Why shoot 2K?

[Rick Darge]

What's the reason behind shooting 2K as opposed to just going down a little bit to 1080P?

[Corrado Silveri]

Question of standard.
2K is used mostly in cinema (Cineon sequence, etc).
1080p is an HD/Video format.

[Jannard]

The future is 4K and 2K. And better quality to shoot 2K RAW (digital negative) and down-rez to 1080P in REDCINE. You can shoot 1080P RGB if you like, but you lose the power of RAW.

Jim

[Stuart English]

Even if you are outputting 1080p / i shooting 2K lets you reframe a shot.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

It could be argued that 2k RedCodeRAW into RedCine output as a "one-light" to 1080p is the most efficent workflow currently offered. It won't create as valuable an asset as creating a 4k DCN but it reduces complexity and cost.

[Don Woods]

Always better to go bigger and scale down. sucks to have to do it the other way. And 2k vs 4k will be for the recording time... And for projects that are just going to be for HD

[Rick Darge]

I sure hope FCP allows us to edit in 2k and 4k at a reasonable cost -

Maybe that's why they have so much floor space at NAB....FCP 6?

[Don Woods]

they always have ton of floor space. But we will see some cool stuff. And if I rember right someone did say you can edit 2K right now in FCP but I could be wrong.

[Michael Schrengohst]

I sure hope FCP allows us to edit in 2k and 4k at a reasonable cost -

Maybe that's why they have so much floor space at NAB....FCP 6?

I don't think the RED team would be working so hard and not have some kind of deal in place to edit RED footage. You could edit footage in After Effects but that would not be much fun. Plus how is anyone going to afford a 4K monitor??

[Brook Willard]

There may be 2K and 4K editing, but most will still go to an offline format... say 720p. It just makes more sense with current systems and workflows.

Maybe there's some big RED/Apple collaboration that we don't know about. Maybe there's nothing. No way to know.

[MikeCurtis]

Jim beat me to it - yeah, shooting RAW 2K gives you increased recording times over 1080 RGB, and you can reposition if you want to as well - although with what tool and where exactly in the process may be a bit cumbersome (AFAIK Redcine will allow this, but in a fixed, not animatable position - you could always take source frame into AE or similar and animate repo in there).

2K RAW is substantially smaller smaller file size than 1080 RGB. 4K RGB is bigger, but not hugely, than 1080p RGB. Personally, I'd most prefer to shoot 4K RAW to generate an ultra clean 1080p for delivery.

4K acquisition for the following deliverables makes a lot of sense to me:
-4096x3112 (traditional anamorphic 4K digital, will be uprezzing slightly from Redcode RAW master)
-4096x2160 (DCI spec digital master)
-2048x1556 (traditional anamorphic 2K)
-2048x1080 (DCI spec 2K digital projection master)
-1920x1080 HD master
-1280x720 HD master
-720x480 anamorphic or letterboxed SD master (or PAL equivalent)

Yo Graeme/Stuart/somebody - if one were to Redcine to anamorphic traditional 2K/4K sizes, could those files be handed off to folks working as if from film scans, or would there be optical anomalies incurred stemming from spherical vs anamorphic lens acquisition? Or should there be some lens type distortion/correction going on in there somewhere?

Note that DCI spec 2K is only slightly larger than 1080p master - there's a lot of marketing spin around the phrase "2K"

Traditionally, saying 2K implied shot on film, and scanned at 10 bits/channel log at 2048x1556 (sometimes 1536) pixel resolution.

This was more info and better highlight detail/reproduction than traditional HD, which was 1920x1080 and 4:2:2 color sampling (often only 3:1:1 if on HDCAM, and 1440x1080 to boot).

BUT...if you're shooting with Red, it is no problem to generate a 4:4:4 master at 1080p resolution.

Considering that a Spirit with the 2K upgrade board is basically sampling 1080 lines and just scaling it up to 1556 pixels tall, the difference between 2K and HD can be not that much.

Considering that it is now possible to get film material transferred at 1920x1080 at 10 bit log, HD can be pretty damn good. (Wait, I'm getting off track here, hang on, coming back to point.)

So if you shoot Red at 2K or 4K RAW, even with the arguably lesser sampling resolution due to Bayer pattern (arguably around 1.4 multiplier, so 4K RAW is circa 3K "real" pixels resolution) and 2K RAW yielding around 1.4K "real" 4:4:4 res (still exceeding HDCAM's 1440X1080 4:1:1 res & sampling, still at a fraction of the price), you STILL are getting some really solid actual resolution out of the system.

2K RAW will make sense if you have 16mm lenses, OR want that depth of field behavior, OR want longer record times, OR want to shoot at higher frame rates.

4K RAW will make sense if you want the Super35mm depth of field, AND/OR want best possible image quality...even for your HD destined projects.

Don't forget, at present 2K (be it 1080 DCI spec of 1556 traditional 2K res) can be more unwieldy to work with, although both AJA and BlackMagic have added presets to work with those resolutions. Does Avid? I don't THINK so, but anybody who knows better please correct me. Does Premiere Pro 2? I think that is possible, but I don't know offhand - anybody else chip in here.

As I said in another thread the other day, for those willing, skilled, and able it'll be possible to generate 2K & 4K masters, even from desktop based systems (provided you have a 3D LUT & suitable monitoring solution, plenty of storage and know-how, etc., large caveats), but producing a really nice, sharp, clean 1080p 10 bit HD master will be pretty straightforward, even with today's existing & affordable gear.

Actually, that'd be a pretty fun goal - to be the first desktop based 4K mastered movie...

That's my three cents, anyway.

-mike

[MikeCurtis]

...and for those looking to future proof - what if you produced a nice HD master for now, and just made sure your production pipeline was amenable to relinking to higher res source to recook/re-render to 2K/4K master should it ever be necessary?

Screen in HD at Sundance/SXSW/Toronto/wherever, then worry about other formats when/if you need to produce them...

[SF Geek]

I have to agree with Richard on this post. It seems that besides the increased max framerate and the smaller record size unless you're going for a deeper depth of field, there isn't a reason to shoot 2k RAW. The resolution would be worse and you would loose your 35mm framing and DOF. Sure 1080 is less than 2k, but not by much. We're still not sure of the quality of a 2K windowed image. We haven't been shown one. I'm not trying to be negative here, I'm just being honest. I have already seen 4k downsampled to 1080 and it looks great. I wouldn't sacrifice that for a little more recording time.

As of now it's 4K Redcode Raw to 1080p or straight to 1080 out of the SDI port to an HD Cam deck for commercial work.

[Hrvoje Simic]

That's my three cents, anyway.

-mike

pretty valuable three cents...

[MikeCurtis]

SF Geek - careful with that analysis - the 1080 res is derived from 2K or 4K (depending on lens/sensor windowing) - so 1080 res (derived from 4K RAW) could easily have more "real" resolution than 2K RAW or 1080p RGB derived from 2K RAW.

Last $0.005.

-mike

[Emanuel A.]

The 1080 RGB will be the most wise option. Since we can go with the RED CODE for slowmotion purposes (60 fps) from the 35mm sensor size (around 9.4 megapixels) getting the 400% more than 2K size sensor (similar to the 16mm size).

Beyond that 90%-95% or still more (definitely... -- this is not hollywood! I mean: achieving the cinematic effect is avoiding the blackmail :D), 4K will be my way. The recording savings at 2K don't mean nothing when you have the future proof and the theatrical release as your main goal.

[Stokestack]

I have to agree with Richard on this post. It seems that besides the increased max framerate and the smaller record size unless you're going for a deeper depth of field, there isn't a reason to shoot 2k RAW. The resolution would be worse and you would loose your 35mm framing and DOF.

That seems to be the biggest limitation of the Red's 2K, which may vex those people who want to save storage space, don't need 4K, but still want the DOF and 35mm framing. If you want those things, it looks like your only option is downscaled RGB at 1080P, right? I don't remember, and some of the cells in the format chart on the Red site are empty.

I assumed that's the cost of 2K mode recording a windowed section of the sensor as raw data. But is it not possible to "resample" raw data, blending data from corresponding photosites across the whole sensor to create a smaller rectangle that still retains the full latitude of the raw data?

[donatello b]

we'll have to wait to see how 2k & 4k intercut to both output of 2k & 4k ..
but i could see shooting both 4k & 2k in same project ..
there could be shots or scenes that i would want the S16 DoF - and other times 35mm DoF - maybe this will work best if the final output is 2k ???

it will all have to be tested
1)intercutting S16 primes ( recording 2k) and 35m lens ( recording 4k)..
2) 35m lens shooting both 2k & 4K ...
perhaps intercutting will stand out ? and shooting whole scene with one or the other ( not intercutting 2k & 4k ) will work best???
we have alot of testing to do when RED arrives ...

[Nick Shaw]

We're still not sure of the quality of a 2K windowed image. We haven't been shown one.

We may not have been specifically shown a 2k windowed image, but it's pretty easy to generate one yourself. Take any one of the released 4k images (preferably an un-compressed TIFF from David Stump's shoot – available on CML) and crop it yourself in Photoshop. It looks pretty good to me!

There is no 'right' way to do things. You just need to choose on a per project, or even per shot, basis what is most appropriate for what you are trying to achieve. I'm sure 4k and 2k will intercut fine in a 2k or HD master, and even 720p shot at 120fps would not be particularly noticeable if the important thing was a smooth slow-mo. If finishing at 4k, maybe 2k and 720p inserts would be noticeable, but how many of us are likely to need a 4k finish in the near future? Besides, if 2k windowed is the only way to achieve the shot you need, for reasons of DoF or frame-rate, then the compromise is necessary. Compromises are always necessary.

My 2 penneth.

Nick

[REDHKSC]

Forget about 1080i or P Camera Capture and JVC 's 720P + 16mm PLs are the only affordable alternative choice to RED One camera for Super-Valued Tape based Format ( Mini DVTape costs only 6 USD per 11GB for 24P 1280x 720 at 19.7Mb/s just for 6 GOP ) So the picture element density per second is greater than 1080i )

JVC will have a 2K super - valued projector to blew us away at home for the 120 -150" Screen. Many 4As agency will love it though !!!

http://web.mac.com/timdashwood/iWeb/sundance/HZ-CA13U_Test.html

Just got my own 1 penny from Home Kinghom ( Hong Kong )

Stewart

[REDHKSC]

Besides 2K or 4K D-Cinemas, don't forget the huge market like IPTV and Mobile TV which is lower than 1080 or even 720P in a viewable Screen with our Boby !!! Remember the RED's Statement " 4K to anything " is a change is gonna come.............

Stewart

[Steve Gibby]

Being a creative indie is fine and necessary. Being a fiscally-aware indie is the other side of the success paradigm. I think wisdom dictates shooting in the highest resolution possible - then leveraging that footage downward and outward to as many revenue streams as possible. "Future-proofing" and "long legs" should be integral parts of your business plan looking forward.

Right brain creativity + left brain business sense = a larger percentage chance of fiscal success

[REDHKSC]

Agreed, let's all RED One users Come Together - John Lennon ( RIP )

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Because RedCine can output 1080p for post from either 2k or 4k I am planning to shoot 4k for the reasons Gibby mentions. I think the investment in more storage space for 4k over 2k is worth it for the upside down the road. I would only suggest 2k if your budget is stretched tight.

[Joe Carney]

The cost of that jvc kit Tim Dashwood was using puts it the ballpark of a
SI2K, plus the SI2K gives you 10bit color, lut in camera and uses S16mm lenses.
And for less than 10K more you are in RED territory.

If you already have one of the JVC HD cams, then it's a different story.

[Hans von Sonntag]

we'll have to wait to see how 2k & 4k intercut to both output of 2k & 4k ..
but i could see shooting both 4k & 2k in same project ..
there could be shots or scenes that i would want the S16 DoF - and other times 35mm DoF - maybe this will work best if the final output is 2k ???

it will all have to be tested
1)intercutting S16 primes ( recording 2k) and 35m lens ( recording 4k)..
2) 35m lens shooting both 2k & 4K ...
perhaps intercutting will stand out ? and shooting whole scene with one or the other ( not intercutting 2k & 4k ) will work best???
we have alot of testing to do when RED arrives ...

A question I was also thinking about... But then it all comes down to lenses. The lens gives the picture its very own look and feel. A Cooke MK2/Mk3 Zoom with its unique warm soft feel will not intercut smoothly with the cool crystal-like sharpness Zeiss Primes deliver. A downrez from 4k to 2k will affect the picture not as much (if at all) as lenses do. I guess it will be much more like mixing a faster filmstock with a slightly slower one which mostly works fine, too subtle is the difference.

my 0.5 cent

Hans

[Michael Hastings]

Jim and others: I'm wondering if this thread is misreading the intent of the question. It seems that the answers assume wanting to output 1080p, however my issue is only to use 1080p as a method of getting higher frame rates with the same frame size as when I shoot 4K REDCODE because as I read the charts Emanuel's comment is incorrect - REDCODE only does 30 fps (RED 4K raw does 60fps but seems like field recording of raw is an issue).

In other words I think I want to normally shoot 4K REDCODE and if I need 60 frame slo mo, then shoot 1080P and uprez it to 4K in post and hope it isn't too noticeable, similar to mixing high speed and regular speed stocks.

My background is essentially a video guy (with pretty in depth knowledge of issues involved in colorimetry and tonal quality in video cameras) with just a little film experience. My interest in RED is twofold 1) to get that 4K resolution, since the underwater material I shoot is somewhat timeless - but it has been really annoying to realize that, as we move into the extended definition era, everything I ever shot is technologically obsolete. So I am hoping to leapfrog a generation with 4K material. 2) is to get into the more filmic look, and as such I would like to figure the practical aspects of working in different modes.

So how does it look if you shoot regular motion 4K Redcode and mix it with 1080p or 2K slow motion?


The future is 4K and 2K. And better quality to shoot 2K RAW (digital negative) and down-rez to 1080P in REDCINE. You can shoot 1080P RGB if you like, but you lose the power of RAW.

Jim


The 1080 RGB will be the most wise option. Since we can go with the RED CODE for slowmotion purposes (60 fps) from the 35mm sensor size (around 9.4 megapixels) getting the 400% more than 2K size sensor (similar to the 16mm size).

[Rogelio Salinas]

In other words I think I want to normally shoot 4K REDCODE and if I need 60 frame slo mo, then shoot 1080P and uprez it to 4K in post and hope it isn't too noticeable, similar to mixing high speed and regular speed stocks.

So how does it look if you shoot regular motion 4K Redcode and mix it with 1080p or 2K slow motion?

I was thinking about shooting in 4K for all the 24P footage and 60P in either
2K or 1080P, but 35mm DOF and the difference in picture quality between 4K and 2K/1080P was also a concern. There will most likely be a difference in the quality, but I don't think it will make too much of a difference unless it is shown in 4K. If 4K 60P was offered without the need for a RAID, then I would shoot everything 4K and downrez it from there. I'm still praying that Jim and the RED crew will surprise us, once again, when the camera is finally released.

[Jannard]

We will surprise you... or we haven't done our job.

Jim

[IAN SUN]

We will surprise you... or we haven't done our job.

Jim

I like surprises, 4K @ 60p would surprise the heck out of me!

[Rogelio Salinas]

We will surprise you... or we haven't done our job.

Jim

Classic Showman. Always leave them wanting more. I know that we are all eagerly awaiting these surprises, we'll find out next month.

[Emmanuel Cambier]

We will surprise you... or we haven't done our job.

Jim

What a teaser (and a genius) this man is…
I believe that after NAB it's gonna get real tuff not to become a fanboy:greedy:

Emmanuel

[JD Holloway]

I hate being kept in the dark.

Some new high speed module using off-the-shelf computer RAM a-la Phantom system would be nice. Super-nice if the adapter module was field mountable and didn't cost more then a grand!

J

[Tom Lowe]

I like surprises, 4K @ 60p would surprise the heck out of me!

Word.

[JD Holloway]

Word.

I concur. It's the weakest link in an otherwise incredible system.

Why shoot 2k when you own a 4k camera?

I have a need for speed!

J.

[Scott Webster]

Stupid question. When you quote 4K RAW and 2K RAW I ass-u-me you mean 4K and 2K 'REDCODE RAW'? Is RAW reduser shorthand for REDCODE?