Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: Apple + RED

Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 18 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 171
  1. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by Misha Engel View Post
    How relevant is a RAW compression ratio of more than 6 times these days, considering current flash prices and the need for high quality and flexibility in post?
    This is a question.



    X.265 (HEVC) 4:4:4 12 bits lossless straigth from the camera gives you even more compression and also stellar looks and it is supported by both NVidia and AMD on their newest GPU's. Shooting 8k 16:1 over 5k 6:1 or 4k 4:1 for shitty facebook content will only give you more rolling shutter.




    ARRIRAW is lossless and with HDE it stays lossless, it's just one of the many selling points of the ARRI cameras.



    The combination of 2001 USB 2.0 and a 2013 Red 6k is a weird combination knowing that USB 3.0 was introduced in 2011. For linus youtube stuff (shot at 8k 22:1) you just get extra rolling shutter for free and as a viewer in 4k, you won't see the difference in picture quality over youtube when something is shot with a helium at 8k 22:1 or 4k 5:1 (because of the youtube compression) the extra rolling shutter is sometimes visible.

    I'm not saying that high compression is irrelevant but asking the following question: How relevant is a RAW compression ratio of more than 6 times these days, considering current flash prices and the need for high quality and flexibility in post?

    To me shooting FF gives a certain look using a certain lens. cropping into 5k gives a different look with the same lens among other things. So no, more rolling shutter is not the only thing I get when shooting 8k and honestly I never really had rolling shutter problems, not even in 8k, when that happens camera is way to shaky or things moving to fast anyway.

    And X.265 is not raw there is a difference.

    Arri raw might be a selling point for arri, we work with arri material all the time and yes sure as the camera has such a shittly low resolution you better record uncompressed especially if mastering in 4k. We did some projects using their in camera prores upscale and yes quite disaster for chroma key. But its quite easy to turn that around and saying, ARRI not having compressed raw, is not really their key selling point, is it? Or do you think for one second that if arri added a compressed raw option that they would loose their high end clients?

    Sorry ment to write usb3. What I mean is flash price does not really matter much. The hundreds of productions I came across the last couple of years none where having their rushes on SSDs. Pretty much all DIT´s except for TV series used single disks or delivering on small slow raid with less than 3 spinning drives or such to offload their rushes.

    I dont care much what happens on youtube. To me capture compressions is relevant to what you intend to do with the matierlal in post, if there is a lot of chroma key, composting, colors that needs to be heavily twisted, low exposure levels, light colortemp far from balanced etc. Then yes low compression is needed. But if things are well exposed and you are not trying to make sunshine out of a rainy day and are happy with what you see in camera and possibly prefer a bit of texture, and dont have much movement in camera then yes compression can be cranked up quite high. 10:1 is normally no issue, I use it alot even when there will be loads of FX done to it.

    As to me resolution is better than compression. I much rather have a 8k 8:1 than a 4k 2:1 Cmos capture to play with.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #72  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,816
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    As to me resolution is better than compression. I much rather have a 8k 8:1 than a 4k 2:1 Cmos capture to play with.
    6k RAW (less rolling shutter) being a sweet spot for 4k/UHD rgb-delivery with a compression ratio between 3 and 6.
    http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...SMC2-Petition!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #73  
    Senior Member andrewhake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    594
    Another thread lost. All is lost.


    To bring the topic of discussion back around. Anyone at Red got an ETA on a R3D FCPX Plugin update? :)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by Misha Engel View Post
    6k RAW (less rolling shutter) being a sweet spot for 4k/UHD rgb-delivery with a compression ratio between 3 and 6.
    http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...SMC2-Petition!
    Well I got that on monstro but for sure, 99% of what I do I prefer more pixels and the bigger sensor for most of the lenses I use. And what others use I dont care much about I done my testing. And not sure why you link to that thread. Ask those guys there if they would prefer a monstro instead of a 6k dragon and Im sure not a single one of them would turn down such offer if costs where the same. So no I dont see the logic in that comment. And yes, I did not see anyone in that thread that wanted to trade in their monstro for a 6k Dragon...

    I used monstro and dragon side by side a lot. Mixing 6k and 8k and also shot both at 6k ana. To me the monstro chip is simply better, less noise, more usable range, more precision in the highlights. I dont know about re-draw time differences, but would not be surprised if thats better on monstro as well at same resolution. But again re-draw time I never seen as a big issue... and soon, very very soon there will be a some what fix for camera move introduced rolling shutter issues for red cams. Just wait think you will be surprised. :)
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #75  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,816
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    Well I got that on monstro but for sure, 99% of what I do I prefer more pixels and the bigger sensor for most of the lenses I use. And what others use I dont care much about I done my testing. And not sure why you link to that thread. Ask those guys there if they would prefer a monstro instead of a 6k dragon and Im sure not a single one of them would turn down such offer if costs where the same. So no I dont see the logic in that comment. And yes, I did not see anyone in that thread that wanted to trade in their monstro for a 6k Dragon...

    I used monstro and dragon side by side a lot. Mixing 6k and 8k and also shot both at 6k ana. To me the monstro chip is simply better, less noise, more usable range, more precision in the highlights. I dont know about re-draw time differences, but would not be surprised if thats better on monstro as well at same resolution. But again re-draw time I never seen as a big issue... and soon, very very soon there will be a some what fix for camera move introduced rolling shutter issues for red cams. Just wait think you will be surprised. :)
    Yep Panasonic has a Global Shutter (with a claimed DR of atleast 16 stops according to Andrew Reid, https://www.eoshd.com/2019/09/ibc-sh...dynamic-range/)

    Monstro 8k and Gemini 5k are both very good sensors and better than Dragon 6k, if only they where 6k.
    Still looking for a good 6k sensor camera within the S35/APS-C specifications, currently where are stuck with the Hulk/Helium sensor on 7k.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #76  
    Senior Member Chris Luker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Salt Lake City, sometimes France
    Posts
    895
    Ok, so one question... was this Apple seeing how RED's patents hold up so that they can better value the company and buy it from Jim?
    /I know, NDA and such
    //one blink for yes, two for no
    ///
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #77  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    Sounds like you haven't looked at their camera lineup recently. A lot has changed for Canon in the last 2 years.
    Hey Phil, it sounds like you might have skimped over my post. Two lines below the part you quoted I mentioned rawlite so I'm very well aware of its existence. :)

    My understanding of RED's patent is they hold the rights for lossy compressed raw data (5:1 and greater), NOT for uncompressed or mathematically uncompressed/lossless ratios such as 3:1. Canon’s rawlite mathematically lossless 3:1 implementation seems to have allowed them to dodge that lossy bullet. If they were licensing RED’s IP then why wouldn’t they offer more flexible compression ratios such as 8:1 and greater right now? Their line is used extensively in doc work where higher compression ratios would be a godsend.

    It sounds like Apple wants to expand Prores Raw, which to me implies broadening their compression ratio into the lossy 5:1 and beyond which would thus infringe RED’s patent and the reason why they petitioned it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #78  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by gabrielB View Post
    Phil are you saying you expect Canon to implement ProRes Raw and open the door to compressed raw that way ?
    I see that I didn't use the right wording here, hence Phil's misinterpretation of what I was saying. I meant lossy when I said compressed. Because it's mathematically lossless, in my mind Canon's rawlite is not really compressed raw.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #79  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Misha Engel View Post
    Yep Panasonic has a Global Shutter (with a claimed DR of atleast 16 stops according to Andrew Reid, https://www.eoshd.com/2019/09/ibc-sh...dynamic-range/)

    Monstro 8k and Gemini 5k are both very good sensors and better than Dragon 6k, if only they where 6k.
    Still looking for a good 6k sensor camera within the S35/APS-C specifications, currently where are stuck with the Hulk/Helium sensor on 7k.
    In a way, the Red eco system of sensor sizes and resolution is pretty great. 5K is much more efficient in light capture and file sizes, yet delivers good 4K. Monstro can go full 8K or crop in s35 for more efficient needs. And helium is a great tool for high end s35 needs. Because motion capture is still largely super 35, many lenses are better there. It is good to have an 8K option in that realm.

    6K or 5.7K for 4K delivery is great, but i prefer the low light and efficiency of 5K for most things, and feel that chasing the perfect downsample is not worth the trade offs for me. The 8K and 5K division of labor works well. Two specialized cameras, rather than one doesn’t do either efficiency nor extra high resolution.

    Komodo is rumored to be 6K, so, there will be a simple go anywhere camera with perfect 4K output soon. But when 8K tv’s were released, and the realities of broadcast and internet, chasing the best raw resolution for HD or 4K became less crucial.
    Last edited by James Sielaff; 11-14-2019 at 09:23 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #80  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,653
    Quote Originally Posted by gabrielB View Post
    misinterpretation
    Strangely in the audience of many who very much tagged along with the headlines and promoted the process of this endeavor for whatever reasons, I took the time to read the patent closely several times as well as the contesting documents, and was able to digest it more deeply. Which was funnier from my perspective earlier on because clearly people we fueled deeply by some other emotions.

    Many are sighting the examples given in the patent in regards to what "at least" and the various compression ratio examples set forth, but the patent itself appears to cover all forms of compressed raw. I would say I could be wrong about that, but it appears to be the case.

    The patent covers compressed RAW data and does reference specific frame rates and resolution targets, but he compression itself is not exactly "limited to" 6:1 throughout the patent.


    In reference to what I would suspect Apple would want with ProRes RAW and truly what this patent contest was actually about. Remember Apple moves millions of phones, which is rather different than the thousands of cameras that hit our profession. Licensing at the scale is very different when it comes to financial ramifications. The strategy here is common in tech if you've been tracking the journey's of the largest companies on Earth. Apple and Samsung enjoy fencing with each other often for instance for just such things which either result in major payoffs, licensing, etc. So their effort here was likely squarely aimed at created an environment where this patent would be invalidated which would allow them to deploy ProRes RAW freely into their own devices and creating a large install base, then additionally eventually offering licensing to manufacturers to support ProRes RAW in the cameras themselves. This adoption would in turn make a defacto standard that Apple could very much have a great deal of control over in the process despite other forms of RAW likely existing if this patent was overturned. This isn't really speculating as the general path occurred already to rather successful levels where ProRes itself is very much an industry standard globally. I strongly feel they want to repeat that success with a mezzanine codec to a codec used for image acquisition.

    In which case strategically speaking, fair game and a worthwhile drop in the bucket to give this a whirl as I've written a few times surrounding this topic.

    However the patent is real and has been upheld before.

    The fallout from this truly is now Apple in particular knows the path to ProRes RAW in their devices and likely other devices requires licensing, this is what all technology patents are all about. Which all companies are aware of and apparently some have worked out deals that we are aware and likely unaware of.


    And to circle back to the validity of compression in motion picture filmmaking and to touch on some other points here. Yes, anything that can help save production dollars is valid.

    RED - Implement REDCODE RAW, a variable compressed RAW codec. Owns the patent essentially on Compressed RAW for motion picture use.
    ARRI - Focus on ARRIRAW, but introduce a post process of HDE via Codex, essentially a zipped ARRIRAW file
    CANON - Found a way to get Cinema RAW Lite going and you'll here about straight Cinema RAW more soon
    SONY - Their path is via add-on RAW modules and we don't know the net results of whatever negotiations they had other than that
    BMD - Create a new codec that sort of works like RAW, but isn't RAW, which is attractive to their general audience base as it's easier to deal with than CinemaDNG (small, less intensive on a processing level) and at least something they can develop further
    PANASONIC - Output a RAW signal to an external recorder like Atomos, which has publicly stated some sort of licensing agreement is going on
    APPLE - Create ProRes RAW and try to get it integrated into the marketplace to expand adoption.

    Bare in mind I'm close with most of these companies and what Jarred is stating is very true regarding a pathway to a compressed RAW licensed workflow. But if you can work around that, the obvious path to more profit is not dealing with that. And considering R&D and other licensed tech involved with a few of these cameras already, you don't want to always play it that way. And I'll say this, I do think what Canon is doing this round is very admirable because they are clearly licensing a few bits of tech in their cameras now to give people generally what they've been asking for for a long while now.


    And to the point of the value of a compressed workflow. Just today I finalized a bid of 5 different workflows for a project filming in 2020. Spanning a rather long filming duration and cost per TB needed for the entirety of the shoot, the two extremes are: $57,832 versus a $289,161 total on expected used storage across the technologies they want to use on and off set for the general compressed versus uncompressed workflow in this case. i.e. The cost of the data footprint, which are estimates I have to put together often when bidding. This is one single camera project, though a decent sized one, when you start taking into account multiple productions or larger multi-cam shoots. Yes, this adds up. It's not uncommon to see much larger number than this on a project either. I'm going to leave the film costs out of this discussion, because they were looking to film 65mm 5-perf and it quickly got out of hand once considering the additional costs. Fine if you can write your own ticket, but when data ranges from 5 figures to 8 figures, you'll talking a whole different ballgame. In this case, chewing into the budget too much.


    This general topic has been covered around the web a whole bunch. Now the real thing to watch is where ProRes RAW pops up next and whoever has new compressed RAW codecs coming out.
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

    2X RED Monstro 8K VV Bodies and a lot of things to use with them.

    Data Sheets and Notes:
    Red Weapon/DSMC2
    Red Dragon
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts