are irrelevant. Hell - image quality ITSELF is irrelevant. Even if every pixel in the finished result does not contain complete rgb 4:4:4 information. The sensor just has to capture over 4k pixels horizontally, and it is, by definition a 4k camera.

 

I'm not saying I wouldn't love to see a 4k camera that downsamples from 8k to create a 4k image, but it doesn't HAVE to, to count as a 4k camera.

 

 

Posted on: Sep 9 2006, 12:52 PM

 

And it's not a freaking 4K camera. Bayer arrays render something just under half their raw dimensions, and that's assuming you're OK with effectively-subsampled colour. It's a just under 2K camera, with the best interpolation in the world. Yes, that does mean it's an HD camera

 

Just UNDER you say? But now you've changed it to OVER.

 

 

Btw you know where you accused RED of lying about their proposed timeframe in one of the quotes above? Oh look - they weren't lying after all. The camera is shipping. I think you owe Jim an apology.

 

failure to do so will speak volumes about your character.

 

Best of luck,

R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 463
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I hear noise... I've asked for constructive suggestions that might make RED a better system (this is the RED forum) and I still haven't heard anything except the same old thing. Is it your job (Max and Phil) to save the world from RED? Do you have anything to contribute that could be considered positive? Can you actually add something to the program?

 

The noise you generate here is deafening.

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree that in many ways this is just noise. The discussion of Bayer pattern resolution is an academic one, just as the discussion of true MTF resolution off a 3-chip sensor block would be. Why can't we simply discuss the actual functional plus&minus of the RED camera system? Here, I'll start:

 

Hey Jim, I'm curious if anyone's taken you up on insisting on a RED One with a RAW port instead of the Redcode design. I recall you saying that you'd sit them down and try to convince them otherwise. If they did get a RAW port, where would they send the data? Just wondering, and no baiting here at all!

 

Also, what is currently shipping now? I know there is the camera and the short zoom. How about the various rails, motors, handgrips, drives, etc.? Again, just wondering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree that in many ways this is just noise. The discussion of Bayer pattern resolution is an academic one, just as the discussion of true MTF resolution off a 3-chip sensor block would be. Why can't we simply discuss the actual functional plus&minus of the RED camera system? Here, I'll start:

 

Hey Jim, I'm curious if anyone's taken you up on insisting on a RED One with a RAW port instead of the Redcode design. I recall you saying that you'd sit them down and try to convince them otherwise. If they did get a RAW port, where would they send the data? Just wondering, and no baiting here at all!

 

Also, what is currently shipping now? I know there is the camera and the short zoom. How about the various rails, motors, handgrips, drives, etc.? Again, just wondering.

 

We can certainly deliver a RAW port... we just don't have an order for one. And I continue to "not recommend" it. Our image is now so clean that you have to wonder why anyone would want to record 335MB/sec. if they don't have to. We'll sell you one, but be warned. You can use a Codex box to record to or other options. We haven't spent too much time thinking about all the other options because there is no demand. And we still have our hands full getting all the features enabled.

 

We are delivering the camera body, rail system, batteries and charger, 18-50mm zoom, 300mm, CF cards and some mics. extras now. The 50-150mm zoom will deliver in small quantities 1st of November, larger quantities after that. The Prime set is delayed until March 2008. The 18-85mm is now scheduled for Summer 2008.

 

Hope that helps,

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear noise... I've asked for constructive suggestions that might make RED a better system (this is the RED forum) and I still haven't heard anything except the same old thing. Is it your job (Max and Phil) to save the world from RED? Do you have anything to contribute that could be considered positive? Can you actually add something to the program?

 

The noise you generate here is deafening.

 

Jim

 

I saw the Peter Jackson stuff at NAB... the Milk Maids... do pretty girls count ... yeah we looked at the footage also... it all looked nice... the only thing... please no more footage of guys with zits...

 

I think it got skipped over... but really why all the fear of what Phil or Max think... again I don't think you made a lot of cash selling sunglasses because two guys didn't like them...

 

All I care about does it look good... will it work and it won't cost me an arm and a leg in post...

 

Does it look like film not really... does it look like video not really... its kinda like the old days when HD hit... or the new 24p Cine Alta is coming... at the Sony Hi-Def Center I saw RR's test of Spy Kids... the 35mm... then his 24p test... yeah the 24p stuffed looked like crap compared to the 35mm footage...

 

But then I saw it two weeks later... only the 24p stuff... a woman who had been to both screening also... her and I agreed by itself we thought you could use it to tell a story... its the story in the end that counts... and again... there is a difference in me shooting something over a top DP... they shoot mini dv and would get a better looking feature than if I shot with the Red... the only thing... can they tell a better story that's hard to say... each of us have are own craft...

Edited by Gary McClurg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can certainly deliver a RAW port... we just don't have an order for one. And I continue to "not recommend" it. Our image is now so clean that you have to wonder why anyone would want to record 335MB/sec. if they don't have to. We'll sell you one, but be warned. You can use a Codex box to record to or other options. We haven't spent too much time thinking about all the other options because there is no demand. And we still have our hands full getting all the features enabled.

 

We are delivering the camera body, rail system, batteries and charger, 18-50mm zoom, 300mm, CF cards and some mics. extras now. The 50-150mm zoom will deliver in small quantities 1st of November, larger quantities after that. The Prime set is delayed until March 2008. The 18-85mm is now scheduled for Summer 2008.

 

Hope that helps,

 

Jim

 

Are you considering recording options to get higher than 30fps at 4k? (sorry 2 and a bit k, or whatever)

 

I'm surprised nobody has taken up the raw port option if this is (will be?)the only way to get high speed at high res...

 

Is the bottleneck preventing higher frame rates the processing power to record to redcode, or the recording media?

R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you considering recording options to get higher than 30fps at 4k? (sorry 2 and a bit k, or whatever)

 

I'm surprised nobody has taken up the raw port option if this is (will be?)the only way to get high speed at high res...

 

Is the bottleneck preventing higher frame rates the processing power to record to redcode, or the recording media?

R.

 

We are working on other high speed options that don't require the RAW port. Nothing announced yet.

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I have to agree that in many ways this is just noise. The discussion of Bayer pattern resolution is an academic one, just as the discussion of true MTF resolution off a 3-chip sensor block would be.

That is my precisely my point.

 

This constant 2K vs 4K argument is getting very tedious. Everyone is by now aware of what a 4K Bayer image means. I wish people would just judge the camera by its images, not some numbers.

 

The 'Do I hear an echo in here?' quote is from 'The Insider' by the way. It is what the DA says to the tabacco company lawyer who is repeating 'objection' over and over again, despite the judge throwing it out every time. Kind of reminded me of the repetitiousness of the 4K vs 2K argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jim,

 

That would be a very good reason to wait a little & not to spend $6500 on one.

 

Stephen

 

Absolutely... a customer can always add the RAW port if we can't provide another solution. But we also don't want someone to buy a RAW port, then ask us for a workflow solution! :-)

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jim,

 

That would be a very good reason to wait a little & not to spend $6500 on one.

 

Stephen

 

 

If the high speed framerate options are not currently available, I presume there would be no point anyway buying a raw port right now...? If I ordered one today (assuming I had one of the early numbered reds already shipped) would the raw port work, right now and give me 60fps at 4.5k?

 

R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the high speed framerate options are not currently available, I presume there would be no point anyway buying a raw port right now...? If I ordered one today (assuming I had one of the early numbered reds already shipped) would the raw port work, right now and give me 60fps at 4.5k?

 

R.

 

We have RAW ports available but have not enabled that recording option in the firmware yet. We can do so as soon as we have an order, but we have other, more pressing features to enable that our customers do want now.

 

Hypothetically, the answer to your question is yes. Practically, not one of our customers has asked for a RAW port.

 

Jim

Edited by Jim Jannard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have RAW ports available but have not enabled that recording option in the firmware yet. We can do so as soon as we have an order, but we have other, more pressing features to enable that our customers do want now.

 

Hypothetically, the answer to your question is yes. Practically, not one of our customers has asked for a RAW port.

 

Jim

 

 

Cheers. Ok here's another one. Say I'm shooting a 150 million dollar movie, and I want to use anamorphic lenses to get that look. ESPECIALLY wide angle anamorphic lenses that would be cropped using te 16x9 sensor. What can ya do for me? Can you build me a one off (or say 5 of them) camera with a 4x3 sensor, that works with scope lenses, and how much would it cost?

 

(gotta ask!)

R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Murphy
Can you build me a one off (or say 5 of them) camera with a 4x3 sensor, that works with scope lenses, and how much would it cost?

 

(gotta ask!)

R.

 

And if you build one for Ruairi you'll have to build a few more becase that would be something a lot of people would be interested in:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers. Ok here's another one. Say I'm shooting a 150 million dollar movie, and I want to use anamorphic lenses to get that look. ESPECIALLY wide angle anamorphic lenses that would be cropped using te 16x9 sensor. What can ya do for me? Can you build me a one off (or say 5 of them) camera with a 4x3 sensor, that works with scope lenses, and how much would it cost?

 

(gotta ask!)

R.

 

 

Gee I was trying to make a guess how much custom lens would run... design, making them, etc... but heck on a $150mil film you could spend $1m on lens with no problem...

 

Now the hard part probably won't be making the lens... the hard part would be to get the $150m....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Personally I feel that at some point a line in the sand has to be drawn on this sort of thing. Either you are interested in upholding technical standards, or you're willing to forego them for convenience, but either way don't lie about it. I stand for cutting the crap, but other people may feel differently. But fine, okay, nobody's interested. Dismiss it as noise. I'm clearly fighting a losing battle here; Red is being discussed on the 2K-444 list of CML, a place known for the rigidity of its rules, even though the compressed output is neither 2K nor 444 nor anything like.

 

This is the beginning of a slippery slope down which producers would just love us to slide, towards a point where manufacturers can sell their products to us as anything they like, with or without reference to reality, and where the balance between cost and technical standards is hopelessly upset. This balance has been jealously guarded by generations of scientists and engineers, and it's an insult to every one of them that we are so eager to roll over for a guy who's trying to sell us a 2K camera as 4K the same way he used to persuade us that ten-dollar sunglasses are worth a hundred. I'm dismayed that Mr. Nattress, a man who I'd previously have esteemed as among those keepers of technical excellence, is willing to be involved.

 

All I can say is stand by for a plummeting of standards elsewhere, too. The precedent set here is lethally dangerous. This is an immensely sad moment; it makes me feel as if the principles I've always worked for are being dismissed out of hand.

 

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

There's a difference between quality standards and precision & accuracy in terminology -- the issue here isn't necessarily the technical quality of the RED image, just the terminology used to describe it. I'm all for accuracy and precision, but there have always been limits due to the fluid nature of language and the fact that the film industry is not run by the engineers and technicians (not all of whom agree anyway.)

 

Ultimately all that matters is how it looks on the big screen (or little screen, but the big one is more demanding technically due to the degree of image enlargement.) Personally, I think that the quality loss has come from the institution of compressed HD and 2K as resolution standards for image origination for eventual large screen projection... and see hope that we are passing through that phase with 4K Bayer-filtered cameras, 4K D.I.'s of 35mm material, and 4K digital projection. Of course, that only addresses resolution issues, there are plenty of other ones that affect image quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers. Ok here's another one. Say I'm shooting a 150 million dollar movie, and I want to use anamorphic lenses to get that look. ESPECIALLY wide angle anamorphic lenses that would be cropped using te 16x9 sensor. What can ya do for me? Can you build me a one off (or say 5 of them) camera with a 4x3 sensor, that works with scope lenses, and how much would it cost?

 

(gotta ask!)

R.

Isn't the anamorphic gate area covered by the Mysterium sensor? I think it is, but the question would be in the height. It covers easily on the Phantom HD, btw. In either camera, just crop in post for the appropriate image area and de-squeeze. The big trick will be de-sqeezing on set for shooting. It can be done, but not to the viewfinder (at least not comfortably).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Isn't the anamorphic gate area covered by the Mysterium sensor? I think it is, but the question would be in the height. It covers easily on the Phantom HD, btw. In either camera, just crop in post for the appropriate image area and de-squeeze. The big trick will be de-sqeezing on set for shooting. It can be done, but not to the viewfinder (at least not comfortably).

 

Hi Mitch,

 

The height is the issue. Strangely Dalsa was at IBC with some cameras but not their new anamorphic lenses.

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I feel that at some point a line in the sand has to be drawn on this sort of thing. Either you are interested in upholding technical standards, or you're willing to forego them for convenience, but either way don't lie about it. I stand for cutting the crap, but other people may feel differently. But fine, okay, nobody's interested. Dismiss it as noise. I'm clearly fighting a losing battle here; Red is being discussed on the 2K-444 list of CML, a place known for the rigidity of its rules, even though the compressed output is neither 2K nor 444 nor anything like.

 

This is the beginning of a slippery slope down which producers would just love us to slide, towards a point where manufacturers can sell their products to us as anything they like, with or without reference to reality, and where the balance between cost and technical standards is hopelessly upset. This balance has been jealously guarded by generations of scientists and engineers, and it's an insult to every one of them that we are so eager to roll over for a guy who's trying to sell us a 2K camera as 4K the same way he used to persuade us that ten-dollar sunglasses are worth a hundred. I'm dismayed that Mr. Nattress, a man who I'd previously have esteemed as among those keepers of technical excellence, is willing to be involved.

 

All I can say is stand by for a plummeting of standards elsewhere, too. The precedent set here is lethally dangerous. This is an immensely sad moment; it makes me feel as if the principles I've always worked for are being dismissed out of hand.

 

Phil

 

You know Phil, I've been watching this board for awhile, and I had previously been somewhat understanding of your viewpoint and have even agreed with many points you've brought up. But with this most recent post of yours, I have absolutely no way to express the incredulity I'm feeling right now. I have exactly the OPPOSITE perspective regarding this camera and the standards it's bringing to the industry, and I'm not alone. If it was only myself and the fanboys at reduser.net, I wouldn't fault you for dismissing it. The reality is that the ones getting REALLY excited are those that are actually USING the camera. And I'm not talking about guys coming over from the HVX200. These are veteran 35mm guys being blown away by the image quality and workflow. So far, I haven't heard any complaints from them about it being advertised as 4K. Are you really worried that the industry as a whole is really so ignorant as to be 'duped' into buying a camera that's really only 1/2 or 1/3 what it's being advertised as?

 

At least it costs 1/10 what the nearest competitor costs... it'd be worth it even if it only shot 1080p. How is this a case of 10-dollar sunglasses being sold for 100 dollars? I don't see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Cheers. Ok here's another one. Say I'm shooting a 150 million dollar movie, and I want to use anamorphic lenses to get that look. ESPECIALLY wide angle anamorphic lenses that would be cropped using te 16x9 sensor. What can ya do for me? Can you build me a one off (or say 5 of them) camera with a 4x3 sensor, that works with scope lenses, and how much would it cost?

 

(gotta ask!)

R.

If you're going to make a new chip, why not make it 2.39:1? What is it about the anamorphic look that you like? Do you want the tops and bottoms of objects to be twice as sharp as the sides, or would you want the photosites on a "made for scope" chip to have a 1:2 aspect ratio?

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
How is this a case of 10-dollar sunglasses being sold for 100 dollars? I don't see it.

Indeed, it's a price/performance point that lands in a very sweet spot, way off the curve. There are a lot of designs out there that cost more and don't work as well.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

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

Forum Sponsors

BOKEH RENTALS

Film Gears

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

CINELEASE

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...