PDA

View Full Version : 4K DI options



Blair S. Paulsen
03-07-2008, 03:06 PM
I think we would all love to have a real time 4K pipeline for DI and if you have enough money you can do that today. What if you want to do it at a realistic price? Somewhere north of shoestring indie territory but south of a heavy iron post facility.

For the sake of this discussion lets set a timeline of a year or so. We want to grade native RedCode36 and see the results of our adjustments in real time on the display. Yes, this is a lot to ask - but we take it for granted that we can correct and view SD footage this way and with a little budget you can do the same in HD right now.

Note: due to the quality of modern compression schemes and the bandwidth/cost issues of uncompressed 4K this theoretical exercise posits "visually lossless" compression will be used as needed.

Parameters/Issues

Display topology:

AFAIK at NAB 2007 Red Digital used a DVS Clipster serving a Sony SXRD 4K Cinema sized projector via 4 dual link HD-SDI cables to show Peter Jackson's CTL short. Looked great but too expensive, too big and overkill for DI.

Jim has a 4K delivery system in development and has promised to show it at NAB in April 2008. The basic components are likely a server, a monitor or projector and a way to connect them. This is a key piece.

Grading:

Assimilate's Scratch system, well equipped, can grade native RedCode at 2K in mostly real time (depending on what operations you are doing). Perhaps with enough horsepower on the computing side this can be done at 4K. (Lucas, Mark or someone with more hands on Scratch time can jump in and clarify this as I don't wish to misrepresent their product.)

IMHO the best path to make this happen before 2011 is a dedicated acceleration module, PCIe2.0 card comes to mind, that can decode RedCode in real time. The alternative is to leverage the tech that Red uses in their 4K delivery system by integrating it with post tools. Of course I have no idea if Red is developing a stand alone server like the Clipster or something that runs on a MacPro tower with a hardware interface, or something else my pea brain can't conceive of.

Would there be enough market for someone like AJA to build such an accelerator card? What is the quantity/price break between FPGAs and dedicated silicon? What kind of CPU/GPU horsepower and bus interface would be required to decode on the fly without an special purpose accelerator?

Yes, before Mike Most and others jump on me, I happily concede that a talented colorist is a huge factor in the mix. I just want to give them the tools to see what they are doing without giving Discreet the deed to my house (or Ketch's :biggrin: ). In any case, I am out waving my sign and it says "4K power to the people", rock on.

Lucas Wilson
03-07-2008, 03:14 PM
Display topology:

AFAIK at NAB 2007 Red Digital used a DVS Clipster serving a Sony SXRD 4K Cinema sized projector via 4 dual link HD-SDI cables to show Peter Jackson's CTL short.

Small correction... At NAB, the SXRD was fed from a Keisoku Giken 4K DDR, not a Clipster.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA

Mark L. Pederson
03-07-2008, 06:59 PM
I think we would all love to have a real time 4K pipeline for DI and if you have enough money you can do that today. What if you want to do it at a realistic price? Somewhere north of shoestring indie territory but south of a heavy iron post facility.

For the sake of this discussion lets set a timeline of a year or so. We want to grade native RedCode36 and see the results of our adjustments in real time on the display. Yes, this is a lot to ask - but we take it for granted that we can correct and view SD footage this way and with a little budget you can do the same in HD right now.

Note: due to the quality of modern compression schemes and the bandwidth/cost issues of uncompressed 4K this theoretical exercise posits "visually lossless" compression will be used as needed.

Parameters/Issues

Display topology:

AFAIK at NAB 2007 Red Digital used a DVS Clipster serving a Sony SXRD 4K Cinema sized projector via 4 dual link HD-SDI cables to show Peter Jackson's CTL short. Looked great but too expensive, too big and overkill for DI.

Not suited for DI. Good luck calibrating that projector.

Watch JVC take the 4K projector lead at NAB.




Jim has a 4K delivery system in development and has promised to show it at NAB in April 2008. The basic components are likely a server, a monitor or projector and a way to connect them. This is a key piece.

Nope.

Jim did NOT say he would SHOW anything. He said he would announce details. I HOPE it's a server/decoder that would play out REDCODE RAW and REDCODE RGB (it's coming because it MUST for delivery) to QUAD DVI and QUAD HD-SDI. I would like to just PLUG a third party drive into the server without transferring files.



Grading:

Assimilate's Scratch system, well equipped, can grade native RedCode at 2K in mostly real time (depending on what operations you are doing). Perhaps with enough horsepower on the computing side this can be done at 4K. (Lucas, Mark or someone with more hands on Scratch time can jump in and clarify this as I don't wish to misrepresent their product.)

I am not really all that interested in viewing in 4K while grading COLOR. I'll do it when I can for the "smoke and mirrors" perception thing. The film will look the same in terms of color. 2K is the deal. The size of the screen and distance needed to resolve 4K is not really suit any DI suite I can imagine. What I want in my RED PROJECTOR is actually RED 4K image sampled to 2K - that is the SWEET RED SPOT.



IMHO the best path to make this happen before 2011 is a dedicated acceleration module, PCIe2.0 card comes to mind, that can decode RedCode in real time. The alternative is to leverage the tech that Red uses in their 4K delivery system by integrating it with post tools. Of course I have no idea if Red is developing a stand alone server like the Clipster or something that runs on a MacPro tower with a hardware interface, or something else my pea brain can't conceive of.

Would there be enough market for someone like AJA to build such an accelerator card? What is the quantity/price break between FPGAs and dedicated silicon? What kind of CPU/GPU horsepower and bus interface would be required to decode on the fly without an special purpose accelerator?

Yes, before Mike Most and others jump on me, I happily concede that a talented colorist is a huge factor in the mix. I just want to give them the tools to see what they are doing without giving Discreet the deed to my house (or Ketch's :biggrin: ). In any case, I am out waving my sign and it says "4K power to the people", rock on.

Not sure what you are after Blair. Right now, TODAY, we can grade 4K RED media in 2K realtime on Scratch on a prototype workstation from BOXX. render out 4K DPX or TIFF. Not sure what else you want that isn't already working ... March 7th, 2008.

M Most
03-07-2008, 07:07 PM
I think we would all love to have a real time 4K pipeline for DI ......

I have to ask...

Why? What exactly are you delivering and to whom that this is important? If we're talking about actual distribution, it should be noted that at least 85% of high end DI work is done in 2K, and to date there have been very, very few digital cinema packages done in anything but 2K. So even in the highest end theatrical distribution chains, there is little demand or even opportunity for 4K finishing or delivery elements. Other than personal ego or a lack of understanding of distribution realities, what are your reasons for feeling that this is needed?

Mark L. Pederson
03-07-2008, 07:12 PM
I have to ask...

Why? What exactly are you delivering and to whom that this is important? If we're talking about actual distribution, it should be noted that at least 85% of high end DI work is done in 2K, and to date there have been very, very few digital cinema packages done in anything but 2K. So even in the highest end theatrical distribution chains, there is little demand or even opportunity for 4K finishing or delivery elements. Other than personal ego or a lack of understanding of distribution realities, what are your reasons for feeling that this is needed?

Exactly. FIRST you want killer RED 4K to current 2K infrastructure.

But for the record ... personal ego and perception run this industry.

Oh yeah ... and stupid committees.

I am selling "F the DCI" T-shirts at NAB.

gbalaji
03-07-2008, 10:52 PM
Why not we have edl/FCP XML import in REDCINE to do a primary color correction of what edited in FCP. Cheapest option.Once done with primary color correction export 4k as dpx file and take to any DI suite you want. Why not RED implement this in REDCINE as of now?

Sorry, if i deviate from the topic.

Evin Grant
03-08-2008, 12:24 AM
I'd be happy with finally having the R3ds drop right in the timeline, and having an FX plug to manipulate the native files from FCP. There's obviously some reason this hasn't happened yet but once that can be done I'll be pretty happy. Don't get me wrong, the 2K proxy is working great on my machine right now but the round trip to Redcine is workable but really not ideal.

Mark L. Pederson
03-08-2008, 02:42 AM
I'd be happy with finally having the R3ds drop right in the timeline,
Evin - you mean QT wrappers from R3ds I assume. Which you CAN do now. RT performance is based on system, BUT wrappers do NOT have a true debayer. FCP timeline will NEVER take "r3ds" as FCP is built on QT.



and having an FX plug to manipulate the native files from FCP.

I don't think FXplug is the right architecture for the job.



Don't get me wrong, the 2K proxy is working great on my machine right now but the round trip to Redcine is workable but really not ideal.

Well ... round trippin to REDCINE is about to get a hell of lot more elagent. I'll show you in person next Sat. at the LA User Group breakfast.

You guys gotta remember that Apple has COLOR now in Final Cut Studio. More and more they will build build up that app - Apple is going to assume you want to EDIT in FCP and COLOR in COLOR.

IMHO - COLOR will be the DIY for grading RED. It will be the "poor mans" DI for RED. And since I have been holding my breath for over 5 years for Apple to solve GAMMA HELL - how long do you think I will have to hold my breath for them to change their GPU driver bottleneck? Until then, best of luck getting anything close to excting in Color's playback speed. I do think that EVENTUALLY Color will be bad ass. I just can't wait for them to do it (2-3 years) and I have already moved past it.

Sanjin Jukic
03-08-2008, 03:36 AM
FCP timeline will NEVER take "r3ds" as FCP is built on QT.


Nonsense!

As we know for the last 10 years that QT has an open software architecture

AND ACCORDING TO THAT IS POSSIBLE TO INCOPORATE R3D CODEC TO QUICKTIME.

It's just a matter of RED and Apple how and when can do it.

We just have to ask Frank Casanova, Apple's director of QuickTime product marketing more about that.

Hans von Sonntag
03-08-2008, 04:26 AM
IMHO - COLOR will be the DIY for grading RED. It will be the "poor mans" DI for RED. And since I have been holding my breath for over 5 years for Apple to solve GAMMA HELL - how long do you think I will have to hold my breath for them to change their GPU driver bottleneck? Until then, best of luck getting anything close to excting in Color's playback speed. I do think that EVENTUALLY Color will be bad ass. I just can't wait for them to do it (2-3 years) and I have already moved past it.

I've tested Color with my Nividia 5600fx and it is very fast. RT 1080p up to 30 fps. I am not a IT person but the 5600fx is a new dimension in this regard, IMHO.

Hans

Mark L. Pederson
03-08-2008, 04:38 AM
Nonsense!

As we know for the last 10 years that QT has an open software architecture

AND ACCORDING TO THAT IS POSSIBLE TO INCOPORATE R3D CODEC TO QUICKTIME.

It's just a matter of RED and Apple how and when can do it.

We just have to ask Frank Casanova, Apple's director of QuickTime product marketing more about that.
You are still talking about EXTRACTING r3ds INTO and/or THROUGH QT.

Would you like to discuss how well FCP handles QT architecture?

Don't get me started ....

Sanjin Jukic
03-08-2008, 05:25 AM
Would you like to discuss how well FCP handles QT architecture?



Mark,

now from this notion somebody could conclude that Apple did not

make well implementation of QT in FCP or even that QT is

totally wrong digital media platform

and for years they (Apple) bluffed thousands of FCP user base and more.

I think something is wrong here.

Apple, Quicktime or Off...

laguun
03-08-2008, 05:26 AM
Exemplary for the worldwide 4K DI marketleaders are:

filmlights baselight.
http://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/

dvs clipster
http://www.dvs.de/

Pricing for these systems starts at 50-75 at dvs, ~100 at filmlight. For a lightspeed 4K setup one might want to throw in even more hardware.

The main differences to software basing DI systems using Nvidia (or rarer, ATI) graphics cards, as iridas speedgrade, apple color, assimilate scratch etc are:

- realtime 4K processing with FX as blurs and conform tools as dissolves etc
- 4K display in order to see what you are doing
- 4K i/o, typically via quad DL-HD-SDI
- dedicated hardware (i.e. clipster) or clustered computers (i.e. baselight).

while i agree that we will see mainly 1080/2K masters in 2008, i can only warn out of experiences to master at 4k without 4k monitoring/QA.

While 35mm filmout will be hiding many issues of a 2K for 4K master, in a digital 4K projection you will see lots of details you missed in a 2K DI for a 4K Master, logically, as you only see 25% of the resolution on 2K the master/source have.

Especially noise can be very hard or even impossible to spot on a 2K display when its at fine 4K, but i will be -noticeable- if screened by a 4K projector (or used at a tradeshow to feed several 1080p displays etc).

laguun
03-08-2008, 05:28 AM
Mark,

now from this notion somebody could conclude that Apple did not

make well implementation of QT in FCP or even that QT is

totally wrong digital media platform

and for years they (Apple) bluffed thousands of FCP user base and more.

I think something is wrong here.

Apple, Quicktime or Off...

Marc is correct, Quicktime has -many- well known issues since -many- years.

Mainly these are painful for professional users, as the notorious crossplatform gammaissues etc.

laguun
03-08-2008, 05:40 AM
I think we would all love to have a real time 4K pipeline for DI and if you have enough money you can do that today. What if you want to do it at a realistic price? Somewhere north of shoestring indie territory but south of a heavy iron post facility.

4K realtime DI systems isnt much different in price than i.e. scratch, dvs is somewhat surprising inexpensive.
4k -dci- compliant displays are still much to expensive, but if you grab one of the classic 3840x2400 pix lcds (they use to flow on ebay at ~1000-3000) you have a pretty good sharpness check
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors
they are quite angle dependent and not to fast however.



Would there be enough market for someone like AJA to build such an accelerator card? What is the quantity/price break between FPGAs and dedicated silicon? What kind of CPU/GPU horsepower and bus interface would be required to decode on the fly without an special purpose accelerator?

this is above aja or decklink in 2008 - dvs (and others) fill that niche sucessfully since over 20 years. they were doing 1080p/2K when the other were pal/ntsc, now they are doing 4K while the others are doing 1080p/2K.

besides the approach dvs has (dedictaed multistream 4K with colorcorrection, fx, transparency etc), others, as filmlight, used clustered computers instead of a single one.

Whats nice about these systems is that they also allow fully realtime 4K networked storage, excellent if you want to attach some VFX / CGI / graphics systems in the background.

However, so far they were all not allowed to use redcode by red.
In the case of dvs they seem to integrate it since mid 2007, and once red opens the redcode codec at NAB 2008, i suppose they will offer r3dcode support rather soon.

4K RT -debayering- however seems not to be on the very very near horizon. Speaking with -the- DI raw pioneer, iridas, at IBC 07, they said that -maximum quality- 4k debayer with software/gpu basing systems in 2008 might be pretty narrow, and after supporting raw for the s:i 2k, vision phantom 65, cineform neo, arri D20 etc about the time red came to the market, i suppose they know quite a bit about raw.

Sanjin Jukic
03-08-2008, 05:42 AM
MATRIX from Chrome Imaging, Geneva, Switzerland is coming up today

as the most affordable high-performance post-production solution with

a range of turnkey systems starting from DI, 2K to 4K.

MORE>>> (http://www.chrome-imaging.com/index.php?page=products)

Mark L. Pederson
03-08-2008, 05:51 AM
I've tested Color with my Nividia 5600fx and it is very fast. RT 1080p up to 30 fps. I am not a IT person but the 5600fx is a new dimension in this regard, IMHO.

Hans

Hey Hans -

I am impressed!

Can you tell me how fast 1080p ProRes with ONE primary grade and TWO secondaries?

Uncompressed 1080p with ONE primary grade and TWO secondaries?

Thanks on advance!

Mark L. Pederson
03-08-2008, 05:55 AM
and for years they (Apple) bluffed thousands of FCP user base and more.

I think something is wrong here.

Apple, Quicktime or Off...

LOL!!

No, they just "buffed" the high-end PRO users because we are a NICHE MARKET.

We joke at Offhollywood all the time that they should call change the name Pro Apps to Semi-Pro APPS or Sorta-Pro Apps.

laguun
03-08-2008, 06:05 AM
LOL!!

We joke at Offhollywood all the time that they should call change the name Pro Apps to Semi-Pro APPS or Sorta-Pro Apps.

QT is nicknamed by several VFX guys here gammagamble and slowtime.

Lucas Wilson
03-08-2008, 06:19 AM
4K realtime DI systems isnt much different in price than i.e. scratch, dvs is somewhat surprising inexpensive.

A Clipster at its *base* configuration is not much more expensive than SCRATCH. But it is still more expensive. But if you want the realtime 4K configuration - that is *much* more expensive. If you want multistream 4K, that is exponentially more expensive because you have to own not one, but two Cine4K servers.

Laguun, could you please explain how you can do multistream 4K off one Clipster? Since a Clipster can only connect to one Cine4K server at a time, and one server is only capable of one stream, how is this possible? Even the DVS website claims "up to 4K." with no mention of multistream.

Don't misunderstand me. I think Clipster is a great box, and I have a lot of respect for the LA team - but I think you are overstating their capabilities and I know you are understating their price. :)

A Baselight8 is the only Filmlight product capable of realtime4K. They start at over US$500K.


4k -dci- compliant displays are still much to expensive, but if you grab one of the classic 3840x2400 pix lcds (they use to flow on ebay at ~1000-3000) you have a pretty good sharpness check
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors
they are quite angle dependent and not to fast however.

But 3840 x 2400 is not 4K, and these monitors have horribly slow refresh at maximum resolution. They were primarily intended for medical applications where refresh isn't a critical gating factor. If you're not going to be displaying true 4K, wouldn't you be just as well off with a decent 23"?

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE< Inc.
LA, CA, USA

M Most
03-08-2008, 07:18 AM
Oh yeah ... and stupid committees.

I am selling "F the DCI" T-shirts at NAB.

Mark, I really don't understand your problem with the DCI specification or the committee that created it. Do you know any of the people who serve on that committee, and have you talked to them about it? The specification was specifically written to be very open ended regarding evolving color standards and yet still be applicable to current technology. It was also written to institute security procedures that are there not only because of general Internet based consumer piracy, but also to allow the business to continue as a business, by specifying a time frame for exhibitor distribution of the material and also by specifying what screens it can be shown on. All of these things are necessary for the business to continue to make money and protect and expand the theatrical experience for moviegoers. It's not simple because it can't be. It's not intended for consumers, and it's not intended to be a substitute for projecting DVCProHD files from a Mac Mini. It's intended to make the digital cinema system more uniform and reliable by laying down specific requirements for proper exhibition. And if it takes a bit of effort on the part of post production service suppliers to achieve that, I personally have no problem with that. Not everything is intended to be consumer desktop software, you know. Nor should it be. If one wants to take an HDCam tape and stick it in a JH3 connected to a digital cinema projector, nobody is stopping you, provided you can find a theater that will allow you to do that. And if you want to play back files from a computer into the same projector, well, nobody is preventing you from doing that either. But if you want a reliable, repeatable presentation with some standards for color, brightness, sound, and distribution format, that adapts easily to things like subtitled presentations without modification and from the same distribution element, and that will look virtually the same in a theater as in your original DI suite, a DCP is a much better bet. Just don't expect to do that on consumer software.

Rudi Herbert
03-08-2008, 08:01 AM
A lot of this discussion, informative, inspired, indicative of future trends and fun as it is to read, is ultimately academic. Do we REALLY need realtime 4K monitoring, editing, grading and other for exhibition that, for the foreseable future (meaning the next 3-4 years at the very least) will remain 2K 99% of the time? Of course not. Have you ever seen a film projected on a well set, DCI compliant theather on a good 2K projector? It looks fantastic. I certainly don't need anymore than that, much less will the "uneducated" audiences. It is taking tremendous time and effort to move theathers worldwide into a digital projection format, do you think they'll do it any less begrudgingly if instead of the relatively easy and cheap 2K system we tell them to incur 4 times the headache and expense for a 4K projection system? I don't think so.

I f we can truly work in realtime at 2K, with several layers, transitions, whatnot, then that is indeed the sweet spot. Check things here and there at 4K, but 2K is where the real world work will be done for a while still.

Mark L. Pederson
03-08-2008, 08:31 AM
And if it takes a bit of effort on the part of post production service suppliers to achieve that, I personally have no problem with that.
Neither do I.

I'll argue DCI with you over drinks at NAB on me.

M Most
03-08-2008, 09:04 AM
Neither do I.

I'll argue DCI with you over drinks at NAB on me.

If we're talking politics of DCI - and that would mean the true nature of who really owns distribution, and who is permitted to participate either as a service supplier or a customer as a result of that ownership - then it probably won't be much of an argument, because we'll likely be in total agreement. If, however, we're talking tech, I'll be looking forward to your thoughts on that. Prior to those drinks, though, you might want to read up on the AMPAS IIF proposal, which should be made publicly available soon and incorporates some good ideas for post production standardization (lots of things from ILM's work on OpenEXR, and some interesting ideas about scene referred color, use of ILM's Color Transformation Language, and reference transforms), and DC28, which is the SMPTE committee that is attempting to finalize a standard based largely on the work of DCI, but incorporating other things as well.

Hope I'm not getting too geeky here...

If you're planning on being in Vegas over the weekend, or more specifically attending the Digital Cinema Summit, that would be a good time and place to meet..

Hans von Sonntag
03-08-2008, 09:44 AM
Hey Hans -

I am impressed!

Can you tell me how fast 1080p ProRes with ONE primary grade and TWO secondaries?

Uncompressed 1080p with ONE primary grade and TWO secondaries?

Thanks on advance!

Hi Mark (you made me curious..)

I got the 5600fx for SpeedGrade which is my favourit CC app. SpeedGrade works like a charm (tons of grading layers RT) with this card but als does Color. 1080p ProResHQ (did not want to turn on my Raid for UC) is RT with 1 Primary, 2 Secondaries (Key) and 1 more Secondary with a mask that was even blurred.

I did not go any further because of lacking time (the kids) but it seems like that Color benefits very much from this card and the drivers are not bad at all. Highly recommended!

I have to add that the 5600fx does not have a HDSDI out, for some a dealbreaker for others like me a feature which is no so important (there are work arounds). Anway, the only solution for serious DI work on the MAC.

Hans

Edit: Footage played back at 30 fps.

David Birdy
03-08-2008, 10:08 AM
Exactly. FIRST you want killer RED 4K to current 2K infrastructure.

But for the record ... personal ego and perception run this industry.

Oh yeah ... and stupid committees.

I am selling "F the DCI" T-shirts at NAB.

Quote of the week!!! O how true it is Mark... I will add the people controlling the money really don't know media work-flows....

Dave

Lucas Wilson
03-08-2008, 10:31 AM
I have to add that the 5600fx does not have a HDSDI out, for some a dealbreaker for others like me a feature which is no so important (there are work arounds). Anway, the only solution for serious DI work on the MAC.

A small clarification... There is an SDI card for the 5600, but it is only supported on Windows.

Cheers,

Lucas
------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA

Hans von Sonntag
03-08-2008, 10:37 AM
A small clarification... There is an SDI card for the 5600, but it is only supported on Windows.

Cheers,

Lucas
------
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA

You are right, of course. Appel is sleeping again.
Just to add: The 5600 with SDI option is not cheap... but great to have.

Hans

cinepost35
03-08-2008, 12:04 PM
Does anyone know if you can Color in 2k in realtime on any system and then apply that CC to 4k DPX files headed to the lab for output?

Sanjin Jukic
03-08-2008, 12:21 PM
Go back to the main topic 4K realtime colo(u)r grading

is possible today only with Baselight8,


Quantel's Pablo (http://www.quantel.com/site/en.nsf/html/pablo_home)

and maybe Chrome Imaging's

MATRIX 4K (http://www.chrome-imaging.com/index.php?page=products) that something about that should be confirmed at NAB 2008.

All other systems are 2K like Speedgrade, Scratch, Color, etc...

More about Baselight EIGHT:

"Baselight EIGHT:
maximum bandwidth, ultimate efficiency
Featuring 48TB local storage capacity,
Baselight EIGHT provides the performance
and allows you to play and grade multiple
4K streams in real-time. Doubling the power
of Baselight FOUR, the Baselight EIGHT enables
real-time grading of 4K scans or multiple
real-time 2K streams and is ideal for a high-end
grading suite for commercials or film grading.
Baselight EIGHT includes Blackboard."

Baselight Blackboard Viewer>> (http://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/products/baselight/blackboard_viewer)

LINK>>> (http://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/products/baselight/product_range)

http://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/images/filmlight/misc/bl_architecture_large.png

http://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/images/filmlight/carousel/carousel_bl_hd_insuite.png

http://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/images/filmlight/carousel/carousel_bl_8closeup.png

cinepost35
03-08-2008, 01:17 PM
I have to ask...

Why? What exactly are you delivering and to whom that this is important? If we're talking about actual distribution, it should be noted that at least 85% of high end DI work is done in 2K, and to date there have been very, very few digital cinema packages done in anything but 2K. So even in the highest end theatrical distribution chains, there is little demand or even opportunity for 4K finishing or delivery elements. Other than personal ego or a lack of understanding of distribution realities, what are your reasons for feeling that this is needed?


4K ( in 2D and 3D ) is the future of Digital Cinema and plenty of folks are creating projects in 4K and/or involved in projects in production now. All these will be delivering in 4K and 2K when they are completed.


The sooner Red makes additional 4K tools available the better. I agree a great deal of folks who are buying Reds seem to be finishing in 2k or less which is fine but I wouldn't discount the need for 4K any day.


BTW....AMC just signed a deal with IMAX for 100 new theaters for DMR films all will look for 4K .

laguun
03-08-2008, 02:55 PM
A Clipster at its *base* configuration is not much more expensive than SCRATCH. But it is still more expensive.

clipster is in the same ballpark as your prices. It is usually offered at ~50-60K.



But if you want the realtime 4K configuration - that is *much* more expensive.

No.
The difference is in the lower $$.$$$.



Don't misunderstand me. I think Clipster is a great box, and I have a lot of respect for the LA team -

Clipster surely is a real powerhouse and performancewise a class above the pc with sdi graphics card system as iridas speedgrade, assimilate scratch or apple color. i however prefer speedgrades or scratchs interface over the dvs ui. The clipsters spycer networking in the background however is also outstanding (and free). For an ideal uncompressed red 4k workflow clipster is certainly one of the top choices out there.



but I think you are overstating their capabilities and I know you are understating their price. :)

I think you know quite well that clipster perform 4K in realtime, and regarding the prices, dvs does allow price quotes. My last quote was in september 2007, and it was in the same pricerange as scratch. I will inquire monday if that changed.



A Baselight8 is the only Filmlight product capable of realtime4K. They start at over US$500K.

baselight starts at ~130.000. The baselight8 system costs quite a bit less than 500.000 (at least here in europe), but it is correct that the bl8 it is their 4K realtime-capable system.



But 3840 x 2400 is not 4K, and these monitors have horribly slow refresh at maximum resolution. They were primarily intended for medical applications where refresh isn't a critical gating factor. If you're not going to be displaying true 4K, wouldn't you be just as well off with a decent 23"?

I stated that the monitors are slow, however they arent "terribly" slow. Different from 2K/1080p monitors, they are sharp enough to spot 4K noise and sharpness issues which one will miss in 2K, when 75% of the pixels arent displayed.

Also, their contrast is mediocre and they arent recommendable for precise color timing. As inexpensive 4K monitoring alternative to a SRX these monitors are however quite something.

M Most
03-08-2008, 05:25 PM
4K ( in 2D and 3D ) is the future of Digital Cinema and plenty of folks are creating projects in 4K and/or involved in projects in production now. All these will be delivering in 4K and 2K when they are completed.

Uhh, OK. If you say so. I wish them all good luck with that.


BTW....AMC just signed a deal with IMAX for 100 new theaters for DMR films all will look for 4K .

Installing a projector is one thing, and, frankly, the easy part. Creating deliverable 4K content at the same budget as 2K (which is pretty much required in today's industry economic environment), and then creating and delivering 4K DCP's for anything but the largest studio projects is very unlikely in the foreseeable future, at least for the next few years. Not to mention that of all the projectors I've seen, the Sony 4K projector - the only currently shipping product - is probably my least favorite digital cinema projector. Pure resolution means little if the blacks are not right and the colors are not accurate. But each to their own.

Your opinion seems to be one of conjecture. Mine is one of reality. However, everyone is entitled to accept or reject either.

cinepost35
03-09-2008, 08:36 AM
Uhh, OK. If you say so. I wish them all good luck with that.



Installing a projector is one thing, and, frankly, the easy part. Creating deliverable 4K content at the same budget as 2K (which is pretty much required in today's industry economic environment), and then creating and delivering 4K DCP's for anything but the largest studio projects is very unlikely in the foreseeable future, at least for the next few years. Not to mention that of all the projectors I've seen, the Sony 4K projector - the only currently shipping product - is probably my least favorite digital cinema projector. Pure resolution means little if the blacks are not right and the colors are not accurate. But each to their own.

Your opinion seems to be one of conjecture. Mine is one of reality. However, everyone is entitled to accept or reject either.


4k will be commonplace faster than you think.

Mark L. Pederson
03-09-2008, 10:34 AM
4k will be commonplace faster than you think.

I agree with that statement. That's one place mmost and I differ on opinions -

but you should note that IMHO mmost is one of the more knowledgeable post production folks who post on REDUSER. He has significant real world experience and he knows his tech.

M Most
03-09-2008, 12:12 PM
4k will be commonplace faster than you think.

We'll see. Digital projection was supposed to be on about 9000 domestic US screens by now. It's currently on less than 1/3 of that, and movement to digital distribution and projection is much slower than that outside the US. There is no measurable consumer demand for digital projection, let alone 4K. If anything, there is far more interest and at least empirically demonstrated demand for digital 3D projection than there is for 4K. The general moviegoing public is at least aware of what 3D is and brings to certain presentations, while they know little to nothing about 4K, either as a practical reality or even a buzzword. The main impetus behind digital projection is an economic one in terms of distribution costs, and even that has not been enough. The only workable model for financing digital projection has come from a virtual print fee system, which basically means that for the next few years, the studios are subsidizing their anticipated future cost reductions by paying for the digital equipment and installations through a diversion of the money they would normally spend on prints for those theaters that choose to participate, so even the economic benefits to the studios are some ways away.

Those here and elsewhere who believe that technology in and of itself - at least in the entertainment film business - is desirable and inevitable are forming those opinions in part based on their own personal wish list. Practical and economic reality says otherwise.

Martin Tlaskal
03-11-2008, 07:55 AM
A Baselight8 is the only Filmlight product capable of realtime4K. They start at over US$500K.



I work for FilmLight - I'd just like to take a moment to refute this comment.
A Baselight4 is capable of realtime playback and grading of full-gate (4x3 aspect) 4k.

We at FilmLight wouldn't normally post on the message boards of another company, I just wanted to set the record straight.

In my experience, it's often wise when gathering product information to
contact manufacturers directly (rather than on relying posts from
competitors in public forums).

Adam Glick
03-11-2008, 11:00 AM
Clipster surely is a real powerhouse and performancewise a class above the pc with sdi graphics card system as iridas speedgrade, assimilate scratch or apple color. i however prefer speedgrades or scratchs interface over the dvs ui. The clipsters spycer networking in the background however is also outstanding (and free). For an ideal uncompressed red 4k workflow clipster is certainly one of the top choices out there.



The Clipster is a fine turn-key platform for 2K & 4K finishing but there is no denying that beyond its (err quirky?) software toolset, network rendering and some fairly robust I/O (4K realtime playout, for what it's worth), it is a standard PC in every way.

With the RED pipeline in mind, and certainly for 2K finishing, I can't see any benefit to Clipster over the other options available.

(edited for spellinfhg)

laguun
03-11-2008, 04:39 PM
The Clipster is a fine turn-key platform for 2K & 4K finishing but there is no denying that beyond its (err quirky?) software toolset, network rendering and some fairly robust I/O (4K realtime playout, for what it's worth), it is a standard PC in every way.

DVS is and was manufacturing dedicated film/video hardware for standalone, Silicon Graphics, Intel X86 and many other platforms since over 20 years.

No matter what the host system is, the real power of these solutions, which exceed the limits of current personal computer technology, are in the DVS designed hardwares, boxxster could also OEM some of these, as the Centauror Hydra Boards etc.

I would recommend to contact DVS to understand their products.



With the RED pipeline in mind, and certainly for 2K finishing, I can't see any benefit to Clipster over the other options available.
(edited for spellinfhg)
The main benefit would be that you work and edit in 4K realtime with 4K display and 4K display for a 4K camera, not with 75% less reolution. 2K is 75% less resolution.

The red is 4K, and X86 computers deliver full 4K i/o with dedicated image hardware (as Dvs), clusters (as Filmlight) or a mix of both (as Quantel), but standard desktop/workstation pc as skulltrail etc are so far simply not powerful enough or a missing hardware for 4K i/o.

Thats why this thread is called "4K DI options".

If your opinion is that the houndreds of baselight/clipster/iQ customers made a poor choice and should instead buy a regular PC with a Nvidia graphics card and work in 2K instead of 4K thats perfectly ok.

Lucas Wilson
03-11-2008, 06:55 PM
I work for FilmLight - I'd just like to take a moment to refute this comment.
A Baselight4 is capable of realtime playback and grading of full-gate (4x3 aspect) 4k.

We at FilmLight wouldn't normally post on the message boards of another company, I just wanted to set the record straight.

In my experience, it's often wise when gathering product information to
contact manufacturers directly (rather than on relying posts from
competitors in public forums).

Martin,

My source for this was a current Baselight4 customer. You're right - I should have contacted Filmlight directly.

Apologies, and thank you for jumping in.

Best,

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA

Sven Seynaeve
03-11-2008, 07:17 PM
Ok, Luki,
no offense, but if 3 or 4 companies have jumped on the train for 4k , I think it would benefit scratch a lot to work on this issue now and not later. Me myself, even if I would only have to deliver 2k , I'd prefer being able to output 4k and work in a 4k realtime environment when possible, and assure my investment on a longer term. I'm sure there must be a workaround or a hardware manufacturer able to help you guys out on this. And Scratch being well priced, i still had to scratch my hair when they made me an offer for the san and needed equipment, I'm getting closer to the highpriced systems than I first thought.
Or maby some of your collegues over here are somewhat misinformed and made my future workflow to expensive for what I was meaning. Anyway i asked being able to output 4k dpx files when graded, and having space to put a whole feature on it.

I would regret it I would have to follow my current dp's choice and needs on this and looking at some other system.

On the other hand , I really loved the demo at Ibc, I'm really believing your product should be able to deliver some familiar results, but then you should take it to account that even for a higher price, ( a little bit the same as the red prime price case), then we would choose scratch over the other systems
based on your knowledge and coorperation with red themselves.

Adam Glick
03-11-2008, 08:21 PM
No matter what the host system is, the real power of these solutions, which exceed the limits of current personal computer technology, are in the DVS designed hardwares, boxxster could also OEM some of these, as the Centauror Hydra Boards etc.

I would recommend to contact DVS to understand their products.



- Am very familiar with the DVS offerings for many years. As I said, they have some nice hardware technology.

Realtime 4K scaling/grading, 2K cross-dissolves, 4K I/O, etc are very nice but mostly irrelevant for for editorial, FX & finishing based on feedback from just about everyone/everywhere.

Most facilities don't want to/need to work at full 4K resolution - and wouldn't be able to see the difference anyway on anything less than a 40' screen...

And, As has been stated, the Sony SXRD projector isn't likely to be something that most facilities need to (or want to) grade/finish on. The few other 4K displays are arguably unusable for grading/finishing purposes.

The added expense, technical overhead, and immature (and expensive) display options required for working in 4K likely outweight any benefits for the vast majority of projects/facilities.

Please tell me where I'm wrong...as I am here to learn as much as share what I (think I) know...





The main benefit would be that you work and edit in 4K realtime with 4K display and 4K display for a 4K camera, not with 75% less reolution. 2K is 75% less resolution.



Again, see above...no measurable benefit that I can see... Maybe I just don't get it though...





If your opinion is that the hundreds of baselight/clipster/iQ customers made a poor choice and should instead buy a regular PC with a Nvidia graphics card and work in 2K instead of 4K thats perfectly ok.

[/QUOTE]

I'm sure that there are many happy baselight/iQ & clipster customers cranking out projects on a daily basis.

Those are certainly respected and powerful toolsets.




Thats why this thread is called "4K DI options".



RED 4K conform works beautifully & reliably on Windows workstations running Scratch. This is the most cost-effective and powerful of the purpose-built "4K DI options" I can think of...

;)

Again, not here to put down anybody or any company - just trying to understand where everybody is "coming from"...

Cheers!

Adam

laguun
03-11-2008, 09:35 PM
RED 4K conform works beautifully & reliably on Windows workstations running Scratch. This is the most cost-effective and powerful of the purpose-built "4K DI options" I can think of...

scratch is a good software, however, its displaying 2K and has 2K realtime. It cant display 4K. it cant grade at 4K in realtime, and it doesnt edit at 4K in realtime. for a 4k workflow, you might want to edit, grade and display in 4K.

there are many reasons why customers want 4k realtime. one might be productivity speed (changing things in the 4k master in realtime, or not having to render for a version), another might be quality assurance (as you wont be able to spot i.e. sensor noise or keyspill on the full image in 2k for 4k master), another one might be -presenting- your work done with red. to show it in 4k, speedgrade/scratch/color/lustre owner will need to rent at a clipster/baselight etc studio. Not the other way around.






Again, not here to put down anybody or any company - just trying to understand where everybody is "coming from"...
Cheers!
Adam
combustion or digital fusion etc all operate at above 8k. speedgrade or scratch or apple color etc i/o at 2k and have 2k rt. clipster and baselight i/o at 4 and have 4k rt. different markets. All 3 approaches serve different needs
of different customers. And as red is a 4k camera it makes sense to work in 4k. Or would you recommend to master NTSC at 320*240?

cheers as well

p.s.
has boxx anything with 4k i/o in the pipeline or will you guys stay with 2K in 2008? Always liked your system, ehm... boxxes.

Lucas Wilson
03-11-2008, 09:57 PM
scratch is a good software, however, its displaying 2K and has 2K realtime. It cant display 4K. it cant grade at 4K in realtime, and it doesnt edit at 4K in realtime. for a 4k workflow, you might want to edit, grade and display in 4K.

Laguun,

What is more correct is:

1) SCRATCH cannot grade the Full Rez. decode of R3D files in realtime.
2) SCRATCH cannot output the entire raster of a 4K file in 4K to an SXRD.
3) SCRATCH can grade 4K RGB in realtime and can edit and playback 4K RGB in realtime.
4) SCRATCH has i/o at 4K in data.
5) There is no such thing as 4K video input. SCRATCH can feed dual-link 2048x1080 RGB in realtime from half-rez R3D, but cannot feed octo-link to an SXRD.


And as red is a 4k camera it makes sense to work in 4k. Or would you recommend to master NTSC at 320*240?

They are not the same thing.... it makes sense to you to work in 4K, and that will be a great workflow for you and your facility. Many other facilities (and other users and artists on Reduser) have spoken to why 2K is a good workflow for them, and it is.

Best,

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA

Dan Hudgins
03-12-2008, 12:09 AM
I have been working on a uncompressed 4k post system for several years now, most of the Phase 1 work, just enough to do the job on a feature is for Download in "Beta Test" now.

One surprise from all this is just how god awful film is to work with, and that color film does not come close to 4k resolution at 80% MTF in real world use. I have been doing scanning tests with a good 105mm Printing Nikkor and the film grain+Camera lens COF is much larger than pixels at 4k, perhaps 3 to 5 pixels wide, and don't say the focus is off in the scan because the dust and scratches resolve better, maybe 2 to 3 pixels wide. That lens is one of the best ever made for optical printer work. I scanned some footage shot on Sound Recording film which is rated over 500 l/p per mm and got better results but the grain is still at least 2 pixels wide, and that film is 3 to 6 times sharper than any color film. I do not have a camera that is 8k on the scanner yet, but can crop and do not see that their would be much gain in scanning 8k since the grain will just get sharper making it more visable.

The RED ONE (tm) camera does not resolve single pixels at 4k with the OLPF in place at better than 80% MTF in all colors. It probably does not get true resolution in RGB even at 2k at 80% MTF, although with sharpening the monochrome test chart might be fudged to seem so.

To get true 4k RGB for all pixels at 80% MTF from a Bayer filter sensor would require 8k or more.

The increase in resolution on the theatre screen from a 2k DI to 4k DI is small in the low % MTF because the lens used in a 35mm film theatre projector cannot resolve 4k at 80% MTF, and even if it could it is out of focus almost all of the time so what you get is just a slight bit of improvement not double. And if you do get a 4k projector to focus yes you will see more noise on a 4k monitor also at 4k because most of what is in 90% of the frame was never in focus enough when the film or digital was shot to record detail at 4k anyway.

What 4k gets you is less raster in the result, but if are going to compress the end result you have four times as much information to compress, so still frames may look sharper, but moving subjects will show more artifacts when interframe compression is used than using 2k since in 2k the full screen refresh rate can be 4 times a fast for a given bit rate.

4k projection should be coming in a few years, and film out at 4k can show less residual raster lines, so I have been working on the assumption that doing the DI at 4k is worth the 6x to 8x increase in workflow time, because in the future when 4k becomes standard I would have a set of UNCOMPRESSED 4k frames to use for output archived. (see below for the your film will never be seen again point of view).

Since color film fades, scanning now at 4k lets you archive a good quality version, since scanning at 8k will just give sharper grain and dust for the most part.

I also notice that many people sit too far back in many theaters to see much improvement when going from 2k to 4k, to see individual pixels in the blue/green you would need to sit near the front next to the screen, maybe half the screen width, rather than twice the screen width or more that most people sit at now.

As far as I can make out the 80% MTF resolution in many theaters corresponds to about 1280x720 due to poor focus of the projection lens, & has been less that 512x288 at some places I have gone.

I just got through seeing Peter Bogdanovich's Nickelodeon shown on the Castro's big screen in video projection from a Beta SP tape. The resolution of the Beta SP tape was about 2/3 of what the screen usually gets from a 35mm print, maybe, since the focus is not touched up often enough.

Although 4k preview might be nice, if it is compressed you are not going to see the film grain from every frame, nor are you going to see the dust and other marks spots and muck that are on each frame as it comes back from the lab. When footage is compressed to take less space you can no longer see what you shot on the preview screen the way you would if you were looking at a workprint in a projector, and since if you look at a workprint in a projector you barely see 1k at 80% MTF. If you did get an uncompressed 4k preview you would see much more grain and noise than the viewers in the movie theatre, if the preview screen displays at 4k RGB on each pixel and you get VERY close to the monitor.

For the grading in my system I use 1024x768 since CRT monitors running at 2048x1536 do not show much more detail and it takes more than 4 times as long to update the screen. Using a 4k monitor would take 16 times as long to update, although that would be a nice option. If you want look that close at a frame, it should be enough to look at a part of the image, like in my Sharp/Soft command where I have a 1:1 zoom crop view on a 1024x768 screen. If you put the 1:1 zoom crop view on a 2048x1536 monitor you can no longer SEE the pixels so it is no linger a 1:1 view. On a 4k monitor you would need a magnifying glass to see the pixels if it was able to display them if you have a 22" monitor on your desk, so to look at details a in 4k image it seems better to just use a zoom crop of the whole image at 1k.

For myself I do not see the advantage of real time 4k preview since the cost of making an uncompressed 4k preview system would be more that I could earn in 5 lifetimes.

For editing uncompressed 640x350 proxy preview seems to work just fine, if you need a close up for looping or looking at the actors lips you can make a zoom crop set of proxy frames.

Some people on this forum have suggested that people cannot tell the difference between HD compressed video and Uncompressed 4k once shown on 35mm film. I for the most part am sure I could tell, and that is why I have been working on making a uncompressed 4k system that any feature filmmaker could use for "freeish" if he wanted uncompressed 4k.

I have been doing some tests, and my program seems to run (at least in part) under XP using NT file system, so it may be possable to get a network hooked up to manage the 25TB to 200TB of frames required. Right now the throughput for 4k uncompressed is very slow, but I may be able to get the speed up 3x someday, I have done some tests to see what makes a difference.

The thing I do notice in the movie theatre from digital compressed source more than low resolution, and 35mm is not high resolution at 80% MTF on the movie theatre screen, is the compression artifacts. In digital projection, and projection of film from compressed digital source, that I have seen, the compression artifacts are much worse than the washed out colors, poor shadow deatil, and twinkling pixels.

People who have seen digital projection from NEW projectors should realize that projectors in theatres are not well mantained due to cost, so the optics get fogged up and the black level goes up in older projectors, so even if digital projection is a little sharper in time film may look better because it will have a black and good color. It seems unlikely that theaters will upgrade to 4k projectors when only a few people show up now. There has been talk of using DVDs rather than 35mm film prints for Repertory Cinema, and I am seeing more medium rez video projection in movie theatres around here (not the previews but the feature).

So does that mean that 4k distribution will only be to the home (for the most part), and if so at what compression level. At that compression level, will the detail in an Uncompressed 4k DI be worth the bother? My brother says that the DVDs of our film tests look BETTER than the film projected because the software filters remove some of the flicker, dust, grain, weave, and such so that the interframe compression can be done. Since 4k may require higher compression ratio than 2k for home viewing, will the 4k show more compression artifacts than 2k or HD (limited bandwith over cable etc.)?

What people seem to like is "beautified" film that has passed through many software filters. In the old days the lack of resolution in the contact printing and optical printing "beautified" the film as well by not sharply resolving the image detail, grain, and muck. If you scan old films at 4k you would need to filter out much of the detail to not see a storm of grain and muck.

4k uncompressed DI can be done on a bank of networked PCs now, probably, if you want to. The software is "freeish", so the main cost is the TB of storage and the CPUs, maybe $25,000.00 to $50,000.00 could get a feature finished in a year. At 2k that same hardware might finish in 3 months, but unless you have a large staff you could not do the editing, grading, scoring, folly, yourself in 3 months. So I have been thinking why not post at 4k uncompressed since if it will take me two years to edit,grade, score, and folly,... the frames can cook on PCs without monitors night and day while I am doing things, so their is not real big penalty for going 4k uncompressed over 2k uncompressed other than needing twice or more as many computers and four times or more as many HD.

I think there is piratical benefit from shooting UNCOMPRESSED in the RED ONE (tm), if they ever get that working, since if you pull the shadows up the compression artifacts can probably become visable as the camera works now, if you use fill light the compression ratio goes up so you lose detail elsewhere in the frame. The compression cuts the bandwith in the shadow areas.

Then you get the issue of will there be a later 4k market for what you are shooting now, or is the product a "here today gone tomorrow," if so then the point of view to go compressed HD and forget any idea of quality says "just do it" and do it as fast and cheep as you can get away with.

BTW If anybody has a few frames of color negative film that is 80% MTF at 4k please send it to me so I can scan it & see for myself...

laguun
03-12-2008, 08:12 AM
3) SCRATCH can grade 4K RGB in realtime and can edit and playback 4K RGB in realtime.

Hi luki,
thats these statements who mislead customers.
scratch plays back 4k RGB to 2k RGB display. thats 25% of 4K resolution.



4) SCRATCH has i/o at 4K in data.

so do after effect, combustion, shake or nuke.
4K i/o to an astro or ibm monitor, to a sony (or the upcoming jvcs) 4k projector is basing on sdi. Systems as DVS Clipster or Filmlight Baselight offer taht, other systems as iridas speedgrade or assimilate scratch or apple color dont.



5) There is no such thing as 4K video input.

Thats simply wrong.
The sony SRX (which recently won its first order for over 100 cinema screens at landmark) has standard 4K video input via linked sdi.

I am pointing this out as we already had the nasty experience with a fullfeature what can can happen if you monitor at 2k and then screen at 4k.

We graded on discreet with 2K monitoring, 35mm filmout was nice, 2K monitoring was nice, and when we run it through the clipster to the SRX me, director, dp and producer spotted noise and aliasing we never saw before and we had to rework several scenes - this time with 4k monitoring.



SCRATCH can feed dual-link 2048x1080 RGB in realtime from half-rez R3D, but cannot feed octo-link to an SXRD.

Thats what i am talking about.
I dont understand why you claim 4k playback when you only have 2K monitoring. Following your logic any computer could playback 4k, even with quicktime or video for windows.



They are not the same thing.... it makes sense to you to work in 4K, and that will be a great workflow for you and your facility. Many other facilities (and other users and artists on Reduser) have spoken to why 2K is a good workflow for them, and it is.

Many projects are and will be 1080p/2K here as well. But many production shot on red want to use the 4K quality, thats whats this topic all about.

Best,

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA[/QUOTE]

Mike Gifford
03-12-2008, 09:31 AM
post 46 seems to have been sent by both laguun and lucas...

are you both now in agreement ? :unsure:

Sanjin Jukic
03-12-2008, 09:59 AM
After all Laguun and Luki deserve drink and dinner together in Las Vegas.

M Most
03-12-2008, 10:23 AM
The sony SRX ...has standard 4K video input via linked sdi.


There is no such thing as a "standard 4K video input." In fact, there is no such thing as a 4K video standard, period.

I can only speak for myself here, but Laguun, I think your inability to resist posting long, involved, and repetitive retorts to just about anything Lucas says is getting pretty tiresome. Everything you say, you've already said - in great detail - at least 100 times previously. I find some of the things you say interesting and on occasion, insightful, and I find Lucas' posts informative as well. But this constant tit-for-tat nonsense really needs to stop, as its not doing you, Lucas, or any readers here any favors. We really don't need to see a Laguun posting for each and every Luki posting, especially when we've already read what's in it.

As I said, I can only speak for myself. And I don't intend for any of this to be taken personally.

Rudi Herbert
03-12-2008, 10:28 AM
I can only speak for myself here, but Laguun, I think your inability to resist posting long, involved, and repetitive retorts to just about anything Lucas says is getting pretty tiresome. Everything you say, you've already said - in great detail - at least 100 times previously. I find some of the things you say interesting and on occasion, insightful, and I find Lucas' posts informative as well. But this constant tit-for-tat nonsense really needs to stop, as its not doing you, Lucas, or any readers here any favors. We really don't need to see a Laguun posting for each and every Luki posting, especially when we've already read what's in it.

Now, now, now Mike :-) I agree with you fully, while I reiterate that I have nothing but respect for both those members.

Mark L. Pederson
03-12-2008, 03:36 PM
There is no such thing as a "standard 4K video input." In fact, there is no such thing as a 4K video standard, period.


sounds like a opportunity.

M Most
03-12-2008, 04:57 PM
sounds like a opportunity.

Huh?

Mark, I think you know better than that. Standards are set by standards setting organizations to allow manufacturers and others to build devices that conform to a single set of rules. They are often (but not always) sanctioned internationally and are based on what is determined by a group of interested parties to be the best ways to represent things like interfaces, signal formats, and equipment interconnects. Standards setting entities are things like the SMPTE and the EBU. When individual companies come up with proprietary devices and formats they are not "standards." Just because Sony - or Panasonic, or Apple, or Red - declares their own proprietary format a "standard" does not make it so. So setting a standard is not an "opportunity," it is a responsibility of the standards setting entities this industry supports. That's why, for instance, the DCI specification is not a "standard." It is a specification that spells out, in great detail, a framework for eventual acceptance as the basis of a standard. The standard will be written by the SMPTE, specifically by a SMPTE committee called DC28. And it will not be proprietary to any particular company.

It is, of course, true that companies often submit parts of their own intellectual property to be considered as a partial basis for a standard. That is the case with Microsoft's Windows Media Video (the basis for the VC-1 standard) and a number of others. Now, if you want to talk about "de facto standards," like, say, Quicktime, those are proprietary formats that attain enough market penetration to be significant. But they are not "standards," and you won't often see things like hardware interfaces being designed without real standards.

laguun
03-12-2008, 05:24 PM
I can only speak for myself here, but Laguun, I think your inability to resist posting long, involved, and repetitive retorts to just about anything Lucas says is getting pretty tiresome.

Hi,

in this thread its the exact opposite. please read the thread from the beginning. Luki was adressing me directly, not the other way around.

As much i respect luki, when he post completly wrong technical information about the most widely used 4K projectors (as the sony srx would have 4 seperate panels), gives wrong price quotes of other manufacturers systems as baselight (a employee of them corrected luki on this), or gives wrong information of their different models (as baselight 8 would be necessary for realtime 4K, its the baselight 4) or when he claims that a 2K system as scratch has 4k playback, then its no surprise that i, employees of baselight, owners of srx 4k projectors will comment on this. I fully respect lukis enthusiasm for his employer and their products, and i think that their product is a good product. That however is no reason to post wrong or, lets say, rather marketing driven information.



I find some of the things you say interesting and on occasion, insightful, and I find Lucas' posts informative as well.

same with your posts.



But this constant tit-for-tat nonsense really needs to stop, as its not doing you, Lucas, or any readers here any favors.
We really don't need to see a Laguun posting for each and every Luki posting, especially when we've already read what's in it.

Its the exact opposite.
Read the thread from the start - and you will find that luki was directly adressing me.



As I said, I can only speak for myself. And I don't intend for any of this to be taken personally.
no bad blood - not taken personally (especially not on internet forums). its also getting on my own nerves, however this thread is about 4K DI options, not about them being unnecessary or why 2K systems as iridas speedgrade, assimilate scratch, apple color can playback a 75% scaled down 4K. Its also nothing personal for me and luki - i think when we once meet at a tradeshow we will probably have a good time.


There is no such thing as a "standard 4K video input." In fact, there is no such thing as a 4K video standard, period.

The DCI, Kodak, Sony and many others have clear standards for this:
http://www.dcimovies.com/

Without mediablock as in DCI, -all- the houndreds of 4K installations use quad and/or octalinked HD-SDI or DVI.

Also the existing 8K and UHDTV systems use HD-SDI, here is a photo of the rear of the NHK 8K camera:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/9/98/Uhdfuji0000.jpg

While i share your skepticism if 4K will be the dominant cinematic distribution resolution within the next 5 years (i personally rather expect 90-95% 2K and 5-10% 4K, with ~20% 2K 3D) and also agree basing on many years of first hand experience, that for viewers who sit quite distant from the screen 4K and 2K are no visible differences, i personally had my experiences how important 4K for 4K DI mastering is.

Furthermore, it makes a -huge- difference in the creative workflow if you have to rerender everything for 4k or simply press play, and astro, jvc, panasonic are bringing 4K products as displays and projectors to the market and we will hopefully have more 4k displays at lower pricepoints to choose from this year than ever before.

And finally, back to the topic - there are many great uses for 4K besides cinema.

We have done -many- multi-HD installations and special venues, cinerama-style, with many displays or projections side by side. From arts to trade show. Before red we had to use several hdcams together to shoot such things, now with red we can shoot for 4 displays at once, and for these kind of movies 4k for 4k is crucial.

Sven Seynaeve
03-12-2008, 05:35 PM
For me it's as simple as this,

when we have to put up a huge amount of money where risk is naturally envolved, you always want to make sure you don't did your homework wrong or this could have catatrophic results for you and your company.

We and the market are talking about 4k more often and often, some manufacturers start creating displays and projectors, there are editing and coloring applications that can handle it, but ..... Scratch being introduced to us on different ways with always the mentioning that the R3d files are 4k and that you could use them, they all could get away if they speak about systems who doesn't cost the price of a house, but these REALY are big amounts of money, where we have gotten used to through the years of being in the biz...
but it doesn't say we must not ensure ourselves.

For me it's clear , it seems that assimilate won't do an effort in the short time and that probably other systems will open up being able to import the R3d files sometime, maby due to a payed upgrade, but I prefer paying double when knowing what I'm getting instead of feeling ripped of sometime or owning equipment that didn't last enough time to make enough out of it....


It 's up to them , if they take this discussion into acount , or if they still want to lose as many installations as there have been spoken of lately by a couple of post houses.

Andrew Madu
03-13-2008, 12:30 AM
I can only speak for myself here, but Laguun, I think your inability to resist posting long, involved, and repetitive retorts to just about anything Lucas says is getting pretty tiresome.

It is imperative that, and as non to shabby investment figures are involved, product information presented here is done so in a clear and concise manner for the benefit of all, be they experienced or not so experienced.

FilmLight has already been forced to correct information presented to this forum, by a rival company, which was simply incorrect.

M Most
03-13-2008, 06:44 AM
The DCI, Kodak, Sony and many others have clear standards for this:
http://www.dcimovies.com/

1. The DCI document is not a standard. It is a specification. The DCI is not a standards setting entity.

2. Nowhere in the current DCI document (version 1.2 is the current one) is a physical interconnect for 4K mentioned. Dual dual link is mentioned, but it is referred to in terms of being able to deliver 2K at 48fps. The only references to 4K have to do with the media itself, not any specific method of feeding it to a projector - which is basically not in the scope of the DCI's work.

3. As I mentioned previously, it's not up to Kodak or Sony to define standards. Anything they do is proprietary to their products, and represents only one way of doing it. Standards are set by standards organizations. At this point in time, there is absolutely no such thing as a "4K video standard." That doesn't mean there aren't any ways to feed 4K worth of information to a display that can show it, but it does mean that there isn't a standard in place that defines how to do it.

Blair S. Paulsen
03-14-2008, 11:51 AM
When I started this thread I tried to limit the scope of the discussion and included some arbitrary givens. Of course humans, being humans, took the thread on quite a tour.

First off, the 2K vs 4K banter is perhaps entertaining but not the point of this thread. Notes about the poor quality of many theatrical presentations and how close you need to sit to see the benefits of high resolution imagery are important in the larger context but I think this discussion will be more efficient if we consider such factors stipulated as fact.

Currently shipping and NAB '08 show ready products that can work with and output 4K are very much of interest and IMHO on point for this thread. My thesis assumes that in "x" number of years that 4K display tech will see the penetration that HD is finally seeing now. I think specialty venues will lead the way, as Laguun mentioned there is demand for imagery where the head turning factor is a value add.

I am interested in this issue because I wish to sell the benefits of 4K and to do that effectively I need to be able to show people what I am talking about and for that I need 4K display. Like others mentioned there is also the critical issue of making sure that your 4K masterpiece looks dynamite when the client sees it on the big screen, nasty surprises at that stage can be problematic to say the least.

I don't expect to be doing 4K uncompressed for less than $50K plus display before 2011. What I am hoping is possible is to use modern wavelet compression to allow 4K real time workflows within a year. How to make that happen? Here is my completely speculative road map:

Workstations running Linux, Mac or Windows incorporate the next generation of CPUs, GPUs, memory and bus architectures, etc.

A PCIe2.0 special purpose card that can do hardware de-bayer of RedCode on the fly. Limited updates via firmware would be nice.

A GPU that can crank out 4K via current multi-link topologies or, better yet, a new connection standard for the next decade, please.

4K display tech for under $10K. I keep expecting Apple to offer a 3,840 by 2,160 LED backlit LCD monitor but no love yet. The Red Leader has teased us with 4K delivery options, including projectors, but the timetable is uncertain.

Blair S. Paulsen
03-14-2008, 02:09 PM
For those of you wondering about the current status of digital projection this article about ShoWest has some interesting points

http://displaydaily.com/2008/03/13/3d-dominates-showest/

Dan Hudgins
03-14-2008, 03:11 PM
When I started this thread I tried to limit the scope of the discussion and included some arbitrary givens. Of course humans, being humans, took the thread on quite a tour.

First off, the 2K vs 4K banter is perhaps entertaining but not the point of this thread. Notes about the poor quality of many theatrical presentations and how close you need to sit to see the benefits of high resolution imagery are important in the larger context but I think this discussion will be more efficient if we consider such factors stipulated as fact.

Currently shipping and NAB '08 show ready products that can work with and output 4K are very much of interest and IMHO on point for this thread. My thesis assumes that in "x" number of years that 4K display tech will see the penetration that HD is finally seeing now. I think specialty venues will lead the way, as Laguun mentioned there is demand for imagery where the head turning factor is a value add.

I am interested in this issue because I wish to sell the benefits of 4K and to do that effectively I need to be able to show people what I am talking about and for that I need 4K display. Like others mentioned there is also the critical issue of making sure that your 4K masterpiece looks dynamite when the client sees it on the big screen, nasty surprises at that stage can be problematic to say the least.

I don't expect to be doing 4K uncompressed for less than $50K plus display before 2011. What I am hoping is possible is to use modern wavelet compression to allow 4K real time workflows within a year. How to make that happen? Here is my completely speculative road map:

Workstations running Linux, Mac or Windows incorporate the next generation of CPUs, GPUs, memory and bus architectures, etc.

A PCIe2.0 special purpose card that can do hardware de-bayer of RedCode on the fly. Limited updates via firmware would be nice.

A GPU that can crank out 4K via current multi-link topologies or, better yet, a new connection standard for the next decade, please.

4K display tech for under $10K. I keep expecting Apple to offer a 3,840 by 2,160 LED backlit LCD monitor but no love yet. The Red Leader has teased us with 4K delivery options, including projectors, but the timetable is uncertain.

Since I am working on uncompressed non-realtime 4k post, I have some questions?

1) What compression ratio are you planing on using for the frame data, 100:1, 1000:1?

You can sumulate what the end result will look like by taking a good 2 1/4 slide and having a high rez scan made, then make downsample JPEG2000 images of the end result. The slide should be underexposed so that you need to do gamma and color correction on the scan after it has been compressed, since raw footage from a camera will be under exposed and require color corection. Take the JPEG2000 images in and out of every program you can think of that will be needed so that the images accumulate double, triple, or quadruple re-encoding losses. Then duplicate the frame and view it from your compressed "4k" stream. If the compressed stream involves interframe compression than you need to have motion and brightness changes, so using computer generated source frames may work better than a slide scan. When I take high rez computer generated images and compress them with JPG there is an immediate and obvious loss even at the high quality settings, having the image un-compressed then re-compressed several more times would not make it better.

2) If every pixel in the images is going to be processed in filters for "opticals", do you propose doing those with a real time 4k preview?

It can take 15 minutes or more per 4k frame to do complex filters, to do those things in real time at 24fps would not be piratical on a PC of any kind I have ever seen. At some point I think non-realtime processing will be an issue for you to look at, as will using lower rez proxy frames.

3) If you avoid re-compression losses by going to uncompressed frames for work footage, then making 4k compressed proxy frames, the load time for the uncompressed frames and then the save time for the compressed proxy frames will be longer than the play time (by many times on a PC), in such an arrangement what does "real time" mean?

Try loading a uncompressed 4k frame on your PC then saving a compressed 4k frame, multiply by 126720 to see how long it will take to output 88 minutes of 4k compressed images to view for 4k playback. 4K 24bpp frames are 4096*2304*6=56,623,104 bytes each, times 126720 is 7.3TB. At 100MB/s it takes 20 hours just to copy those frames, doing something to them would take longer. So if you figure the compression ratio from 20/1.4 you get a compression ratio of about 15:1. 300MB/s HD do not realy work at that speed on a PC all the time.

Just as a general observation, there seems to be a steady erosion of the meaning of resolution fromats for marketing, 4k 24fps is when you have a 4k image that has unique color at 24bpp+ for each pixel, and each pixel is unique on each frame. Live video has lost its live look now because everything is compressed. Film will soon be lost to the ages and we will never see ALL the grain change on every frame again. Just calling something 4k playback where 90% the frame is an "approximation" and the screen has parts that refresh at 6fps or even 4fps, would better be called something else, except for the desire to make it sound better than what it realy is, artifacts and all.

Dj Joofa
03-14-2008, 03:28 PM
1.
3. As I mentioned previously, it's not up to Kodak or Sony to define standards. Anything they do is proprietary to their products, and represents only one way of doing it. Standards are set by standards organizations. .

Big, high-profile companies have their representatives at the standardization committees and hence, can sway the standards to be formed in a way that favor their internal specifications.

In addition, there have been examples of private companies proprietary way of doing things becoming international standards. For e.g., see the H.239 standard.

Blair S. Paulsen
03-14-2008, 04:41 PM
Thanks for the info DANCAD3D. My first response is that I do not expect to add complex filtration and then play back 4K at full frame rate immediately, I would be happy with a single frame for immediate preview and then RAM cache rendering in the background.

In any case, my primary DI objective is to play back 4K material in real time, even if that means that image processing steps like color correction have been rendered out in advance. Ideally some sort of large RAM cache would allow me to make changes per the client request and with a 10 second wait I could play back at least a few seconds from the RAM cache at close to full quality.

My quest is for a beefy desktop solution that gets me 70% of what I can get with "big iron" at a reasonable price point. I am cool with days or even a couple weeks of rendering after sign off for a 90 minute feature.

More important to my pipeline is 4K dailies to check focus, noise levels, how the makeup will look at high resolution, application of a print LUT if film out is in the cards, to check lighting ratios, etc.

Dan Hudgins
03-14-2008, 09:06 PM
Thanks for the info DANCAD3D. My first response is that I do not expect to add complex filtration and then play back 4K at full frame rate immediately, I would be happy with a single frame for immediate preview and then RAM cache rendering in the background.

In any case, my primary DI objective is to play back 4K material in real time, even if that means that image processing steps like color correction have been rendered out in advance. Ideally some sort of large RAM cache would allow me to make changes per the client request and with a 10 second wait I could play back at least a few seconds from the RAM cache at close to full quality.

My quest is for a beefy desktop solution that gets me 70% of what I can get with "big iron" at a reasonable price point. I am cool with days or even a couple weeks of rendering after sign off for a 90 minute feature.

More important to my pipeline is 4K dailies to check focus, noise levels, how the makeup will look at high resolution, application of a print LUT if film out is in the cards, to check lighting ratios, etc.

I was thinking about how this could be done, if you have some money it may be possable to make a few mods to what I have done so far and be able to get 4k uncompressed play back by using parallel computers since I have master/slave SMPTE sync anyway, you could use this trick as well, no need to wait until 2011 if you can get the right hardware,

1) Don't try to do it on one computer, figure that you can display 1fps at 2048x1536x32 on each computer. Get a video board maker in China to make video boards that work in banked and linear mode at 2048x1536x32 and have master/slave H&V sync so that all the video from the computers will be in sync on their 15pin output.

2) Make a small change to DANCAD3D.EXE (tm) v3.7N or some other system to display the Modulus of the SMPTE frame number part, so that one computer would hold and load all the SMPTE TC frames that number 0, another computer SMPTE TC frames 1, another SMPTE TC 2, and so on up to SMPTE TC 23. This divides the workload each computer needs to do. 24 computers working in SMPTE LTC slave mode (supported now) could display 1920x1440x 16 or 32 or 2048x1536x16 or 32 at 24fps then, maybe, since each would only realy be going 1fps. By running 96 computers in SMPTE slave mode you could get a four input SVGA monitor of 3840x2880 or 4096x3072 running 24fps uncompresed, so that you would see everything, even things that would not show up in an uncompressed playback system because the compression had removed them.

3) Control the 24 to 96 SMPTE slaved computers from a single SMPTE master computer using proxy frames so that the shot selection and jog controlls would allow all the frames to be selected easer. DANCAD3D.EXE v3.7N (tm) does SMPTE master now, you could also use this idea.

4) Build a multiplexer to switch the video output signals from the 24 to 96 video boards so that the current SMPTE frame computer would be selected. It might be needed to put a 12 frame delay offset (1/2sec) in the sound playback to insure that the frames are loaded, so the multiplexer would be running 12 frames delay also in sync mode and you would enter a 12 frame offset into Magix (tm) for the sound, otherwise the software could have a 12 frame lead on the SMPTE code so that the frame would be loaded when the SMPTE TC for that frame was tripped. In other words, the video board buffers update in a ripple so that even though they are at 1fps, each loads just before the 1/24th of a second that the monitor will see its signal.

If Modulus was also applied to the Insert command, and some master command code was written, then the changes and image processing could be done in parallel on 96 computers to cut the render time to about 1%. That might make something like what you are looking for.

If you keep to one system, I think your render times will be days not seconds, maybe even weeks or months. Since even compressed frames for 88 minutes can take TB of data using a RAM cache could not work since I do not know of any normal computer that has a TB of RAM. If you put the RAM cache outside it would still cost $$$$$$$ to have TB of RAM, and going through one computer would still have problems with bottle necks.

If you use a 3D LUT you can reduce the render times on the updates, but doing a 3D LUT on a 4k image could still take too long for real time changes unless you use a hardware 3D LUT in the video which could be a high cost item at 48bpp. Just updating the 3D LUT at 48bpp would take some time.

So you would need 98 computers, 96 SMPTE slave for quarter frames, one for SMPTE master and jog, one or more for SMPTE slave sound play back. If you use 8 computers for sound playback you can have 16 channel sound playback along with your 4k uncompressed images. So that would be 105 computers total. If each computer costs about $400 * 105 = $42,000 plus a few $1000 more for the wires and multiplexer. The screen and sound system might be $20,000 more? So the total might be less than $75,000?

If you could make a 20 foot wide OLED monitor, you could replace the projector in theaters and have something better than projected film or video, no focus problems or smoke and haze in the optics, no lamp to dim, the future of theater display?

Thor Wixom
03-14-2008, 11:33 PM
Exactly. FIRST you want killer RED 4K to current 2K infrastructure.

But for the record ... personal ego and perception run this industry.

Oh yeah ... and stupid committees.

I am selling "F the DCI" T-shirts at NAB.

Where do I send my $20?

-Thor

mezmo
03-28-2008, 08:14 AM
Hi Dancad3d,
Make that 105 laptops cause I think Blaire needs this thing
in his DIT/camera van.
Mezmo

Michael Hastings
03-28-2008, 09:07 AM
After all Laguun and Luki deserve drink and dinner together in Las Vegas.

Or maybe a metalcage death match in the middle of the RED booth.:wink: :clown2: