Cineform response to Final Cut Studio? [Archive]

Tom Lowe

04-19-2007, 05:41 PM

Cineform's been doing this for a while already, I believe.

It's cool that RED is working closely with Mac, but I hope they don't neglect PC editing. The bottom line is, I have never owned a Mac and I never will. I'm a PC guy, and for most of us OS is like Sunni vs Shiite. Aint no way I'm switching, especially after all those f*cking Mac ads dissing PC users! hehe.

underachiever

04-19-2007, 05:59 PM

I second that.

"iRed" is giving me the chills :cold:

Tom Lowe

04-19-2007, 06:07 PM

underachiever

04-19-2007, 06:41 PM

I think it will have native support for redcode RGB, though not immediately available.
You might want to read this thread for more info:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1634

Poi Boy

04-19-2007, 06:52 PM

never say never...
-A

Emanuel A.

04-19-2007, 07:18 PM

I second that.

"iRed" is giving me the chills :cold:Same here. ;-)

Desert Rune

04-19-2007, 07:40 PM

The bottom line is, I have never owned a Mac and I never will. Aint no way I'm switching, especially after all those f*cking Mac ads dissing PC users! hehe.
Eight years ago, I thought exactly the same way. At the risk of starting a PC/Mac war, are you saying those ads are preventing you from buying a Mac? Rather lame excuse, no?

Anyway, it won't hurt to try Mac, you might actually come to like "us". :tongue: :blush:

Nik Manning

04-19-2007, 07:50 PM

BTW, I haven't been following the whole MAC/REDCODE thing very closely. Is Final Cut allowing actual native support for REDCODE files, or do you have to convert the REDCODE files into some type of intermediate? I realize you will probably have to do your RAW conversion first, before it will work in any NLE.

Get the tools that work best for you and if you plan on using red it seems that FCP is the way to go. You can install windows on your intel mac and edit FCP and do whatever else in Windows. I was the same way until I got a internship editing on FCP.

Tom Lowe

04-19-2007, 09:30 PM

Eight years ago, I thought exactly the same way. At the risk of starting a PC/Mac war, are you saying those ads are preventing you from buying a Mac? Rather lame excuse, no?

Anyway, it won't hurt to try Mac, you might actually come to like "us". :tongue: :blush:

Lol, if Apple thinks the best way to get PC people to use Macs is to insult them as fatass dorky nerds, they've got another thing coming. :bleh:

I'm quite happy with my PC, and Premiere Pro, which will also support 4K. I like Adobe products, including Photoshop and After Effects, so I'm looking forward to getting the complete CS3 suite. If I have to buy Cineform, I'm also happy to do that, as their Aspect HD add-on to Premiere for the HVX is probably the single best piece of software I have purchased in recent memory.

In short, I will not be using a Mac!

Dan Sturm

04-19-2007, 10:21 PM

To add yet another perspective to this debate...I own and use both mac and pc products. I've just ordered an 8 core mac pro with the FC studio and i have a comperable 8 core PC system in my studio already.

I hate to see users get caught up in the MAC / PC argument when they should be focusing on the toolset rather than the platform. The reason I'm willing to use both platforms (aside from both finally containing identical Intel technology in them) is that i recognize that each system has its advantages and by combining the best tools from each, I can more easily and effiecietly do my job and make my customers happy. I have yet to run into a customer that actually cares what platform was used to create their prodcut. Bottom line, it doesn't matter. If i deliver a great product, who cares what side of the MAC / PC war you are on.

I think the biggest reason people find themselves in these sorts of arugments trying to convice others that one platform is better than the other, is simply a lack of understanding their options. Take for example Apples new ProRes 'format' which has been praised by so many apple users. If you would rather not use a Mac, try an Avid. DNxHD is the exact same concept and coincidently runs at the exact same bit rates as ProRes (and then some) and will give you stunning results, just as we've begun to see with ProRes.

4K editing? If you are so inclined, you have the pc options and noted above if you prefer not to use FCP. All I'm trying to say to our ever growing community of artists is, find the tools that allow you to do your best work, becuase that IS all that matters in the end.

Gavin Greenwalt

04-19-2007, 10:39 PM

And we're saying our tools are PCs and we don't want to be neglected. Choice is good. I've spent several years using FCP. I hate it. I also hate Premiere and I've been using it longer than any other editing application. To me they're not the tools for the job. So I would like to continue to use the tools I have come to like.

Course I don't care, I'm editing offline for the forseeable future so I have no stake in who supports what RED format. It's SD editing for me!

Sean

04-19-2007, 10:58 PM

Switching platforms and switching NLEs is a big deal to me. I've invested thousands of hours in learning a PC inside out, and knowing Avid as close to inside out as I can get (still learning). I'd rather spend my time writing a screenplay than re-learning a new platform. And ultimately, all the software will be pretty much capable of exactly the same things within a year or two anyhow. The fact that one has a lead in handling 4K is temporary. In short order, ALL NLEs will be handling 4K in some form or another. Then the next rainbow to chase will be 8K or something. In the meantime, I hope to have spent more time shooting films than re-learning a new platform.

Gunleik Groven

04-19-2007, 11:14 PM

BTW, I haven't been following the whole MAC/REDCODE thing very closely. Is Final Cut allowing actual native support for REDCODE files, or do you have to convert the REDCODE files into some type of intermediate? I realize you will probably have to do your RAW conversion first, before it will work in any NLE.

Seems like you can drap the Redcode RAW file directly into the timeline or ingest it (like p2).

The playback happens via prores.

OR

You can redcine into redcode.

Redcode is supported as soon as you have the cam (as it is a QT component). The "drop raw into timeline" workflow will follow "soon"... -;)

ProRes seems to be HW accelerated through the AJA IO HD.

That's what I've understood.
Could be mighty wrong here.

Gunleik

Poi Boy

04-19-2007, 11:44 PM

The never this platform or never that platform is really lame. Just use what works for you and let your images do the talking.
Aloha
-A

Don King

04-20-2007, 12:30 AM

Lol, if Apple thinks the best way to get PC people to use Macs is to insult them as fatass dorky nerds, they've got another thing coming. :bleh:

I'm quite happy with my PC, and Premiere Pro, which will also support 4K. I like Adobe products, including Photoshop and After Effects, so I'm looking forward to getting the complete CS3 suite. If I have to buy Cineform, I'm also happy to do that, as their Aspect HD add-on to Premiere for the HVX is probably the single best piece of software I have purchased in recent memory.

In short, I will not be using a Mac!

You're not alone! Same feeling, same workflow.

Evin Grant

04-20-2007, 12:40 AM

Deanan

04-20-2007, 12:50 AM

The Redcode RAW (4K or 2K) will cut natively on a an FCP timelime (With a 1k or 2k preview). In fact you can drop it right on a Macbook pro from your Reddrive and play it realtime, no rendering. I know I've been doing it in the booth for the last four days. As far as PC support, you can go from Redcine to anything you want on a PC. Scratch (witch runs on XP) will DI Redcode Raw 4k natively. If you want native support in Adobe or Avid products then let them know vocally the need to come to us, just like Apple and Assimilate did.
E.

Yeah, what Evin said and also... Redcode via QT will be supported
on windows. Redcine can also output dnxhd QT files.

Deanan

Don King

04-20-2007, 12:51 AM

The Redcode RAW (4K or 2K) will cut natively on a an FCP timelime (With a 1k or 2k preview). In fact you can drop it right on a Macbook pro from your Reddrive and play it realtime, no rendering. I know I've been doing it in the booth for the last four days. As far as PC support, you can go from Redcine to anything you want on a PC. Scratch (witch runs on XP) will DI Redcode Raw 4k natively. If you want native support in Adobe or Avid products then let them know vocally the need to come to us, just like Apple and Assimilate did.
E.

Just a small note. In meantime, while they don't supply the support, shall we have the Cineform 4k?

And if so, can we drop it right on a laptop? With a 1k or 2k preview? Likely FCP/Apple?

Will Cineform provide it? Or will the Redcode compression be a better option for editing and color correction?

Sanjin Jukic

04-20-2007, 12:52 AM

Thanks Evin. PC guys supposed to be p...ssed because the RED is born on a Mac. But Mac is also friendly to little fat PC guy. The problem is that he (PC guy) just has to buy a new Mac than he can run the Redcode RAW (4K or 2K) to cut native on the FCP timeline and then he could rebooth in Windows XP/Vista and continue to use his Premiere, Avid, Vegas, etc.. NLE.

Hey PC guy just buy a new Mac once in your life and solve your REDCODE RAW frustration.

Roberto B

04-20-2007, 12:59 AM

sanjin, don't bother.. :)

Just a small note. In meantime, while they don't supply the support, shall we have the Cineform 4k?

And if so, can we drop it right on a laptop? With a 1k or 2k preview? Likely FCP/Apple?

Will Cineform provide it? Or will the Redcode compression be a better option for editing and color correction?

fair questions.. fair enough.. Mr Newman?..

Tom Lowe

04-20-2007, 01:25 AM

The Redcode RAW (4K or 2K) will cut natively on a an FCP timelime (With a 1k or 2k preview). In fact you can drop it right on a Macbook pro from your Reddrive and play it realtime, no rendering. I know I've been doing it in the booth for the last four days. As far as PC support, you can go from Redcine to anything you want on a PC. Scratch (witch runs on XP) will DI Redcode Raw 4k natively. If you want native support in Adobe or Avid products then let them know vocally the need to come to us, just like Apple and Assimilate did.
E.

So you can take footage straight from the camera and drop it into a FCP timeline?? What about the RAW processing? -- white balance, exposure, etc? I thought that had to be done first in REDCINE?

Ace

04-20-2007, 01:34 AM

So you can take footage straight from the camera and drop it into a FCP timeline?? What about the RAW processing? -- white balance, exposure, etc? I thought that had to be done first in REDCINE?

Yeah its quite cool isnt it. Apparantly all that can be done as a final step or on the fly?

Nick Shaw

04-20-2007, 02:10 AM

Anders Holck

04-20-2007, 03:42 AM

What about the RAW processing? -- white balance, exposure, etc? I thought that had to be done first in REDCINE?

It will decode a 1k or 2k proxy in realtime from the raw file. You don't need to go through redcine first or convert at any step (But it's still possible). Don't know if the codec will read the metadata you set in camera, or you need the fx-plug for that.
But this is what we are raving about. Realtime support in a workflow thats even faster than P2...
I think RED going with Quicktime as the in camera format, got them a lot of Apple love :-)

dewman

04-20-2007, 06:30 AM

well coming from the PC side and having invested into the Adobe platform, I'm leaning towards purchasing a new MAC Pro and FCS2. I don't know this for a fact, but I posted a message on Adobe's forum and asked if I could purchase the upgrade for CS3 for MAC if I own the PC version - the answer was yes/probably. So, I can have the best of both worlds...unfortunately I'm locked into Apples hardware...but I'm cool with it.

As I've stated before (my opinion only) Adobe is a traditional style company and as a result they have dropped the ball on engaging companies such as RED and Panny. They really need to look at their current biz model. Also, I'm not sure, but I think they left out batch exporting/rendering in PPCS3 - if this is the case - it's a total oversight on Adobe's part.

I'm definitely going to see what Cineform solution is going to provide...anyways I'm not purchasing anything until probably August - when my camera is scheduled to ship

Nick Shaw

04-20-2007, 08:10 AM

Don't know if the codec will read the metadata you set in camera, or you need the fx-plug for that.

My impression was certainly that the in camera meta-data (white balance etc) would be read by the codec in FCP.

It was certainly impressive to see it working at NAB directly off a RED-DRIVE connected Firewire 800 (bus powered) to a Mac Pro. I don't believe external monitoring (via AJA/BMD etc) is currently possible from a REDCODE timeline, but I'm sure that will come soon – probably from AJA first, given Ted's contacts there.

S. Um

04-20-2007, 08:22 AM

well coming from the PC side and having invested into the Adobe platform, I'm leaning towards purchasing a new MAC Pro and FCS2. I don't know this for a fact, but I posted a message on Adobe's forum and asked if I could purchase the upgrade for CS3 for MAC if I own the PC version - the answer was yes/probably. So, I can have the best of both worlds...unfortunately I'm locked into Apples hardware...but I'm cool with it.

I'm in the same situation, except I already purchased my MacPro and FCS several months ago. I'm thinking of upgrading my Adobe software to CS3, but getting the PC version. That way, I can use it on both my PC and Mac (through Bootcamp or Parallels). On the Mac side, what I really want are just Photoshop and After Effects. Hopefully it will be a fairly smooth workflow, even with the switching between operating systems.

Jason Rodriguez

04-20-2007, 08:38 AM

Just to add an interesting mix to this discussion, I ran an ad-hoc demo in the CineForm booth on the last day of NAB for someone who wanted to know what CineForm RAW could do with 4K footage. We had some scenes from the Dalsa Origin at full 4K RAW resolution, and so on a lark I dropped two 15 second clips on the timeline using a picture-in-picture effect (so two video streams running at the same time), and then added a title.

*Real-time* playback . . . this was on a very humble 3.73Ghz Pentium D with 2GB of RAM (not a newer Conroe-based system) and a very simple Intel-Matrix RAID 0 (two drives using the Intel Matrix RAID utility buitl into the motherboard).

I then did the same thing again, this time using a dissolve in-between the clips rather than a picture-in-picture . . . again, real-time.

Tim Bucklin from CineForm in the Sony booth did the same picture-in-picture effect as myself with a title, but since he was on a slightly faster machine (still Pentium D though), he was able to also get a real-time color-correction to run on one of the clips as well.

So suffice to say, if you're using Premiere Pro, and have a nice machine (especially a newer one based on the Core architecture rather than an older Netburst Pentium D), multi-stream 4K editing is a reality with CineForm RAW.

Again, I can't remember who I ran the demo for (too many names in 4 days and too many demos!), but it was someone with a Red reservation who wanted to know what his options for 4K editing in real-time on the PC were . . .

sander kamp

04-20-2007, 09:34 AM

Jason, just to be sure: you are not saying you were playing back footage at 4k resolution, right? I mean, you wouldn't have a 4k monitor. So my guess is you were playing back 4k footage at a lower resolution, which if I understand it right is exactly what FSP2 can do with the RED files.

David Newman

04-20-2007, 09:55 AM

Sander,

Yes you are correct, the CineForm RAW and REDCODE RAW both exploit the multi-resolution nature of wavelets to achieve higher editing performance. One key difference being CineForm RAW requires less CPU power to decode to the same resolution as REDCODE RAW, the precise performance, while significant can't be truely commented on until REDCODE RAW is publicly released (they might surprise us and catch up some.) We use the additional CPU availability to performance user controlable 3D LUT (film look) processing, there is always ways to use up today's CPU power.

sander kamp

04-20-2007, 10:01 AM

Thanks for the explanation. I think it is great there is competition from Cineform, keeps the guys at Apple awake! And it sounds like a wonderful codec.

Same for the whole PC versus Mac discussion: Let's be really happy we have a choice. I am a Mac user but don't mind PC's at all. I don't want to imagine a world with only Mac's or PC's :waaa:

Gopher77

04-20-2007, 10:24 AM

David,
The CS3 suite looks very invinting to me, however the weak link in the chain is Premiere. Could you describe how cineform will help PP in layman terms. I'm not an editor, i'm a camera man so if you can make me understand it I'd be very grateful.

G

David Newman

04-20-2007, 11:00 AM

G,

That is tricky as everything has their favorite aspects of different NLEs. Premiere Pro is getting a slicker UI, FCP strong point, but PPro has a far superior pixel engine than FCP. PPro has supported 32-float RGB, YUV, 16-bit RGB, and all the favours of 8-bit for a while now (with no gamma shift issues.) For color processing alone PPro is the way to go. However PPro is a memory hog, so we always recommend that feature films are edited in reels to limit memory issues. CS3 is better than 2.0, yet I believe FCP is a little better for large single project timeline. So this is just a workflow issue, either product can and has cut/onlined feature films.

Mike the beginner

04-20-2007, 11:26 AM

If you were completely new to editing and were considering purchasing a powerful new computer complete with NLE suite to use exclusivley with your red camera which would be the most cost effective and ease of learning direction to go as well as making life easier (well less impossible he he)

A new large apple store is to open in Glasgow (where i live) two stories high and there might well be special deals on opening day scheduled for July. This is massivley tempting.

Pc vendors vary in their quality and prices. Macs appear to be all built to similar specs etc. THis might make the mac less likely to have something missed out or not working properly. Their new operating system throws a spannere in the works though? uncertainty? What do i do?

Mike the beginner

Tom Lowe

04-20-2007, 11:50 AM

What is the learning curve moving from Premiere Pro to FCP, and visa versa? In terms of editing features, what are the differences?

Emmanuel Decarpentrie

04-20-2007, 12:05 PM

What is the learning curve moving from Premiere Pro to FCP, and visa versa?

I moved from Vegas (which was the soft I started with) to FCP quite a while ago and it took me about a couple of days to feel myself at home with FCP. This was not the case at all with AVID by the way: I believe you really need some sort of professional training to start feeling comfortable with AVID, unlike FCP which is very intuitive.

In terms of editing features, what are the differences?

Wow! That's a pretty good question and a tough one to answer in a few words. From my personal experience, I have found FCP to be more stable (as long as you maintain your station correctly and you regularly clean the "user preferences") for large projects... There are a couple of Premiere tools that I miss on FCP (like the time stretch or the color correction tools-curves), but on the other hands, I like the bezier curves (including time remap) of FCP very much. I also like the Shake-FCP integration: Shake (and Fusion) is truly the best when it comes to compositing, color correction, etc (at least compared to AE). All in all, I believe Final Cut Studio 2 to be the best solution available for editing and color-correcting. Once you've tried it, there generally is no turning back...

Tom Lowe

04-20-2007, 12:18 PM

How about transitions? Would you say FCP is better than PP for transitions, or the other way around? I really obsess over my cuts, down the frame.

I guess I should try FCP to see what all the fuss is about.

David Newman

04-20-2007, 12:19 PM

As we where PC only for a while, we have pulled many FCP users to Premiere Pro, and the experience is mostly very positive. I do believe the PPro learning curve is shorter for complex productions, mixed media, range of shooting formats. FCP in the past works best if you don't need to tweek presets -- setting up non-standard projects in FCP has been tricky.

Tom Lowe

04-20-2007, 02:15 PM

David, what about the RAW processing. These guys are saying you can drop RAW footage into a FCP timeline, directly, which really surprises me.

To work with Prospect HD, will you have to run your footage through REDCINE and convert it to your codec, basically? If so, do you know if the data rates will be about the same?

It seemed like your Aspect intermediates were roughly the same size as the HVX native footage.

David Newman

04-20-2007, 02:49 PM

Tom,

We are doing 4K RAW processing today on the timeline (more than what has been described for RECODE RAW -- although that could change.) Yes you need to use REDCINE to export to CineForm. If you export to CineForm 4:4:4 at 2K, the data rate is around 35-40MB/s (it might be lower as REDCODE has already lost some high frequency data -- 27MB/s wavelet is not magic.) At this quality you are going better than HDCAM-SR 4:4:4 (see my blog post on this : http://cineform.blogspot.com/2007/04/mastering-to-hdcam-sr-vs-cineform-444.html.) If REDCINE allows for a RAW export, CineForm RAW 4K encodes would be around 35MB/s (if the data was from the RAW port it would be more like 45MB/s -- again the pre-filtering of REDCODE will drop the data rate.) The high datarate of CineForm RAW is not that it is less efficient, we are simply choosing to compress less as we don't have the hardware limitations REDCODE has to deal with (flash / laptop drive speeds etc.) We like to maintain a lot of headroom for the best possible post and to be competive with HDCAM-SR and other respective compression standards. Of course the quality is selectable with the CineForm encoder, you could increase or decrease the data rate as needed. I have some crazy low 10MB/s 4K RAW sequences of Dalsa Origin footage, still looks very nice, bit too low for extensive grading I would imagine.

Tom Lowe

04-20-2007, 02:57 PM

Okay, so basically Apple is bypassing the REDCINE step and allows you to do that processing at the end of the editing process?

Are you saying it remains to be seen whether REDCINE can "export" RAW? If it does not allow for export of 4K RAW, then you would have to make your white balance, exposure, and other RAW decisions at the REDCINE stage, before they are "burned in" to the Cineform intermediate, is that right?

David Newman

04-20-2007, 03:58 PM

Tom, that is correct, that is why we hope for a RAW connection with REDCINE, so we can control the white balance controls. You as export flat (unprocessed) to 4:4:4 2K, which will preserve the headroom as an alternative. As what you can do with REDCODE in FCP is not completely clear yet.

Tom Lowe

04-20-2007, 04:10 PM

Thanks.

While I've got you here... what about reframing and cropping 4K stuff? If we decide we only want to use 60% of our 4K footage frame and crop it down to 2K for our final product, at what stage and in what piece of software would we do that? Does Cineform work inside AE, by any chance?

David Newman

04-20-2007, 04:16 PM

dewman

04-20-2007, 04:26 PM

Thanks, David for all the great news! There's no doubt CineForm is going to provide a workable solution.

Tom - u had asked about the learning curve on FCP; I don't see much myself if you already understand and work with PP2.0; both UI's are similar.

I'm glad I've got a few months to figure this out; starting to get confusing :).

Barend Onneweer

04-20-2007, 05:12 PM

Joel Kaye

04-20-2007, 05:30 PM

CineForm works great in AE. If you has CineForm RAW 4K you can do reframing within any CineForm compatible tool -- today AE, PPro, Combustion, Fusion (limited testing), etc. It is nice to do reframing in the NLE, so you can do it in context of adjacent sequences.

I think you guys are wise to try to keep a close eye on RED and support it as much as possible. I don't know how the Silicon Imaging stuff is selling, but it doesn't feel like nearly as nice a solution as RED is - although it might make a great studio camera.

killfilm

04-20-2007, 05:50 PM

go cineform go, i really dont wanna switch to mac just for redcode raw support, i can just stick to what'm good at, thats ppro and ae. yes!

David Newman

04-20-2007, 06:06 PM

David, are you proposing to use Redcine to transcode Redcode RAW 4k to Cineform RAW 4k?

Are bayer patterns the same between the two?

And compression on top of compression isn't all that ideal... is it?

Bayer patterns are the same, there are only a few varieties.

Compressing to CineForm RAW 4k would be least distortion of any other export option, developing to RGB and compressing to anything else introduces more distortion than staying in the same bayer structure. Staying in Redcode RAW will have it issues, compatibility, speed, flexibility. Converting to uncompressed has it issues, huge data size, and cooked in look. There is no ideal in post. We simply offer more post production choices.

CineForm's business is the compression other people's formats to make the post workflow more flexible, faster and higher quality for multiple generation. We do this for HDV, P2, MXF, ACVHD, HDCAM-SR, whatever it is. Lot of stuff on the web site explaining this. We've been doing it for years.

David Newman

04-20-2007, 06:14 PM

Disclaimer: all of this is simply addressing the various questions. Officially we haven't announced anything, just planning out the workflow. Yes, we intend to do our best to support the red user.

Graeme Nattress

04-20-2007, 08:44 PM

Davd, I went to the Cineform online store and couldn't find a product called Cineform Raw. How much, exactly, does this cost for 4k raw, and what do you get for your money? Can other people play back cineform raw 4k files on mac, pc, or linux?

Graeme

David Newman

04-20-2007, 09:11 PM

CineForm RAW is a core technology of Prospect 2K (http://www.cineform.com/products/ProspectHD.htm -- $1999) and likely part of the upcoming Neo 2K product (http://www.cineform.com/products/NeoHD.htm --$799.) Here is a very old write-up on CineForm RAW posted about this time last year : http://www.cineform.com/technology/CineForm_RAW.htm. I showed you it personally at NAB last year. Since then CineForm RAW has integrated an Iridas 3D LUT look system, gone through many updates and customers have posted several features with it that shot with the SI-2K cameras (and its prototypes.) So the website needs some updates, which we never have time for. CineForm RAW plays back on PC, and the Mac stuff is in beta for CineForm Intermediate and internal only for RAW, the code will port to Linux whenever there is enough demand (we have a SDK for this purpose.)

We have a lot of RED customers awaiting for our support, primarily on the PC. I have been trying to ask RED for some time (now that I have your brief attention) for a QuickTime pixel format out of REDCINE, so that REDCODE RAW can be quickly (no demosaic) exported to CineForm RAW or DNG or any other raw formats. All you need to do is add a pixel format like "BYR2" for a FOURCC code (http://fourcc.org/rgb.php) so that you can export raw at 16-bit linear per pixel. The is no downside to RED (only a small engineering effort) with the benefits of increasing the end user options. What do you think?

Tom Lowe

04-20-2007, 09:15 PM

I would like to express my support for David Newman and Cineform, right now.

Graeme Nattress

04-20-2007, 09:28 PM

Thanks Tom. I'd like to express my support for REDCODE and for keeping it free, and for expanding it's capabilities to meet the needs of all our users.

Graeme

John Allardice

04-20-2007, 09:55 PM

Thanks Tom. I'd like to express my support for REDCODE and for keeping it free, and for expanding it's capabilities to meet the needs of all our users.

Graeme

On that note, if Jim bought Accuscene, think he might pony up the cash for Adobe?

:)

David Newman

04-20-2007, 10:08 PM

Thanks Tom. I'd like to express my support for REDCODE and for keeping it free, and for expanding it's capabilities to meet the needs of all our users.

Graeme

And no one is suggesting you should do otherwise. Enabling third party options would hardly mean the end of this goal, it is more likely to assist in addressing those customer needs.

Tom Lowe

04-20-2007, 10:49 PM

Thanks Tom. I'd like to express my support for REDCODE and for keeping it free, and for expanding it's capabilities to meet the needs of all our users.

Graeme

Hey, how can I argue with that?

Don King

04-20-2007, 11:01 PM

I would like to express my support for David Newman and Cineform, right now.
I second that.

Delivery date?

I've read something around $2,000 (and $3,000 hardware related, a lot less than a FCP/Mac solution, NOT free as well), is it so?

david farland

04-21-2007, 12:24 AM

I hate it when mummy & daddy fight!

David, we so respect what you're doing, but this ain't the arena!

Cheers,

Roberto B

04-21-2007, 12:46 AM

it's acceptable.. they're competitors.. we love both and we can't live without one or another.. even if in this arena i'm with david because apple is too much expensive in indie language when we have the PC stuff around the corner..

cineform rules over here.. Mr Newman as well.

David Newman

04-21-2007, 07:35 AM

Thank you guys for the support. I'm not trying to be a competitor, CineForm doesn't build cameras, we support the post of every camera we can. The may not be the appropriate venue for these discussions, but where is when there are threads with CineForm in the title I get dragged into it again. If Red is successful in providing every software feature for free then the will be no market for third parties, then good on them, but no one in business history have ever been that successful. Even when Microsoft had 95% of the market with Internet Explorer, I still purchased Opera. Open your market, don't create artificial barriers to entry. Consider CineForm is to Red like Nattress Effects is to Final Cut Pro -- who's business is that hurting -- not Apples.

P.S. If people want to ask question about CineForm try http://www.dvinfo.net, there I don't have the feel like a controversial figure.

david farland

04-21-2007, 11:06 AM

David,
I think you provide an expertise & balance that raises the standards of this forum. i'd hate to see you go. I just see your approach regarding commercials on this forum ain’t gonna bring em out.

Trying to look at the whole Apple v PC thing….

Firstly to get any benefit in using Apple in a 4K space I must be able to add effects/CC in FCP/Color and then publish at 10bit RGB 4K.
I’ll make a leap of faith and say if FCP were to publish 4K it must:

1. Ingest native 10bit 4K Raw onto the timeline (where editors add certain basic effects)
2. Port over to Color for final grading..(Color only can handle 2K)
3. Port back over to FCP.
4. Somehow add 4K effects / 4K compositing. (and miss the grading!!)
5. Perform final conform to 4K RGB, via REDCINE API to create 4K sequence files.

I’m pretty sure step 4 (or 5) can’t be done. So therefore FCP/Color can’t do 4K effects, grade and publish.

So the highest rez path for Apple is 2K from FCP to Color which will only output (8/10?) bit RGB 2K sequence files. I hope I got that correct.

On the PC side for 4K publish. Let’s say I use Premiere Pro with the Cineform API.

1. REDCINE to do a low rez extract (I don’t need Cineform for this)
2. Perform an offline edit.
3. Use REDCODE again to achieve an online to Cineform 10bit RGB 4K file.
4. Feed into Premiere Pro/Cineform for onlining & 10bit 4K publish.

Is this correct?

For a 2K workflow, I could use REDCINE to output a 10bit 2K Cineform file which I would import into Premiere Pro/Cineform for onlining & 10bit 2K publish.

Finally, are you wanting Cineform to directly import raw data from RED media, perform low rez edit cuts/effects/grading and then conform to high rez Cineform 10bit 4K files? Also how do you produce 4K dpx, cineon output files?

Cheers,

DF

David Newman

04-21-2007, 11:44 AM

That wasn't we were thinking. Ask over at DVinfo.net, so you or others won't think I'm posting commercials (never my intent, only answering questions.)

Deanan

04-21-2007, 01:05 PM

There is a REDFX FXPlug plugin for FCP, which gives you access to REDCINE type adjustments, right there in the FCP timeline. It was not ready to be demo'd at NAB, but Mike Curtis assured me it was coming.

It's actually been usable for a few months now but the last minute
demo machine had something different about it and it didn't load
into FCP. I didn't want to mess with the demo machine during
the show so we didn't show it.

It may have been running at the Apple booth.

Deanan

Roberto B

04-21-2007, 03:33 PM

David, i'm sorry but we'll need for your support here.. among us.

i love jarred (red is not just the jim's success or graeme's codec success) but i have no the same feeling about chris hurd.. i'm sorry but i have not..

so.. succeeding this:

but where is when there are threads with CineForm in the title I get dragged into it again.

can we count on you here right?

Roberto B

04-21-2007, 03:44 PM

If Red is successful in providing every software feature for free then the will be no market for third parties, then good on them, but no one in business history have ever been that successful.yup.. you're right.. their business is the hardware..

mine?.. my pocket or my bank account..

mine or ours?..

what's the best?..

$5,000 for the hardware and software (PC + Cineform) ?

or more than $12,500 just for the hardware (even if the software is free..) ?

David Newman

04-21-2007, 03:56 PM

David, i'm sorry but we'll need for your support here.. among us.

i love jarred (red is not just jim's success or graeme's codec success) but i have no the same feeling about chris hurd.. i'm sorry but i have not..

so.. succeeding this:

can we count on you here right?

Unfortunately the rules are grey here, this is effectively a RED corporate site, and my response to questions often reveals RED's less then clear support for third parties (those are not now insiders.) Chris Hurd is a nice guy, no open biases on his site which has been very welcoming to CineForm. Jarred's DVXUser has been more welcoming to CineForm also, and we will likely start advertising to both sites soon now that NAB is behind us. When I asked, I was not given an option to officially advertise here (and yes I would like to.) So when I reply here I am very conscious of the thin line I have to tread. If you wish more open answers, please use DVInfo.net, DVXUser (once we advertising there) or email.

David Newman

04-21-2007, 03:59 PM

yup.. you're right.. their business is the hardware..
...
$5,000 for the hardware and software (PC + Cineform) ?

or more than $12,500 just for the hardware (even if the software is free..) ?

It is not just price. Features will be different, workflow will be different, these differences create market share for all.

Joel Kaye

04-21-2007, 04:12 PM

If Red is successful in providing every software feature for free

RED sells hardware. The logical strategy is to provide as much workflow software for free as possible so workflow is never a sales objection. In fact, they want to sell the low cost workflow as an amazing benefit to shooting RED as opposed to anything else. Until the workflow is blatantly superior to film they won't begin to dent the higher end of market.

Roberto B

04-21-2007, 04:39 PM

Unfortunately the rules are grey here, this is effectively a RED corporate site, and my response to questions often reveals RED's less then clear support for third parties (those are not now insiders.) Chris Hurd is a nice guy, no open biases on his site which has been very welcoming to CineForm. Jarred's DVXUser has been more welcoming to CineForm also, and we will likely start advertising to both sites soon now that NAB is behind us. When I asked, I was not given an option to officially advertise here (and yes I would like to.) So when I reply here I am very conscious of the thin line I have to tread. If you wish more open answers, please use DVInfo.net, DVXUser (once we advertising there) or email.advertise here! why not?

the red users need for your product and support.. i'm not a cineform customer.. only directly.. because my editor is a cineform user and he shares the same viewpoint.. cineform is the best indie product.. like red.. not less..

Roberto B

04-21-2007, 04:47 PM

It is not just price. Features will be different, workflow will be different, these differences create market share for all.agreed.. their problem.. not ours..

i love this forum.. but sometimes these bros here are naives like angels.. our interest is not the same than.. when i send my money it's not to my bank account.. it exits from my bank account..

Álex Montoya

04-23-2007, 02:15 AM

I hope that a nice PC-based workflow will be established in the next months. I am not sure I could understand why the RED team, who are all about giving power to the indies would become somehow elitist regarding posproduction.

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 03:39 AM

We're working on it.....

Graeme

laguun

04-23-2007, 04:40 AM

We're working on it.....

Graeme

good to know -
we have so much money, knowhow, licenses and infrastructure on the windows, not osx side of pcs that a shift to osx (besides maybe a few stations) would not be really possible.

also, we need 4k grading, and there is none on osx if i am informed correctly?

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 04:46 AM

Sure you can grade 4k on OS X.....

The benefit of doing the FCP workflow first though, is that it means we get all the quicktime stuff right, and as you may know, that can be tricky.

Graeme

Gopher77

04-23-2007, 04:49 AM

Graeme,
Thanks for the reassurance, this is a very important issue to many of us that have a lot of investment in PCs. Any indication who will be step up on the PC side to offer RED native support?

Gopher

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 05:04 AM

Let's get 1st party support going before we worry about 3rd parties!

Graeme

laguun

04-23-2007, 05:35 AM

Sure you can grade 4k on OS X.....

yeah - i was refferring to DI & CC (as in scratch, lustre, baselight, quantel etc) and i am not aware of a osx DI & CC 4k solution.

i would be happy if i misunderstood that color was "only" 2k, as the price/performance ratio of FCS is really very good.

i have to admit however, that i a m a little bit afraid of the workflow. if i understand it correctly, fcp is now @ 10 rgb color is at 2k but doesn´t support redcode. that sure is already a excellent archievement, but our "spoiled" clients will probably not accept that. (or i have misunderstood something, however there are still several months to plan our workflow)

The benefit of doing the FCP workflow first though, is that it means we get all the quicktime stuff right, and as you may know, that can be tricky.

yeah, i think that makes perfectly sense in that order.
we even speculated that you would go that way here at laguun.
we were sitting in front of the computer here with 3 people when you annouced that at the apple pressconference and we were going like "hrrrhrrr, that was sooo obvious..."

it would be outstanding if you could develop a similar workflow for the other inexpensive, very popular software on that other commercial os...

ps. i would not hesitate to integrate one or two macs in the network here, FCS is really interesting, and we also have a license for compatibilit purposes already. however, we are planning our 4k di pipeline with grading, and it seems that rules out FCS as single solution, unless i am overseeing something.

Karl H

04-23-2007, 05:35 AM

so would I be right in assuming the following so far:

Redcode :

Pros: Edits directly in FCP, no transcoding. FXplug to assign looks. Free.
Cons : No montior support, processor intensive. No PC support.

Cineform :

Pros: Multiple streams of realtime editing/fx on a PC or MAC. Monitor outputs via Blackmagic card.
Cons : Expensive, have to tanscode.

this maybe simplifying too much, but am I on the right lines here?

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 05:44 AM

FCP, in it's high quality render path, does everything in 32 bit float and has done for years. Our REDCODE codec is designed to spit out it's data in 8, 16 or 32 bit depending on what the host app is asking for at that time. Once we get REDCODE RGB working, that will accept the 32 bit data and put it back to 10, 12, 16 or whatever we figure out will work best.

You've got to remember that RED is a really small team, and we're working very hard on making sure the software side works well, has a workflow and integrates with the camera hardware, and that's not a simple task. So I'd better get back to work.....

Graeme

Anders Holck

04-23-2007, 05:50 AM

Greame, isnt 32 bit float only an option in FCP's YUV mode, when rendering from and to an YUV Codec?

BTv. Hope you'll be able to show off some stills of the REDCINE interface soon, for us stuck at home base :-)

Nick Shaw

04-23-2007, 05:55 AM

32 bit float is for YUV only, but Graeme has kind of hinted before that REDCODE may be able to 'pretend' to be YUV to Final Cut (remember REDCODE RAW is only 'pretending' to be RGB). FCP works internally at 4:4:4 all the time as far as I'm aware, even for 4:2:2 codecs.

Anders Holck

04-23-2007, 06:02 AM

Yes but then you have a dual color space conversion. From RGB to YUV, and back again. That shouldn't be something you'd want for color accuracy :- Greame?

When the RAW file is debayred it's stil a RGB file although it's in the sensors native colorspace.

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 06:19 AM

Doing a RGB to YCbCr to RGB at 32 float is totally transparent. I'd not worry about it in the least - I don't. Sure it's a concern at 8bit, but at float - no problems. Basically it's just a hack behind the scenes to make it all work and you'd never notice in in practise. And yes, FCP internally is always 4:4:4.

I don't see any reason why you can't see what you're doing in FCP and REDCODE out your Kona card. I'm sure we had it working in the office out over SDI to a big plasma.

Also, if you transcode to any other RAW format, you're loosing links to RED Metadata and what it means, and white balance would have to be reverse engineered and you'd not have the benefits of our tried and tested colour space transforms and sensor colorimetry data.....

Graeme

Nick Shaw

04-23-2007, 06:21 AM

But isn't there a colour space conversion happening anyway when the de-bayered file is converted from camera native colour space to the working colour space? RGB->YUV->RGB is normally particularly destructive because of the 4:2:2 sampling normally used by YUV. If it stays 4:4:4 it would not be so bad. If all processing is 32-bit float, there should be negligible quantization errors. Now the only thing you're left with is gamut mis-matches, which I agree could cause some colour information to be lost.

EDIT: once again Graeme's there before me!

Anders Holck

04-23-2007, 06:29 AM

Ok, sounds great. So basically you do the colorspace conversion inside the codec and present YCbCr 32-bit floats to FCP?
Ok, I was just confused because I thought the FCP quicktime File I/O was limited to 16-bit integer.

david farland

04-23-2007, 07:26 AM

So the color space is always 4:4:4, either yuv or rgb...and 32 float.

You can natively edit 4k (or low rez offline version) in FCP and 2K color fx in Color...yeah?

Color has LUT's that can be read by Redcode and visa versa.

So hopefully the Color FX's can also be read by Redcode so you can do a final conform of it's 2K output to 4K in FCP.

Or am I way out?

Cheers,

Anders Holck

04-23-2007, 07:38 AM

Graeme. Hope you'll cosider implementing a simple lossless mode in the REDCODE RGB codec as well.
Having a high quality uncompressed RGB codec that you can use in FCP would be really useful.
Not to dismiss your wavelets, but I can still imagine a few places where I'd want to go fully uncompressed.

Can't really grasp why no one else (Blackmagic, AJA) has implemented this color space conversion in their RGB codec's before. (Other than a few thoughts about you being a genuene geniuos)

David Newman

04-23-2007, 09:07 AM

Let's get 1st party support going before we worry about 3rd parties!

Graeme

That is backwards. The whole point of embrassing third party support is that customers do not need to wait for the first to get all there products complete (and there is no such thing as a feature complete product in post.) Look at CineForm's relationship with Adobe, Adobe wanted HDV support for Premiere Pro 1.5, so they licensed CineForm as we had already released products that served that market back in Premiere 6.5 days (nearly 2 years earler.) Adobe allowed third parties from a very early stage by posting their SDK online, for all who wish to use it. When Adobe released PPro 2.0 which had its own HDV support, third parties like CineForm and Matrox simply shifted their features to address a higher-end market. All this helps Adobe even though they have large development team. The smaller your team the more third parties can help. Graeme, you have you own business, got a good reputation, and then your position at Red, primarily because Apple was open enough to allow you develop your effect filters / plugins. This an business approach that is proven to work. I know producing a full SDK is an engineering effort, but we don't need that day one, just a small change here or there is all we have asked.

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 09:13 AM

I fully understand your point David. Once we get our support done I fully expect others will come along and fill in niches, but I also think RED should offer at least the basic workflow on each platform we support - that's what I mean about getting 1st party support right first. You're totally correct about 3rd parties being great to either provide support for a new format when the producer of that format offers no support or for filling in a niche, like I do with advanced chroma upsampling algorithms in FCP and Color.

Graeme

Kevin Halverson

04-23-2007, 09:18 AM

... but I also think RED should offer at least the basic workflow on each platform we support...
Graeme

Has a list of platforms that RED intends to support been released officially?

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 09:35 AM

No, but please tell us what you want supporting apart from the obvious 3 A's - Apple, Adobe and Avid.

Graeme

David Newman

04-23-2007, 09:43 AM

Thank you for least acknowledging the request, and that RED does realize there will be parts of the market you cannot address. It was getting frustrating from here. Still a RAW pixel format would only be a small effort for your team and get the real-time PC post up and running very quickly, even if it was a CineForm solution. This would not be before your own PC offerings as we do require the existence for REDCINE to do anything, which will serve a wider market. Please keep this option open.

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 09:51 AM

We're keeping all options open, but we do need to fully concentrate on our own path for now.

Graeme

Kevin Halverson

04-23-2007, 09:54 AM

No, but please tell us what you want supporting apart from the obvious 3 A's - Apple, Adobe and Avid.

Graeme

That would seem to be the obvious choices, though I would not place them in that order. Anything beyond these platforms could be considered secondary in terms of market share.

Good to know that all three major NLEs fall into the category of supported platforms.

Thanks,

Kevin Halverson

Gopher77

04-23-2007, 01:30 PM

I'm probably on the low end of the economic spectrum trying to buy a red, a freelancer in a small market that teaches college to make ends meet. I own PC's so to try to switch to mac for me is not economically possible. So a PC solution like Adobe is what I'm hoping for. Yet I'd hate the thought that I could shoot in such a great format only to lose color or resolution going to the NLE. So thanks for your tremendous efforts in bringing this type of capability into a realistic price point, I'll definitly be staying tuned for developements on the PC front.

Joe Carney

04-23-2007, 01:30 PM

That wasn't we were thinking. Ask over at DVinfo.net, so you or others won't think I'm posting commercials (never my intent, only answering questions.)

There is also dvxuser.com, just as friendly I've found.

M Most

04-23-2007, 01:49 PM

No, but please tell us what you want supporting apart from the obvious 3 A's - Apple, Adobe and Avid.

Since you asked...

Linux. In some format that Autodesk applications understand.

I can't be the first one to bring this up - can I?

Deanan

04-23-2007, 02:12 PM

Still a RAW pixel format would only be a small effort for your team and get the real-time PC post up and running very quickly, even if it was a CineForm solution.

It's not simple once you start factoring in the time QA all the stuff that
happens after RAW and all the changes that will be happening over
the next few months. Our bandwidth at the moment is best spent
focusing on our current workflow as Graeme mentioned.

Since you asked...

Linux. In some format that Autodesk applications understand.

I can't be the first one to bring this up - can I?

Very very few requests so far. Internally we have the
three camps well represented. Graeme is mac biased,
Rob is way too Windows biased (but we still like him),
and I'm the token linux guy (linux, irix, tru64, etc.).

Most likely the linux stuff will be command line :)

Deanan

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 02:18 PM

Linux has been mentioned. How would you like Linux support to work - I'd guess myself some command line tools would be easiest all around.

Graeme

Deanan

04-23-2007, 02:28 PM

Linux has been mentioned. How would you like Linux support to work - I'd guess myself some command line tools would be easiest all around.

Graeme

And which applications are you planning on integrating with?
I'm presuming Burn and maybe Nucoda and ?

Deanan

04-23-2007, 02:32 PM

The next obvious question for you guys...
What distros are you using?

d

Graeme Nattress

04-23-2007, 02:33 PM

Deanan

04-23-2007, 02:38 PM

And is what you really need a tool to take REDCODE RAW to RAW RGB, or basic grade RGB or in-camera metadata grade RGB? Into what formats - tiff, dpx, exr etc? In what colour space? And in what sizes? 1k, 2k, 4k?

Graeme

Agreed. It would certainly help to understand what pipelines you want
to integrate into from start to end. We have to fully understand so we
can plan for linux integration now and implement as soon as we
have the bandwidth.

d

Joe Carney

04-23-2007, 05:24 PM

Agreed. It would certainly help to understand what pipelines you want
to integrate into from start to end. We have to fully understand so we
can plan for linux integration now and implement as soon as we
have the bandwidth.

d

Network rendering comes to mind, especially in 64bit. Doing it without the Apple or MS software tax would be great.
I heard Unbutu is popular.

david farland

04-23-2007, 05:43 PM

1K grading may be known but 10bit RGB 2K, 4K is still in the upper bracket for people.
And yes it's very valuable to know what choices people have out there.

I thought lots of them were going from SGI to unix and quite a few had both unix/win support.
But if you can't afford a proper grading or compositing system,does it matter if it's on unix, sgi or windows. You pass it to somebody else to do that.

I thought more pressing would be i/o compatibility file formats or edl, aaf, cmx, xml, etc formats and of course bit depth/colour space.
But I still not too sure about this area Deanan....like lots of people here I'm learning.
Also the platform support seems to change so quickly.

Cheers,

M Most

04-23-2007, 05:46 PM

And which applications are you planning on integrating with?
I'm presuming Burn and maybe Nucoda and ?

Wow, so much response for one request. I'm flattered.

Actually, I was thinking more about Lustre than anything else. Right now, one could, of course, use Redcine and convert to DPX for use in any Linux environment, and that is one workflow possibility. However, the ability to color correct directly from the raw data is a very useful one, particularly on more extreme footage. To this end, it would be nice to supply libraries that software such as Lustre, Nucoda, Baselight, and Flint/Flame/Inferno could use to allow "native" operation with Red media files, much as Redcine and Scratch will have. A full Linux port of Redcine is probably not necessary, as just about all shops have at least a few Macs and Windows PC's around to do this. Of course, if the libraries would allow a Linux based render farm for Redcine, that would be nice too.....

By the way, this request is not necessarily for me personally. I just happen to see an industry need, based on the fact that many higher end DI projects are being finished on Linux based tools, not to mention the rather copious use of Linux on render farms - due in part to its "free" status, but also due to its scalability and efficiency. For the moment, we're Scratch users - and right now, that's a very good place for a Red-supporting post facility to be. But I would like to have flexibility in the future, and many Linux based tools are very attractive for various reasons. One could view the lack of Linux Quicktime support as a problem, or one could view it as an opportunity to provide more direct, and possibly more efficient, access to the media without third party code in the way .... ;--)

laguun

04-23-2007, 05:58 PM

I thought lots of them were going from SGI to unix and quite a few had both unix/win support.

ggi had their own unix blend (irix), however, sgi, irix & mips are gone from the vfx/nle/di market.
there are still some legacy systems running, but autodesk is now completly x86 & linux.

however, wouldn´t it be possible to support these simply by a V-machine running under linux or a seperate win/osx transcoding box getting commands via scripts?

I thought more pressing would be i/o compatibility file formats or edl, aaf, cmx, xml, etc formats and of course bit depth/colour space.
But I still not too sure about this area Deanan....like lots of people here I'm learning.
Also the platform support seems to change so quickly.

speakig of edls, aaf, xml... many manufacturers have their own internal issues & bugs...so...graeme, it would be -excellent- if RED would deliver the redcine/code software to the reservation holders before shipment of the cameras.

we could provide valuable, maybe even excellent, feedback even without the cameras.

Peter McCully

04-23-2007, 07:00 PM

We're working on it.....

Graeme
Graeme, thanks for that hint about future workflow in PC environment. I am not in a hurry to badger you Red guys with a lot of questions because I know it can be a drag but I do have some questions about the Final Cut software. At NAB I was given the impression from the Apple booth that Final Cut is upgrading with the inclusion of "Color" their new grading module but that you have to get the whole package (US$16,000 approx) and not have the option to get it in separate packages. This is wasteful because an editor is not neccessarily a compositor or a grader and to have that much money just tied up on one box...? Ideally, I would want Final Cut (or an equivalent PC software) on a laptop on location. Then, in the office - in a light controlled environment the grading module and the compositing module on different suites. Each of the parts of Final Cut would need to be individually accessable in much the same way as the Adobe production bundle works. After all, 16K is almost as much as the camera head. Do you know something I don't here? Can you give any hints about the PC development - is it heading the Avid way???
Thanks heaps.

Jim Reed

04-23-2007, 07:13 PM

No, but please tell us what you want supporting apart from the obvious 3 A's - Apple, Adobe and Avid.

Graeme

I'll place a vote for file support and dpx workflow for the Quantel systems. You've had some experience already at Park Road Post and iQ and Pablo do have the power to edit the full 4K. ((It would be great if the Quantel FPGA hardware could be accessed to handle the 4K demosaicing!!))

Jim Reed

laguun

04-23-2007, 07:21 PM

Graeme, thanks for that hint about future workflow in PC environment. I am not in a hurry to badger you Red guys with a lot of questions because I know it can be a drag but I do have some questions about the Final Cut software. At NAB I was given the impression from the Apple booth that Final Cut is upgrading with the inclusion of "Color" their new grading module but that you have to get the whole package (US$16,000 approx) and not have the option to get it in separate packages.

16.000?
should be ~1200$

Can you give any hints about the PC development - is it heading the Avid way???
Thanks heaps.
the only avid system which could handle red 4k atm would be DS, so i suppose (hope) Adobe Premiere is first in the queue, which is pretty resolution agnostic.

david farland

04-23-2007, 07:29 PM

Can dpx be Raw or RGB?

Joel Kaye

04-23-2007, 07:32 PM

At NAB I was given the impression from the Apple booth that Final Cut is upgrading with the inclusion of "Color" their new grading module but that you have to get the whole package (US$16,000 approx) and not have the option to get it in separate packages

Color is FREE. The studio package price of about $1200 is the same as it was without Color.

David Newman

04-23-2007, 07:35 PM

Can dpx be Raw or RGB?

Dalsa uses DPX in a RAW format, but I don't know if it is a standard extension -- Adobe's tools will not load them without help.

Peter McCully

04-23-2007, 07:52 PM

16.000?
should be ~1200$

the only avid system which could handle red 4k atm would be DS, so i suppose (hope) Adobe Premiere is first in the queue, which is pretty resolution agnostic.
You're right of course! Thanks.

Deanan

04-23-2007, 08:50 PM

Can dpx be Raw or RGB?

There are many formats that can be used to package a Red Raw bayer
files. Basically anything that can do a 12bit luminance
or four channel file. Tiff and DPX are generally the most likely
candidates (SGI files too :).

DPX has the advantage of having alot of metadata that's useful
to us. The down side is that dpx as format is rarely full
supported let alone supported properly in few common types
people do support.

Deanan

Deanan

04-23-2007, 08:56 PM

Wow, so much response for one request. I'm flattered.

Actually, I was thinking more about Lustre than anything else.
Of course, if the libraries would allow a Linux based render farm for Redcine, that would be nice too.....

One could view the lack of Linux Quicktime support as a problem, or one could view it as an opportunity to provide more direct, and possibly more efficient, access to the media without third party code in the way .... ;--)

How pervasive is linux Luster vs win Lustre. I've only used the Windows
version and don't really know which one is more popular out there.

A linux/mac/win renderfarm version is planned so that'll likely
come first.

My guess is that Quicktime will likely not be supported on linux
because there are so many holes in the linux QT libs. There could
be ways around it (wine, etc) but they're not really worth it since
QT access is more to enable win and mac apps and doesn't do
much for linux apps. Direct support would be better for linux.

Deanan

david farland

04-23-2007, 11:12 PM

Deanan,

Let me get this clear.

You’re looking at grading systems i.e. Autodesk Lustre and want to know our preferences OS wise and maybe other grading system preferences also?
Or are you interested in just Autodesk products to begin?

Stepping back a bit, Red obviously has to have an order when it comes to supporting different time-lined based editors, effects /compositing /grading systems and file types. You can’t do everything at once!
I don’t care what the order is, just nice to know you have one because then we know not to jack you guys about why can’t we have support for this package, codec, raw format etc.

You want to know our preferences regarding linux/windows on grading systems but shouldn’t you also be looking at all systems that receive Red produced online quality video/image files, i.e. compositing systems as well.
You also mention that linux QT is crap and should be avoided. Any thing else regarding platform?

So, if I get Brook, :whistling: to come up with a chart that lists most of the NLE’s, FX / Compositor packages and Grading systems by platform, input/output video codec & image format, bit depth, color space & conforming standards
and their respective sales figures, that should give you enough to go on with.

I’m on to it!!

Cheers,

Deanan

04-23-2007, 11:27 PM

Hi David,

The question was about linux and then about Lustre because
Mike asked about those two. We are interested in support
Linux at some level but need to get a feel for what people
are interested in aside from our own biases.

There are lots of variable on the linux side. Some apps
work on multiple distributions and some companies
like to stick to certain distros (i.e. larger studios or
post houses). It's such a huge playing field
that it needs to be narrowed down to something
manageable (at the same time it's very limited also :).

A general command line utility should go a long way
to enable most, if not all of the linux compositing/grading
systems. What we do after that is more dependant on
the feedback we get.

Hope that makes some sense...

Deanan

M Most

04-24-2007, 09:02 AM

How pervasive is linux Luster vs win Lustre. I've only used the Windows version and don't really know which one is more popular out there.

In the future, there will be no Windows Lustre. Autodesk has committed to the Linux platform for all of its systems products. My understanding is that the Windows build of Lustre - currently limited to the Lustre HD variant, I believe - will disappear in favor of Linux-only builds in the next upgrade cycle. But you should check with Autodesk on that for an accurate assessment.

A linux/mac/win renderfarm version is planned so that'll likely
come first.

That's a good approach, as render farms are where the speed and low cost of Linux really comes into play.

My guess is that Quicktime will likely not be supported on linux
because there are so many holes in the linux QT libs. There could
be ways around it (wine, etc) but they're not really worth it since
QT access is more to enable win and mac apps and doesn't do
much for linux apps. Direct support would be better for linux.

I think you and I are saying exactly the same thing here. Quicktime is not supported for Linux at all, at least not by its developer (Apple). My comment about supplying libraries for direct Red file access was not based around Quicktime wrappers, it was based around avoiding Quicktime entirely and enabling a generic solution that could be used by any developer of a Linux based application. I think we see this the same way.

Deanan

04-24-2007, 02:30 PM

My comment about supplying libraries for direct Red file access was not based around Quicktime wrappers, it was based around avoiding Quicktime entirely and enabling a generic solution that could be used by any developer of a Linux based application. I think we see this the same way.

Agreed.

Lucas Wilson

04-24-2007, 09:18 PM

I'll place a vote for file support and dpx workflow for the Quantel systems. You've had some experience already at Park Road Post and iQ and Pablo do have the power to edit the full 4K. ((It would be great if the Quantel FPGA hardware could be accessed to handle the 4K demosaicing!!))

I think that iQ is an incredibly powerful system, but the workflow for iQ...

RED -> REDCINE -> DPX -> Dylan ingest.

And then you start working. And don't forget how much storage you need for 4K DPX frames at 50MB/frame. The new shared workflow stuff Quantel showed at NAB was cool. But the iQ media is still proprietary and still needs to be ingested. At 4K.

Quantel has some brilliant people working for them, but the mentality of closed-system workflows really starts to break down in a world filled with 4K dailies and deliverables.

...my $.02.

Lucas
------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA

david farland

04-24-2007, 11:27 PM

Deanan,

I was thinking about all the RED post workflow variations and how to classify them.

Take Lustre, roughly the spec says 10-and 16-bit DPX, Cineon, Tiff, TARGA, Bitmap and SGI file formats as well as importing EDL's & (CMX 3600 for DPX).

Yeah it's good to come up with a list of online packages and what file formats they support but it seems more expediant to define the formats that RED will support....hint hint.
I guess the thing I have no clue about (...lots really) is variations of these file formats (or how robust they are when manipulating them) and also the different conforming standards between packages.

i guess you guys are going through a world of 'it' trying to be compatible!

I included a list here (ftp://video:video1@www.farland.tv/) of 3D/Compositing/NLE/Grading software by platform translated from this Russian graphics site (http://www.cgtalk.ru/).

Cheers,

DF

Jim Reed

04-25-2007, 09:07 AM

[QUOTE=luki;34373]I think that iQ is an incredibly powerful system, but the workflow for iQ...

RED -> REDCINE -> DPX -> Dylan ingest.

And then you start working. And don't forget how much storage you need for 4K DPX frames at 50MB/frame. The new shared workflow stuff Quantel showed at NAB was cool. But the iQ media is still proprietary and still needs to be ingested. At 4K.

Lucas, I couldn't agree more. Quantel continues to insist that only their Dylans can provide the required speed without need to defrag. And they price them HIGH. These days, though, seems like Scratch and others get the throughput they need from many vendors of storage.

Also agree that folks seem not to realize that 4K finish is not a trivial thing, and that at 50 MB/frame--that's 4+ TB/hr!!

I'll contact you off list to hear more about Scratch.

Thanks for your $ .02

Jim Reed

Joe Carney

04-25-2007, 09:27 AM

Deanan

04-25-2007, 02:10 PM

[QUOTE=Jim Reed;34565]
RED -> RedCine -> OpenExr -> Fuson 5.1, or if Eyeon ever gets their act together, just bring in the Quicktime file.

Ideally you'd want to go:
RED->Fusion 5.1

via a fusion plugin directly or an openfx plugin.

I'm not saying there will or won't be one :)

Chances are that people will want to deliver openexr or dpx
to vfx with a baked in white balance and colorspace.

Deanan

Joe Carney

04-25-2007, 02:22 PM

[QUOTE=zeke;34596]

Ideally you'd want to go:
RED->Fusion 5.1

via a fusion plugin directly or an openfx plugin.

I'm not saying there will or won't be one :)

Chances are that people will want to deliver openexr or dpx
to vfx with a baked in white balance and colorspace.

Deanan

Be still my beating heart!!!

killfilm

04-25-2007, 08:44 PM

Rocco Schult

04-26-2007, 07:43 AM

I think that iQ is an incredibly powerful system, but the workflow for iQ...

RED -> REDCINE -> DPX -> Dylan ingest.

And then you start working. And don't forget how much storage you need for 4K DPX frames at 50MB/frame. The new shared workflow stuff Quantel showed at NAB was cool. But the iQ media is still proprietary and still needs to be ingested. At 4K.

Quantel has some brilliant people working for them, but the mentality of closed-system workflows really starts to break down in a world filled with 4K dailies and deliverables.

...my $.02.

Lucas
------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA

Can't eQ and iQ import QT's ? And therefore the original Redcoded Quicktime ? Still you'd have the importing, of course.

Lucas, I couldn't agree more. Quantel continues to insist that only their Dylans can provide the required speed without need to defrag. And they price them HIGH. These days, though, seems like Scratch and others get the throughput they need from many vendors of storage.

Also agree that folks seem not to realize that 4K finish is not a trivial thing, and that at 50 MB/frame--that's 4+ TB/hr!!

I'll contact you off list to hear more about Scratch.

Thanks for your $ .02

Jim Reed

Scratch is a formidable coded package, but even they need 1.2Gb of throughput for 4K uncompressed/realtime. And this is not done with a bunch of striped desktop discs. Quantel choses its system/Dylans because they provide turnkey systems and can't allow a dropped frame. You can buy scratch for your laptop if you like to. And besides the Dylans have come down pretty much in price in the last years.

Joe Carney

04-26-2007, 07:55 AM

i'm about to buy the red cam, and i hope the red cam will be fully supported on the pc side through premiere pro. I'm not gonna switch to mac just for red workflow support. i think i will hold off on my purchase till david is given the freedom to do his work properly

Remember, Premier Pro CS3 is coming to the MAC. Maybe someone should talk to someone at Adobe about what is and isn't supported.

Graeme Nattress

04-26-2007, 07:56 AM

You'll get support through the Quicktime codec on the PC.

Graeme

Lucas Wilson

04-26-2007, 10:22 AM

Can't eQ and iQ import QT's ? And therefore the original Redcoded Quicktime ? Still you'd have the importing, of course.

Yes - the Q series of products can import QT. So that puts it in line with other products that will support QT. Except for those pesky Dylans and the need to import into a proprietary format that nobody else can see or understand...

Scratch is a formidable coded package, but even they need 1.2Gb of throughput for 4K uncompressed/realtime. And this is not done with a bunch of striped desktop discs. Quantel choses its system/Dylans because they provide turnkey systems and can't allow a dropped frame. You can buy scratch for your laptop if you like to. And besides the Dylans have come down pretty much in price in the last years.

Quantel originally built the Dylans because at that time, the only way to get that kind of dedicated performance was to build your own file system, your own drivers, your own hardware, your own files, and control the disk subsystem completely. And for many years, the Dylans were revolutionary in their capability and performance.

That is no longer the case. It is no longer rocket science to build a disk subsystem that can consistently support realtime 2K and beyond.

Quantel's answer is to up the ante to 4K. That's fine... but the higher the resolution, the more rarefied the customer base and the more expensive everything gets. And it is a rathole. In another year or 2, realtime 4K RGB will be fairly easy as well. Then what?

And true - the Dylans have come down in price. Down from several hundred thousand for a disk subsystem is the only way they could go!!

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA