Your 4k Workflow Specs...

[Mardi_Gras]

Let's hear it folks, how do y'all intend to capture, edit and manage your 4k assets. All your specs - MAC and Windows users, let's hear it all...

[PaulClements]

Too unsure about this all at the moment. I've heard that the Quad Core's aren't even going to be built into Vista, I can imagine Mac will start using them sometime in the next year but it'll be at a fair old price. I can see the worth in future proofing a Mac by buying a quad as and when they arrive but if I were to go the PC way I'd probably just opt for the cheaper Duo Core option with at least 8Gb of memory and a couple of highend graphic cards. Would also like either 2 24" monitors or one 30", Apple would be my prefered choice but Dell et al seem to be 2/3rds price so it depends on the budget.

Frankly though it's a wait and see how much it all costs once the camera is here and how much of a budget remains after shelling out for the camera and accessories.

Looking forward to the minimum spec requirements from Graeme though, should give an indication as to the smallest budget needed for "Good Enuf" results.

[Martin Drew]

Too early to say. My intention is to use bare 250Gb drives to back up projects on though. I got a firewire/SATA enclosure on eBay for 14 GBP and 250Gb SATA drives cost about 40 GBP over here so it works out quite cheap unless you are doing a lot of volume, even allowing for dual backups (for safety). And it makes access to older projects very snappy.

Martin

[Jaime Vallés]

In production:

1) Capture at 4K REDCODE to the internal flash module.

2) Plug in a 1TB Firewire 800 Hard Drive to the camera and transfer the footage.

3) Verify that the transfer was ok and the data is not corrupted.

4) Plug in ANOTHER 1TB Firewire 800 Drive and transfer footage AGAIN, as a backup.

5) Verify the backup transfer.

6) Erase flash module footage and start over.

In post-production:

1) Bring in footage from master to REDCINE on a new Mac Pro, whatever is the most I can afford when I have to buy it (should be at least a 4 core, ideally 8 core with at least 4GB RAM, and at least 3TB of disk space for footage, not including the boot drive).

2) The RAW footage will be converted to 480p for an offline edit.

3) Edit footage in Final Cut Pro until it's almost perfect, but without fades, dissolves, FX, etc.

4) Using REDCINE, transfer the footage used in the final cut at 2K.

5) Color correct, make final fades and dissolves, etc. (maybe this is done at a post house that can do the whole online edit more easily).

6) Export as a 1080p file to HDCAM SR, HD DVD or Blu Ray.

[Mardi_Gras]

Jaime,

This looks preety straightforward. You must have it figured out already.

[Jaime Vallés]

Yeah, the workflow is easy, as long as I don't need to deliver a 4K final film to someone. I have no idea how to do that. But seeing as 1080 was good enough for Superman, I think it'll be fine for the near future as a delivery medium. Most digital projectors in theaters today do 1080 or 2K. There's very few places that can show 4K in all its glory.

I don't know what digital projector they have at the Zigfeld theater here in NYC, but Mission: Impossible III looked spectacular projected digitally there, and I'm sure it wasn't 4K.

[Júlio Taubkin]

Honestly I have no Idea on how I'm going to deliver the footage. But that has less to do with REDs format than with Brazilian market. I guess I'll have to bring HDs to the post house and pay for print Digibetas... Sad...

[Zakaree Sandberg]

is 2k too much for an at home online session?
or will it pretty much have to be 1080 if u wanna do it yourself?

[Mardi_Gras]

is 2k too much for an at home online session?
or will it pretty much have to be 1080 if u wanna do it yourself?
Onlining 2k assets at home, like its bigger brother, 4k, don't come cheap. Even getting a good 1080p online at home is a big deal. You can easily run up thousands of $$$ before cutting a single frame of media. Sh*#@ don't come cheap! My best guess is that most non to average techies like me will be offlining @ 480 and exporting for a professional 1080p posting, just like Jaime outlined above:D

[Emanuel A.]

is 2k too much for an at home online session?
or will it pretty much have to be 1080 if u wanna do it yourself?Onlining 2k assets at home, like its bigger brother, 4k, don't come cheap. Even getting a good 1080p online at home is a big deal. You can easily run up thousands of $$$ before cutting a single frame of media. Sh*#@ don't come cheap! My best guess is that most non to average techies like me will be offlining @ 480 and exporting for a professional 1080p posting, just like Jaime outlined above:D$5,000 for 4K online editing is the David Newman's estimated figure:

«We just demonstrated real-time online 4K RAW editing (dual stream dissolve with Dalsa Origin footage) to Adobe management under Premiere Pro 2.0 running on a Dual core dual proc Xeon Woodcrest system (about $3K PC with two drives in RAID-0.) So it can be done today, although we aren't shipping this technology yet, but we intend this be available for Red customers as the alternative workflow (for those who can't stand offline workflows.) This a simple extension of the now shipping CineForm RAW workflow. So even with the purchase of our software the system costs will be doable at $5k for a Red online.»

LINK (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=713712&postcount=12)

FOR MORE INFO >> CLICK HERE (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=73448)

[Jim Arthurs]

In production:
2) The RAW footage will be converted to 480p for an offline edit.

Hi Jaime... I think you're greatly underestimating the power of your new system... why not do your "off-line" in DVCPRO 100 instead of 480?

A REDCINE on-line/DVCPRO 100 offline workflow would be doable, if not the fastest, on virtually any current system... and a few solutions considered "vintage" nowadays.

It would be much easier to judge focus on shots, and generally keep you in the high resolution world for the whole process. The watered down, resolution starved DVCPRO 100 codec seems to me to be the off-line format of choice for RED. No offense intended to current DVCPRO 100 users (myself included).

Regards,

[Jaime Vallés]

Maybe... But I have no problem editing in SD. For me it's mostly about getting the rhythm right, so I could be looking at an iPod-sized screen and still edit. Of course, editing on a 50" plasma at 1080p would be ideal, but I'd rather use up that money on taking the final offline cut to a small post house and having them do a full-out pro online cut and grading.

My biggest beef with offlining in HD is that I hate, hate, HATE my computer being bogged down while playing footage. I have a 3 year old Dual 2GHz G5 (Rev. A) with 1.5GB RAM, and a ton of storage space. I can't do DVX footage smoothly enough with this system (for my tastes). Dropped frames, huge loading times, slow everything, lots of renders. If a new Mac Pro can do SD flawlessly, I'll be much happier having a "snappy and super-fast" editing workstation doing 480p than a "merely acceptably slow and finnicky" HD workstation.

If, when the time comes, my new system can handle HD footage and still feel super-snappy and solid as a rock, then by all means I'll edit on HD. But I'll still probably be using my Sony 14" NTSC monitor for checking color... And if Walter Murch could cut "Cold Mountain" on SD, then I think I'll be ok. ;)

[Jim Arthurs]

If a new Mac Pro can do SD flawlessly, I'll be much happier having a "snappy and super-fast" editing workstation doing 480p than a "merely acceptably slow and finnicky" HD workstation.

Jaime, to each his own, though I don't think you'd find any issues whatsoever using your proposed system high-end system with DVCPRO 100... and I'm not a Mac guy! I've seen the early model dual core Macbook Pro play two streams of 24fps 720p with EFX applied and 0 hiccups... I guess what I'm saying is that the current user experience with DVCPRO 100 is as smooth as SD...

Perhaps some other FCP users could step in and give their real world experiences with DVCPRO 100 on their Macs?

[Ace]

And if Walter Murch could cut "Cold Mountain" on SD, then I think I'll be ok. ;)

Not only did he cut in SD, he cut without sound either (lipreads).

[Thomas Mathai]

$5,000 for 4K online editing is the David Newman's estimated figure:

«We just demonstrated real-time online 4K RAW editing (dual stream dissolve with Dalsa Origin footage) to Adobe management under Premiere Pro 2.0 running on a Dual core dual proc Xeon Woodcrest system (about $3K PC with two drives in RAID-0.) So it can be done today, although we aren't shipping this technology yet, but we intend this be available for Red customers as the alternative workflow (for those who can't stand offline workflows.) This a simple extension of the now shipping CineForm RAW workflow. So even with the purchase of our software the system costs will be doable at $5k for a Red online.»

LINK (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=713712&postcount=12)

FOR MORE INFO >> CLICK HERE (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=73448)


Real-time in vendor speak is so subjective. To me true real time is as you work, a final version is generated, instantly updating changes, etc.

A real-time 4k system for $5k isn't the same as a real-time 4k system that costs maybe $100k to $500k.

I would inquire what you are getting for your $5k. It's definitely a compressed 4k codec, which isn't really a deal for most users.

How many layers of real-time is it?
How are effects and transitions handled in real-time?
What are render times going to be like?
Will the system allow you to conform an uncompressed version if needed for color timing or output.

[David Newman]

1) How many layers of real-time is it?
2) How are effects and transitions handled in real-time?
3) What are render times going to be like?
4)Will the system allow you to conform an uncompressed version if needed for color timing or output.

1) Two 4K video streams of CineForm RAW can be played on a dual proc dual core Intel Woodcrest -- quad core may do better (note: our 3Ghz Woodcrest, was slightly out-performing a 2.4Ghz dual proc quad core.) With half res'ing wavelet tricks more real-time layers will be supported.
2) Color correction, transitions, titles, etc in RT. The basics are in realtime.
3) Around 1-2 frames per second on a Woodcrest Intel system -- this lowish render speed is due to the demosaic required to convert form RAW to RGB.
4) No real need. You source is compressed (whether REDCODE or CineForm RAW) and for post renders to CineForm Intermediate this can have as little compression as the user desires. If you wish to decompress to DPX then conform those, the quality is not visibly different even for extreme workflows.

David Newman
CTO, CineForm
blog : cineform.blogspot.com
web : www.cineform.com

[Steve Gibby]

Not only did he cut in SD, he cut without sound either (lipreads).

And it was FCP 3 he used...

[Adrian Correia]

would a fully loaded Mac Book Pro be a viable editing workstation option?

[Thomas Mathai]

1) Two 4K video streams of CineForm RAW can be played on a dual proc dual core Intel Woodcrest -- quad core may do better (note: our 3Ghz Woodcrest, was slightly out-performing a 2.4Ghz dual proc quad core.) With half res'ing wavelet tricks more real-time layers will be supported.
2) Color correction, transitions, titles, etc in RT. The basics are in realtime.
3) Around 1-2 frames per second on a Woodcrest Intel system -- this lowish render speed is due to the demosaic required to convert form RAW to RGB.
4) No real need. You source is compressed (whether REDCODE or CineForm RAW) and for post renders to CineForm Intermediate this can have as little compression as the user desires. If you wish to decompress to DPX then conform those, the quality is not visibly different even for extreme worflows.

David Newman
CTO, CineForm
blog : cineform.blogspot.com
web : www.cineform.com

well I figure even at 1 second a frame, it would take 36 hours to render a 90 minute movie. I'm sure the experienced editors will break the film up into reels. So say 5 reels, each about @ 18 minutes would take 7.2 hours to render.

Anyway to have this split up over a small render farm?

My experience so far with DI software, has been with uncompressed image sequences like DPX. I don't know if any of them handles compressed movie files.

For filmout, same thing. I think only Lasergraphics has has quicktime support. Most of the time, movie files are converted to image sequences.

So it would nice to have the ability to render out mutiple versions, final edit with an uncompressed version for DI use.

[David Newman]

For filmout, same thing. I think only Lasergraphics has has quicktime support. Most of the time, movie files are converted to image sequences.

So it would nice to have the ability to render out mutiple versions, final edit with an uncompressed version for DI use.

Yes, Lasergraphics supports Quicktime, I know this as they're currently doing some 4K filmout tests using CineForm Intermediate compressed MOV files. Even so the export options are unlimited, DPX/Cineon, TIFF, TGA, MOV, AVI of many different codecs. Accelerating exports is certainly doable, although even at well under 7 hours a reel, that is fast for a 4K export (2K is much faster.) 4K uncompressed DPX has unanother issue more significant than rendering time, that 90 minute feature will require 9.2 Terabytes to store (1.9TB per reel.) So compression is a good thing, at 4K filmout quality compression would only use around 200GB per reel, now you can deliver your masters on a single firewire drive (one reel at a time.) At 2K or 1080p, compression makes it very easy to move data around, the whole filmout master for our first feature (Dust to Glory (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0386423/) -- LaserPacific did the filmout) fits in under 200GB.

[Emanuel A.]

Thank you David. Your knowledge is so much appreciated. As well, your products.

[Robert Niessner]

Too unsure about this all at the moment. I've heard that the Quad Core's aren't even going to be built into Vista, I can imagine Mac will start using them sometime in the next year but it'll be at a fair old price. I can see the worth in future proofing a Mac by buying a quad as and when they arrive but if I were to go the PC way I'd probably just opt for the cheaper Duo Core option with at least 8Gb of memory and a couple of highend graphic cards. Would also like either 2 24" monitors or one 30", Apple would be my prefered choice but Dell et al seem to be 2/3rds price so it depends on the budget.


The amount of cores doesn't have to do anything with Vista, because how will you build a core into an operating system?
Even Windows XP Professional does support the Quad Cores. You can have up to 2 CPUs with unlimited cores each, in WinXP Pro. For more than 2 physical CPUs you need Win2k3 Server.

If you compare Dell and Apple prices, you have to look closer, as Apple uses the more expensive Xeons (Intel Server CPU) and Dell the cheaper Core 2.
The Xeons have some bigger cache and some more Pro features - like the ability the have more than 2 CPUs (not cores!) switched together.

[Rob Lohman]

freezer is right, Windows 2000, XP & Vista (except for Home Basic!) supports 2 physical processor packages. Doesn't matter how many cores are in those packages.

You can also get the Xeons from DELL, but I think they are only in there server line of products (not the workstation line).

For more information about Vista and CPU's & cores: http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_02.asp

[Gavin Greenwalt]

*cough* Boxx *cough*

[Matthew Greene]

If you compare Dell and Apple prices, you have to look closer, as Apple uses the more expensive Xeons (Intel Server CPU) and Dell the cheaper Core 2.

Yeah, the Dell Precision workstation line is the one that uses the Xeons (on the website it's not in the consumer options, you have to go to the business divisions). You probably want to be looking at workstation class systems anyways. I have a Precision 690, an old 350 and an M90. Along with HP and Boxx they are probably the best professional windows based systems in my opinion. Aditionally, unlike their consumer division, their tech support for the business products is awesome.

[Mark L. Pederson]

NAB 2007. More than one option for your 2K and 4K workflows.

Forget the Dell. Boxx and Apple rock.

[JW Lee]

Assuming you have the horsepower to work with 4k files, it seems to me that you'll need to invest in some pretty expensive gear to view it. This is a question which has been on my mind for awhile as I've been going through the Red threads. What kind of monitor do you need in order to view your 4k footage? What kind of video card? What do you need in terms of hard drive space and speed to do a feature length production?

It seems to me thus far that the suggested workflow is shoot at 4k, edit in 2k or less, which makes me think, OK just keep it to 2k then. For a closed loop indie production house looking to be based on Red, it seems like going to a full blown 4k system will be cost prohibative with a low ROI. For a bigger budget studio, I can see where the investment would make sense.

[Robert Niessner]

I would say for many productions 2k in the workflow will be enough. If you shoot 4k and process it down to 2k, you will benefit from the better source resolution. You could easily do a pan or zoom into the 4k if needed. For me this is the biggest benefit for working in post when going the 2k route.

[Mardi_Gras]

Well said, Freezer.

[JW Lee]

Well those are pretty obvious benefits and well covered for anyone who's been reading these threads. I'd like to get back to the question of, what do you need to do 4k editing, or at a minimum be able to view the 4K footage? Is it the general consensus that you can view it with a 2K monitor and don't need to see the 4K footage displayed pixel for pixel? I was hoping someone would pipe in with some 4K editing equipment recommendations. If I missed the thread with that info, please point me there.

[Nick Shaw]

Is it the general consensus that you can view it with a 2K monitor and don't need to see the 4K footage displayed pixel for pixel?

It's certainly true that a lot of HD edit suites (including mine) are set up with a CRT reference monitor which is not capable of displaying the full 1920 pixels of HD (no CRTs are). I use this CRT for colour correction, and only ocasionally feel the need to flip the image onto one of my 23" Cinema Displays to see it pixel for pixel. I guess the same applies to working with 4k. I've certainly been in a 2k grading suite where they only had a 1k (CRT) monitor.

Nick

[Thomas Mathai]

Well those are pretty obvious benefits and well covered for anyone who's been reading these threads. I'd like to get back to the question of, what do you need to do 4k editing, or at a minimum be able to view the 4K footage? Is it the general consensus that you can view it with a 2K monitor and don't need to see the 4K footage displayed pixel for pixel? I was hoping someone would pipe in with some 4K editing equipment recommendations. If I missed the thread with that info, please point me there.

It depends on what your 4k viewing needs are.

If you need to display pixel for pixel for dailies and vfx final reviews you probably want to get as high resolution monitor you can afford, view the whole image, then have the images showed 1:1 and move it around to see different sections. This is what I used to do for vfx reviews of 2k shots.

If you are editing, do you need to be looking at a 4k image all the time?

To be honest, there are no 4k editing equipment that anyone is using as far as I can tell.

[Akcelik]

Auto Render Mode? for less capable computers?

is it possible to "only" render in automatic mode (no editing) RedCode 4.5K on a slow computer ie iMac 2GHZ Core2DUO?

in camera downscaling option good for low low budget producers but then your stuck with low rez image.

a realistic option for people who are saving up their dimes to make do with what they have would be possible?

[Rob Lohman]

I'm not following what you mean with "auto render mode". Can you elaborate?

[Akcelik]

i will try :)

in basic terms, RedCine doing what the Red would have done in camera when shooting in downscaled mode.

as i understand when shooting raw, one would have better control over white balance , color enhancement, gain for different scenes hence the 4k workflow. and this requires a (minimum) $5000 PowerMac, but when shooting downscaled in camera one can make do (together with the aid of Sheer Video but thats another topic) with a low end system ie iMac Core2DUO, however not have control over the 4k raw workflow.

even if rendering times are unbearbly longer, it would give the option for the s35mm frame and future reworking of raw when quad cores become the norm.

[donatello b]

based on TODAY - looks like cineforms Prospect HD/2k/4k is my likely workflow ... shoot either 4k/2k - use redcine and output to cineforms 2k raw clips ... and edit from there .... i will not commit till RED 103 is about to ship = things can change over the coming months ... guessing NAB should have some proposed/working solution to edit 2k/4k ...

as of today cineform appears to be a very good and very cost effective workflow ...

[Nick Shaw]

Don

That is of course assuming REDCINE permits RAW to RAW conversion. We know David Newman would (obviously) like this to be possible, and is petitioning Red to allow it, but we don't know if it will be.

Nick

[David Newman]

Nick,

You are correct. However there aren't any good reasons not allow it given the benefits to the Red customer, and technically it is straight forward. If Red is a closed environment there are workarounds, but the open approach is better for everyone.

[Rob Lohman]

Akcelik: yes, REDCINE can do what the camera can also do internally with RGB.

So you can downsample to a lower resolution if you want to. No problem. The higher your machine specs the faster it'll all be. It will still work on lower end computers (REDCINE doesn't run on a PowerPC processor like in the G5 though)

[Akcelik]

thanks you Rob for clearing that one up for me.

[Hoffmann Films]

That's too bad that REDCINE won't run on a G5 with the power PC. I will have to see what system to get when it gets closer to delivery..

[Jeff Kilgroe]

(REDCINE doesn't run on a PowerPC processor like in the G5 though)

No G5? OK... Actually, I half expected that. RED isn't the only thing going that route, I guess I'll have to start thinking about retiring these G5 quads then. I've got two, anyone want to buy 'em? Hehe...

[Rob Lohman]

Other software like REDCODE will run on a PowerPC like the G5. So you can load footage into Final Cut for example. You won't be able to enjoy REDCINE though, sorry.

If you can wait with computer purchases then do so. Faster hardware is coming out every day and if you want to do high resolution stuff you're gonna need it (that's all I can say about performance at the moment).