That 60i look?! [Archive]

MikeCurtis

03-22-2007, 06:28 AM

I always find it interesting when Stuart says "Lets assume" rather than "Redcine does".

; )

Some kind of secret code?

If we assume you follow what Stuart suggests (DV100=DVCPRO HD @ 720p60 in this case since we started progressive), then you can use an AJA card to output downconverted SDI in real time, center cut if you wish. That's a bit of an awkward workaround.

The company line at IBC was that Redcine would kick out NTSC or PAL reslution, but that might presume progressive not interlaced frames...which may be Stuart's point here.

I would assume that if Redcine 1.0 doesn't have interlaced output (and checking the workflow page, it DOES say 480p, not 480i), that perhaps a later version would add it - otherwise that is a bit of a kludge. While we are wishlisting, adding 3:2 pulldown and 2:3:3:2, 2:3:2:3, and 2:2:2:4 cadence for 720p output from 24p fotage.

A proper output card will be what rescues this hole in their capabilities in the meantime. But they DEFINITELY need to add the capability. To not have it in, say, 3 or so months after they ship would be weak.

-mike

Michael Schrengohst

03-22-2007, 07:31 AM

I know Grame has a re-interlacer filter for FCP....
why you would ruin a perfectly good progressive frame by re-interlacing is beyond me? I understand some would want that news "look". But I would not purchase a RED to go out and shoot news. You might happen upon something that is newsworthy with your RED someday but the whole news thing is going on and it is all about speed. Most of the newsrooms are going away from tape and this is why P2 is going in so many places. Even that 1 min saved by not having to digitize a tape can make or break a story. Go to NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) this year. I don't think RED will have a big impact in the newsroom, the impact will be everywhere else and will be the news.

Stuart English

03-22-2007, 08:17 AM

My suggested workflow reflects the fact that newscasts are all about speed and using existing infrastructures. So recording 480 resolutiuon in camera would still create a need to re-code to what your NLE is using as its base codec. Exporting footage from REDCINE in 480i NTSC would involve software based scaling and interlacing that can be done faster in dedicated hardware. The DV100 codec is a good choice for editing as it is in many newsrooms already.

So I believe that the fastest way to get RED ONE footage on air, is: shoot REDCODE 720p RGB, then use REDCINE to re-encode to 720p 4:2:2 with DV100 compression. Use Final Cut Pro (ar Avid eqivalent) do the editing using DV100 as its codec. An AJA or equivalant I/O card can do a real time scale / crop / interlace to NTSC / PAL and output via SDI. From there the stations's routing switcher send the baseband signal to their video servers (which could be almost any flavor of DV, M-JPEG or MPEG compression)

Mark Mannschreck

03-22-2007, 03:32 PM

It's not just the "news" look - it's also the "discovery", "soap opera", "reality", and "sports" look...

I too have the same question about 60i motion. Not concerned about speed of transfer for network news. I'd like to be able to intercut Redcode RAW with existing 60i footage in SD and HD in terms of the 60i motion "look".

So how do do we do it? In 4K Redcode Raw is 30p the closest we'll get to that? 4k at 60p then redCine to 1080i? Or maybe we just have to wait for RGB to be enabled and shoot 1080i or 720p at 59.94 for those projects?

----

disregard! found my answer...

GlennChan

03-23-2007, 01:08 AM

So I believe that the fastest way to get RED ONE footage on air, is: shoot REDCODE 720p RGB, then use REDCINE to re-encode to 720p 4:2:2 with DV100 compression. Use Final Cut Pro (ar Avid eqivalent) do the editing using DV100 as its codec. An AJA or equivalant I/O card can do a real time scale / crop / interlace to NTSC / PAL and output via SDI. From there the stations's routing switcher send the baseband signal to their video servers (which could be almost any flavor of DV, M-JPEG or MPEG compression)

1- I think for news editing, every bit of time saved is crucial. Apparently some crews shoot with discipline and edit linear for the added speed? (Well I have no idea, I don't do news. I'm just curious.)

The ideal workflow for Red would be:
A- Shoot. Ideally you get pre-record. Frame lines for center crop if necessary. In-camera processing like a good knee would be nice, but not necessarily necessary.
B- Drop footage into NLE and start editing. No tape shuttling, no transcode through Redcine.
C- Output from NLE and live to air.

Perhaps this is a little much to ask for... but the transcode through Redcine is not a good thing for news. Perhaps there may be some reason to implement a 480i or 576i format in-camera. Do real-time scaling, line-pair summation (increase sensitivity, reduce aliasing), and image processing (knee) in camera.

2- I believe the Kona downconvert is not color accurate. It needs to apply a matrix to appropriately account for Rec. 601 versus Rec. 709 luma coefficients. Not doing this results in major color inaccuracy. :(

Stuart English

03-25-2007, 06:58 AM

Well to shoot for 1080i, (i.e not news now - except perhaps HDNet and a few others) you could shoot at 2K RAW at 59.94fps using a windowed sensor and process in REDCINE; but maybe I'd recommend shooting 1080p @ 59.94fps instead and convert that to 1080i. This involves a very simple progressive to interlace conversion - just take the even or oddd lines in each alternative frame to create the necessary fields. There are no timecode, audio or pulldown issues to worry about.

JohnF

03-25-2007, 07:26 AM

In the newsworld where they are using mobile phone footage (10-15fps@160x120), ultra-low bandwidth sat phone uplinks, camcorder footage in "easy whatever" mode that good looking footage will be more of a relief for news editors than anything else... providing it does not slow down their workflow!

I've seen all the above plus material shot in progressive mode on the major news
programmes here in the UK. Plus far to much overexposed and poor white-balanced crap that would have lead me to fire whoever shot it. (unless it was super exclusive "surprise moment" type footage)

So I don't think good looking footage will not bother them too much.

JohnF

Michael Hastings

03-25-2007, 10:34 AM

If you are truly shooting news - why not just buy a used News type camera for $5K-6K including lens, or if you need HiDef get a FX7 or V1 - everybody can already deal with an HDV tape.

If you are shooting EFP or any of those others for look, you should have time to create whatever file type you need out of REDCINE to your system can use.

My suggested workflow reflects the fact that newscasts are all about speed and using existing infrastructures. So recording 480 resolutiuon in camera would still create a need to re-code to what your NLE is using as its base codec. Exporting footage from REDCINE in 480i NTSC would involve software based scaling and interlacing that can be done faster in dedicated hardware. The DV100 codec is a good choice for editing as it is in many newsrooms already.

So I believe that the fastest way to get RED ONE footage on air, is: shoot REDCODE 720p RGB, then use REDCINE to re-encode to 720p 4:2:2 with DV100 compression. Use Final Cut Pro (ar Avid eqivalent) do the editing using DV100 as its codec. An AJA or equivalant I/O card can do a real time scale / crop / interlace to NTSC / PAL and output via SDI. From there the stations's routing switcher send the baseband signal to their video servers (which could be almost any flavor of DV, M-JPEG or MPEG compression)

GlennChan

03-25-2007, 08:51 PM

This involves a very simple progressive to interlace conversion - just take the even or oddd lines in each alternative frame to create the necessary fields.
Ideally, Red would do something similar to what current interlace cameras do... you can use the whole sensor area to create each field, instead of using half the sensor area to create each field. Using twice the area doubles sensitivity and reduces interlace flicker (with CRT displays); the downside is that there's a hit in resolution.

Graeme Nattress

03-26-2007, 06:39 AM

With interlace, there's always a hit in resolution. If we do interlace conversion it will be correctly filtered.

Graeme

tj williams

03-27-2007, 01:12 PM

With interlace, there's always a hit in resolution. If we do interlace conversion it will be correctly filtered. GRaeme

If you do interlace conversion???

Graeme:

Since the large majority of SD TV is interlace and according to Stuart above you do convert 1080P to 1080I and he says it is a simple conversion. Then will we be able to convert to 480I with RED Cine or will we have to go to our edit system or some other program or what????

Stuart English

03-27-2007, 01:57 PM

Independent of anything that REDCINE may or may not do, converting from progressive to interlace while maintaining the same frame resolution and frame rate involves a loss of vertical resolution. 480i is not the same vertical resolution as 480p. And 1080i is not the same vertical resolution as 1080p. But as you can't broadcast 480p or 1080p its a mute point. However capturing in progressive scan is absolutely the right way to shoot - unless you have a pure application like local news whose "get it on the air right now" operation demands you shoot 480i (NTSC) all the way.

But then RED isn't chasing that specific market.

tj williams

03-27-2007, 02:05 PM

I totally agree that progressive is superior in not only resolution but artifacting on graphic elements as well, which is why you couldnt read this print on the same rez. interlace screen. I was very hopeful when our local mega company Microsoft championed progressive scan tv standards a few years back. Given all that and a pretty clear answer that the camera will not be recording in 480 at all I'm looking to determine if RED Cine as part of the process of rendering a 2K or 4K frame to 480 will also convert to 480I. This is a workflow issue for any of us who's work ends up on TV as it means that prior to delivery I may have to take the footage and further massage it in some other application or bring it back to an editing system to convert the already rendered footage.

GlennChan

03-27-2007, 10:11 PM

You could broadcast progressive images as progressive segmented frame... split it up into two fields and send the signal that way. If you do want to send SD progressive footage as PsF, you might want to blur the image vertically to avoid interlace flicker. (This blurring hurts resolution and should reduce noise. An adaptive algorithm could blur only in the areas that need blurring.) You could do this on a shot-by-shot basis in your NLE, although for workflow reasons you might as well blur or deflicker everything.
*Progressive images have a different motion than interlace. Would it bug you to have interlace motion alongside progressive/psf motion?

Or you can take 720p60 / 1080p60 footage and convert that to interlace. I'm not too sure on the technical details here. What most interlace cameras do is that they take two rows of pixels and average them together. When scanning the other field, they shift a row down and average two rows of pixels together. This doubles sensitivity and also blurs the image. I ?think? you can do the same idea in post, if you begin with a 720p60/1080p60 image.

*720p60/1080p60 footage will go through standards conversion easier than shooting 480i (or 1080i, or 1080p30) footage.

2- Yes, there are many bad things about interlace. But interlace will likely stick around for a while. It does however leave the door open for broadcasting progressive as psf.

That's as I understand it.

3- I guess for news, I am missing the point in that people probably don't care that the footage has progressive motion (i.e. 25 or 29.97 progressive frames / second) instead of interlace motion (50 or 59.97 fields / second). Workflow, price, camera operation and maybe low light sensitivity are bigger concerns.

Jeremy Hughes

04-04-2007, 05:56 AM

You would have to increase the contrast and give it a low dynamic range too. If you really want that video look.

Mike Devlin

04-04-2007, 07:26 AM

Well to shoot for 1080i, (i.e not news now - except perhaps HDNet and a few others) .

I may be missunderstanding your parenthetical Stuart, but it seems to imply that news is not HD. I frequently see comments on this board to that effect ("My grandfather shot Betacam and my grandchildren will be shooting Betacam 100 years from now...") from lots of folks, but it surprises me a little that so many RED-oriented folks are obsessing over SD (easy for me to say since I don't shoot news for a living!).

I live in an area where we get local news from Sacramento (a B market compared to LA or the Bay Area) and Reno (a smallish town with a decent rodeo). Yet our local news is HD for both Sac and Reno. Heck, last time I was at Cineflex getting some upgrades to our gimbal (heli&marine) I saw Dan Shively from KCRA 3 there. They have the same HD setup for their NEWS helicopter that we are using for EFP, although I am not sure if their gimbal has the F950 or the newer HDC1500. I know Cineflex has almost 100 HD gimbals sold to NEWS orgainizations, and there are other companies besides Cineflex providing HD helicopter gimbals for NEWS. And the helicopter is NOT the first thing that gets upgraded to HD. (sidenote: Cineflex gimbals were widely used on the Planet Earth series)

I hope that RED owners help push news rapidly to HD, although given the exploding sales of HD TVs (at least in North America and Japan) it will almost certainly happen anyway.

Given the time to actually take delivery for our RED cameras, and the long lifetime we can expect from RED's modular design most of the RED shooting for any of us will be in the 2008-20015 timeframe. Hopefully that means SD will be an insignificant part of the shooting life of any RED camera.

Please, no flaming! I know that most news has been SD to date, and much will remain SD for some years to come (broadcast, if not origination). If there is no cost for RED to support SD and such, great. My main concern is that we not distract the RED team too much with backward looking issues for supporting obsolete technology. I would rather have RED innovating new great technology and driving the industry forward! Perhaps I am overly concerned that the extreme customer focus of the RED team (a great strength) will cause them to be distracted from their main mission.

Again, I apologize to news professionals if I am being insensitive to short term needs, but I see it (perhaps incorrectly) as a matter of priority. And I very well understand Gibby's notion of a camera that can do everything. There are lots of cool things RED can do to support ENG/EFP. We should be careful what we ask for. Probably I should have more confidence that the RED team can sort out the priorities quite well on their own (especially since the camera pretty much has everything needed for SD NEWS already). Regardless I believe many here underestimate how rapidly news is moving to HD (In Japan and North America anyway, where 60i matters).

tj williams

04-04-2007, 10:47 AM

Mike

It's not just news. I live in Seattle which we all know is cooler than the Bay area but not so big as LA (our metro area SEA-TAC contains less cities) Most of my work is spot shooting for regional air. Western WA northern OR and some play in EAstern WA and Idaho. I shoot some on film, some on HD and some on SD. Almost all of it goes on air from SD players. Both film and HD are used because the oversampling from higher resolution origination gives a notably better SD picture. You're right that this will all one day change. Given the reduced revenue of broadcasters this may not change all that fast. Already many of them are using the various boxes to up-rez their std def programming to HD as a money saving initiative. Even when SD is no longer broadcast it will be the format of podcast and internet video. Wider bandwidth will allow 480 to play as streaming, in the near future.

Now all this said, in the past I have paid off my cameras in less than three years or considered the camera a loser. I want to have my red paid off in a similiar time. Although the RED is designed to update, the nature of future media is unknown and it may not be able to support updates beyond a few years. Remember that we all thought Oxide Betacam would last a long time? 2 years later incompatable BetacamSp....

Right now I have a pretty good workflow from HD to broadcast SD. I'm looking for a workflow that is faster for producers to enable them to prefer RED to the Sony HD and hopefully that puts more of the expenses of the current workflow in my pocket... ie RED Cine capabilities that rival Davinci. I don't expect this in the version 1.0 software at NAB but I believe it will increase CURRENT sales of RED a lot and be very helpful for a lot of us that work in current broadcast for the short term (3 to 4 years) if The RED Team makes significant efforts in this area. I think they are considering this after all the show is called National Broadcast Assn..... They could only show at Cinema related shows...

Mike Devlin

04-04-2007, 04:14 PM

I understand what you are saying TJ, but I still view SD as lower priority. NAB may be the National Association of Broadcasters, but folks are at NAB to talk about equipment for HD and beyond, not SD. Even the churches around the US are converting to HD. My Sony rep tells me it is one of his biggest markets now that so many broadcasters have moved or already committed to HD. I guess that is where the money is...

My prediction is that only backwaters like Seattle will still have SD in three or four years...just kidding.:wink:

It is all moot if the RED team can do everything every user wants, but if there are tradeoffs to be made... Actually I am sure they know how to make the right tradeoffs and I just want to provide balanced (or different) input from an ENG/EFP point of view.

In post-production there are lots of ways to produce content for the web or iPods, and there is much more to it than just supporting 480i. Graeme has made the point elsewhere with respect to interlacing and 4:2:2 subsampling that you ruin a signal by doing these things. Give the full image to modern algorithms and they will do a better (more efficient) job of saving space or bandwidth than the crude hackery of interlacing or 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 subsampling.

One man's opinion only, but I would like to see effort go to more image quality (more dynamic range / lattitude, better colorimetry, etc) rather than image degradation (SD).

Thom Steinhoff

04-04-2007, 08:56 PM

...I'd recommend shooting 1080p @ 59.94fps instead and convert that to 1080i. This involves a very simple progressive to interlace conversion - just take the even or oddd lines in each alternative frame to create the necessary fields. There are no timecode, audio or pulldown issues to worry about.

This entire thread seems like one of the Seven "Red"ly sins, but To get that Interlaced "Video" look, this seems like the ideal solution and one that would give you the closest artifacting to true interlaced footage. I would imagine if you took 1080p, 59.94 and scaled it down to 480p and then did the same interlace dance from frame to frame you could really get that 480i look.

Seems like a real shame, though. Might as well go all the way down to 230 and go for that classic VHS look. :)

Maybe someone has a box that can go 1080p @ 59.94 to 480i realtime (scaling and alternating lines/frame) and you can take the HDMI feed off of the camera and go realtime into a 480i in on your editor.

This said, I'll fade back into the woodwork, as I know nothing about ENG!

Thom

Michael Schrengohst

04-05-2007, 06:17 AM

Graeme Nattress

04-05-2007, 08:00 AM

VHS still has 480 lines though..... The 230 is the horizontal resolution, not the vertical.

Personlay, I'd like a 30 line Baird mode (progressive) and a 405 interlaced black and white mode :-) Just for compatibility :-)

Graeme

Mike Devlin

04-05-2007, 10:53 AM

Interesting that I am sitting here de-interlacing videos for several different websites. The client is upset that I am charging them to do this. Boo Hoo.
They wanted to know why all those ugly lines are necessary. I said they are not and explained the differences. I deliver several TV spots a month - all shot progressive and edited progressive. Never a complaint from the clients or the TV stations.

I know of several startups working on technology and content for very high quality IPTV to rival HD broadcast. I hope they are successful -- more a business risk than a technology risk at this point. Someone needs to offset the race to the bottom (worst possible quality) with youtube and such.

tj williams

04-05-2007, 02:43 PM

HI Mike guess we hafta agree to disagree...

If you have cable/dish you can always count the channels of HD and SD........
go to the multiplex and count the people and see if there weren't more watching tv at home that day?
At the end of the day this is a game of how many eyeballs did ya get?

I do agree with you about the churches. Attendance is at an all time hi!
church budgets are soaring, and they are among those putting in the best and latest media. In our market one of the strongest radio stations is religous, bet it's the same where you live? Kind of strange given what the founder said about camels rich men and needles?

Meanwhile broadcasters are desperately searching for new ways to market their content as the broadcast base shrinks away to nothing in the face of dish/cable......

Thom
if your (REal time scale to 480 box) was on the back of the RED on location, you could real-time out to your laptop and start your rough cut at lunch or even, have your editor putting it together wireless right out of the camera.... Then you would know the coverage was totally there (before) you tore up the set or moved locations???

The good news here for those who couldn't care less about delivery to this huge market is: Graeme agrees that 480 of any flavor sucks totally and is very against it.... see his pixel vision related and the post above.... and he is the problem solver so this is a problem which will not get solved. I can make money with a high end camera. I can make more money with a camera that does both ends! If RED doesn't provide a way for me to sell support of the workflow to broadcast clients then I will soon be needing to also buy another camera to support this end of my work.

The basic argument against 480 support seems to run that if RED provides this they will take away quality from the 4K image. If the 4K image doesn't already look amazing then the RED Team is in deep trouble, we are days from NAB they have a 4K projector and a booth!!

Given that 4K is already together, I think RED should look at other business opportunities to sell more cameras and put more money into a lot of owners pockets.

JohnF

04-06-2007, 08:09 AM

I totally agree with TJ.

Despite the hype 80% of the market is still SD. There might be tens of thousands of HDV cameras out there but for broadcast footage operators are instructed to shoot only in miniDV or DVCAM mode (SD). (though this mainly because of codec issues (also for HD XDCAM))

A huge proportion of productions don't have the time and/or cannot afford the extra post costs of huge storage, hiring HD decks, grading etc so they are currently sticking with what they know... but this is changing, slowly. In Europe we have no definite or official time-scale for true HD transmission (switchover) or indeed exact standards that we would have to conform to (frame rate, resolution etc ).

Channels are saying that they want more productions shot on HD but the proof is in the pudding, most of it isn't.

Cameras like RED are likely to change all this as it's going to give camera operators the kind of gear they want ie higher than required resolution, a rugged recording system, a decent choice of lenses and of course a price that's right... (producers like that too!)

As mentioned before if the REDCINE conversion to SD is fast then, IMO, RED will clean up a huge market segement as us camera op's are going to switch without even blinking as this camera will then have all bases covered...

I'll make this clear I, and I suspect TJ and others, want to shoot 4k at all times or at least as much as possible but our clients will have all kinds of demands from internet transmission to cinema release and there's the rub they might actually be asking for SD footage and we have to provide if we are going to get paid...

Just to hammer the point home with an extreme example if you get a super exclusive shot which is newsworthy (like the Concorde crash in Paris) you can make upto $200,000 if it's picked up worldwide and you have a good distribution deal(eg 50/50 split) but you'd have to move fast hence the need for fast 4k to SD conversion as currently the chances are that most networks will ask for this footage on SD...

I write all this as I really believe that RED will clean up the market as long as it bares in mind that HD has still a very long way to go worldwide before it will be normal to have a complete and cohesive HD production chain.

JohnF

GlennChan

04-06-2007, 03:50 PM

What about if the workflow for HD was really fast, and you just still a HD-->SD downconvert on the back-end of that.

If you could shoot Redcode and start editing the footage right away (no conversion in Redcine), then that might be a reasonable workaround?

JohnF

04-07-2007, 05:22 AM

If the the shoot is one of my productions then this issue won't matter as I'd have obtained the facilities to happily shoot and post at 4k but if I'm being DOP/camera operator on someone elses shoot their post chain and final output format becomes a serious issue. There have been many instances where at the end of a day or days shoot I've just handed the tapes over and had no further involvement with the project. These "bread & butter" type jobs are generally working to a tight schedule working t'ward an SD master with little or no time/budget for a HD edit & down convert.

Hence my concern for a fast SD output (pref uncompressed file) to hand to clients. (and RED 4k to SD will look stunning anyway)

This issue won't put me off using RED at all as the features it brings to play could well outweigh any problematic issues - but let's face it some producers just don't care too much about picture quality when their neck is on the line to get a job done on time - and as TJ mentioned earlier we might have to have a second, more traditional, camera to hand to keep those jobs.

But I'd much rather use RED!

JohnF

GlennChan

04-07-2007, 10:57 AM

Well basically I guess there are 3 possible workflows:

1- You shoot Redcode, and the NLE can edit Redcode natively without conversion.

1a- If everything is shot on your camera, then it might be ok if it were 720p30 Redcode. And let them downconvert in the end. If it's corporate stuff and they have to jazz it up with graphics, then the rendering time won't be fun.

1b- In other situations, it might be better if the Red camera could shoot DV. Because almost all editors will handle DV (though you need to get the wrapper right).

2- You shoot Redcode and convert it to a format that works with the post house's NLE. i.e. DV, DV50, DVCPRO100, DNxHD or Meridien, Cineform, etc. etc.

It seems like an extra step, but it eliminates the step where you have to log & capture. Have an assistant convert your footage, and dump it onto a firewire drive.

I'm not sure if Avid works with this workflow.

3- Hand them a tape... i.e. DV, DVCAM, or betaSP. Other cameras will obviously have a workflow advantage here.

Michael Schrengohst

04-07-2007, 11:00 AM

Sure, you could always get the HD-SDI>>S-video converter.
Route the signal to a DVX-100 and record on DV...
If you are that intent on shooting SD....leave the RED at home.

tj williams

04-08-2007, 10:35 AM

A world of different experiences come into play in this......

Some of the folks on this board have owned some type of dv camera or currently do. Many of the same folks have an edit system usually final cut.
Their experience is cutting the stuff they shoot whether its indy films or weddings. Most of their experience is non broadcast. They use terms like "my movie"

Some of the folks on this board are free lance camera people. Often Dp/operators. They don't cut their own stuff they hand it to production.
They own film or broadcast cameras like S16/BetacamSp/Digibeta etc. which they use in their work and usually don't even have an "edit system" except enough to dupe their reels. They use terms like "on that shoot"

Some of course fall somewhere in between. JohnF seems to have freelance camera work and his own productions for instance!

Are there other advantages and disadvantages for the RED in this type of work?

Clearly I'm in the second category. I thought This would be a thread about problems for people like myself in the same second category.

About my work:

I shoot a variety of projects. Most of them end up on TV. Even projected projects end up on Tv!

On most shoots I just hand off the footage or the asst. takes it away and I don't see it again. I try to supervise DI/Davinci transfer whenever producers will allow it.

What are my concerns:

My concern in electronic shooting with the RED, for TV Broadcast, is to hand off footage easily and cleanly at the end of the day which will compete effectively with the Digibeta guy who bid against me.

Most TV I shoot is for 480I distribution. I also shoot some pal jobs for European producers. Origination format varies. May be Film 16/35/S16/Hd/Digibeta/BetacamSp/some Dv cam though not much.
( I have a DvCam dockable deck for my Sony broadcast camera)

Do I prefer to shoot for Bigger screen?

I shot most of the Earth day special on PBS last year that was HD broadcast.
If I could, I'd shoot all HD 4K and film. Those are not the calls.

Advantages of the RED in TV Shooting:

1. 4K raw frame allows extensive color correction and 11+ stops
2. Oversampling will allow better looking HD/SD than many other systems.
3. All digital system obviates the need to digitize tapes.

disadvantages.

1. unproven work flow which will involve complications of drive delivery/rendering time/other equipment on the shoot computers power sources etc. that may fail/awkward waiting times for the producer to take his/her footage.
2. Higher standard prod formats like Digibeta16/9 Panasonic 900HDX, and Sony 900F hd look very good and the difference between this and RED in HD/SD may be hard to see.
3. Producers unfamiliar with camera and or work flow may not accept the system well.

Steve Gibby

04-08-2007, 10:50 AM

In just 8 more days, at the opening of NAB exhibitions, we should get a much better understanding of how the RED One camera system will fit into various acquisition and post workflows.

tj williams

04-08-2007, 05:19 PM

Gibby

Hope to see you there. On your other post I hafta agree that a lot of questions just won't be answered at NAB because of the limitations of boothiness. Maybe there will be a wiki here. with real RED certified answers to many reservation holders questions. That would be a wonderful adjunct to the camera manual, and I believe a first for professional camera manufacturers.

I do hope RED is running a set of NAB sessions at their booth demonstrating the work flow to various formats.

Roberto B

04-09-2007, 06:03 PM

that 60i look?.. hmmm.. what for?!..

GlennChan

04-09-2007, 10:52 PM

So it cuts with other 60i footage and you don't notice motion weirdness/differences.

Some folks claim that 24p = film, and 60i = video. So theoretically if you cut between the two, you'd be able to tell some footage is more "filmic" than other footage. I wouldn't know about 30p.

2- By the same token, if you want Red footage to cut seamlessly with other news footage, you might need flat colors, more noise, overly sharpened edges, less DOF (unless using windowing), etc. etc.

Or, it may not be an issue at all. Because it's freakin news, they will show anything.

Stuart English

04-09-2007, 11:27 PM

Its not just news. Its also NHK and CBS and NBC and HDNet and Discovery etc... and a whole bunch of standard definition outlets too. So the discussion isn't about the need to provide a 60i deliverable, its about the workflow to deliver it in the fastest and least expensive manner.

I can also say that we have looked at HD scaled from our 4K RAW source footage v's HD direct from HD cameras - and there is a very noticeable difference. The same advantage should also show up in an SD deliverable.

tj williams

04-10-2007, 11:10 AM

Glen
JMHO Video is always video even if you record at 24 frames per second. Film looks just as nice recorded at 30 frames. If what you are after is image flicker I suggest film at 18 FPS.

24P was originally developed to be marketed as a universal origination format. ie convert to 29.97I by 3/2 pulldown, in US etc and 25 FPS by slight increase in playback speed for PAL for Europe etc. Most broadcast is either originated at the format of distribution or in some cases converted from 24P to one of the common formats for broadcast. Although 24P material does convert well it, in my experience, doesn't look any more like film unless the lighting and camera motion were done in a film like style, and it went thru a color correction process, in the transfer (to 60I etc) like DaVinci etc.

2- By the same token, if you want Red footage to cut seamlessly with other news footage, you might need flat colors, more noise, overly sharpened edges, less DOF (unless using windowing), etc. etc.

This kind of footage does appear more on local and small market broadcast. For the nat. mags etc. the gain is kept low, the colors are usually up, the lighting is more filmic. and Edge enhancment is in the negative numbers. Freelance Camerapersons putting out such footage as you describe for better programs will quickly be replaced. All that said in doc. or news. the challenge to find good light in natural settings is profound.

Stuart I see that you totally get this. I of course hope that you are able to find a way to present SD out the back of the RED work flow in a way that works for TV producers. I see you understand the numbers in terms of RED Sales, which because of economy of scale will help us all. I thought the oversampling would also make great HD footage. It's good to see it confirmed by you!!!

GlennChan

04-10-2007, 10:55 PM

I think the major marketing push behind 24p cameras was that they would produce a more film-like image. Although IMO the motion is only a very small piece of the puzzle.

JohnF

04-11-2007, 05:15 AM

Stuart,
like TJ I'm very much reassured by your response but please remember us in PAL land as we need 50i!!! (though I'm sure you won't forget ;) )

I'm already trying to persuade producers here in the UK about RED's potential and knowing that you guy's are looking at the SD output issue will help a lot.

Thanks

Glenn,
24P is not so much the film look but more about getting the exact frame rate so one can use these camcorders as second cameras to match or rather inter-cut with the (much more expensive) footage of the master cameras. I'm afraid a lot of these cameras are seen as the "disposable" cameras that get put in the high risk positions during stunt/pyro shots for example. The other point of this feature was that alot of people were asking for it for the purposes of 35mm blow-ups.

The other thing a lot of people forget is that 24P is the frame rate & type, the "filmlook" depends not on frame rate but , partly, on what type of gate one is trying to simulate...

JohnF