Monitoring 4K Resolution Video

[Scott Brown]

Hi Folks

I'm currently looking at options available for viewing the 4K output we can expect from the Red camera.

I appreciate that we can view down-converted 1080p material easily enough, however we're going to be shooting at 4K and really want to be able to view our rushes at this level.

As far as I can see at the moment there really is very little available in the marketplace. Sony's SXRD 4K digital projector is stunning but is seriously expensive.

I see that Taiwanese manufacturer Chi Mei has a 57" LCD with 3840 x 2160 resolution, however I'm not sure if this is shipping yet. If it is, I suspect that we can expect it'll be costly.

http://www.cmo.com.tw/cmo/english/product/showtv.jsp?flag=20051012111324

Anyone who attended IBC in Amsterdam last September would have witnessed a prototype of this display showing 4K material...made the HDCAM footage we usually work with look like VHS!!! It was incredible.

Anyone know of any other options on the horizon? LCD, SED, Projectors...perhaps for all we know Red are secretly working on something behind the scenes that will solve this dilemma!!!!

Best wishes

Scott Brown

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Westinghouse has announced 50" and 57" 3840x2160 displays - based on ChiMei panels. I haven't seen the official press release, but some people are saying USA$50K - for some reason I doubt that. Samsung previewed a "4K" prototype display a while back (was either at IBC or shortly after) and will supposedly have such a panel in 46" size and one other larger size later this year. So we know the LCD panels and related tech are coming to market. Just not sure how soon or how much I guess. We'll need 2 * dual-link DVI or the upcoming UDI interface to drive these things too.

Personally, I don't see the practicality of a 4K display at 50" or larger right now with the exception of building a screening room for your RED footage. But if it's like other ChiMei panels, the resolution will be great, brightness will be OK but color and contrast will just plain suck. :( I'd love a 4K monitor in the 30" to 42" size range so I could actually set it at my workstation desk. And they are coming (maybe not this year), but HD-TFT and 200ppi LCD tech is just around the corner and one of the driving forces behind Apple's move to start incorporating resolution independence in OSX 10.5.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I am seriously hoping that before the year is out that Apple will bring a monitor to market that will display 3,840 by 2,160 in a 40" to 60" form factor. I have not seen full specs on the UDI interface but those of us jumping into 4k would be well served by any pipe that can handle 4k at 10bit color depth with a robust connector. Quad DVI, dual link HD-SDI times 2, HDMI-DL times 2 and every other solution I have read about seems like it could fail too easily.

I am still waiting to see what the RAW (optical?) port on ther RedOne truns out to be. Perhaps our Red Leader and the secretive Cupertino impressario already have a track on this that, of course, they won't talk about until it is released. All I ask is to save us from some multi-connector fan, please :D

[Patrick Jennings]

sharps 62-inch 4k monitor - 4096 x 2048 (8.3 megapixels)

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/15/sharps-4k-x-2k-64-inch-ultra-high-res-monitor/

[Chris Forbes]

sharps 62-inch 4k monitor - 4096 x 2048 (8.3 megapixels)

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/15/sharps-4k-x-2k-64-inch-ultra-high-res-monitor/

They got so close. The 4k standard is 4096 by 3112. It's like 1080p on a 1050 monitor.

[Graeme Nattress]

Chris - that's an aspect of 1.31 though ~ 4:3. 16:9 4k is 4096x2304 - that's what RED is using. The Sharp is aspect 2:1 by the looks of it - which is not terribly useful either.

Graeme

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Just to throw another kink in the mix... I think the Samsung "4K" panel they demonstrated last year was 4032x2268. :?

[Craig Ryan]

Plus isn't the UHD spec something just as random? These varius aspect ratios and resolutions definitely don't help matters :rolleyes:

[Tom Lowe]

lmao... how shocking would it be to monitor (or edit!) on a 62" 4K monitor!!!!???!?!?!

[Scott Brown]

Hi Guys

Many thanks for all the feedback.

I have e-mailed Chi Mei directly for further information on availability of this display. I found some additional information on the panel - see below.

Taiwanese Chi Mei Optoelectronics is a name you may not know, despite the company being the third largest LCD TV panel supplier in the world. They are producing the world’s first 56-inch LCD TV offering Quad Full High Definition (QFHD) with a resolution of 3840 x 2160 pixels and an astonishing 8.29 million pixels.

The new panel features resolution that is four times that of currently available products (1920 x 1080), and the highest ever achieved. The new panel consists of over 24.8 million units of transistors, with a data transmission speed of over 1.4 gigabytes per second.

To achieve this breakthrough result, the Chi Mei Optoelectronics research and development team overcame a number of significant technical challenges, including the development of special new driver methods and scanning procedures and solving massive heat generation problems caused by the alignment of so many transistors.

The company points out that the technical challenges were not only in developing a larger sized LCD panel, but also in developing the 4x increase in screen resolution.

I've researched the Westinghouse connection and rumour has it that they will indeed use this display and aim to ship towards the year end at a price point of around 10,000 dollars.

I would not be surprised if Apple are looking closely at this display and perhaps we can expect to hear something at NAB to tie in with the release of Leopard + hopefully the LONG awaited Final Cut Pro 6. Wouldn't it be wonderful if Apple have factored in both 2K + 4K into FCP6...or am I just dreaming!

Best wishes

Scott

[Mike Devlin]

Graeme I am surprised that you are saying 4096x2304 for 16:9. The DCI spec is 4092 x 2160 and all aspect ratios are then derived from that.

16:9 (1.778) becomes 3840x2160 (Quad HD)
Vista Vision (1.85) becomes 3996x2160
Cinemascope (2.39) becomes 4096x1714
4:3 (1.33) becomes 2880 x 2160

That is my understanding of the DCI spec, and that is also what is supported by our Sony SRX-R105 projector, so I expect that is what we will be using with our RED. Obviously in post we can do whatever, but i would hope REDCODE is optimized for standard DCI formats. No use wasting bandwidth since we will have to throw away those pixels.

[Graeme Nattress]

If you have 4k pixels, ie 4096, and want a 16:9 aspect ratio, that leads, because we all want square pixels, to 4096x2304.

16:9 is the aspect ratio for all HD.

So yes, you'll have to crop RED footage to display on the non-16:9 Sony Projector. That's because the projector is not 16:9! Why on earth would you make a modern projector or display that isn't 16:9?

REDCODE is optimized for the RED camera with it's 16:9 sensor.

Graeme

[Mike Devlin]

I believe that the reason the Sony projector is DCI 4096x2160 is the same reason that all the 2K digital cinema projectors from Christie, Barco and NEC are 2048x1080. The DCI spec defines 4096x2160 and 2048x1080 as the DCI approved resolutions. Projectors (and/or screens) are then masked to give Vista Vision or Cinemascope aspect ratios rather than HDTV's 16:9, at least in North America. In Europe 1.66 is also common. 16:9 is a Television aspect ratio, not a cinema (or film) aspect ratio.

I had been assuming the camera would capture DCI 4096x2160 as the Digital OCN. Then in post we select the aspect ratio by cropping to the pixel sizes mentioned in my post above, similar to the way film worked (when using spherical rather than anamorphic lenses).

Anything that will appear in a theatre will be using these aspect ratios, not television's 16:9 ratio. Many theatre chains are in the process of upgrading to these 2K and 4K projectors which are spec'd for not just resolution but colorimetry and everything else. I realize TV is also a primary destination for footage shot with RED, but I assumed RED Digital Cinema would also provide optimized support for Digital Cinema.

If you provide 4096x2304 it is not a big problem, we will just crop in post to the appropriat DCI image for theatrical release. For TV (and DVD and BlueRay and HD-DVD) we will crop to QuadHD (3840x2160) since that is what all our post tools and monitors and projectors will support. Better to have too many pixels on the OCN, we can probably figure out how to use eventually for effects (stabilization and such).

[Mike Devlin]

Actually now that I think about it we will probably need help in REDCINE if you are capturing something different than DCI resolution. I have not tested it (since right now we just do 1920x1080), but I believe Avid DS Nitris is expecting DPX files with 4096x2160 pixels, although perhaps it handles anything you give it since it is currently setup for telecine like a 4k DI. I will check on this.

[Lucas Wilson]

Actually now that I think about it we will probably need help in REDCINE if you are capturing something different than DCI resolution. I have not tested it (since right now we just do 1920x1080), but I believe Avid DS Nitris is expecting DPX files with 4096x2160 pixels, although perhaps it handles anything you give it since it is currently setup for telecine like a 4k DI. I will check on this.

Mike,

The thing about DS Nitris is that is does not support any file formats natively other than its native .GEN file. You can playback DPX files in the DS Nitris viewer - but in order to actually do anything with them (color, DVE, etc., etc.) - they have to be imported and converted to GEN.

Also just fyi - DS does not support 3D LUTs and working in native log space. If you are going to import to DS, a (2D only) LUT must be baked in to see a linear representation. DS does not have the capability to non-destructively apply a LUT as strictly a viewing option.

These sorts of tools are pretty standard in any app that deals with non-linearly acquired images - and especially with RAW images. Baselight, Lustre, FilmMaster, Clipster, SpeedGrade, and (of course :) ) SCRATCH all have those tools.

I worked as an online editor on DS for many years, and actually worked for Avid as a DS Product Specialist for a few years. I still love DS for many of the concepts and tools that it represents. But one thing DS is not, and unfortunately I don't think ever will be, is a datacentric tool. It is built at a very core level as a video tool dealing with video formats. Changing that would mean fundamental rearchitecturing of the product... which Avid doesn't seem like it's anxious to do. It's a shame, but it is what it is.

Lucas Wilson
------------
business card used to read "DS Guru" (really)
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
Los Angeles

[Blair S. Paulsen]

The adoption of 4k (in any of the specific pixel grids mentioned) in the short tern is going to be tough for many reasons. It seems to me that the QuadHD resolution of 3,840 by 2,160 is the path of least resistance. I would love to be looking at 4,096 by 2,304 RedCode RAW in RedCine with the option to motion track, scale and crop (in addition to the "one-light" image tweaking) to a QuadHD 4:4:4 10bit output OR to a DCI friendly 4,092 by 2,160 for the remainder of the post workflow.

I suppose that the 4,092 by 2,160 would be the safer choice for shows likely to see the theater and then the TV, with only minimal cropping for current HD res and the (total guess) QuadHD res of the TV future.

If Apple and the display vendors adopt QuadHD then it may become the defacto standard due to the realities of the work folks like us do no matter what the DCI spec is - will it not be possible to just put some black pillars down the sides and have the theaters mask off the sides with curtains? Maybe I am just too old school.

[Mike Devlin]

Lucas, thanks alot for your perspective on DS. We own several licenses of Avid Media Composer and two Avid Media Composer Adrenaline (w DNxcel) systems which we have been using for off-line. We were thinking about getting a DS after NAB this year (primarily because of the supposed ease of use in moving a timeline (with effects and such) over to DS rather than having to deal with EDL), but it sounds like maybe we should talk to you first. I assume you will be at NAB. I will contact you off line.

[Lucas Wilson]

Lucas, thanks alot for your perspective on DS. We own several licenses of Avid Media Composer and two Avid Media Composer Adrenaline (w DNxcel) systems which we have been using for off-line. We were thinking about getting a DS after NAB this year (primarily because of the supposed ease of use in moving a timeline (with effects and such) over to DS rather than having to deal with EDL), but it sounds like maybe we should talk to you first. I assume you will be at NAB. I will contact you off line.

Mike,

Like anything else, there are trade-offs. The DS conform from a Media Composer Sequence is certainly much much better than anything outside the Avid family. It's much better than FFI, eQ/iQ, Baselight, SCRATCH, etc. So, if you're doing tons of multi-layer nests and effects with Composer, then DS may still be the best choice for you for finishing.

It's when you start getting into 2K, 4K, LUTs, metadata transport, or anything having to do with higher, non-video, non-SMPTE resolutions that DS starts to fall down.

I will be at NAB... please give me a shout offline!

Best,

Lucas

[Lucas Wilson]

I would love to be looking at 4,096 by 2,304 RedCode RAW in RedCine with the option to motion track, scale and crop (in addition to the "one-light" image tweaking) to a QuadHD 4:4:4 10bit output OR to a DCI friendly 4,092 by 2,160 for the remainder of the post workflow.

4K motion tracking, pan/scan/scale/crop, color tweaking, and 4:4:4 10-bit dual-link HD RGB output.

I gotta ask - do you really expect all that in a *free* application??

Lucas Wilson
------------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
Los Angeles

[Mike Devlin]

Blair I imagine most theaters can mask to 16:9, especially since many are multi-use (satellite live events, etc). Even though the DCI spec is 24fps and such I know the NEC, Christie, etc support other framerates include HDTV. We have had an NEC iS8-2K Digital Cinema projector for over two years and it supports all the SMPTE-292/372 formats. My guess is that this will be true for most of the equipment, but who knows.

Again we are currently a 1080P shop and although we have had a 2K cinema projector for two years we only started looking seriously at DCI and 4K with the announcement of RED last year.

[Stuart English]

Mike you are right - better to have too many pixels captured in-camera and then crop them to get down to your delivery format / aspects than make your camera originals too format specific. That was a valuable lesson from film brought over to RED. Unless you know the project is for HDTV - in which case you can shoot 1080p or 720p - its best to shoot 16:9 RAW and then scale / crop / apply LUTs from that digital equivalent of a camera negative.

[Mike Devlin]

Agreed Stuart. It just takes time to get used to thinking about things that way and we are adjusting our brains as we go here. Thanks for being open about what you guys are doing.

[Thomas Mathai]

For the DCI spec, as far as I know, the image area is 1998x1080 which is 1:85 image. The left over 50 pixels is probably used for something else.

DCI Cinemascope image area would be 2048x858


Also Vistavision (8perf 35mm) isn't normally used for anything except visual effects plates, and is considered 3k 3072x2048 and is 1.5 aspect.

[Mike Devlin]

Thomas the 1998 x 1080 number you cited for vista vision is just half (each) of the 3996x2160 I quoted in the post above since I was talking 4k (in particular the Sony 4k projector) and you are using 2K numbers. The extra pixels are just those surplused in cropping to 1.85.

[Lucas Wilson]

For the DCI spec, as far as I know, the image area is 1998x1080 which is 1:85 image. The left over 50 pixels is probably used for something else. DCI Cinemascope image area would be 2048x858

Thomas - where do you get that information? The DCI spec and its errata are publicly available at www.dcimovies.com.

From the DCI spec v1.0a, section 3.2.1.2:

"The DCDM [Digital Cinema Distribution Master] shall provide an image structure container that consists of either a 2K (2048 x 1080) or 4K (4096 x 2160) image file as defined in Table 1. It is expected that the image structure shall use one of the two containers such that either the horizontal or vertical resolution is filled. For example, a 4K image file with a 2.39:1 aspect ratio would require an image structure of 4096 x 1714, therefore filling the horizontal resolution of the 4K container...."

Lucas Wilson
------------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
Los Angeles

[Mike Devlin]

I may have mis-read your post Thomas. I know Sony claims Vista Vision is 1.85 and is 3996x2160, since we have their projector.

[Thomas Mathai]

Thomas - where do you get that information? The DCI spec and its errata are publicly available at www.dcimovies.com.

From the DCI spec v1.0a, section 3.2.1.2:

"The DCDM [Digital Cinema Distribution Master] shall provide an image structure container that consists of either a 2K (2048 x 1080) or 4K (4096 x 2160) image file as defined in Table 1. It is expected that the image structure shall use one of the two containers such that either the horizontal or vertical resolution is filled. For example, a 4K image file with a 2.39:1 aspect ratio would require an image structure of 4096 x 1714, therefore filling the horizontal resolution of the 4K container...."

Lucas Wilson
------------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
Los Angeles


My assumption is you're always going to have to maintain aspect ratio, no matter what.

Even if it's 2048x1080, that's an aspect of 1.89:1. So you can fill X to 2048, then your Y have to be 1107, which is outside the Y limit of the spec (1080).

If you instead have 50 pixels of black at the left side, and fill to your Y @1080, then your X will be 1998. This means you have a 1.85 image pasted flush right in a 1.89 image.

The spec says the final container image is 2048x1080, but there is no way you're going to want to slighty stretch a 1.85 image to 1.89.

So for 1.85 Academy image, you'd take 1828x988, scale to 1998x1080 and paste flush right to 2048x1080.

I don't know if the extra 50 pixels is used for anything, probably not. I can find out.

[Jeremy Hughes]

What graphics cards will work with these resolutions?

[Lucas Wilson]

Even if it's 2048x1080, that's an aspect of 1.89:1. So you can fill X to 2048, then your Y have to be 1107, which is outside the Y limit of the spec (1080).
...
So for 1.85 Academy image, you'd take 1828x988, scale to 1998x1080 and paste flush right to 2048x1080. ...

Ah - ok, I get what you're saying. I thought you were saying that the DCI output was 1998. Yeah, you're right - 1.85 within DCI would be 1998.

I just posted a question to the CML-2K - I'm curious what 35mm cinematographers are doing (if anything) to accomodate for DCI. Common-top?

Regards,

Lucas Wilson
------------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
Los Angeles

[Thomas Mathai]

Ah - ok, I get what you're saying. I thought you were saying that the DCI output was 1998. Yeah, you're right - 1.85 within DCI would be 1998.

I just posted a question to the CML-2K - I'm curious what 35mm cinematographers are doing (if anything) to accomodate for DCI. Common-top?

Regards,

Lucas Wilson
------------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
Los Angeles

I think anyone encoding for DCI is going to accomodate the cinematograhers at the moment.

Most should be straight forward. Though I wouldn't be surprised if there are some funky resizing going on.