1080p... Not a loser!

[PaulClements]

Jim's post about losing 720 and 1080p seems to indicate that he (or maybe Red) are mulling over the idea of 2k and 4k only in camera. Personally I like the idea of faster frame rates at 2k and 4k but I'm not too sure it would be worthwhile at the expense of losing 1080p. If 720p can be dropped and allow for 2k@96fps so be it. But here are a couple of reasons why I believe 1080p is worthwhile having:


It is the largest format that we can actually see what we are shooting through the EVF or monitoring via HD-SDI. Therefore it's the only truly reliable format to shoot what you are seeing and I like the idea of working that way, especially when I know what I'm shooting will only ever be shown at 1080p or less.


It is a standard format globally and will be for many years to come. If removed, anything shot on the camera automatically requires an extra stage of post to get it to 1080p.


1080p RGB uses the entire sensor meaning what you shoot 4k through a lens is the same at 1080p. 2k windowed means your lenses have different characteristics.


1080p should mean smaller filesizes allowing you to shoot longer on a single RedDrive or CF - ideal for field work where backing up is difficult and the shooting days are long.

There are more points that have been raised about 1080p such as B4 mounts, and if anyone thinks of anything extra feel free to add it on.

Fact is I don't rate extra frame rates at 2k windowed above 1080p scaled and the above are some of my main points why.

[Rocket]

I wonder if it's an option to have two possible camera configurations to choose from. One 2K/4K for digital cinematography, and one with the 1080p for those shooting for broadcast.

This could be a really stupid idea, I don't know, just throwing it out there. It seems that this issue has raised a lot of tension, and perhaps one camera body that caters for both d-cinema and broadcast may not be possible.

I don't see the point of any format utilizing a windowed sensor at all. The full 35mm sized sensor, 35mm cine lenses and associated d.o.f. is one of the main selling points of the camera. But then I want it to replace 35mm and that's all, so of course I am biased to one side. Just my 2c

[Tony Lorentzen]

Couldn't agree more!

[PaulClements]

...One 2K/4K for digital cinematography, and one with the 1080p for those shooting for broadcast.

This is the point though. Red ought to be bridging that gap between broadcast and cinema, especially with the modern drama's such as Soprano's, Lost, Heroes etc. They have the characteristics of a movie but weren't ever shot with the intention of being shown on the big screen. Cinema and broadcast are very much converging these days and Red in my opinion needs to be seen as the company making that convergence less painful!!!

[Jason Murphy]

I don't see the point of any format utilizing a windowed sensor at all.

While I agree with you about most of what you just wrote, the two reasons I can see for shooting with the windowed sensor are:

1) It could mean that you're working with a significantly lower data rate (which could mean higher frame rates).

2) You want the other advantages of RED while shooting with S16 lenses/DOF. Ridiculously shallow DOF, while incredibly useful for many applications, is not the be all, end all of image quality. I could see documentary shooters wanting to shoot in windowed S16 mode for increased DOF in run and gun situations.

[Jim Arthurs]

Two points, one leading to the other...

First, here we are with the talk of ditching a native 1080 record, when (other than HDCAM SR) we haven't even had access to a camera/field record system that can truly live up to the formats resolution potential! RED 1080p will be the best 1080p ever!!! Downsampled to perfection, excellent bit depth. Having this as an option is a way to directly compare and compete to the Sony high end line. Oh, but RED is so much better, right?

...sure, soaring past these mere HD cameras into the 4K stratosphere is exciting, but I can read the biased review right now... "While RED exceeds expectations in the still rarified digital cinema market, lack of true "out of the can" 1080 support still leaves the door open for Sony to shine in the current HD market." Or some such drivel.

Finally, having spent a year or so with the HVX workflow and the process of trying to give clients HVX footage, I've got to say anything that anything that can mean less processing time and is instant plug and play into their NLE is extremely important. The HVX has been out for a year and a half or so, and I've never had two clients in a row expect or want the footage in the same manner... some want HDRack AVI's, some want the raw MXF's (god bless them), others want DVCPRO 100 QT's... all mean WORK for me at the end of a shoot, usually as I want to pack up and get the hell out of the location. It's bad enough to have to copy the footage off to their media, but to think of adding additional processing on top of that... Now with the HVX it's been a year and a half, and still you see client confusion with the options. I predict RED will have the same sort of "client education curve". It would be nice to say, "Here's your RGB 1080P. Load it up in whatever NLE on whatever Mac or PC platform." and be done with it.

I love jobs where I monitor and control more than just the shoot aspect, and strive for them. But, sometimes you need to deliver and be out the door.

[Emanuel A.]

Jim's post about losing 720 and 1080p seems to indicate that he (or maybe Red) are mulling over the idea of 2k and 4k only in camera. Personally I like the idea of faster frame rates at 2k and 4k but I'm not too sure it would be worthwhile at the expense of losing 1080p. If 720p can be dropped and allow for 2k@96fps so be it. But here are a couple of reasons why I believe 1080p is worthwhile having:


It is the largest format that we can actually see what we are shooting through the EVF or monitoring via HD-SDI. Therefore it's the only truly reliable format to shoot what you are seeing and I like the idea of working that way, especially when I know what I'm shooting will only ever be shown at 1080p or less.


It is a standard format globally and will be for many years to come. If removed, anything shot on the camera automatically requires an extra stage of post to get it to 1080p.


1080p RGB uses the entire sensor meaning what you shoot 4k through a lens is the same at 1080p. 2k windowed means your lenses have different characteristics.


1080p should mean smaller filesizes allowing you to shoot longer on a single RedDrive or CF - ideal for field work where backing up is difficult and the shooting days are long.

There are more points that have been raised about 1080p such as B4 mounts, and if anyone thinks of anything extra feel free to add it on.

Fact is I don't rate extra frame rates at 2k windowed above 1080p scaled and the above are some of my main points why.

Beyond the new amazing 4K and 2K world, I'm surely second the plead. 1080p will be quite useful.

EDIT -- What's 2K anyway? 1080p + 6,6%. Resolution and the standards can be everything and nothing at the same time. What matters is the 35mm sensor size. I'd prefer 1080p RGB scaled than 2K windowed, definitely.

[Desert Rune]

Maybe 1080P is being reserved for the Red Pocket Professional version?

Even if it doesn't shoot 4K, but cost less and has the same 12-stops of latitude, then I'm all over it.

[donatello b]

"1080p should mean smaller filesizes allowing you to shoot longer on a single RedDrive or CF"

i was under impression that 1080p RGB was much larger files then RAW ?
if that is correct i think you would get more 4k raw on a CF card then 1080 rgb ? and alot more 2k raw on CF?

[Nils Ruinet]

"1080p should mean smaller filesizes allowing you to shoot longer on a single RedDrive or CF"

i was under impression that 1080p RGB was much larger files then RAW ?
if that is correct i think you would get more 4k raw on a CF card then 1080 rgb ? and alot more 2k raw on CF?

RGB takes much more space than RAW. If I remember well, 1080P RGB was about 2/3 of the 4K data rate.
So a 1080P file will surely be much bigger than a 2K RAW file, I guess like 2 or 3 times more...
Jim said 2K RAW would be around 7 MB/s.

[Emanuel A.]

i was under impression that 1080p RGB was much larger files then RAW ? Here's a good argument pro 2K RAW though windowed doesn't make my day.

[martinnoweck]

I agree with many aspects mentioned in this thread:

e.g. Emanuel mentioned "What matters is the 35mm sensor size" - i would love to have the 35mm sensor size and the OPTION of shooting 4k redcode raw OR 1080p (i personally would also love to keep the option of 720p with 35mm Sensor size, but would still be happy to have the option of 1080p)

i personally don't think there should be two different configurations like "Cinema" and "Broadcast" to choose from - the cool thing about the RED ONE is / was (?) the fact, you can shoot 720p and 4K with the same camera not having to make a choice.

how long does it take to downrez 1 minute of 4k redcode raw to 1080p or 720p?

Martin

[Jason Murphy]

I haven't seen any info on this yet, but does anyone know what sort of a dynamic range hit the camera would take in recording Redcode RGB vs. RAW? I imagine there would be some.

[Ben Feuer]

The whole RED experiment has been about taking everything people want ... adding things they think they could have ... and giving them all of that for less than they thought they had to pay for the first thing.

I thought the original plan of waiting for firmware updates was a fine one. Give us whatever you can when the camera ships, and give us the rest later. But if the camera is physically capable of shooting a given res/spec, I want to have the OPTION of that res/spec. Options are good because you don't always know what situations will arise, what sort of needs will appear.

Throwing away features to differentiate products is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[Jason Murphy]

Throwing away features to differentiate products is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

While I agree in theory, at some point it seems obvious that designing a camera like this DOES become a zero-sum game, and to keep or add certain features, you need to lose others to keep the overall project feasible. Upgrades in the future will likely add significantly more functionality, but sometime it's gotta go out the door, and some features may have to be put on the chopping block (maybe to be reinstated later, maybe not).

[Blair S. Paulsen]

The time and format imperatives of day rate EFP work are a challenge for the as yet untested data workflow of the RedOne's on board recording options.

My first thought is to hook up a Wafian to the HD-SDI outs
OR
the AJA IO/HD, laptop and external HDD to ProRes
OR
some other tethered option for immediate turnaround situations that will fit seamlessly into existing workflows.

Of course I will be traveling around in a camera van with an on board edit bay that makes copies and runs dubs for the clients all day long. To avoid a long end of the day wait, I plan to just rotate the RedDrives several times a day so only the last couple of takes need to be crunched during the strike.

Of course the tricked out van will cost me more than the RedOne kit and limits me to gigs within driving distance but I think the value add will give me market presence and ease producer concerns about the new paradigm.

[David Battistella]

Of course I will be traveling around in a camera van with an on board edit bay that makes copies and runs dubs for the clients all day long. To avoid a long end of the day wait, I plan to just rotate the RedDrives several times a day so only the last couple of takes need to be crunched during the strike.

Of course the tricked out van will cost me more than the RedOne kit and limits me to gigs within driving distance but I think the value add will give me market presence and ease producer concerns about the new paradigm.

I think you should paint the van RED. :)

David

[Steven Parker]

I thought the original plan of waiting for firmware updates was a fine one. Give us whatever you can when the camera ships, and give us the rest later. But if the camera is physically capable of shooting a given res/spec, I want to have the OPTION of that res/spec. Options are good because you don't always know what situations will arise, what sort of needs will appear

I agree. 720p? Bah! Gone in a couple years! 1080p? Ummm, I have several of those clients...

But it is a tough choice. Higher-rez, higher fps would be fantastic. But when I shot the release of the iPhone in San Diego, w/two HVXs, the AC was still backing up and verifying an hour after we wrapped. That was when I left and he still had work to do...

We MUST know what the time requirements of RedCine are on a decent computer system or it's all speculation.

[Priyesh P.]

At the beginning of the Red project I thought all those format options were just little software tweaks that use the same hardware. But like I understand it now, it seems that certain formats need special hardware in-camera. Is that correct? And is this some sort of new technical limitation Red wasn't aware of?

[David Battistella]

We MUST know what the time requirements of RedCine are on a decent computer system or it's all speculation.

EXACTLY! There must be enough 4K REDCODE footage flying around now to be able to do some simple tests. With actual results.

David

[Nils Ruinet]

But when I shot the release of the iPhone in San Diego, w/two HVXs, the AC was still backing up and verifying an hour after we wrapped. That was when I left and he still had work to do...

We MUST know what the time requirements of RedCine are on a decent computer system or it's all speculation.

Sounds familiar :wink:
I recently came back from a 2 week HD shooting with 2 HVX. It was a documentary film, we had 4 firestores, which we dumped to two 4TB raid-5 drives (the second one was for backup). We were changing location quite often, so there was no time for transfers during the day. The poor AC didn't sleep much during these 2 weeks ! :waaa: I think he now hates P2 and tapeless workflows !

And that was without any conversion (like the one we would need from 2K or 4K to 1080P), just transfers...

So Redcine render times DO matter.

[Casey Green]

Again, my big three questions:

1) Can a software app. come with the Camera that allows the User to flash the firmware and thus allow for individual choice of supported modes? (this is based on the idea of the programmable FPGA which we have been told we can upgrade with firmware already, no?...... then no one loses functionality; those who want 2K@96 change the firmware for that mode, those who want 720, or 1080 use a different firmware rev. Also, this may allow for other possible 4K modes... :) )

2) If not, if 720p is dropped and 1080p is still kept, will this still allow for 2K@96fps? (if so, this is not a bad compromise.)

3) What is the RedCine down-res processing time? (And what factors go into this calculation? Is it different on faster CPUs?)

I know Jim wanted to let this sit for a day or two to get our responses... when we get the answers to these questions, it will make the decision a bit easier to make.

[Häakon]

Really good post, Casey - I think it pretty much sums up the pages and pages (and pages!) of discussion we've been having over the last couple of days. I almost want to just close it now since I do agree with you that we really need this information before speculating any further, but then the topic would probably fall off the front page and not be seen by the person(s) who we need to see it most. :-) Anyway, I hope that Jim can address those items soon.

[Nils Ruinet]

Again, my big three questions:

1) Can a software app. come with the Camera that allows the User to flash the firmware allow for individual choice of supported modes? (this is based on the idea of the programmable FPGA which we have been told we can upgrade with firmware already, no?...... then no one loses functionality, thos who want 2K@96 change the firmware for that mode, those who want 720, or 1080 use a different firmware rev. Also, may allow for other possible 4K modes... :) )

2) If not, if 720p is dropped and 1080p is still kept, will this still allow for 2K@96fps? (if so, this is not a bad compromise.)

3) What is the RedCine down-res processing time? (And what factors go into this calculation? Is it different on faster CPUs?)

I know Jim wanted to let this sit for a day or two to get our responses... when we get the answers to these questions, it will make the decision a bit easier to make.

I totally agree.
We can't really answer Jims initial question as long as we don't have these answers.

Regarding your first point : I think they said the RGB modes were not supposed to be on the first cameras, they would come later as firmware upgrades. So if they're able to do such an upgrade, I don't see why this wouldn't be possible.
And this solution would solve everything ! Everyone could install the firmware he wants, the one with the 720 / 1080 option, or the one with the 2K@96fps option. And we could reprogram the FPGA if we need to change, depending on the work we're doing and what we need at that moment.

[number6]

If we get to build our REDburger our way, make my meat 4k raw, and hold all the condiments, except the Redcode sauce.

[Laco Zamba]

Let's stop speculations and wait for Jim.

[David Battistella]

3) What is the RedCine down-res processing time? (And what factors go into this calculation? Is it different on faster CPUs?)


To quote Frank Zappa, This is the crux of the biscuit.

If RGB and REDCODE are effectively the same speed then just dump 720P in favour of the 2K@96 option.

e z p z.

David

[Poi Boy]

I'm with you #6, the simpler the better. 4k into FCP and spit out what you want. I don't have any time figure but going from 1080 to 720 doesn't take any time at all so I don't think that will be a huge issue. IMO If you need to pass off 720 or 1080 at light speed then you really should be using a different solution.
Aloha
-A

[David Battistella]

Let's stop speculations and wait for Jim.


Jim actually asked us for all of this speculation. We appreciate having a hand in shaping the final product.

David

[Häakon]

I'm with you #6, the simpler the better. 4k into FCP and spit out what you want. I don't have any time figure but going from 1080 to 720 doesn't take any time at all so I don't think that will be a huge issue. IMO If you need to pass off 720 or 1080 at light speed then you really should be using a different solution.
Aloha
-A
Keep in mind that if you ditched everything but 4K, the highest framerate you'd get is 30p. At least with the 1080 scaled option, you can shoot up to 60p and still take advantage of the image characteristics of the full sensor.

[Laco Zamba]

Jim actually asked us for all of this speculation. We appreciate having a hand in shaping the final product.

David

OK, but it's not ease to read it all. It will take long-long time :-) Too many threads, confusing pollings, ... We miss his quick answers.

[number6]

Keep in mind that if you ditched everything but 4K, the highest framerate you'd get is 30p.

I got the sense from Jim that greater things (framerates) are just over the horizon. I think if the Red Team could concentrate on increasing the framerate of 4k, it could happen very soon. Brainpouer is like a lense... turned one way it concentrates light to it's highest intensity, while turning the lense around scatters it.

[Poi Boy]

Sorry I forgot to mention I like the 2k@96 option
Aloha
-A

[Costelloe Michael]

I'm pretty sure you may have said something about that previously:shifty:

Mike C

[Tom Lowe]

If there is no 1080p RGB, I won't order the camera. It's the only way I can shoot overcranked scenes for my movie using the 35mm lenses I can going to buy or rent.

[number6]

If there is no 1080p RGB, I won't order the camera. It's the only way I can shoot overcranked scenes for my movie using the 35mm lenses I can going to buy or rent.

Tom, what is the minimum frame rate you need? I'm just asking because I'm wondering if the 2k framerate of 96 fps rate, then sped up in post, wouldn't be as good or better than 1080 RGB? I'm just sayin'... I'm just askin'.

edit: it just occurred to me that you want high frame rates to SLOW DOUN the action.... Duhhhh

[Poi Boy]

If there is no 1080p RGB, I won't order the camera. It's the only way I can shoot overcranked scenes for my movie using the 35mm lenses I can going to buy or rent.

Tom you are not serious are you ? slo mo is your only reason for buying Red?
-A

[Jason Murphy]

Tom, what is the minimum frame rate you need? I'm just asking because I'm wondering if the 2k framerate of 96 fps rate, then sped up in post, wouldn't be as good or better than 1080 RGB?

The real issue here is DOF. 2K windowed won't have the same DOF/lens characteristics as 1080 scaled.

[Michael Lindsay]

Tom

I doubt that is true...:biggrin: If so would you like to make a fast buck???

Reading between the lines of recent red posts... Jared talking about red-ram possibilities about a week ago and JJ yesterday.. there is the strongish hint that there will be a away to shoot higher than 30fps without a fridge (High speed data recorder)... Some high speed memory to cache the overflow of raw data needing to be wavelet compressed combined with the higher potential data rate of red-ram perhaps?

I frequently need to shoot 60fps on my paying jobs... But it is very rarely wider than full body shot therefore 2k Windowed on some fast glass should be fine I've cut near S16 out of the centre of 35mm in HD tk before and its cuts fine (if it isn't wide...)

Years ago I spent a little time as a consultant for a company doing some HD products and it amazed me how slow it can be... Therefore I'm happy for Red to really focus development resources and deliver faster (and probably more solidly)..

regards

Michael (two red reservations too late for his liking) Lindsay

[Michael Lindsay]

shooting at T1.3 (or a little off for sharpness) on Master primes, Ultra 16 lens, super speeds or maybe even Optar T1.3 with a slightly longer lens might work for you...

Cooke make a conversion on there big zoom that turns it into T1.5... Maybe Red can offer it on there zooms and alow us to have an option on a super fast s16 lens with the same field as view as 35mm (If it was offered as fixed mod I'd buy the lens twice)

regards

Michael

[number6]

The real issue here is DOF. 2K windowed won't have the same DOF/lens characteristics as 1080 scaled.

Jason, wasn't the increased ISO numbers supposed to help with the DOF limitations?

[Michael Ragen]

I remember a while ago Jim said he plans to shoot almost exclusively with the Red-Ram and I would imagine he would want to shoot higher than 30fps sometimes at 4k for races and whatnot. It will be interesting to see what the near future holds...

[Andrew Kimery]

Brainpouer is like a lense... turned one way it concentrates light to it's highest intensity, while turning the lense around scatters it.

And if the "scattered" beam revealed something useful in a shadowy corner that the "focused" beam did not... ;)


-A

[Tom Lowe]

The #1 issue I have been talking about, over and over and over again, since day one, is being able to overcrank. My dream would be 60fps at 4K REDCODE RAW onboard. But I am willing to settle for 1080 RGB scaled down from 4K, even though this means I will have to lower the overall resolution of my entire movie to 2K (lowest common denominator), so the 4k RAW and 1080 RGB will match up.

This is a compromise I have made peace with. But if you take away 1080 RGB, I cannot shoot the overcranked scenes I need (dozens of very specific shots I have in mind for my feature next summer) with my 35mm lenses. I am planning to buy or rent a set of very fast 35mm primes for the shoot, and I have no interest in renting a second set of 16mm primes.

I guess in theory that I could use really wide 35mm primes on the windowed sensor...? I don't know...

[Poi Boy]

I understand what you want; for me I would rather have the higher quality and higher frame rate of 2K@96 in exchange for having to reframe my shot or renting a lens on occasion. We will have to wait and see but it is exciting that higher rates are being talked about as a possibility.
Aloha
-A

[Costelloe Michael]

Guys,

Whatever your theory about the best way to deliver or dof issues 120 fps makes the camera marketable in the real world differently to 96fps. 120fps would be a real bonus for TV work as a high speed camera in special applications such as stunts, esp in the UK.

You may think the % is small but the perception is large. I can see it would make a difference in marketing for this application.

Having said that I don't intend to use it for that purpose but I can see that others will.

Mike C

[Tom Lowe]

I like higher frame rates, for sure, but I'm not so sure that 2K windowed is going to be a higher quality image than 1080p downsampled from a full-size sensor. If you use DLSR images as an example, a downsampled 2K image from a 4K Canon 5D shot will be far superior to cutting/cropping out a 2K image from a 4K image, if you follow my meaning.

Some tests should be done on this, but my guess would be that the downsampled 1080 RGB image should look beautiful and would probably be better than a windowed 2K image. A windowed sensor will not have the benefit of downsampling, nor will it have DOF to match the 4K REDCODE stuff.

I could be totally wrong about all this. I'm not an expert on such things.

[Poi Boy]

I don't think anyone will not buy Red because of 96 versus 120.
-A

[Häakon]

Jason, wasn't the increased ISO numbers supposed to help with the DOF limitations?
Higher ISO means being able to close down lenses (and in effect, expand your DOF). This may "help" you or not, depending on your preference. It makes focusing easier as you have more room to play with, but the shallow DOF is what many people are wanting from the 35mm sensor in the first place. Also, higher ISO means more noise; what is an "acceptable" level of noise will vary from user to user, but many will want to shoot in the cleanest space they can - lenses permitting.

[Poi Boy]

with 1080 rgb you don't get raw, that is bigger for me than the cropping. I don't think the cropping will degrade the image significantly.
-A

[Costelloe Michael]

I don't think anyone will not buy Red because of 96 versus 120.
-A


I think you're probably right, but it would be a shame to exclude a feature that attracted people to the camera in the first place...

Mike C

[Poi Boy]

I don't think anyone will not buy Red because of 96 versus 120.
-A


I think you're probably right, but it would be a shame to exclude a feature that attracted people to the camera in the first place...

Mike C

I take your point. Speaking for my use I'd give up 24 frames to avoid 720 and still get great slomo at a higher resolution; I'll be a pig in shit either way.
Aloha
-A

[Costelloe Michael]

but the shallow DOF is what many people are wanting from the 35mm sensor in the first place.

Surely we are talking about the difference in dof between 35mm and 2/3rd inch chip cameras being an issue? ie the 'video' look we all hate? Or am I missing something here?

Mike C

[Tom Lowe]

with 1080 rgb you don't get raw, that is bigger for me than the cropping. I don't think the cropping will degrade the image significantly.
-A

Hard to say. RAW is awesome, but again, you then lose the DOF, plus you have to deal with a focal-length magnification factor on your 35mm lenses.

I would really be interested in seeing a Pepsi Challenge of 2K RAW windowed footage vs 4K downsampled to 1080 RGB. Generally speaking, downsampling seems to work far better on these types of CMOS sensors, rather than windowing/cropping.

[Costelloe Michael]

Higher ISO means being able to close down lenses (and in effect, shrink your DOF). .

Haarkon Surely closing down your lenses does exactly the opposite of this. It increases your dof.

Mike C

[Costelloe Michael]

you have to deal with a focal-length magnification factor on your 35mm lenses.
.

Funny this... we've been dealing with this in the UK for quite a while. Domestic TV S16mm and Features 35mm. I've got so used to it it seems second nature to calculate all the variables.

Mike C

[Häakon]

with 1080 rgb you don't get raw, that is bigger for me than the cropping. I don't think the cropping will degrade the image significantly.
-A
That's interesting; I think we'll have to wait and see the results to determine that (and even then it will be subjective). I'd personally much rather have an oversampled image than a center slice - even with the RAW benefits - as I don't do a lot of VFX work and I prefer to light and balance as much as I can when I shoot as opposed to creating the entire visual feel in post. And that certainly isn't to say that an RGB image (especially a 10-bit, 4:4:4 one) can't be pushed around with good results after it's "in the can"). Benefits of oversampling are reduced noise (which can equate to increased sensitivity) and higher quality anti-aliasing, which can result in a far nicer picture. As Tom pointed out, a downsampled 2K image from a 4K Canon 5D shot will be far superior to cutting/cropping out a 2K image from the center of the 4K original.

Going with the center crop also means losing the 35mm DOF characteristics, the wider FOV, and potentially needing a completely different set of lenses. Again, not necessarily deal breakers - some will find this way of shooting to be preferable for what they do and others won't. But it is important to factor in all of the variables when making the decision - it's not just as simple as "RAW or RGB."

It also may come down completely to budget, time restraints, client demands, lens availability, and an array of other external factors.

[Steve Gibby]

2) If not, if 720p is dropped and 1080p is still kept, will this still allow for 2K@96fps? (if so, this is not a bad compromise.)

Your "Big three" questions summarize the core of the issues well Casey. Let’s review what Jim said…and didn’t say, plus a comment about variable bit rate form Stuart English:

“We don't have to change anything... it was just a thought. But we don't have the space to do everything. We can leave the spec as it is OR we can get creative at the last minute. I don't really care either way. I'll shoot 4K at 24fps to CF or either 720P @ 120fps or 2K at 96fps to CF. My personal preference is 2K @ 96fps, but I'm just one customer. If the majority wants 720P @ 120fps... that's what we'll do. We can't do both. In hindsight, we would have put in a bigger FPGA (not available when we started) but then the price of the camera would be $4K more expensive. Choices... choices.”

Jim Jannard
7/30/07
RED User
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3450&page=7



In answer to this Shawn Nelson question: “Why is it one or the other? Why can't you enable both 720p120 and 2k96?” Jim said:

“FPGA space... imagine what we are giving compared to the competition. Think of the box size. Just think about it for a moment. There is a limit to what we can do. I know that seems an impossible concept since we are offering so much, but trust me... there is a limit.”

Jim Jannard
7/30/07
RED User
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3450&page=9



Then add into the mix this recent comment by Stuart English:

“You got it right Chris - relative to the video data rate audio is trivial.

The hours per mag discrepancy is just that the codec's AVERAGE and PEAK data rates are still being tweaked. In addition, some comments fall on the conversative side of that equation, some comments reflect the assumption its 27MB/s as per our IBC estimate.

Unlike tape decks that have a requirement of a fixed data rate, we have a lot of flexibility in using constant or variable bit rates and / or higher bit rates as may be most appropriate to the task at hand.

More later ...”

Stuart English
5/4/07
RED User
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2225


Suggestion for a possible solution
I’m not an engineer, but I would guess that RGB 720p/120fps is actually a higher data rate than RGB 1080p/60fps. Jim has stated that RGB 720p/120 or 2k RC RAW/96fps is an either/or situation – both are not possible. There seems to be many people OK with losing 720p/120 to gain 2k/96fps, but they also want to keep 1080p/60. If 1080p/60 is a lower data rate than 720p/120, it just may be technically possible to finalize the specifications with 2k/96fps and 1080p/60 and still keep within the sensor limits using VBR (variable bit rate) manipulation. I’m outside my area of core expertise in making that suggestion, so I’m just asking of it would be possible. If not, can a slightly lower fps in 2k enable the keeping of 1080p/60?

I think RGB 1080p is very important to keep in the camera specs for many of the reasons myself and others have posted on the “1080p and 720p…losers” thread. I'm fishing for a compromise that would allow 2k/96 and 1080p/60 to both be in the final specifications.

Food for thought…

[Poi Boy]

Thanks Gibby,
I think we need the big guy to chime in here.
Aloha
-A

[Häakon]

Haarkon Surely closing down your lenses does exactly the opposite of this. It increases your dof.

Mike C
Yes, of course. :) The rest of my post spoke correctly as I intended, I was just thinking of the stop numbers decreasing. Always mixing that up in my brain!

I fixed the original post. :-)


Surely we are talking about the difference in dof between 35mm and 2/3rd inch chip cameras being an issue? ie the 'video' look we all hate? Or am I missing something here?
No, there are a few different methods of shooting with RED being discussed; in 4K mode, you shoot with the entire s35mm sensor. in 2K mode, you're shooting with a center crop of that sensor - they're referring to it as the "windowed" portion of the sensor. When you shoot 2K windowed, you can use 16mm lenses on the camera in order to preserve your FOV, but at the same time you expand the DOF. Some may not prefer to do this or find it acceptable.

The final option (right now anyway, that's what this topic is discussing) is to shoot with the full sensor but then shrink it to a 1080p frame in-camera. This means you are still shooting with your 35mm lenses and retaining that DOF, but your overall image size is smaller (it's much closer to that of the 2K windowed frame).

When you shoot in full 4K or the 2K "window," you record with RAW functionality. When you shoot 1080p in-camera, the footage becomes RGB, cutting some flexibility in post (but again, retaining the DOF characteristics and arguably getting a better image as it is an oversample from the full 4K frame). It's all about the different options the camera is offering, and we're just discussing which ones may work better than others in certain situations. :-)

[Häakon]

Suggestion for a possible solution
I’m not an engineer, but I would guess that RGB 720p/120fps is actually a higher data rate than RGB 1080p/60fps. Jim has stated that RGB 720p/120 or 2k RC RAW/96fps is an either/or situation – both are not possible. There seems to be many people OK with losing 720p/120 to gain 2k/96fps, but they also want to keep 1080p/60. If 1080p/60 is a lower data rate than 720p/120, it just may be technically possible to finalize the specifications with 2k/96fps and 1080p/60 and still keep within the sensor limits using VBR (variable bit rate) manipulation...

...I think RGB 1080p is very important to keep in the camera specs for many of the reasons myself and others have posted on the “1080p and 720p…losers” thread. I'm fishing for a compromise that would allow 2k/96 and 1080p/60 to both be in the final specifications.

I agree with you completely Gibby; 1080p is essential - aside from instant deliverables, it's the only way (at this time, anyway) to keep (onboard) 60fps alive from the full 4K sensor. That's a big deal to many people here.

However, (and I'm not an engineer by any means possible - so take this post with a grain of salt), I would speculate that it's not the bandwidth of the recorded frame that's the problem (after all, you wouldn't be recording 720p/120 and 2K/96 at the same time) but just space on the FPGA itself for coding instructions/format choices. In other words, while the sensor is potentially capable of doing 96fps at 2K AND 60fps in 1080p RGB AND 120fps in 720p RGB, there may not be room on the FPGA to embed and deal with all of the conversion instructions. As long as you have a fast enough pipeline (CF card, hard drive, whatever), the bandwidth isn't the issue. That's how I'm interpreting it, anyway.

And you're right, we haven't heard back yet if nixing 720/120p will still allow the provision for 1080/60p - which is the critical question. I think if enabling 2K/96p is possible - but only at the expense of both 720 AND 1080 - many people will have a problem with that. Here's hoping to hear back from RED soon!

[Poi Boy]

Shooting 720 at 120fps you are windowed as with 2k at 96fps. At 2k you are giving up 24fps but are getting much higher resolution and not giving up raw. Off course you light and balance when you shoot but you have so much more control if you stay raw.
Aloha
-A

[donatello b]

"take away 1080 RGB, I cannot shoot the overcranked scenes I need "

ok you cancel your RED and replace it with ??

or you could do what many will do - rent a hi speed camera for the days you need it = 120fps is no longer your limit ...

[Blair S. Paulsen]

One bit of clarification - several posters are comparing 1080P downsampled from the full sensor versus 2K RAW windowed. I thought the two available choices were 720P downsampled from the full sensor @120fps versus 2K RAW @96fps windowed.

Assuming a 2K or 1080P finish, the 720P @120fps option would require an up-rez in post which the 2K option would not. Without testing there is no way to know just how the up-rez from 720 would impact the image but...

Until we can test it's just a guess, but I am thinking that intercutting 4K RAW and 2K RAW overcrank will be easier since both have the latitude and gamut of RAW color space. DoF issues might require some adjustments but since the faster shutter will generally require a bigger aperture with the same light levels it should be doable.

I still think that if you need to go beyond 96fps you should just rent a Phantom - horses for courses.

[Poi Boy]

According to the faq 720@120 is s16 sensor crop.
-A

[Tom Lowe]

Häakon, let me expand on the point you made about a downsampled 4K-to-1080 image having much less visible noise than a cropped/windowed 2K image. This tends to be especially true when shooting in low-light conditions, like during sunsets. My guess is that 4K downsample to 1080 will be the superior image vs the 2K windowed.

Only way to know for sure is to run some tests. Gibby, any chance you could incorporate such a test in LART? Maybe turn Mlullen loose for some exterior sunset shots?

[Peter McCully]

....And you're right, we haven't heard back yet if nixing 720/120p will still allow the provision for 1080/60p - which is the critical question. I think if enabling 2K/96p is possible - but only at the expense of both 720 AND 1080 - many people will have a problem with that. Here's hoping to hear back from RED soon!

I tend to agree here. If only because of the amount of 1080p production that my Red would be used for. It's another reason for producers to say yes. Even if the advantages are percieved rather than real. Naturally 2K and 4K are the big daddys but I can foresee much of the future output being 1080.

[Bruce Allen]

Gibby,

1920x1080x60 = 124 million pixels / sec
1280x720x120 = 110 million pixels / sec

So, uncompressed, they are comparable.

When you compress them, which one is bigger depends on whether your compression occurs primarily in the spatial or temporal dimension. It's possible there will often be less drastic frame-to-frame changes for a lot of 120fps footage. But the 1080p footage will probably have less detail per pixel than the 720p.

REDCODE is spatial only, right? So I'd expect the 1080p stuff to compress better.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Häakon]

According to the faq 720@120 is s16 sensor crop.
-A
Further expanding on that, according to the current format options (http://www.red.com/formatoptions.shtml) page, it is possible to scale to 720p from the full sensor - but only up to 60p (as that's the max framerate the full sensor is capable of).

So perhaps that's the missing piece? Since there are actually two ways to get 720p out of the camera (currently, or at least according to the website) - perhaps getting 96fps out of the 2K mode means nixing the scaled-from-the-window flavors of RGB. Just another thought.

[Poi Boy]

I think we have beat this to the ground, we need some JJ clarification.
Aloha
-A

[Jim Arthurs]

My guess is that 4K downsample to 1080 will be the superior image vs the 2K windowed.

The only way that this wouldn't be true is if the on-board hardware downscaling/processing winds up only being of "monitoring quality". I firmly hope this isn't the case. Maybe that is a behind the scenes reason behind some of the re-thinking of legacy HD formats? Again, I hope not.

I've been a strong proponent of the downscaled 1080p RGB since announced. It's the closest thing RED offers to a "hand over and walk away" deliverable.

[Häakon]

One bit of clarification - several posters are comparing 1080P downsampled from the full sensor versus 2K RAW windowed. I thought the two available choices were 720P downsampled from the full sensor @120fps versus 2K RAW @96fps windowed.
Those are the two options Jim put out, but he also mentioned that both "720p and 1080p are losers," and some of us are just concered about losing both RGB formats in order to enable 96fps in the windowed 2K mode. Since the 1080 variant is quite close in size to 2K - and it allows for up to 60fps in that mode while preserving the image characteristics of the full 4K sensor - it's the one RGB option that many of us are concerned about. If 1080p/60 RGB is not in danger of being removed, then the choice between 720p/120 and 2K/96 is really just a personal choice... what's more important to you, high speed or image quality? That of course completely depends upon if you have a need for high framerates in the type of shooting you do as well as if you plan to do a lot of windowed shooting. For me, the 1080p/60 scale from the full sensor is more important than any of the windowed formats... but that's just my personal preference.

[Bruce Allen]

No, AFAIK, the 720 @ 120 is also downsampled from a cropped sensor. I don't think Red is capable of reading out the entire sensor at 120fps.

If you look at DSLRs you'll see a similar phenomenon. You can read out twice as fast if you window.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Häakon]

AFAIK, the 720 @ 120 is also downsampled from a cropped sensor. I don't think Red is capable of reading out the entire sensor at 120fps.
That's correct, but the format options page shows that up to 60 fps is possible at 720 from a sample of the entire sensor. So perhaps they can keep 720p/60 (and along with it, 1080p/60) to enable the magic 2K/96 barrier and only have to sacrifice the windowed RGB options. Hence, what do you prefer - 720p at 120, or 2K at 96?

[Poi Boy]

My ideal would be 1080p60 and 2k96; lose 720 all together.
Aloha
-A

[Jeff Kilgroe]

One bit of clarification - several posters are comparing 1080P downsampled from the full sensor versus 2K RAW windowed. I thought the two available choices were 720P downsampled from the full sensor @120fps versus 2K RAW @96fps windowed.

720p @ 120fps is only possible from the 2K window (s16mm) area of the sensor. It can not scan the entire s35mm 4K area at rates higher than 60Hz.

The 1080p RGB scaled from the 4K sensor area is a must. It's the only way to get the full 35mm sensor area at 60Hz recorded onboard. It's also a practical format to be able to record for EFP / Broadcast applications and even cinema depending on certain factors.

I think we do need some clarification though. I've interpreted Jim's posts a bit differently than most everyone else it seems. I took it as he was considering the elimination of onboard RGB recording. As in do we really need onboard ability to record 720p and 1080p? Many people said they were interested in these modes, primarily 720p because of 120fps capability.. To which the question was put if the RGB modes were eliminated, would 2K windowed RAW recording suffice for those in need of overcranking? -- particularly if it were capable of up to 96fps, which looks to be possible.

Anyway, I think I've seen several of us (myself included) post the same sentiments in several threads, perhaps it's time to start locking some of these down.

[David Battistella]

Anyway, I think I've seen several of us (myself included) post the same sentiments in several threads, perhaps it's time to start locking some of these down.

AMEN!

This has been a RED marathon!

David

[Casey Green]

1) Can a software app. come with the Camera that allows the User to flash the firmware and thus allow for individual choice of supported modes? (this is based on the idea of the programmable FPGA which we have been told we can upgrade with firmware already, no?...... then no one loses functionality; those who want 2K@96 change the firmware for that mode, those who want 720, or 1080 use a different firmware rev. Also, this may allow for other possible 4K modes... :) )

2) If not, if 720p is dropped and 1080p is still kept, will this still allow for 2K@96fps? (if so, this is not a bad compromise.)

3) What is the RedCine down-res processing time? (And what factors go into this calculation? Is it different on faster CPUs?)

I know Jim wanted to let this sit for a day or two to get our responses... when we get the answers to these questions, it will make the decision a bit easier to make.



Your "Big three" questions summarize the core of the issues well Casey. Let’s review what Jim said…and didn’t say, plus a comment about variable bit rate form Stuart English...




...Suggestion for a possible solution
I’m not an engineer, but I would guess that RGB 720p/120fps is actually a higher data rate than RGB 1080p/60fps. Jim has stated that RGB 720p/120 or 2k RC RAW/96fps is an either/or situation – both are not possible. There seems to be many people OK with losing 720p/120 to gain 2k/96fps, but they also want to keep 1080p/60. If 1080p/60 is a lower data rate than 720p/120, it just may be technically possible to finalize the specifications with 2k/96fps and 1080p/60 and still keep within the sensor limits using VBR (variable bit rate) manipulation. I’m outside my area of core expertise in making that suggestion, so I’m just asking of it would be possible. If not, can a slightly lower fps in 2k enable the keeping of 1080p/60?

I think RGB 1080p is very important to keep in the camera specs for many of the reasons myself and others have posted on the “1080p and 720p…losers” thread. I'm fishing for a compromise that would allow 2k/96 and 1080p/60 to both be in the final specifications.

Food for thought…



Thanks Gibby,

(not going to quote all the sources here, however...)

I agree with Haakon, where I'm not so sure the variable bit rate is a factor here. And this is well beyond my expertise, but it seems as if the FPGA can only hold so many instructions or "format modes" if you will. If my understanding is accurate (it may be WAY off) and that is the case, perhaps the Firmware mods are possible, and that would be just great... Have the Camera ship in a standard mode (possibly in the state that was advertised), and then include the software app which allows the user to upload their own customized modes...

That could mean eliminating ALL non-4K modes for some and increasing the 4K fps to the max, including higher 2K modes, or even possibly allowing only the highest 720p or 1080p framerates.

I suppose there would be some marketing issues to work through, but we all know RED is great in that dept.

OK... I think I'm done on this one. Anxiously awaiting RED's response.

And thanks again to RED and this amazing community for presenting us the opportunity to be this involved in the development process. (I've been charging $5 a letter for my posts, how about you guys?) :wink:

[Michael Lindsay]

1080p @ 60 = 1920x1080x30x60 = 445MB/s then compressed
4k raw @ 30 = 4096x2304x12x30 = 405MB/s then compressed

Couple of thoughts:

There is perhaps some more capacity to be squeezed out since already the 1080p image is both higher bandwidth and more complex in process... Maybe Red could give us a 3k image (windowed) at 60fps it would be about the same pre-compression (post matrixed) data rate as 1080p60?.. you'd have to use 35mm glass but it could be a nice compromise???

Also a 4k windowed image that had a 2.35 to 1 ratio at 45fps would have a very similar pre-compression data rate to 1080p60fps..

Perhaps it is possible to record short bursts of 4k@60fps without a fridge even if sustained many minute takes are not possible....

Also since larger images compress more gracefully I would like to see the quality of the RGB 1080p image compared to a 2kcrop...

regards

Michael

[mezmo]

Hi guys,
I'm not a reservation holder here so I don't have much clout,
but I do plan to hire two of the early cameras for a project
next year.
I need cameras that will deliver excellent pictures a 24fps and
high speed.
96 fps would be fine, the intercut between these framerates
must be seamless as post ramped shots will be intercut with 100%
24fps dialogue shots.
Lets face it, Red is not a high speed 4K digital film camera.
Without testing it's hard to determine the quality of highspeed 2K
intercut with 4k.
Loosing 35mm D.O.F. to shoot highspeed I see as a major problem
and don't see this as any sort of option.
I also see this as an important issue with this camera if it's to be used in a
high end professional enviorment.
We can do all this with film, the benchmark. It's as expensive as hell
running two 35mm cameras at high speed on a film set but it's simple
and works well with no noticable quality loss.
Red needs to achieve this with the same results if it's going to compete
in this area,
and this I think should determine what the camera is and where it should
be in the marketplace.
A second cheaper model for 720/1080p could also be an option for the
video based guys.
Cheers Mezmo

[David Battistella]

OK, but it's not ease to read it all. It will take long-long time :-) Too many threads, confusing pollings, ... We miss his quick answers.

Laco,

We won't miss his answers. The other thread he started had about 17 000 views. Hard to miss.

Cheers.

David

[Stuart English]

I stil find it amazing to be able to take a RED-DRIVE, hook it up to my 15" MacBook Pro laptop via FW400, and instantly playback Quicktime movies referenced to the 4K REDCODE RAW files in real time. This means instant deliverables for your client can just be a clone of RED-DRIVE or CF cards.

[Casey Green]

any comments on the 4K to 1080p or 720p conversion time, Stuart? (CPU specs included)

[Stuart English]

I wont quote a number as that depends in large part on the CPU speed you have. My point is the client can instantly see the footage in the field, sign off on it and convert it themselves later - just drag it into Final Cut Studio 2 (as soon as it supports REDCODE RAW) and render the project.

Or take it via REDCINE to any other brand of NLE. Thats pretty amazing.

[number6]

This is a personal opinion only, but I think some moderator is missing a very good opportunity to allow us to just shut up, with Stuart's post being the last.

[Joe Carney]

Any word if Adobe will be fully supporting the qt/redcode option. I know they support Sheervideo 10bit with no problem. Not all of us want to go to FC studio.

that's more important to me than 1080p rgb

[Casey Green]

I wont quote a number as that depends in large part on the CPU speed you have. My point is the client can instantly see the footage in the field, sign off on it and convert it themselves later - just drag it into Final Cut Studio 2 (as soon as it supports REDCODE RAW) and render the project.

Or take it via REDCINE to any other brand of NLE. Thats pretty amazing.

Very amazing... no doubt!

I'm sure, however, not everyone's environments will be the same. Having a client on set or in the edit bay is just one of many different situations. Please keep in mind the many other production situations that will come about.

But yes, what you mentioned is astounding and not to be taken for granted. :)

[David Battistella]

I wont quote a number as that depends in large part on the CPU speed you have. My point is the client can instantly see the footage in the field, sign off on it and convert it themselves later - just drag it into Final Cut Studio 2 (as soon as it supports REDCODE RAW) and render the project.

Or take it via REDCINE to any other brand of NLE. Thats pretty amazing.


Thanks for shedding some light on this. I think this is one fantastic advantage to RED and the "proposed workflow".

One very real scenario will be that clients will show up with their own CF cards and could do a quick check off the camera and walk away with the cards. For longer shoots a FireWire file transfer, or disk clone, from a RED DRIVE will be as fast as you can copy 320GB of data. I'd say that would take probably about an hour at best.

I was on a shoot a week ago where a 16GB P2 card took about that long to offload to a P2 store. This is why I think the CF cards are going to be the best way to turn things around quickly. Initially this might mean more CF cards, but I love that it is inexpensive, affordable, accessible media.


David

[Poi Boy]

I wont quote a number as that depends in large part on the CPU speed you have. My point is the client can instantly see the footage in the field, sign off on it and convert it themselves later - just drag it into Final Cut Studio 2 (as soon as it supports REDCODE RAW) and render the project.

Or take it via REDCINE to any other brand of NLE. Thats pretty amazing.

I don't understand why you don't give a ballpark number at this late date; Just say on such and such configuration it takes about x amount of time. Your system may be a bit faster or a bit slower.
Simple.
-A

[planet e]

i agree. this whole "lose HD" debate is taking place on partial information. without a ballpark grasp of down-rez times, what is the point? if the down-rez time is minimal, then dropping the HD formats will be no big deal, but if it means losing a substantial chunk of time to conversion, ugh.

we simply don't know. even a rough estimate would have some use value.

[M Most]

For longer shoots a FireWire file transfer, or disk clone, from a RED DRIVE will be as fast as you can copy 320GB of data. I'd say that would take probably about an hour at best.

I don't know what kind of Firewire drives you deal with, but in my experience, a 320GB copy is going to take more like 2.5 - 3 hours or more, not an hour.

I understand what Stuart is saying, but "instant" deliverables to me mean taking something physical directly out of the machine and handing it to someone. That's done with tape all the time, and although there's nothing that says that tape is any more bulletproof than, say, a hard disk, the fact remains that if you drop a tape, you're more likely to recover most of what's on it than you are if you crash a hard drive, hence the hesitation to hand over the one and only digital recording if it's not on tape. Of course, if one doesn't wait until wrap to start the backups, and instead has someone doing the backups after every, say, 20 minutes of recording, this is much less of an issue.

[David Battistella]

I don't know what kind of Firewire drives you deal with, but in my experience, a 320GB copy is going to take more like 2.5 - 3 hours or more, not an hour.


I also stated that CF cards might be better in this case, or the other thing to do is modify you workflow. You would normally only put 1 30 minute tape in the camera at a time so when you need to do a "tape change" to a "drive change" and start a transfer as you have stated. The RED drive is a mini RAID so it will be faster than a regular FW drive and I believe ti also has a FW800 port.

It's true that most of my large transfers have come from a 4TB Huge systems Fiber array and that is considerably faster than FW so I am sorry if my numbers are off.

David

[MikeCurtis]

I apologize if some of this has been said before, Paul and Jim hit most of what I already agree with, and I didn't have time to go through all 10 pages of posts

MY MAIN POINTS:

1.) OK everybody, DON'T decide from the math or your gut - lets look at some actual frames to get what the difference is, and THEN decide from there if possible. I don't mean to be creating work for the Red Team or introducing hassles for them, I know they're busy and down to the wire trying to get this done, but I think they'd agree that making informed decisions from actual facts rather than having to guess basedon the math and uninformed (not that they are ignornant, only because they have't seen actual test frames pertinent to this discussion) reader polls is the better way to go.

2.) 720p and 1080p are CRUCIAL to maintain in camera. Broad acceptance will hinge on being able to quickly and easily work with industry standard formats as much as possible (EDIT - I had an incorrect line in here about 2K not being 16:9 - it is, I just had it wrong) Do you REALLY want those more decisions when you're in a hurry, or would you rather have "just convert it to my NLE codec NOW please" options, or better yet, just native NLE support (in time! Maybe 2008...)

3.) Even in present circumstances, 2Kx1080 isn't broadly supported. Cutting 720p/1080p would be a HUGE mistake in my opinion, if only to gain another 25% frame rate gain at an improved resolution.

4.) Realistic shooting/viewing environments - even if you shot your 2K@96fps perfectly, AND had a 1080p set to watch it on (or, for the other 1% of the jobs that do get filmout of DCI projection), would you rather it be a weensie bit sharper or better slo-mo? Now lets get practical - when shooting, by the time you factor in the glass you can afford, the focus you can pull on a moving subject as you're trying to shoot high speed, and the amount of high frequency detail in that subject matter...how much better sharpness focus do you REALLY think you'll be able to get to differentiate 2K RAW converted to 1080p vs. 2K RAW converted to 720p uprezzed to 1080p?

Now, presuming your viewers are watching your footage on HDTVs (as most Red footage is likely to be), most of those are too small and the viewers sit too far back to optically resolve the full res of the set anyway (if it is even a true 1920x1080 res set - most are 1366x768 pixels or some variant from there) - most viewers can barely see 720p res anyway at home (for next several years, and some kind of Red Two may probably be out by then!). They can eyeball better slo-mo before they can eyeball better resolution. My gut (and again, I'm wide open to changing my mind if I see test frames that convince me otherwise) says that in much the same way that we appreciate/prefer contrast and color before we appreciate/recognize/prefer resolution when seeing an image, that more FPS in a slo-mo shot is better/preferable than a sharper image.

In terms of utility (not sexiness or marketability), keeping 720p/1080p on board makes more sense to me than opting for 2K@96 rather than the current 2K@60fps. Ditching industry standards native on camera for the sake of 61-96 fps in 2K when you already have 120fps 720p? Doesn't make sense to me.

But that's just my opinion.

But it was awfully nice of Jim to ask us what we think, and very cool that he makes things like this an open discussion.

-mike

EDIT - I've been thinking about 2Kx1080 as a format recently, and Red shoots 2K @ 1152 or so some-odd pixels tall.

I got a Red spec wrong, in public! Oh, the shame, The Shame!

: )

-mike

[Stephen Webb]

I'm confused. Crop my 2K to 16:9? I hadn't heard that 2K was anything other than 16:9 (unless you know something I don't?)

Why does having 720p and 1080p make the camera any more acceptable? I can't deliver in REDCODE RGB, so I have to convert to something else anyway. Just as easy (and quick) to do that from 2K RAW than 1080p or 720p RGB.

I'm sure there's a huge difference in visible resolution between 2K and 720p. As 720p is the only format I can shoot 120fps on, I'm happy to drop that (useless) in favour of a higher frame rate at 2K.

[redhead]

Crop my 2K to 16:9? I hadn't heard that 2K was anything other than 16:9 (unless you know something I don't?)

Well, let's figure it out. . . . It says in the FAQ: "Furthermore, we know that 2K is 2,048 x 1,304." So, now, it's easy math: 2,048 / 16 = 128. And 128 * 9 = 1,152. So, 2,048 x 1,152 would be 16:9, but 2K is not. If anything, 2,048 x 1,304 is 256:163 (or, if want to compare, roughly 16:10, which is the ratio of a typical widescreen computer monitor).

[Stephen Webb]

I assumed that was a typo (1304 is 2304 with the first digit reduced by one - I can't see a sensible reason for it to be correct) and that 2K is 2048x1152.

[REDHKSC]

I agree with Mike that keep the display screen in 720p and 1080P as most affordable viewings.

How many 2K LCD TVs in large size we can get by now ?

I have no opposition to shoot 4/2K but the 2/4K home display world is not ready but VERY SOON. WHO Knows better than I - In china World Factory .

STEWART



I apologize if some of this has been said before, Paul and Jim hit most of what I already agree with, and I didn't have time to go through all 10 pages of posts

MY MAIN POINTS:

1.) OK everybody, DON'T decide from the math or your gut - lets look at some actual frames to get what the difference is, and THEN decide from there if possible. I don't mean to be creating work for the Red Team or introducing hassles for them, I know they're busy and down to the wire trying to get this done, but I think they'd agree that making informed decisions from actual facts rather than having to guess basedon the math and uninformed (not that they are ignornant, only because they have't seen actual test frames pertinent to this discussion) reader polls is the better way to go.

2.) 720p and 1080p are CRUCIAL to maintain in camera. Broad acceptance will hinge on being able to quickly and easily work with industry standard formats as much as possible - adding too many choices can be a bad thing (Google Steve Jobs' quote on that) - imagine if all your 2K footage needs to be cropped to 16:9 - where to crop? Should I be reframing slightly in post? Do you REALLY want those decisions when you're in a hurry, or would you rather have "just convert it to my NLE codec NOW please" options, or better yet, just native NLE support (in time! Maybe 2008...)

3.) Even in present circumstances, 2Kx1080 isn't broadly supported. Cutting 720p/1080p would be a HUGE mistake in my opinion, if only to gain another 25% frame rate gain at an improved resolution.

4.) Realistic shooting/viewing environments - even if you shot your 2K@96fps perfectly, AND had a 1080p set to watch it on (or, for the other 1% of the jobs that do get filmout of DCI projection), would you rather it be a weensie bit sharper or better slo-mo? Now lets get practical - when shooting, by the time you factor in the glass you can afford, the focus you can pull on a moving subject as you're trying to shoot high speed, and the amount of high frequency detail in that subject matter...how much better sharpness focus do you REALLY think you'll be able to get to differentiate 2K RAW converted to 1080p vs. 2K RAW converted to 720p uprezzed to 1080p?

Now, presuming your viewers are watching your footage on HDTVs (as most Red footage is likely to be), most of those are too small and the viewers sit too far back to optically resolve the full res of the set anyway (if it is even a true 1920x1080 res set - most are 1366x768 pixels or some variant from there) - most viewers can barely see 720p res anyway at home (for next several years, and some kind of Red Two may probably be out by then!). They can eyeball better slo-mo before they can eyeball better resolution. My gut (and again, I'm wide open to changing my mind if I see test frames that convince me otherwise) says that in much the same way that we appreciate/prefer contrast and color before we appreciate/recognize/prefer resolution when seeing an image, that more FPS in a slo-mo shot is better/preferable than a sharper image.

In terms of utility (not sexiness or marketability), keeping 720p/1080p on board makes more sense to me than opting for 2K@96 rather than the current 2K@60fps. Ditching industry standards native on camera for the sake of 61-96 fps in 2K when you already have 120fps 720p? Doesn't make sense to me.

But that's just my opinion.

But it was awfully nice of Jim to ask us what we think, and very cool that he makes things like this an open discussion.

-mike

[PaulClements]

... Why does having 720p and 1080p make the camera any more acceptable? I can't deliver in REDCODE RGB...

Doesn't both Scratch Assimilate and Final Cut Studio (or in future releases) allow for editing of Redcode natively? If so then yes you could shoot 720 or 1080p and hand directly to the client if they used either setup.

If 720p and 1080p are dropped the only Redcode usable by fcs will be 2k RAW by my reckoning. I wonder if this will piss Apple off since they're building it into FCP and such a move certainly removes most of the point of having it native.

[redhead]

I assumed that was a typo

If it is, I hope they correct it. If it is not, I hope they confirm it.

[PaulClements]

I made a resolution chart ages ago and I believe it was Stuart who told me 2k was 2048 x 1152... perhaps something's changed but I sincerely hope not since those sizes make little sense as cropping then becomes an issue when outputting to 720/1080p.

[Rocco Schult]

I agree. 720p? Bah! Gone in a couple years! 1080p? Ummm, I have several of those clients...

We MUST know what the time requirements of RedCine are on a decent computer system or it's all speculation.

YES and
YES.

please. Give us some time estimates.

[Häakon]

Hi, Mike. Nice to have you chime in! Just a couple responses to your main points:



1.) OK everybody, DON'T decide from the math or your gut - lets look at some actual frames to get what the difference is, and THEN decide from there if possible.
I'm sure most would agree with you that viewing actual frames is the only way to make an informed decision. Unfortunately, Jim is asking our opinion about features that may or may not be removed from the camera before it ships - and we most likely won't have a lot of data to play with until LART. By then, it will be too late. So we're just hypothesizing on the information that we do have available to us, trying to make as best an informed decision as possible before the camera is released. There's no question, however, that footage from the RED team would be unbelievably helpful.


2.) 720p and 1080p are CRUCIAL to maintain in camera. Broad acceptance will hinge on being able to quickly and easily work with industry standard formats as much as possible
This has been discussed ad nauseum, and I think there are very good arguments on both sides. Even if the camera doesn't end up offering internal scaling to RGB, it certainly doesn't mean you can't get a 720p deliverable from your 2K/4K sources after a transcode. As someone else pointed out, a REDCODE RGB file may be completely useless to a client right now anyway (meaning a transcode will be necessary regardless). Redquick will help for viewing, which should solve a lot of that problem.

Others have addressed the cropping issue, which (like a lot of things) is still not clarified, so that may or may not be something we have to deal with. If 2K truly isn't 16:9, I would have to agree that shooting windowed becomes an even less compelling option than it already is for me - but I also have to think that it is a typo, and that they wouldn't offer it in a different aspect than every other format in the camera.


3.) Even in present circumstances, 2Kx1080 isn't broadly supported. Cutting 720p/1080p would be a HUGE mistake in my opinion, if only to gain another 25% frame rate gain at an improved resolution.
2K is windowed and 1080p is oversampled from the 4K image... with only a 6% difference between the two formats in terms of overall area, you may find that the 1080p image actually has a better picture. (Less pixels, sure, but more pixels doesn't inherently mean more resolution. I can blow up a 20x20 .jpg to 10MP, and obviously a native 8MP image is going to look better.) Again, we don't really know what the difference will look like - how good the internal scaler is, for instance - but I think there is a misconception that 2K is higher resolution (on paper) than 1080p, so it must be superior. I'm feeling that's probably not the case.

Jim has stated previously that RGB options would not be first available when the camera ships... perhaps they're just getting to working that out now? Maybe it's taking more processing power/FCPGA space than was first expected and it would be advantageous to save that room space for other things - hence the proposal to just drop the RGB formats altogether? Hadn't really thought of that before, but anything's a possibility. I'm hoping the final decision will leave us with the most efficient camera we can get without having to sacrifice options we may need. That may or may not include the RGB formats, depending on what other news comes down the pipeline.

Still, with (a tentative!) 28 days until the camera ships... I would think things will have to get hammered out pretty shortly...

[REDHKSC]

Imagine all the people " Living Life in PEACE "

Imagine there 's no formats

It's easy if yu try....

NO Fights below us, and above us only " RED "

Cheers,

STEWART

[stephenlnoe]

Which one of these threads took over the first one?

[Stephen Webb]

Doesn't both Scratch Assimilate and Final Cut Studio (or in future releases) allow for editing of Redcode natively? If so then yes you could shoot 720 or 1080p and hand directly to the client if they used either setup.

You could, but there'd be no point. You can just as easily deliver it to your client as 2K or 4K REDCODE RAW - they'll have to transcode it for output anyway (either to tape or for broadcast) and it seems having it in RGB 1080 or 720 won't have any significant advantage timewise.

[MikeCurtis]

Paul - my bad! 2Kx1152 is the correct number, I've been fooling around with DCI spec 2Kx1080 over the past several days and that was stuck in my brain. While Scratch and FCP 6.x future version will work with native footage, if you look at the industry overall that is only a small percentage of the market - while future NLE's and post software will hopefully support Red as it (hopefully) becomes an industry standard and (expectantly) a powerhouse, for now, we gots what we gots.

And 2Kxanything is very much a minority format. Gimme 1920x1080 any day of the week - EVERYBODY can handle that.

But newfangled codec at newfangled size? I see that as a potential barrier to native NLE adoption and client acceptance. YES we can and will convert with Redcode, but 1080pRGB is going to be good enough for a lot of folks a lot of the time and they are going to want it for convenience/turnaround reasons...even once native NLE support is here. Think 2 years down the road - I think greater utility will come from 1080p record than from an extra bit of 2K fps. Slo-mo/high speed is an edge case usage to start with. A nifty/sexy one, but an edge case.

-mike

-mike

[MikeCurtis]

Haakon - thanks for the detailed response, and ignore my bad math/errors. My bad.

But 61-96 fps @ 2K is an edge case. 720p from 2K RAW at up to 120 fps is also an edge case, arguably a superior one.

1080p in camera for native NLE support is not.

IMHO.

There! I finally said something briefly.

: )

-mike

[PaulClements]

I think the whole subject is based around awkward clients. Everyone has them and knows exactly what I mean.

There'll be a guy who wants 1080p. Say's to you, why are you using a 4k camera, I only want 1080p, you tell him it'll be scaled using RedCine, he says fine, but I'm not paying for your time to do that when I could hire someone with a 1080p camera to shoot it. Ugh.

Perhaps that means that all those people who want 1080p know all to well about uneducated clients or perhaps they are simply lazy, perhaps either isn't justification for keeping it on the camera.

Maybe Stuart and Jim ought to put us out of our misery and just choose what they are going with. 2k96fps probably makes more sense in the long haul I guess, ditch RGB altogether, though I do believe this opens up a gap for Sony and co. to come along with a "more versatile, modular camera" ugh.

[Simon Blackledge]

perhaps 1080 will come along with the red-mini ?

[Poi Boy]

I don't see how it could be any more versatile than shoot 4kraw and output any format that exists. That is the holy grail !
Aloha
-A

[Poi Boy]

Haakon - thanks for the detailed response, and ignore my bad math/errors. My bad.

But 61-96 fps @ 2K is an edge case. 720p from 2K RAW at up to 120 fps is also an edge case, arguably a superior one.

1080p in camera for native NLE support is not.

IMHO.

There! I finally said something briefly.

: )

-mike

720 @120 is windowed rgb and I would bet not as good as 2k96 raw.
-A

[Costelloe Michael]

Poi Boy,

So you're keen on 2k @ 96?

Still? ; )

[Michael Ragen]

Can we assume that a 2k raw frame at 7MB/sec will look exactly like a 2k crop taken out of one of the posted 4k Redcode Raw 27MB/sec samples? Of course disregarding the added Jpeg compression for web posting.

[Poi Boy]

Poi Boy,

So you're keen on 2k @ 96?

Still? ; )

For my use I don't hand off footage right after a shoot so I don't really have any use for 720 or 1080 in camera. I will shoot 4kraw and output whatever the project requires. as for 2k96, yes I prefer that to 720@120.
Aloha
-A

[SalaTar]

I havnt seen this question asked yet but...
Could RED just alllow you to load the settings you want on camera from a laptop.
Make a Place on RED users could log into and get latest "firmware" for the setting you need for the shoot and "flash" the camera.
Also in this area you could make a "custom settings" from users that could be loaded to the camera, adding nice presets...

May be off my rocker but seems that it could work ..in time

[Peter McCully]

For my use I don't hand off footage right after a shoot so I don't really have any use for 720 or 1080 in camera. I will shoot 4kraw and output whatever the project requires. as for 2k96, yes I prefer that to 720@120.
Aloha
-A

I'm tending to go with that side too. If it's a cinema camera, let's use it like that. A digital negative that can be divied up as required - for iPhone if it comes to it! But what we are capturing is a high quality, pristine, CINEMA image.

[Steven Parker]

I don't see how it could be any more versatile than shoot 4kraw and output any format that exists. That is the holy grail !
Aloha
-A

It is indeed the holy grail. I LOVE 4K-to-anything. But the time, man, the time! We don't know how much time 4K-to-anything will take... there's a real potential for losing a few bread&butter clients if it takes too long or is somehow off-putting to them...

I don't know anymore. Scaled vs cropped, RGB vs RAW, 1080@60 vs 2K@96... my brain is down-rezzing - I think I'm working off 1K of proxy synapses!:wacko:

[Poi Boy]

I'm not sure how long it will take but no matter what flavor you shoot you have to do some converting. I don't think it will be that long and for sure the quality will be worth the wait , clients will see that.
For those that don't, keep your hvx handy.
Aloha
-A

[Casey Green]

For my use I don't hand off footage right after a shoot so I don't really have any use for 720 or 1080 in camera. I will shoot 4kraw and output whatever the project requires. as for 2k96, yes I prefer that to 720@120...

...I'm not sure how long it will take but no matter what flavor you shoot you have to do some converting. I don't think it will be that long and for sure the quality will be worth the wait , clients will see that.
For those that don't, keep your hvx handy.
Aloha
-A

This is a good argument for you and if the RED was built solely for the Feature Film Market, but that is not the case as is mentioned once again from Jim today:



We are not trying to exclude the ENG shooter. We have a B4 adaptor to PL mount (although we do not have many orders for that accessory yet), along with a B4 connector on the right side of the camera. We have successfully tested that the run/stop on a B4 lens does in fact... start recording. :-) And the B4 adaptor enlarges the image to 2K size. It does quite a good job.

So one fact to begin with is that a B4 lens is native to 2K in our camera and not 1080P.

There is no data rate saving shooting 1080P RGB over 2K REDCODE RAW, while there is a considerable difference in image quality and "elasticity" of the images.

One little known fact is with REDQUICK (our mini app) you can instantly put a Quicktime wrapper on REDCODE RAW files to immediately view as a Quicktime movie. There is no transcode time to do this. It is truly instantaneous.

We fully acknowledge the importance of ENG uses of RED ONE. We just want to make sure we deliver what is needed, not just what is asked for.

This is a healthy discussion that we are watching closely.

-Jim



I believe you have stated your reasons from your perspective very well. But that does not mean there are other viewpoints from other types of business models that are not valid here.

Personally, I fall in the middle. Some productions I would want to have the quick turn around, and full Sensor Area, and am in that camp, and for other projects, I would love to increase the 2K and 4K capabilities.

That is why I am still asking about what is possible with Firmware changes by the end user. If this is not possible, I'll have to think about it some more...

Please, RED, let us know if this is possible? :blink:

[Paul Hazlett]

I don't see how it could be any more versatile than shoot 4kraw and output any format that exists. That is the holy grail !
Aloha
-A

Some clients, the bread and butter ones, are now going to be asked to do
color correction as well from shot to shot....tick tick tick...I know for a fact that the majority of broadcast does not have a heavy wieight cc process.
not all, but most.