More thoughts on media and where to pull data from...

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Yeah, I read through the thread... Sync problems and other streaming issues are a concern if this becomes a codec targeted for real-time or direct streaming over the net. I don't see that happening here. A/V sync shouldn't be an issue, nor should the codec itself. It only becomes an issue when audio and video are separated and handled, streamed or decoded separately. But if maintained together in the same data set, sync is only an issue on the end of the receiving unit as it decodes the data. Codecs themselves do not need to be specifically optimized for streaming and I don't think direct internet streaming will be a good application here anyway. At least not for a few more years until average internet bandwidth can greatly increase.

Based on the numbers we know thus far, we're looking at approximately 10Mbps sustained bandwidth requirement for streaming. So 100Mbps or better ethernet connectivity will more than suffice for LAN installations of up to say maybe 8 nodes, not considering other potential network traffic. We don't need to look at this in the same regards as streaming QT, RealPlayer or FLASH video online. But rather delivery of large data files over the network...

Don't think of it as typical web streaming... But more like playing or editing a video file on your computer from a NAS box or server down the hall or even just an external RAID. Most of your typical "streaming" issues like sync issues, come from compromises made in order to offset bandwidth limitations caused by network topography, latency and unpredictable routing issues. If RED RAY is going to allow playing from remote storage, I don't see it making such compromises, you either feed it with the bandwidth needed or you pack up and go home.

Some of the other points raised in that thread like what Spiff said about 4K not improving how films look can be true. Not all films out there are going to benefit from a 4K transfer... Film stocks have varying levels of grain and sharpness. Not to mention productions that could be inherently soft due to focus or lens issues or even just the style in which they were shot. 4K isn't going to magically make more detail appear. Most DI work and FX shots these days are still generated and finished at 2K, so transfers to 4K will do little more than a 4X up-scale on the master resolution of the DI frames. ...And will give the 4K authoring people an opportunity to add in all sorts of extra edge "enhancements" and artificial sharpening. <yuck>

Anyway, I hope that made sense. Seems like I rambled and repeated myself, but I'm tired. Gonna go find some sleep.

[Dj Joofa]

A/V sync shouldn't be an issue, nor should the codec itself. It only becomes an issue when audio and video are separated and handled, streamed or decoded separately. But if maintained together in the same data set, sync is only an issue on the end of the receiving unit as it decodes the data.

Video and audio data is typically in separate streams for several reasons, least of which is the different hardware clocks they use, and to put proper synchronization in RTP headers.

Codecs themselves do not need to be specifically optimized for streaming

They do, that is why Quicktime encoding lets you put those "hint tracks" for optimzed streaming. Please refer to H.264 standard which was heavily optimized for such issues.

and I don't think direct internet streaming will be a good application here anyway. At least not for a few more years until average internet bandwidth can greatly increase.

People/devices will always be bandwidth hungry. As Internet advances, demand shall increase accordingly and there may never come a utopian time with free luxurious bandwidths available copiously.

Don't think of it as typical web streaming... But more like playing or editing a video file on your computer from a NAS box or server down the hall or even just an external RAID. Most of your typical "streaming" issues like sync issues, come from compromises made in order to offset bandwidth limitations caused by network topography, latency and unpredictable routing issues. If RED RAY is going to allow playing from remote storage, I don't see it making such compromises, you either feed it with the bandwidth needed or you pack up and go home.

Yeah, this part I agree. However, if your concern is only localized network, then technology already exists for that. You can do a search online for that. Red Ray does not have to invent something new. Some very clean interfaces already exist for that.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

After sleeping and getting my brain right, I realize my previous post failed. I'd just delete it, but you already responded to it.

Essentially, I was just saying that I don't see RED RAY, or its associated codec, fitting into a web streaming application. No need to place unnecessary restrictions or potentially crippling factors onto the codec for this purpose. No reason to run separate audio / video streams, etc..

Of course, that's just my opinion. OTOH, if 2 hours of 4K can fit into roughly 8.5GB... Then an internet streaming / delivery consideration is inevitable. Assuming that 1080p will average 1/4 in size when treated with the same codec, that suddenly places Blu-Ray quality quality delivered in approximately 1GB per hour.