Red Facts

[K Brown]

I did a search for this article, but couldn't find it, so (hopefully) this isn't a repeat.

Interesting opinions....

http://www.rcjohnso.com/REDFACTS.html

[Peter Hodgins]

I guess we'll just have to view stories recorded by these different approaches and see what we like.

[Stephen Gentle]

One problem with this article is that he talks about RED's effective resolution as being about 3.2K (which is true), but then says that the high end cameras have an effective resolution of 1.9K (or 1920x1080, although it should be 1.87K). This is not correct unless these cameras oversample a lot (which the Genesis kind of does, but in a different way), because they, like RED, also lose resolution from having optical filtering...

Also, the article acts like RED is worse because it has a single sensor (thus not having three photosites for each pixel) but the Genesis doesn't either... It does have a different pattern to RED's sensors, but the end result is pretty much the same as if you downscaled RED footage to 1080p...

He kind of rambles about resolution, bit depth, data rates and so on for a long time, making some, well, 'interesting' comparisons along the way, and then will randomly say that the numbers don't matter and that the other cameras are just better without any evidence. Such as in the compression section for example, they say that HDCAM's MPEG compression is "as good as it gets" while trashing REDCODE without any details as to what resolution, data rate or anything they were using was - they just say that there were 'artefacts'. If we're going to disregard all the numbers and just go on visual comparisons, then we really need images to actually compare against!

He does make a few good points, but I don't really see it as a very good comparison...

[Stephen Gentle]

I actually love this bit:

(they often use the word "wavelet," which is supposed to prove that their compression, not just their vocabulary, is better)

Maybe they could gain some credibility by actually bothering to find out what wavelet compression is, which might let them actually fairly compare them...

[Jordi Figueras]

Can someone help me with this article, please?
It's called "RedFacts" but I haven't find almost any fact in there, just an opinion that tries to imply that everything anyone would like to say to refute it is wrong...
Didn't like it and didn't understood why does that even exist. There are a bunch of other writings comparing the Red One with other cameras in a negative way, but they, at least, have facts and tests in them...

[Patrick Tresch]

I did a search for this article, but couldn't find it, so (hopefully) this isn't a repeat.

Interesting opinions....

http://www.rcjohnso.com/REDFACTS.html

I guess this article will make history because it's how RED ONE was percieved early 2008 by the RED naysayers in Europe (that RED early adopters had to fight against).

This fact sheet is the best compilation of biased anti-RED propaganda... they make it sound like it was based on some facts.

Take what you see on the screen as your best juge!

Patrick

[Michael Hastings]

One problem with this article is that he talks about RED's effective resolution as being about 3.2K (which is true), but then says that the high end cameras have an effective resolution of 1.9K (or 1920x1080, although it should be 1.87K). This is not correct unless these cameras oversample a lot (which the Genesis kind of does, but in a different way), because they, like RED, also lose resolution from having optical filtering...

It isn't optical filtering that gives 3.2K it is using a bayer mask sensor and reconstructing the whole image through algorithmic interpolation.

[Patrick Tresch]

It isn't optical filtering that gives 3.2K it is using a bayer mask sensor and reconstructing the whole image through algorithmic interpolation.

Isn't the calculation based on the whole system: Bayer pattern, OLFP and compression?

Pat

[Michael Hastings]

Isn't the calculation based on the whole system: Bayer pattern, OLFP and compression?

Pat

Yes, and no - obviously if you were to choose the OLPF and compression with lower resolution than your sensor/bayer pattern can deliver they would determine maximum resolution. But it would be kind of stupid to do that. AFAIK you choose an OLPF with a little higher pass through than your sensor res to eliminate problems from resolution/detail you can't use.