4 hour of 4K

[imported_Cedric_Akins]

Now this question may have been asked already but does Red's calim refer to 4hrs of r3d files or does this refer to actual rendered and edited final output of a movie?

Curious minds would like to know. :detective2:

[Benni Diez]

Interesting question. Are you guys developing a special output/archiving codec? I understand that redcode is for RAW data compression. A codec for final output would need a different approach, right? Or does r3d work as an export format as well?
I'd love to see an open RED output/archiving format change the distribution world like the cameras are changing the production world.

[Nils Ruinet]

Red Ray is supposed to use standard DVD-9 discs.
You would be able to store about 5 minutes of 4K Redcode RAW on a 9 GB DVD.

So it has to be a new distribution codec, probably a new much more compressed Redcode RGB codec.
Redcode is based on a wavelet JPEG2000 compression, so it is not limited to RAW and could very well be used for RGB.

[Shawn Nelson]

They've said that RedRay will host 2hours of 4k on a DVD-R. That makes my brain hurt.

[jimhare]

They have already said it will be a new CODEC and new software to create it.

[imported_Cedric_Akins]

Has there been any new information posted on Red-Ray and the software?

[brainburst]

They have already said it will be a new CODEC and new software to create it.
All I can say is Ugggh! We really don't need to solve yesterdays problems with yet another incompatible proprietary codec to try to use yesterdays hardware DVD. There is an open source codec developed by the BBC that is wavelet based. It's being considered for a SMPTE standard. It should be fine for Red media. Dirac is already being developed in silicon, unlike Cineform which seems to want to cripple its market penetration.
http://diracvideo.org/about_dirac
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/projects/dirac/diracpro.shtml

The reality is that Flash media is getting cheaper. Flash media now is already cheaper than it's equivalent in film (inclusive of processing costs.) It will last longer than dye based optical media. Long enough to hold onto until something more robust arrives. It won't be that long. Secure Flash media is on the horizon (San Disk announced archival media rated to last 100 years though only in small sizes for now.)
http://sandisk.com/Corporate/PressRoom/PressReleases/PressRelease.aspx?ID=4353

[Wayne Morellini]

It is really simple, if Jim wants disruptive technology, then Red ray on the Microsoft Xbox 360 would enable Microsoft to counter and send broke Sony.

This is something that could be done within 6 months and maybe possible using the GPU for decoding (if encoding to record HDTV was possible, it would also be good) even as a down loadable player application. Film studio support could be won after release, with copy projection scheme and rights management post finalised and installed by firmware update, otherwise we could be waiting 2-6 years of lost profits for them to make up their minds. In the meantime, every xbox 360 owner with a HD pocket camera, and small Indie productions, could take advantage of it, reason enough to do it.

If they really do have a flawless 700:1 etc compression codec, then Microsoft would likely be willing to pay hundreds fo millions for it. Microsoft loves compression codecs, because a high compression codec is extremely useful to their computer business for game, multimedia and video/movie content. This would totally eclipse Apple or Sony. To be totally disrupted, content could be sold on-line, or on disk, with the player application embedded, something I had wanted to do with my codec technology. From there, it is a few steps onto PayTV and Digital TV use especially when they move to SHD and UltraHD signals.

The Chinese are particularly interested in a low priced alternative to DVD and blu-ray for the local market, but such a codec would be valuable to them, to give their manufacturing companies leverage to produce an international standard for sales into the rest fo the world.

9GB DVD is not the limit, there has been many proposed red laser HD standards with more layers over the years, paradoxically proposed for Asia. One proposal out of Asia was for a red laser disk of around 100GB (I think single layer) that only required a firmware update in many players to use.

How many advisers have been able to inform Jim of these things? So, how about it Jim?


However, I have been tinkering with ideas for ultra high compression consumer codecs for many years, and I doubt Red has the skill set to do it at the claims of quality third party audience members are making. There are many logical leaps in between to get to this level, I know. It is one thing to strip an image down till you get 700:1, on ultra-HD I could probably even do it at hundreds thousands to one within kilobytes of code, but it would hardly be worth watching, but it is rather a different thing to have a quality detailed image left that is worth watching, let alone appear to be as good as a high end digital cinema recording format to people that can tell the difference. Yet another thing I was too poor to get to market first, I wish them the best.

[Stephen Gentle]

Did you really have to dig up a seven month old thread to post that? Anyway,


It is really simple, if Jim wants disruptive technology, then Red ray on the Microsoft Xbox 360 would enable Microsoft to counter and send broke Sony.

I'll just say for one thing that I think that you're far more likely to see it on the Apple TV than the Xbox...


9GB DVD is not the limit, there has been many proposed red laser HD standards with more layers over the years, paradoxically proposed for Asia. One proposal out of Asia was for a red laser disk of around 100GB (I think single layer) that only required a firmware update in many players to use.

The red laser drive is there, in my opinion, simply and only because it is a dirt cheap way for people to distribute films up to feature length. That is absolutely all that is required, as if someone wants more space, it's almost definitely going to be possible to plug in a 500GB hard drive (what, about $60) and play straight off that. There's no point in it using some obscure format that would have more expensive media than DVD9 and that very few people would be able to burn disks for.


However, I have been tinkering with ideas for ultra high compression consumer codecs for many years, and I doubt Red has the skill set to do it at the claims of quality third party audience members are making.

I think that's way out of line. What insight do you have into RED's company and employees that makes you think they couldn't do this? Judging by REDCODE, and now the RED-RAY demonstration (remember, they fooled a few hundred digital imaging professionals into thinking it was uncompressed), I think that Graeme and the team are completely top notch...

[Wayne Morellini]

Did you really have to dig up a seven month old thread to post that? Anyway,
My apologies, I was quickly catching up here and misread the dates.


I'll just say for one thing that I think that you're far more likely to see it on the Apple TV than the Xbox...
Yes, Apple is also gearing up their games efforts, we suspect a gaming console and computers. All these together could be geared to use it. I did not mention it, because they are not in the market and desperate yet, like some games companies. MS also has more money to spend on something like this, and much bigger user base. MS stands to have a much larger instant user base, if they went ahead with this in a suitable manner (realising how many companies have failed before).


The red laser drive is there, in my opinion, simply and only because it is a dirt cheap way for people to distribute films up to feature length. That is absolutely all that is required, as if someone wants more space, it's almost definitely going to be possible to plug in a 500GB hard drive (what, about $60) and play straight off that. There's no point in it using some obscure format that would have more expensive media than DVD9 and that very few people would be able to burn disks for.
To the contrary, we are talking commercial marketability. These formats are cheap, some burnable (well I could probably get the 100GB one burnable) but the main emphasis in how cheap they are to mass produce, and the 100GB one is compatible with standard stamp presses. You have to start thinking of the UHD 3D market with HDR, and DVD9 will no longer be suitable. The thing is, that there is an opportunity there for emerging markets to compete, and for somebody into disruptive technologies to make money out of it, if they really want. Asia has had a number of locally supported successful items in times past, despite what the west thinks, in this case they could take it to the west (worth a fair bit compared to most information technology companies).


I think that's way out of line. What insight do you have into RED's company and employees that makes you think they couldn't do this? Judging by REDCODE, and now the RED-RAY demonstration (remember, they fooled a few hundred digital imaging professionals into thinking it was uncompressed), I think that Graeme and the team are completely top notch...
That is not out of line, what insight do you have into them, or into the requirements of such a codec? Do you know there has been so many 1000:1 compression codecs claims over the years, that such claims are often laughed at and thought crackpot (and these are not digital cinema quality ones that require orders more performance). It takes a number of logical leaps, even to 700:1 on SHD, which should be easier and more compressible. Just because these people thought that at the time does not prove that it was, or that it was as enjoyable than uncompressed. You have to move closer to lossless to match the enjoyment of uncompressed. Some people also think that standard definition DVD is perfectly good, and SD TV's as well, but I do not know of one cinema that uses SD DVD or a SD TV to show their movies. Most people out side of compression professionals don't even realise what they are looking at, but it has measurable effect on the audience. If they can do what people (not themselves mind you, I am not claiming that) say, great, but I doubt it, it has defeated countless compression people over many years. They are probably doing something else than what people think, I am just disagreeing with some of the overzealous noise people are making. I do however, believe they could get Blu-ray level quality in SHD into that data-rate, that requires less logical steps, and would fool many people. If aiming it at the consumer level (Apple TV, don't discount MS yet, both together could dominate the market) then that is the level that a business would likely aim down to (through DVD quality is also good at these resolutions).

As for the business opportunities, it helps to broaden your horizons.

As for what zealous fans speculate, a little bit of technical knowledge helps (been there and done that).

[Wayne Morellini]

I think that's way out of line. What insight do you have into RED's company and employees that makes you think they couldn't do this? Judging by REDCODE, and now the RED-RAY demonstration (remember, they fooled a few hundred digital imaging professionals into thinking it was uncompressed), I think that Graeme and the team are completely top notch...

Stephen, well it looks like his chances just went up a notch. I thought I had seen a picture of Graeme Nattress in times past, but have just seen his actual picture on one of his posts, and it looks slightly similar to someone I have seen around here in times past. And as I have found, similar looking, talented, people often share some aspects of approach to their work.

[Stuart English]

You have to move closer to lossless to match the enjoyment of uncompressed. Some people also think that standard definition DVD is perfectly good, and SD TV's as well, but I do not know of one cinema that uses SD DVD or a SD TV to show their movies. Most people out side of compression professionals don't even realise what they are looking at, but it has measurable effect on the audience. If they can do what people (not themselves mind you, I am not claiming that) say, great, but I doubt it, it has defeated countless compression people over many years.

Skepticism is good. But if you ever wanted to find a team that would be critical of compression artifacts, it would be at a 4K camera company ...

RED RAY works...the proof is on the (30ft) screen.

[Wayne Morellini]

I assume it does, even without artifacting, just how well is the question. For the quality of digital cinema capture, we would be talking about levels in the image and other forms of non artifacting accuracy, which might be considered visually lossless. However, even if Red Ray can achieve quality per pixel better than DVD, that is great and has got my interest. I could use that sort of codec in my own electronic product designs (largely non-camera), but it is unlikely to work on my processing target.

Stuart, what is the officially released line on quality, I do not trust third party opinion so much (as you can tell).

[Tim Whitcomb]

I assume it does, even without artifacting, just how well is the question. For the quality of digital cinema capture, we would be talking about levels in the image and other forms of non artifacting accuracy, which might be considered visually lossless. However, even if Red Ray can achieve quality per pixel better than DVD, that is great and has got my interest. I could use that sort of codec in my own electronic product designs (largely non-camera), but it is unlikely to work on my processing target.

Stuart, what is the officially released line on quality, I do not trust third party opinion so much (as you can tell).


How about a FIRST HAND ACCOUNT?

I saw RED RAY in action at REDUSER and to my eyes, it was indistinguishable from full RES 4K that was projected immediately before it.

It looked INCREDIBLE and tht was 4K streaming at 10 megabits/second.

that sounds like some serious compression magic to me, but I have no technical background...

I just saw what I saw and it was incredible

[Jason Ramsey]

Just watched RED Ray on a big screen for the 2nd time a couple of weekends ago (the first being at the reduser nab event)...

Still looked amazing to me... I was probably less than 10 feet from the screen at red's facilities.

One of those things that when someone says the specs, a lot of people are like... "yeah... uh-huh"... But, when you see it.... Crisp... to me, anyways. RED Ray is the real deal.

later,
Jason

[Stefan Christou]

So Wayne you work for Microsoft? (Keeps using a royal we.)

That does not impress me much at all if you do. Kinda de-values your opinion in a way :biggrin:

[Wayne Morellini]

So Wayne you work for Microsoft? (Keeps
using a royal we.)

That does not impress me much at all if you do. Kinda de-values your
opinion in a way :biggrin:

No, but all is needed is a simple comprehension of english without
bringing royalty into it. "we" as in "we'all" independent of the other
parties and including them is so needed by context ;) . In that context,
we are waiting through 'lost profits', or we are waiting to see etc, not
so much royal, but more common as to include the readers, simple really
(and a bit obvious). Sort of does the opposite to the counter opinion.

Now, back to reality.

People get carried away and are easily fooled by what they see. Show me
an aUFO (alien UFO, as UFO obviously includes anything, like clouds and
beach balls that have been miss-seen) right in front of me, and I see it
as possibly an aUFO and possibly not. It is commonly known that certain
audio visual effects look similar when seen one after another. What is
needed is close examination of the split area in split screens, and
flipping back and forwards of individual frames, and zoom, to get this
sort of obvious sense with a quality compression. Otherwise peoples
opinion from one to another becomes split and less reliable. Though, i
think the reality is one is still more enjoyable than the other. The
other point is to know what to look for. People have a greater response
to overall contrast then resolution, which can fool them. What you need
to look for is the levels of pixels in the image and how they change over
the image. What normally happens is that to increase compressibility the
level changes from pixel to pixel are flattened, which can make the image
less contrasty and more blurry on the edges and details, that can be
artificially sharpened and enhanced at playback. So, at a high level you
are looking for this level flattening from pixel to pixel and blurriness
rather than more obvious image artifacts. To look for image artifacts
only, is to miss the point as to what makes a maximal level quality
image. Of course, if you were comparing a 100Mb/s digital cinema stream
to a 10 mb/s Red ray, you are going to notice a lot less difference then
if it was a truly lossless image or original film. I haven't bothered to
ask what the authentic cinema comparison sequence was recorded as. I
know of a priority technique to improve compression around the level
detail problem, and maybe it is being done here, I have discussed it used
in another way before for another use.

Another issue, apart from the excitement factor, that affects perception,
is wishing it to be the best. When comparison samples of complex scenes
get released and I can download individual frame comparisons, I can tell
more then (and I am talking of 48fps+ capability to, unless it does not
have that). But it does not have to be the best, even if it is DVD
quality, that is an improvement, Bluray even better, but getting 4K at
that quality (think less than highest quality 36mb/s 2mp*4) down to 10mb/s
is quiet a tall order, though 100MB/s digital cinema maybe easier. Now I
have lost track of the conversation over all this time, where we talking
about it being BR quality, or cinema quality originally?


Jason,

If they have demonstrations in Australia, and I can get to them, I would
be glad to have a look myself. If anybody from Red is reading, feel
welcome to let me know.

[Adil Lahoulou]

ahhh...it's one of THOSE arguments.... Oh well. I like Tim and Jason saw the reduser NAB demo and was speechless. Actually I got to see it twice - beautiful both times. I can't comment on how the res held up to a magnifying glass but as far as "functional" 4k delivery it was a stellar demo.

[Wayne Morellini]

ahhh...it's one of THOSE arguments....

Oh well. I like Tim and Jason saw the reduser NAB demo and was speechless. Actually I got to see it twice - beautiful both times. I can't comment on how the res held up to a magnifying glass but as far as "functional" 4k delivery it was a stellar demo.

Yes, one of "Those" arguments (Zap Branigan kill bot style ;) ) unfortunately. Yes, I know amazing quality, but how amazing is the question (the more the better) be good to see eventually.