View Full Version : Redcode transcodes..
04-29-2007, 07:16 AM
Couple of questions....
1. During colour corrections, compositing, etc of an online tiff/dpx file, is the inherent robustness of the image derived from the redcode source image rather than from these various ‘lossless’ codecs /wrappers?
2. With regards to image quality and robustness, is any redcode to 3rd party codec transcode more optimal than another?
04-29-2007, 08:36 AM
1) derived from the clean raw data from the sensor and sensible compression for recording
2) we've only really tried conversion to ProRes so far. And that worked great. Internally, a lot of our transcodes have been to 16bit tiffs, which is very high quality, but large files.
04-29-2007, 02:11 PM
Graeme when do you expect the REDCode to be unleashed upon the world? Are you going to hold out on the codec until the cameras are released? When will we get more information about REDCode? Right before NAB I asked when we could see it available as a stand alone product and I hoped NAB would answer that question but alas we know nothing more in relation to stand alone REDCode purchases.
Here is what I would like to see in my workflow:
REDCode RAW Capture.
Transcode to a robust intermediate such as 40MBs REDCode RGB (I say this because I assume an internal codec RAW Debayering is much much much slower than an RGB redcode decode)
This way I could stay inside of REDcode throughout the data pipeline without any worries about generational loss.
04-29-2007, 02:14 PM
I'd certainly render to REDCODE RGB at some point, but I'd not be doing it straight away - I don't think there'd be an advantage there unless you're working on 4k as 4k right from the start. I can see your point about offloading the demosaicing process into baking it into the RGB, but then you've got 3x the decode time on the codec.
04-29-2007, 06:05 PM
So wait REDCode RGB has 3x the decode time as REDCode RAW? Hmmm.. well it's a moot point because I'll be using REDCode (if you ever offer that blasted stand alone codec) about 98% of the time with RGB originated material and never see RAW files myself.
04-29-2007, 06:13 PM
Well, if REDCODE RGB is 4:4:4, REDCODE RAW, for the equivalent resolution is :4:, and hence has 1/3 of the data to decode, but 2/3 to "create". REDCODE RGB encodes 3x the data, but creates none. Which is quicker? - don't know yet.