Red Ray instead of Blu-Ray?

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Just throwing a question out here:

I'm still on an old widescreen CRT with a great image. An older DVD player, and a nice DVD collection.

I know at one point in time I will have to update to an HDTV.
I don't have a problem with that.

I'm not so sure of Blu-Ray though...
I don't know if it's smart to invest in a new optical format at this point. In Belgium, most people still are on DVD, so the format will probably completely break trough in a year or so. But is it wise to invest in an optical format, when the future may lie in solid state media?

I don't have a problem with investing in Blu-Ray (although I'm not a particular big fan of the format, not because of technical reasons, but the way Sony handles its consumers with the format) if the next future format is 10 years away. But if we're talking about a good breaktrough in RED RAY or another format in 3 years or so, it seems stupid to invest in a whole new format. (points to the HD-DVD people)

I know RED Ray isn't there yet, and RED completely isn't in the consumer-space. But if my current set would be broken, at one point in the future, I want to think about bying into highly properiatary media which is maybe dead in a couple of years again. (RED RAY works with Drives and normal DVD's, right?)
I know you can't spend forever waiting for the next big thing, but just not completely fond of Blu-Ray - although I realise that technically, it's one of the best consumer HD formats at this point.

[Tim Hole]

Don't wait around for RED RAY as a consumer format. Blu-ray is taking far too long to standardise. I think Blu-Ray is starting to come into its own but its very slow. What annoys the crap out of me even more is that the people who should be Blu-ray standard by now aren't. I'm talking about festival screeners. Hardly anyone accepts blu-ray which is to me ridulous considering the speed the industry is moving.

In short blu-ray is not going anyway fast. I might go further and say it could even be the last for a long time. I think digital implementation will become so much of a standard that a replacement for blu-ray will be even slower.

I love actually having physical discs and shelves to glance over whilst deciding what to watch. I enjoy collecting them, in the same way I still collect vinyl. But digital will be the norm in the not too distant future me thinks.

[Gunleik Groven]

I have ONE BR disc.

I have a lot of 1080 and some 4k masters...

I have quite a few 1080/2k deliverables. Not on physical media, though.

With the bandwith RED is hinting at (at the moment) BR will not be very nice to collect.

I like PS3, though...

[Alexander Ibrahim]

RED Ray?

I think its an awesome technology. I suspect it could become the poor mans DCP.

But for movie watching at home?

I think you go with BluRay.

The picture quality is phenomenal. A lot of the films you can get on BluRay haven't looked that good since their theatrical runs.

And it is a LOT of films.

Why not wait for RED Ray?

It will be a cold day in hell before Sony pictures signs on to RED Ray. I think they'll ride BluRay until its plainly outdated... then they'll try to make their own format. They certainly aren't interested in using a format developed by someone who's eating their lunch in cameras.

As to the others... RED Ray requires a lot of upgrading to the finishing standards of their back catalog, plus ongoing investment in 4K they may not want to make for all their films.

Also, a great deal of material shot and finished for TV in the old SD days will never transition to 1080p very well... forget 4K. There are very few exceptions. The original Star Trek series would get remastered from new film scans for example, but even Star Trek requires new digital assets, compositing and lots of other new post. The BluRay version will be THE version for a long while.

I think BluRay may be the last physical media format, and I think it will be a while before digital downloads match, much less surpass, the quality of that medium.

It really is phenomenal. Comparing The Fifth Element BluRay to broadcast HD is eye opening. The BluRay makes the HD broadcast look pitiful. The HD broadcast in turn makes the DVD (even the Superbit editions) look pale and wan.

It isn't perfect, and frankly I'd love to see movies like 2001 remastered for 4K RED Ray.

I'm just not optimistic that that will ever happen. At least not before they fall into the public domain.

[Stuart English]

RED RAY? I think its an awesome technology. I suspect it could become the poor mans DCP. But for movie watching at home? I think you go with BluRay.The picture quality is phenomenal. A lot of the films you can get on BluRay haven't looked that good since their theatrical runs.

Unfortunately despite the high bit rate, actual Blu-ray image quality is about as phenomenal as a prosumer 1080p camcorder's is v's 4K RED ONE .R3D's

There is just NO comparison on image quality, and the bigger the screen the more obvious that is - RED RAY delivers true colors, resolution, dynamic range...

I accept Blu-ray has an installed base and is not likely to go away, but I for one would not purchase a system having seen RED RAY images. Just no way.

[Chuck Z]

What does dynamic range have to do with anything?

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Unfortunately despite the high bit rate, actual Blu-ray image quality is about as phenomenal as a prosumer 1080p camcorder's is v's 4K RED ONE .R3D's

There is just NO comparison on image quality, and the bigger the screen the more obvious that is - RED RAY delivers true colors, resolution, dynamic range...

I accept Blu-ray has an installed base and is not likely to go away, but I for one would not purchase a system having seen RED RAY images. Just no way.

See... I wrote too much again and obscured my point.

I haven't seen the RED Ray tech, but I think its so good on paper, that it could become a low end replacement for DCP. I'll go further and say that it will probably become an important tool for film makers.

It will cost studios a lot to take advantage of RED Ray with their legacy media.

At least one powerful studio is harming their own pocketbook by not using BluRay.

So, expanding and amplifying...

The context of this question is watching movies in the home.

What .r3d, or any professional format, can do is immaterial.

Most consumers don't have displays that can maximize the content on their BluRay discs. A better format is completely pointless for them until the display technology is markedly improved.

RED Ray is as useful to the owner of a brand new HDTV as BluRay itself is to an owner of a 1989 TV.

I'd be happy to see consumer HDTV's that can outperform BluRay, but I won't hold my breath.

I'd also love to see RED Ray gain wide acceptance as a consumer distribution format. Again, I'm not holding my breath.

Of course, even if you deliver 4K displays and RED Ray, most people won't notice the difference or may not care. Very few people care about images as much as we do.

[Michel Hafner]

I accept Blu-ray has an installed base and is not likely to go away, but I for one would not purchase a system having seen RED RAY images. Just no way.

As long as the full Blu Ray catalogue is not coming to Red Ray there is no alternative and competition here for cinephiles. No films, no sales.

[Gunleik Groven]

Thing is...

If RED has got the catalogues for webdistribution, then I guess there is a case here.

If not, whoever comes up with a good webdistribution codec and model will get it.

There are two natural suspects:

Sony with its ps3 installed base and Apple/iTunes.

Both have the hardware and distribution model in place. All they lack is the codec and the catalogue.

As it seems like Red and Sony are not really working against eachother anymore, both are not impossible... Maybe...

[Stuart English]

See... I wrote too much again and obscured my point.

No it's a good point, I'm just offering a counterpoint.

Good debate.

[Steven Caesare]

BR decks are less that $100 these days.

You simply get one along with your HDTV. Not because RedRay won't be better, but because transition takes some time, and the cost for entry in the mean time so low, why not?

Add a RedRay deck when they becom avaialable.

-sc

[David Rasberry]

I just recently upgraded to a Blu-ray player at home. The image quality is certainly a huge step up from DVD. But I don't think it will achieve the consumer market acceptance that DVD did due to a little four letter acronym: DHCP. It gives the media conglomerates unprecedented control over how and under what conditions they will allow you to view their content, including whether a disc will play at all on your system.
Some examples:
The component analog output of my new Panasonic Blu-ray is DHCP restricted to 480p output. Some restrict analog to 720p, but 1080p is not available at all on any current player via the analog output. For some discs the analog output may be disabled altogether. One has to connect via HDMI to a properly licensed display to get 1080p.
This is not much of an issue for single display home use, but it greatly complicates commercial system integration where multiple displays may be used, like sports bars for instance. Even in digital mode, the number of displays a disc will show on simultaneously may be restricted to one or two.
Over the years I have added a lot to my DVD collection buying remaindered discs from the rental stores. But Blu-rays distributed for rental often have a restricted number of plays authorized, so there is no point in buying them for a collection. You will have to buy the retail sale version.
You can back up your DVD collection to a home video server with little difficulty, something that is legal under fair use. This may not be possible on a disc by disc basis with Blu-ray depending on disc authorizations, except for recapturing the reduced quality version via the analog output.
The media conglomerates are doing their best to gain absolute control over everything you see via normal consumer media distribution outlets.

Aside from issues of image quality, my hope for something like the Red-ray codec is an alternative open market for both content creators and consumers via the creative commons GPL. Otherwise both content creation and audience access will be stifled in the future.

[Meryem Ersoz]

The biggest problem with Blu-Ray has been Sony's ineffectual sales and distribution of the medium - with all of the flavors of HD cameras out there, this should have been a frickin no-brainer, but instead Sony's POS distribution pipeline and sales of end user machines has been one of the WORST contributors to the "good enough" mentality. They should have priced these machines to move into every home in the world, and instead that opportunity was completely missed.

They taught the end user to settle for watching SD DVDs on their HDTV - the vast majority of consumers are still settling. Big fat missed opportunity there. Great opportunity for Apple and Netflix to kick portable media to the curb.

I hope RED has some sort of program in mind for making this a ubiquitious delivery system, rather than a niche product for its camera base of content providers. They need to work both ends of the food chain, producer and consumer/end user. I hope they have something big up their sleeve for this product.

[Vladimir Eugene]

I accept Blu-ray has an installed base and is not likely to go away, but I for one would not purchase a system having seen RED RAY images. Just no way.

Is that a hint, I'll wait then

[Sven Seynaeve]

I'm very pleased with my Sony vpl-hw 10 HD projector with blu-ray playback.

Nothing can beat it at home(at least at this price range).
Until we'l see an affordable 4Ks3d projection at home, I'm very satisfied with the results I'm experiencing.
Throw a nice 5.1 system with it and you have your own cinema at home.

[Eric Santiago]

I have ONE BR disc.

I have a lot of 1080 and some 4k masters...

I have quite a few 1080/2k deliverables. Not on physical media, though.

With the bandwith RED is hinting at (at the moment) BR will not be very nice to collect.

I like PS3, though...I wonder if Sony will (or can) let higher res formats to playback on the PS3? Were using that now for BD test (RED clips).

[Jeff Coatney]

Love my HDTV and HD content (When it comes off satellite). Hate the Blu Ray player I have. Hate Blu Ray disc pricing. Won't collect them- they are too costly. I love watching movies on my iPad. Streaming HD+ content will triumph.

[David Mullen ASC]

I prefer the quality of a 1080P blu-ray over the HD content delivered by Verizon FIOS.

The thing is, if you want to watch movies in HD now, then just get the darn blu-ray player, if you can wait for RedRay or whatever, then wait.

[Chuck Z]

I prefer the quality of a 1080P blu-ray over the HD content delivered by Verizon FIOS.

The thing is, if you want to watch movies in HD now, then just get the darn blu-ray player, if you can wait for RedRay or whatever, then wait.

All other things being equal, the CableLabs spec can't compare at all with Blu-ray.

[Jaymes Poudrier]

Buy Blur-ray!

The hints have been around that Red-Ray runs at 10mbps. If that's the case then it is streamable, it will need a dedicated Red Ray box to play it back. The cost of box ownership generally is not as big an investment as the sum of the media you will be playing off of it.

When and if this comes into play I would not expect much physical media to be laying around. So buy into the Blu-ray player and it's physical media now, buy new titles when/if they become available for Redray. Until everyone has a 4k monitor, you will be doing the best with the HDTV you've got.

[Wayne Morellini]

I am stacking up on bluray disks for the future. They are good quality, and at the moment their are lots of cheap ones. The quality compared to internet TV/cable is great (actually cable TV is great market for Red Ray). Downloads/Streamed TV is essentially practically worthless to me, compared to what I can own in my own hands.

We should not depend on low density DVD's or downloads, especially considering 3D and 8K. Red should try to get Red Ray incorporated into the Bluray standard, or setup a manufacturer coalition with a parallel standard using the physical BD disks (manufactures would incorporate both into the same machine as an extension, as happened in DVD standards). Red ray does not have to be tied to bluray either, but can be setup to be moved to other future chosen formats as desired by Red. This would actually help BD coalition a lot, even Sony, as they face there own format challenges in increasing disk density and supporting SHD/SHD3D. Imagine also being able to sell old TV seasons on one BD disk in Red ray.

[Alexander Ibrahim]

I commented before about why BluRay is good... but not about how I am using BluRay.

Despite being a BluRay advocate, I only own 13 films and 3 TV seasons on BluRay.

What I noticed when considering my DVD collection is how little I actually watch my DVD's over and over.

I am slowly selling most of my DVD's.

I am only replacing the ones I have watched at least 4 times since purchasing them, and which I wish to watch again.

There are a few DVD's I'll keep, mostly items of special interest that I have not found on BluRay. (Like the biographical documentary Kurosawa (http://www.amazon.com/Kurosawa-Akira/dp/B00005YUQ2/ref=sr_1_12?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1293474440&sr=1-12)) There is one movie, Bullitt, which I only purchased on BluRay for a special feature. (The Cutting Edge:The Magic of Movie Editing)

The rest will be "replaced" with Netflix/Hulu or subscription broadcast (HBO, Showtime et al.)

When all is said and done, I guesstimate that I'll end up owning about 10% as many BluRays as I had DVD's when my collection was at its largest. (Its already about 80% gone)

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Buy Blur-ray!

The hints have been around that Red-Ray runs at 10mbps. If that's the case then it is streamable, it will need a dedicated Red Ray box to play it back. The cost of box ownership generally is not as big an investment as the sum of the media you will be playing off of it.

When and if this comes into play I would not expect much physical media to be laying around. So buy into the Blu-ray player and it's physical media now, buy new titles when/if they become available for Redray. Until everyone has a 4k monitor, you will be doing the best with the HDTV you've got.

I haven't heard rumors, but I would expect 10MBytes/s not 10Mbits/s

So... I don't expect we'll be streaming that in the US for a while.

[Steven Caesare]

I haven't heard rumors, but I would expect 10MBytes/s not 10Mbits/s

So... I don't expect we'll be streaming that in the US for a while.

It is MBits.

The initial demos were 10Mbps. The final bitrate (including multichannel sound) last we heard was 15Mbps.

Certainly streamable in a number of scenarios.

-sc

[Alexander Ibrahim]

It is MBits.

The initial demos were 10Mbps. The final bitrate (including multichannel sound) last we heard was 15Mbps.

Certainly streamable in a number of scenarios.

-sc

I am incredulous.

Is there someplace where RED team members say that?

[Detlev Eller]

... I for one would not purchase a system having seen RED RAY images. Just no way.

... any timeline and pricing info for public release?

:-)

[Gunleik Groven]

It was 10 megabits. Currently 15 according to Stuart

[Stuart English]

It was 10 megabits. Currently 15 according to Stuart

Yup, that's what we said.

The name RED RAY came from the original design goal to put 4K on a red laser disk i.e. a DVD-R. No need for a Blu-ray media disk.

Since then our thinking has shifted to network and solid state media delivery with an HDD archive - especially as you can buy 2TB of USB based storage for about $100.

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Yup, that's what we said.

The name RED RAY came from the original design goal to put 4K on a red laser disk i.e. a DVD-R. No need for a Blu-ray media disk.

Since then our thinking has shifted to network and solid state media delivery with an HDD archive - especially as you can buy 2TB of USB based storage for about $100.

Well, color me amazed.

I do hope you guys will re-consider BluRay as a data medium for delivery. Especially if you can use the higher capacity formats.

I am not a huge fan of having my "precious" movies on USB spinning disk storage.

I place value on having an artifact backing up all my online efforts. Sure I have an MP3 collection- but I still have the CD's the came from. When I rip my DVD's (which I don't do very often at all) I keep the DVD disc. So far having the original discs has saved my tail a few times with my music collection.

I also like the notion that the physical disk serves as evidence of my license to use the copyrighted materials.

That may seem strange for a digital film guy.. but we all see the effort we go through to retain our data. It's non-trivial.

[Stuart English]

Well, color me amazed.

I do hope you guys will re-consider BluRay as a data medium for delivery. Especially if you can use the higher capacity formats.


We aim to be physical media agnostic Alexander.

If you prefer to archive each RED RAY 4K movie to a 25GB BD-R go for it. You will have a lot of space left over...

[Joseph Hutson]

Yup, that's what we said.

The name RED RAY came from the original design goal to put 4K on a red laser disk i.e. a DVD-R. No need for a Blu-ray media disk.

Since then our thinking has shifted to network and solid state media delivery with an HDD archive - especially as you can buy 2TB of USB based storage for about $100.

Does this mean y'all have decided to scratch the idea of recording to optical disc media, while keeping the same compression format...only saving it to say a CF card or SSD?

[Wayne Morellini]

I commented before about why BluRay is good... but not about how I am using BluRay.

Despite being a BluRay advocate, I only own 13 films and 3 TV seasons on BluRay.

What I noticed when considering my DVD collection is how little I actually watch my DVD's over and over.

I am slowly selling most of my DVD's.

I am only replacing the ones I have watched at least 4 times since purchasing them, and which I wish to watch again.

There are a few DVD's I'll keep, mostly items of special interest that I have not found on BluRay. ...

The rest will be "replaced" with Netflix/Hulu or subscription broadcast (HBO, Showtime et al.)

What interests me is the historical aspect. I get mostly only the best quality movies on BD, to play for friends and family some time down the track when they hit the bargain level. Otherwise, I might buy the odd old $1-$2 movies if I think they are worth watching (Not for collecting). The BD have premium consumer compression quality compared to what I have seen on-line. But the on line services are going to disappear one day, and as long as I maintain backups of my discs , I will have them in hand and potentially compatible playback hardware longer than these on line companies will last, I could even use them in a media center. I could even sell them, if I wanted.

Getting into the post I'm going to reply to Stuart, the quality of Red Ray at 9 or 15mb's is another issue I would like to determine. To get the same quality per pixel as top end Bluray, do you need 15 or 36mb/s at 4K. Then when you go to 3D, high frame rate, 8K, increased pixel depth (and even 21-27 channel sound), even 100mb/s download might not be enough, but new 100GB Bluray disk standard will be. You also have to pay for that download. So, bluray is still a good key format, and if they can use Redray as an official codec, like they use h264, on BD, than I would be happy. I also think that BD 100GB disks are a nice idea for backup compared to drives.

[Wayne Morellini]

Yup, that's what we said.

The name RED RAY came from the original design goal to put 4K on a red laser disk i.e. a DVD-R. No need for a Blu-ray media disk.

Since then our thinking has shifted to network and solid state media delivery with an HDD archive - especially as you can buy 2TB of USB based storage for about $100.

Hi Stuart, see my post above concerning the desirability of BD over time with expansion of resolution and special features for home theater rooms.

I agree with the solid state delivery. Down loading though might be a hassle for premium quality. I have thought long and hard to come up with technologies to put this sort of media into a plug in card at a cd like price (just had another three different cost cutting techniques run through my mind just then), a stream of very advanced methods, even just putting a solid state version along with a disk. Using red ray this might be possible, it seems to be in the league of performance I was planning of my own. The problem you might get is storage space leading to complexity. The closer we get to the size of the atom, the less potential for storage expansion past technological leaps, one day, without a leap, you will run up against a brick wall, and companies might want to charge a lot of money for the biggest products (as they have no future products to replace them with). When you get to this stage, they are likely, if practical, to go to complexity, likely to be expensive, for instance sacking memory layers. 8K is not the end either, we might be eventually looking at 70K+ for surround, not to mention the theoretical potential "holo-deck". But time for a leap is approaching.

Most people don't think of these things, where things will head in the distant future, and work off of limited knowledge and understanding and intelligence. Red, however, has people within the ball park, that should be able to read the times a bit, to plan paths for the future.


ey will be in the futrure, and work off

[M Most]

Down loading though might be a hassle for premium quality.

Not really. If the rate is 10Mb, a 5Mb download pipe - not uncommon today, and probably very common tomorrow - would download in twice real time, or two hours for a one hour show. That's not unreasonable to me. And even if the rate is 15Mb - well, you get the point. Server space + bandwidth costs a lot less than physical storage and/or shelf space.

[Detlev Eller]

Not really. If the rate is 10Mb, a 5Mb download pipe - not uncommon today, and probably very common tomorrow - would download in twice real time, or two hours for a one hour show. That's not unreasonable to me. And even if the rate is 15Mb - well, you get the point. Server space + bandwidth costs a lot less than physical storage and/or shelf space.

... which brings us back to the future form of theatrical distribution ...
looks like you have gained a new view on things, lately ... ;-)

[M Most]

... which brings us back to the future form of theatrical distribution ...
looks like you have gained a new view on things, lately ... ;-)

If you think this is a new view for me, you haven't been reading my posts here very long, or my blog for that matter...

[Stuart English]

To get the same quality per pixel as top end Bluray, do you need 15 or 36mb/s at 4K.

Neither. Our projection tests show that 15Mb/s for 4K is far superior to Blue-ray, and not just in terms of resolution.


Then when you go to 3D, high frame rate, 8K, increased pixel depth (and even 21-27 channel sound), even 100mb/s download might not be enough, but new 100GB Bluray disk standard will be.

Again, we aim to be physical media agnostic Wayne. Nothing to stop you using a BD-R of that capacity for archival use.

[Wayne Morellini]

Not really. If the rate is 10Mb, a 5Mb download pipe - not uncommon today, and probably very common tomorrow - would download in twice real time, or two hours for a one hour show. That's not unreasonable to me. And even if the rate is 15Mb - well, you get the point. Server space + bandwidth costs a lot less than physical storage and/or shelf space.

We were talking about 36-100+mb/s. How much data does a plan have and how much for extra. I think once optical technology get going we might look at costs falling significantly, eventually. For today, how much would it cost to watch 20 15mb/s movies a month (remember we are not talking about what me or you would watch, but what the money earners for a pay per view download service would like + their regular data). Internet delivery of TV instead of cable, is another consideration for their budget. Compared to a $10 disk. The future being download is a bit of a furfy for the moment, disk still has a future for a while.

I listened to people drone on about how slow bluray was taking, as if they expect full market dominance in less time then it has taken Scarlet to come out. I also listened to this rubbish about High Definition TV. What they did not understand is that DVD was quick because of PS2 support, and BD benefited from PS3 support. Nintendo+fans underestimated the benefit and speed of HD TV penetration. Yet here we are with DVD, then HDTV and Bluray. 3D TV is arguable at the moment, SHDTV is also arguable, but I suspect that both will come in eventually when all the 'blind' people see the difference. Download, past low quality cheap downloading, has things to overcome. So, it maybe 5 to 10 years before downloads will legitimately squash disk (unless cheap people with selective vision, decide to go for cheap downloads instead, as with low quality cable TV).

Balance is where it is at, at the moment the balance is not with a download only life. In the end, paid to own (even pay per permanent license) download is only useful if I can archive it, and at that to separate disks for security. Pay to permanent license is also, in my opinion, anti-trust.

[Gunleik Groven]

You were talking about those rates. RedRay was originally announced like "4k delivery of films on a standard DVD"

AFAIK the first bublic screenings was at 10MbS

[Wayne Morellini]

To get the same quality per pixel as top end Bluray, do you need 15 or 36mb/s at 4K.
Neither. Our projection tests show that 15Mb/s for 4K is far superior to Blue-ray, and not just in terms of resolution.

So in terms of latitude, floor, ceiling, signal to noise ratio, detail per pixel, it is better? Increased resolution makes something look better than it is per-pixel, that is why I ask on a objective pixel per pixel comparisons. You can round smooth, reduce difference between pixels (and outline edges and features for sharpness) etc to get more compression, but the hard thing is maintain accuracy. I do not trust the opinions of loud viewers, stick them in a dark room get them happy and excited, and give them some drinks, and they think everything is a lot better than it is. If I wanted to affect the outcome of a survey I could do so, simply by the way I walked into or out of the room, even more with the attitude and what I say. Real business people, and marketers understand these things. So, adding up the differences in the pixels gives a good estimate, taking a quarter of a 4K frame made from the highest quality uncompressed (not redcode) frame and comparing it to the same quarter of the uncompressed frame put through premium 40 (or was that 54) mb/s h264 bluray

Bluray quality is far from perfect, but there is very few of us that can do what people are claiming for redray in a pixel by pixel basis. If you understand what I am meaning Stuart, and the answer per pixel is still yes, 15 mb/s Red ray is as good per pixel as top of the line bluray, then great bring it on, their is room for two genuinenesses in the world.



Then when you go to 3D, high frame rate, 8K, increased pixel depth (and even 21-27 channel sound), even 100mb/s download might not be enough, but new 100GB Bluray disk standard will be.
Again, we aim to be physical media agnostic Wayne. Nothing to stop you using a BD-R of that capacity for archival use.

I mean Redray as a licensed codec on Bluray, as an option to eventual 100mb/s+ download?


Thanks for your help Stuart.

Wayne.

[Wayne Morellini]

You were talking about those rattes. RedRay was originally announced like "4k delivery of films on a standard DVD"

AFAIK the first bublic screenings was at 10MbS


To get the same quality per pixel as top end Bluray, do you need 15 or 36mb/s at 4K. Then when you go to 3D, high frame rate, 8K, increased pixel depth (and even 21-27 channel sound), even 100mb/s download might not be enough, but new 100GB Bluray disk standard will be. You also have to pay for that download.

I was talking about 15 to 36 mb/s, that is how the conversation was going, not the older 10 mb/s (upped to 15 mb/s now). It was also going onto how would we handle all the extra data rate of the extras in the future compared to disks. So, talk about 5 mb/s pipes is not really in it. We are getting 100mb/s pipes here, but how much is it going to cost to downland even a 15mb/s movie, verses $1 a movie rental. People are content with seeing 2mb/s rubbish, that is how download can win short term, they believe they have quality and have the HD label on it. Anyway, enough of this, life is going on and it is time to get on with it instead of writing here, for now.

[Stuart English]

Well no, the conversation wasn't going to 35 - 100Mbps Wayne, it had hopefully stopped at 4K delivery somewhere around an average of 15 Mbps. And I am describing tests observing 4K DPX material encoded to RED RAY on a 35 ft screen illuminated by a Sony SXRD projector. For a smaller screen size with equal visual quality, it's more probable we could drop the data rate lower rather than need to increase it.

[Stuart English]

So in terms of latitude, floor, ceiling, signal to noise ratio, detail per pixel, it is better?

Of course the displayed resolution plays a big part in this, but even my un-trained eyes say "yes, clearly".

[Stuart English]

I mean Redray as a licensed codec on Bluray, as an option to eventual 100mb/s+ download? .

I don't see a technical reason why that could not be done, but it may not be relevant if solid state media costs keep falling at the current rate.

Again 100mbps is your number not ours...

[Wayne Morellini]

Well no, the conversation wasn't going to 35 - 100Mbps Wayne, it had hopefully stopped at 4K delivery somewhere around an average of 15 Mbps. And I am describing tests observing 4K DPX material encoded to RED RAY on a 35 ft screen illuminated by a Sony SXRD projector. For a smaller screen size with equal visual quality, it's more probable we could drop the data rate lower rather than need to increase it.

Well, as I was the one asking about 35 - 100 b/s concerns, answers to me about things I never really said is not that relevant.

I don't need to delve deeper into the test, wherever you used seating for a large prime cinema field of view (around 70-80 degree arc) for proper testing, wherever it was done split screen mirror, or alternating, to get away from the handful of seconds memory laps in comparison test, or at the same resolution to get away from the illusion of more detail making the codec appear better. The only real way to visually test codec performance is resolution to resolution, split screen, probably mirrored, looking for it, or alternating probably with a button to register when it looks better (scientifically pixel for pixel testing is better again, well out of the way of Myth Busters science). Then you can measure how much you have to adjust the data rate to match the two.

So, to get a real test in 4K you would have to start with equivalent 4K bluray codec data rate times 4. So, 4*36 (lets say 160mb/s H264 inter) and the proposed 60mb/s SHD standard.

There is another effect to look at in lossy compression, how appealing, and well chosen, is the rendering, which is very good for lossy compression. The choice can make for more accurate rendering or simply more appealing making people believe it is more accurate. There has been a significant upswing in quality since I wrote about this mid decade, afterwards the original Canon HD consumer camcorder (not the little one) and ambarella cameras came out with significant improvements in technology. What I outlined was a preferential list in how to shape objects and features, and in handling these during movement, and how to degrade the image. In truth some of this has been going on since tele-conferencing compression research in the 80's, where the processing costs would have been too significant compared to today. So while not accurate, what is retained is more accurate or appealing to the human eye.

Screen technology is moving to large cinematic feilds of view, where quality becomes much more apparent. Even I have been researching designs for $10 (cost) projectors capable of covering 2 meter high screens at UHD+ resolutions eventually, even surround (somebody else looks like they are going to beat me to the market with their surround though, likely regularly priced though). This means that many people should be able to achieve $100 (cost) projector designs.

Again Stuart, I will enjoy seeing, and evening celebrating, the evidence, people's opinions during observations test are flawable and influencable (Bush talk).

[Wayne Morellini]

I don't see a technical reason why that could not be done, but it may not be relevant if solid state media costs keep falling at the current rate.

Again 100mbps is your number not ours...

On the marketing and business side. Having Redray as a licensable codec for bluray is potentially a large revenue stream for Red, as with download, and helps bluray handle 4K and 8K with quality. The problem is that bluray might want exclusivity to Redray, as download might also, but it is much more profitable having a codec that works on everything, and as far as I am aware they don't have other options.

Do you have figures for future 8K+, 3D, 10bit+ (high quality latitude for eye iris adjustment on future wall screens) 27 channel sound of 20-bit plus, half data rate to lossless at least), not including surround or true 3D. While many people might stare at their navels I am concerned about future design directions.

As an analyst designer inventor, I keep an eye on the technical side of things a little, even though mostly sick. The upcoming end of flash has been forecast by the industry for years. Flash has been heading towards it theoretical ceiling (though I do remember something about a further break through). Prices in store have largely stagnated in recent years as well (likely to much do with other factors too). I think it was 2012, but could be more now. Multi level flash is unreliable. So, flash as a cheap mass storage is potentially limited. To overcome this they have been researching replacements for flash for years, and I have not kept up with what is coming out. As a non solid state devices, hard and optical disks will keep ahead. But for distribution we are possibly looking towards a viable cheap solid state alternative instead of disk sooner, depending on how compressed it is. Most of the design directions I have, even Red could afford to do.

[Wouter V Gestel]

I used to buy movies on VHS because it was the only way to see a movie at home. After that, I bought DVD's because at the time it was the best quality to see movies at home. Now I buy Blu-Ray's because at this moment it is the best quality to see movies at home. When Red Ray titles will be released, I will buy Red Ray titles, because at that moment THAT will be the best quality to see movies at home.

Now according to some research presented by Amazon at Blu-Con, one of the biggest reasons why Blu-Ray hasn't been doing better than DVD has to do with the number of titles released on Blu-Ray. After 5 years DVD had 20.000 titles available, where Blu-ray hasn't even got 5.000 titles available.

Also remember that tiny format war we had a few years ago? In no way it was about what the consumer wanted, it was all about getting Movie Studio support. And two of the things Movie Studio's want to fight piracy are DRM and DHCP. Nobody likes it, it won't prevent piracy, but the Movie studio's still demand it, otherwise Movie studio's probably won't release their content. No content no sales.

Please don't get me wrong. I'm a big audio- and videophile so I would love to see stereo 4K+ and hear 22.2 192KHz/24bit uncompressed audio in my home theatre some day. But I think that we have a long way to go for that to happen. And getting the movie studio's support is a big bump in that road.

Also I don't know if this is true, but I even think that complying to the studio's crazy DRM wishes is one of the reasons why RED RAY hasn't been released yet.

[Wayne Morellini]

If Redray was a codec on bluray they could use it's encoding. I think they would be looking to upgrade their encoding to make it better. They also have to increase the layers in bluray (though using a method like constellation disk proposed, would possibly be cheaper) or going to violet ray. Red ray could extend BD life by 5 years. With GP-GPU processing, it might be possible to deliver Redray by the SHD version of Bluray, or the next after that, with whatever security upgrade they are planning.

With future shortages and high pricing of some materials, maybe they would welcome this. Frankly, having single layer extreme violet disk, is probably preferable (we could store archive on a multiple layer version).

Without red-ray, they will probably just try to upgrade the layers on bluray or go to V-ray for SHD/UHD, with 100-400mb/s h264 and I will happily buy ;) .

Wouter, thanks. I suppose they didn't mention releasing lots of old films instead, somebodies insistence on sticking to their licensed low quality mpeg2, low bit rates, some people insisting on mpeg2 destroying grain, rather than clean it up to a superior image, or the purely sale killing high pricing, not to mention such outrageous player pricing that industry people don't like to see the outrageously priced PS3 reduced in price (don't get me on about the real price of the PS3). Wow, I bought Total Recall the other week for $10 after they discounted it from about $30 from memory. Despite lower security, DVD is still ahead on releases. People might mock me when I say it, but trying to maximize profit can definitely have the opposite affect on returns.

One area that can really benefit from Redray downloads, is titles from small independent productions on popular systems (PC, PS2, xbox, but future networked BD is a big one). Viva-la-revolution.


I'll say this instead of putting it in my sig for now:

The cutting edge, is to get people to think... about direction to go.

[Stuart English]

If Redray was a codec on bluray they could use it's encoding. I think they would be looking to upgrade their encoding to make it better.

Without red-ray, they will probably just try to upgrade the layers on bluray or go to V-ray for SHD/UHD, with 100-400mb/s h264 and I will happily buy ;) .



That is an interesting point.

If SHD means 3840 x 2160 pixels, we are already doing more than that resolution at less than 1/5 the data rate.

And projecting the results onto a 35ft screen, so we can see there are no artifacts.

[Wayne Morellini]

That is an interesting point.

If SHD means 3840 x 2160 pixels, we are already doing more than that resolution at less than 1/5 the data rate.

And projecting the results onto a 35ft screen, so we can see there are no artifacts.

But is it as robust as 160mb/s h264 under severe pressure :) or have the latitude of neighboring pixel levels and detail? I think that Redray is a great opportunity for the Bluray people, regardless if it has the data rate to beat 40mb/s or 160mb/s h264 it is better than anything they have got, or possibly any plan of the future (past object orientated techniques). I am not familiar with that branch of codecs, but somebody did tell me that various advanced features in h264 could used with alternative compression methods, is this true?

Thanks Stuart.

[Chuck Z]

What is the offline encoding speed for the RED RAY codec?

[Noah Kadner]

I'm a firm believer that Blu-ray will be the last major physical media format ever used for distribution of video content. From here on out it's 100% downloads and files living on hard drives... Have you bought music on a CD lately? I would love to see Red Ray as more of a box with a hard drive than something with a disc inside.

Noah

[Jun-Dai]

I accept Blu-ray has an installed base and is not likely to go away, but I for one would not purchase a system having seen RED RAY images. Just no way.

Image quality is one thing, but what choice do you have until companies start putting their films out in a 4K format? Criterion's got something like 100 phenomenal films out on Blu-ray that I just don't see having access to in 4K anytime soon.

[JD Holloway]

Having access in 4k isn't the only advantage though.
Nice in the long run for home viewing; cinematic release for sure.

Just getting a decent 1080/2k image into the home or business is a huge leap.
REDRAYs (non pro) first goals should include getting IP deliverables into houses at 1080.
This must be part of the RED RAY non-Pro business plan.

It will also be the biggest money maker RED has in its arsenal.

Clearly other players must be involved though.
People who own and distribute content.

[Jeremy Torrie]

I won't be at NAB but I will be paying close attention...we still need as JD says a 1080 solution that is at the highest quality for distribution. Sony is dug into the broadcast distribution standard deeper than an Alabama tick, and not likely to change for a long time unfortunately.

I've read about the Sony SSD module that includes recording via the SRW 5800...but from what I gather you need to buy the 5800 and it becomes an add on (according to pics). So you're still stuck with 100K+ for investing in the broadcast standard deliverable.

If I had the ability to generate a master and have the ability to send a RedRay player with the SSD master to a post place (provided they don't already have one in house) allowing me to generate an SR master with 12 track audio as per my contractual deliverables with Closed Captioning, then we would be talking sweet music.

Here's hoping.

In the meantime I hope Avid either allows 4K in Symphony Nitris or incorporates aspects of DS such as going beyond 1080.

[Stuart English]

I won't be at NAB but I will be paying close attention...we still need as JD says a 1080 solution that is at the highest quality for distribution. Sony is dug into the broadcast distribution standard deeper than an Alabama tick, and not likely to change for a long time unfortunately.

I've read about the Sony SSD module that includes recording via the SRW 5800...but from what I gather you need to buy the 5800 and it becomes an add on (according to pics). So you're still stuck with 100K+ for investing in the broadcast standard deliverable.

If I had the ability to generate a master and have the ability to send a RedRay player with the SSD master to a post place (provided they don't already have one in house) allowing me to generate an SR master with 12 track audio as per my contractual deliverables with Closed Captioning, then we would be talking sweet music.


I think another unfortunate side effect of the Tsunami in Japan is that your SR master deliverable just reverted to D-5 HD again or maybe changed to LTO-4. If reports are to be believed, there is no HDCAM SR tape to be had.

[Stuart English]

Having access in 4k isn't the only advantage though.
Nice in the long run for home viewing; cinematic release for sure.

Just getting a decent 1080/2k image into the home or business is a huge leap.
REDRAYs (non pro) first goals should include getting IP deliverables into houses at 1080.
This must be part of the RED RAY non-Pro business plan.

It will also be the biggest money maker RED has in its arsenal.

Clearly other players must be involved though.
People who own and distribute content.

Absolutely, that's a big win for RED RAY - but the method to achieve that is to deliver your 4K 10-bit RGB source into the home via RED RAY, with internal downscale in the player to 1080p. That's what we were able to show at NAB, and I have to tell you the EPIC source material generated some of the best 1080p images I have ever seen. Despite the fact that we were playing back data at just 20 Mb/s, people thought we were displaying uncompressed DPX files or high bit rate ProRES or DNxHD.

[Jeremy Torrie]

Stuart -I don't need to deliver my SR master for broadcast until the end of the year. And trust me I would prefer not to but contractually this is what CBC demands.

This is why I'm hugely interested in getting my hands on a RedRay Pro as soon as it's available so I can start working through the how for generating a master greater than 1080.

Am posting in Symphony Nitris for the time being, and will lock picture here or DS...will I be able to conform at a greater resolution by then? Who knows...

[Danko Dolch]

Hi Stuart,

Data rates about 15-25 Mb/s for 4K delivery are "unbelivable". If you wheren't RED I would say it sounds like my TV station telling me that 3,5Mb/s 1080i transmission will bring me the perfect HD experience ;-)

My background is content delivery for festivals - where I'm responsible for alternative content not delivered as DCP or HDCAM tape. (documentary & animation films)

Currently we accept 1080p AVC-1 video and 6 channel AAC audio as MP4 container or H.264 MOV for the ease of exporting it by the filmmakers from the NLE timeline. This material is transmitted via internet by FTP so bandwith counts.

A good quality video stream 4:2:0 with some nice looking film grain (not the denoised daily soap look we know from TV) will eat up about 35Mb/s + audio. That's best case - if you try to send a H.264 MOV with 6 channel audio you have to use uncompressed PCM because Quicktime is offering AAC only for stereo channels. Also quicktime is using up to 70Mb/s in best quality encoding setting.

DCP's have min 100Mb/s + highres PCM audio - thats too much for todays internet lines. (50GB per movie is the practical limit for FTP transfers - we would accept more but it's not useful to upload from a 1Mb/s upload line so people don't do it...)

From this perspective RED Ray sounds interesting - it could bring a high quality 4K file format with small bandwith footprint and also the needed player hardware for screening.

We will keep an eye on the dev. and maybe get a clever new distribution format for alternative content not delivered with 200 Mb/s + like a DCP ;-)
(currently we use Doremi Nugget Players to playout - not to mention that we need to reencode all films to 80Mb/s MPEG II that the Nugget can play...)

Danko

[Rob Ruffo]

Just throwing a question out here:

I'm still on an old widescreen CRT with a great image. An older DVD player, and a nice DVD collection.

I know at one point in time I will have to update to an HDTV.
I don't have a problem with that.

I'm not so sure of Blu-Ray though...
I don't know if it's smart to invest in a new optical format at this point. In Belgium, most people still are on DVD, so the format will probably completely break trough in a year or so. But is it wise to invest in an optical format, when the future may lie in solid state media?

I don't have a problem with investing in Blu-Ray (although I'm not a particular big fan of the format, not because of technical reasons, but the way Sony handles its consumers with the format) if the next future format is 10 years away. But if we're talking about a good breaktrough in RED RAY or another format in 3 years or so, it seems stupid to invest in a whole new format. (points to the HD-DVD people)

I know RED Ray isn't there yet, and RED completely isn't in the consumer-space. But if my current set would be broken, at one point in the future, I want to think about bying into highly properiatary media which is maybe dead in a couple of years again. (RED RAY works with Drives and normal DVD's, right?)
I know you can't spend forever waiting for the next big thing, but just not completely fond of Blu-Ray - although I realise that technically, it's one of the best consumer HD formats at this point.

Blu-Ray is great - great sound, great picture, BOTH far exceed DVD on an HDTV. You can buy a player for $100 now on sale, so it is not exactly an "investment". Try watching North bu Northwest on Blu-Ray - that alone is worth $100.

[Michel Hafner]

The worst part of Blu Ray is color subsampling and sticking to REC709 color standard without alternatives. 1080p YUV 4:4:4 cinema color gamut would look a lot better at 40 Mbit/s h264 than what we can have now. No Red Ray needed for better Blu Ray image quality. But an even more efficient codec as Red Ray apparently is that can do 4K from Blu Ray is very welcome, of course. If you did 4K with h264 at 40 Mbit/s it would also look better than what we get now from Blu Ray, simply because going from a lower resolution to a higher resolution source helps improve apparent image quality, even if you stay at the same bit rate or do not go up a lot. 9 Mbit/s 720p/1080p looks usually a lot better than 9 Mbit/s SD (as from DVD) and
20 mbit/s 1080p better than 250 Mbit/s SD studio masters (there is no comparison). You can not make up for missing detail and sharpness by reproducing random noise very precisely. This effect alone makes 4K look better than 1080p at comparable bit rates. The artifacts at 4K pixel size tend to become invisible while the additional detail and sharpness is quite visible.

[Elsie N]

I think some of us could take a lesson from Stuart in how to post. Notice he makes his points in a few lines, not line after line after line ad nauseum. Might even get fewer of those long-winded posts skipped over.

Just sayin'.

[Wayne Morellini]

'People are entitled to opinions!', but people are, entitled to knowledge.

Saying little but arguing incorrectly, just leads to much explanation. Something trolls often use on the original internet newsgroups.

__

[Elsie N]

'People are entitled to opinions!', but people are, entitled to knowledge.

Saying little but arguing incorrectly, just leads to much explanation. Something trolls often use on the original internet newsgroups.

__
Now see? I actually read all of THIS post. ;-)

[Bob Minervini]

Please do get RedRay out... can't beleive DVDs are still sold!

[Wayne Morellini]

Long answers fit long intelligence.
(Pre-written ;) )

[Elsie N]

Long answers fit long intelligence.
(Pre-written ;) )
Wayne, no argument there. And I'm not the post police saying you should post more concisely. I actually want to read your posts and see what you have to say, but I found myself reading into them a few lines, seeing how much more there was to read, looking at the clock on the wall, and then just skipping over the rest and moving on. Others I'm sure have the time and are focused on the subject you comment on enough to invest the time. I try to absorb a little of each and every subject, and don't have time for the detailed minutiae.

Perhaps I was being a little self-centered in trying to have things my way by getting you and others to make your points more succinctly.

It's not you... it me.:001_smile:

[Wayne Morellini]

That is ussually the case. I forget if these posts are concise, but generally they are. Concise does not mean short, but generally is shorter. There is a proleforla of relevant consise information, and at certain levels of discussion/exploration wisely put together, it gets long. Plus when you make it simpler for people in general to read, it just gets longer.

If people incorrectly challenge with short posts what I would bypass and not challenge myself, then discussion is 9 times longer.

However, sorry if my messages have been a bit long,just the target, the debate, and my ability to see the area around s subject. I have tourrets and aspergers, and have them humming together, that lets multiple spontaneous streams of analysis branch out and can systematically work through a subject.

The 128 character txt generation is leading to the death of intellectural expansion.

[Elsie N]

However, sorry if my messages have been a bit long,just the target, the debate, and my ability to see the area around s subject. I have tourrets and aspergers, and have them humming together, that lets multiple spontaneous streams of analysis branch out and can systematically work through a subject.

The 128 character txt generation is leading to the death of intellectural expansion.
That explains a lot... and has just made reading your posts that much more interesting.

cheers!

[Josh Snyder]

Just throwing a question out here:

I'm still on an old widescreen CRT with a great image. An older DVD player, and a nice DVD collection.

I know at one point in time I will have to update to an HDTV.
I don't have a problem with that.

I'm not so sure of Blu-Ray though...
I don't know if it's smart to invest in a new optical format at this point. In Belgium, most people still are on DVD, so the format will probably completely break trough in a year or so. But is it wise to invest in an optical format, when the future may lie in solid state media?

I don't have a problem with investing in Blu-Ray (although I'm not a particular big fan of the format, not because of technical reasons, but the way Sony handles its consumers with the format) if the next future format is 10 years away. But if we're talking about a good breaktrough in RED RAY or another format in 3 years or so, it seems stupid to invest in a whole new format. (points to the HD-DVD people)

I know RED Ray isn't there yet, and RED completely isn't in the consumer-space. But if my current set would be broken, at one point in the future, I want to think about bying into highly properiatary media which is maybe dead in a couple of years again. (RED RAY works with Drives and normal DVD's, right?)
I know you can't spend forever waiting for the next big thing, but just not completely fond of Blu-Ray - although I realise that technically, it's one of the best consumer HD formats at this point.
Sony's way is as annoying as Apple's. No freedom.

The investment for Blu-Ray is small. RED RAY will not be format people use in 3 years because for format to be standard you must be able to buy the players from all stores in the world that sells anything more than milk and bread. I don't see RED doing that. You are living this day and age, so use the format that everyone else is using too. It's tupid to not use something because something different MIGHT be the next thing in next 5 years.

But starting to collect huge collection of Blu-Ray movies is stupid because the day will come that Blu-Ray movies are worth nothing, same thing that happened to VHS and DVD, and same thing will happen to format after Blu-Ray.

[Wayne Morellini]

Your $10 blu ray movies on your media player in Redray, sounds ok compared to using a download service each time. People should have an option to have a hard ("Real") version.