Michael Hastings
08-03-2007, 11:16 AM
I think the issue of 1080P full sensor/high frame rates is the key issue as to why we don't want the 2K only option. That is, we have been told the FPGA can't hold the program for both 1080RGB and 2K high frame rates at once. 1080P full sensor/high frame rates is very important so it seems the logical answer is to allow different camera setups via flash updates. I and several others have asked whether this is possible but if it has been finally answered I missed, hence the thread.
I think it's the faster framerate he is after, not the reduction in data size.
Of course RGB is hugely inefficient when we've got RAW, and it's obvious that Jim and the rest of the team are really trying to emphasize how much better the image can be when it's shot RAW. I trust their judgement, and believe they will make the best choices for the camera. Still, it doesn't fix the problem of higher framerates from the full sensor. It's clear that this issue is important to a lot of users and I think that's what Emanuel was trying to hit on.
Haakon is right on point here. Like many here I initially voted for the 4K @ 96fps option because for my own stuff (primarily documentary and underwater, but have a feature idea as well) I only want to shoot 4K and would only go to 2K for high frame rate.
Keeping the ability to use the full sensor is critical. Second is the competition issue. The truth is the F900 is the most used/rented of the High Def supercams (i.e. not HDV/xdcam/HVX) with the Varicam next in line. To compete for those rentals it will be an easier sell if we can say: "Oh sure, it does 1080P like the F900 - and higher frame rates as well. I think 1080P is fine for the would have rented a Varicam crowd - since we have all the variable frame rate stuff too, so 720P could be eliminated.
Since it appears that it is either 2K high speed or 1080P but not both as far as the FPGA program space, the ideal would be to be able to flash update in the field to switch from a camera that has 4K and 2K 100fps to one that has 4K and 1080P. This should be able to be done with the same procedure that you use to do firmware updates. There may be some greater risk of getting locked up during an update if you are doing this constantly, but most users wouldn't need to do it that often.
But to leave out 1080P altogether probably devalues the camera a bit IMHO.
It seems to me that since RGB is something completely different from the raw, and I think we were told 1080p RGB would be one of the last features enabled, so maybe 2K 96 fps is a quicker development. If that is the case why not put 2K out right away, keep working on the 1080P RGB and when it is ready realase it as an update that can be used instead of 2K and allow us to flash update to create the camera we need most often, and we could go back and forth occasionally if one is more suitable than the other.
Could someone on the RED team settle the issue of flash updates to make either camera possible?
I think it's the faster framerate he is after, not the reduction in data size.
Of course RGB is hugely inefficient when we've got RAW, and it's obvious that Jim and the rest of the team are really trying to emphasize how much better the image can be when it's shot RAW. I trust their judgement, and believe they will make the best choices for the camera. Still, it doesn't fix the problem of higher framerates from the full sensor. It's clear that this issue is important to a lot of users and I think that's what Emanuel was trying to hit on.
Haakon is right on point here. Like many here I initially voted for the 4K @ 96fps option because for my own stuff (primarily documentary and underwater, but have a feature idea as well) I only want to shoot 4K and would only go to 2K for high frame rate.
Keeping the ability to use the full sensor is critical. Second is the competition issue. The truth is the F900 is the most used/rented of the High Def supercams (i.e. not HDV/xdcam/HVX) with the Varicam next in line. To compete for those rentals it will be an easier sell if we can say: "Oh sure, it does 1080P like the F900 - and higher frame rates as well. I think 1080P is fine for the would have rented a Varicam crowd - since we have all the variable frame rate stuff too, so 720P could be eliminated.
Since it appears that it is either 2K high speed or 1080P but not both as far as the FPGA program space, the ideal would be to be able to flash update in the field to switch from a camera that has 4K and 2K 100fps to one that has 4K and 1080P. This should be able to be done with the same procedure that you use to do firmware updates. There may be some greater risk of getting locked up during an update if you are doing this constantly, but most users wouldn't need to do it that often.
But to leave out 1080P altogether probably devalues the camera a bit IMHO.
It seems to me that since RGB is something completely different from the raw, and I think we were told 1080p RGB would be one of the last features enabled, so maybe 2K 96 fps is a quicker development. If that is the case why not put 2K out right away, keep working on the 1080P RGB and when it is ready realase it as an update that can be used instead of 2K and allow us to flash update to create the camera we need most often, and we could go back and forth occasionally if one is more suitable than the other.
Could someone on the RED team settle the issue of flash updates to make either camera possible?