Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: New Compression Ratios?

Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 59
  1. #21  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Fresno, CA
    Posts
    765
    Hahaha @ lightsaber.
    Far and away the best prize that life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing.
    - Theodore Roosevelt

    Justin McAleece
    Sigma Pro Primes and Video Production
    Justin at BLAREMedia dot net
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member Michael Lindsay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    2,721
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    But the numbers don't make sense between DSMC2 and Komodo. If HQ 6K gives you 30 minutes, while Dragon 6K at 4:1 gives you 48 minutes, that would mean the HQ option on Komodo is way less compressed than any other Red at 6K?
    That would mean that for anyone who shot 6:1 on Dragon 6K even MQ is higher quality?
    I think Komodo is DCT based and Red DSMC2 is Wavelet based .... apple and oranges... both fruit but different
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    NY / GA
    Posts
    68
    Is there any updates on if they are going to change the compression options at all?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Lindsay View Post
    I think Komodo is DCT based and Red DSMC2 is Wavelet based .... apple and oranges... both fruit but different
    I would like to know more on this! I thought Red's whole thing was the wavelet compression scheme? And while we are discussing compression, I have recently found that 8k can be nicely compressed 16:1 with good lighting for a 4k delivery. It is really the same or better than shooting 4k at 4:! or 6k at 8:1. Much easier files to handle. That is the magic of higher k values and wavelet compression, you can compress it more, at least that is my understanding. At the end of the day it seems silly to do very low compression if the end product is an even more compressed format.
    DSMC2 Helium 1402
    DSMC2 Helium 6423
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    I like the old / current compression ratio naming convention better. compressed file size vs uncompressed file. As its more easy to calculate with. This small, medium, large feels way less professonal.

    Sure there is different compression codecs in use. So the effect of heavy komodo compression will be different from heavy monstro compression etc. But the difference between cameras is something that we had all the time. 10:1 on monstro looks very different from 10:1 on epic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Senior Member yann LHENORET's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Lindsay View Post
    I think Komodo is DCT based and Red DSMC2 is Wavelet based .... apple and oranges... both fruit but different
    But nobody knows why they had to switch? Which one is better? Which one is less efficient? Is it related to the limited processing power of Komodo? Or on the contrary, is the lower price of CFast media the reason why they where able to use less compressed technology? Is it related to apple and oranges? Is DSMC3 gonna be DCT based too?
    🧠+👁️+👂🏼+📹=...
    Documentary shaper, "that guy...".
    https://m.imdb.com/name/nm1523882/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member Christoffer Glans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    4,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Lindsay View Post
    I think Komodo is DCT based and Red DSMC2 is Wavelet based .... apple and oranges... both fruit but different
    Is this confirmed? All reading I've come across points to wavelet being superior to DCT. So why switch? I see no advantage to image quality and based on the difference in recording times, it seems DCT is even worse at that as well?
    What am I missing? What is the reason for this change, if it's even confirmed to have changed?
    "Using any digital cinema camera today is like sending your 35mm rolls to a standard lab. -Using a Red is like owning a dark room."
    Red Weapon 6K #00600
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    Is this confirmed? All reading I've come across points to wavelet being superior to DCT. So why switch? I see no advantage to image quality and based on the difference in recording times, it seems DCT is even worse at that as well?
    What am I missing? What is the reason for this change, if it's even confirmed to have changed?
    Maybe processing power required and amperage requirements for that processing power? A possible compromise made for battery life and frame rate for data?

    I am just guessing, I don't even know if they did change.
    Scarlet-X #2034 "Bea"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    Is this confirmed? All reading I've come across points to wavelet being superior to DCT. So why switch? I see no advantage to image quality and based on the difference in recording times, it seems DCT is even worse at that as well?
    What am I missing? What is the reason for this change, if it's even confirmed to have changed?
    Likely komodo is a built mostly on existing tech, there is a pretty big possiblity that the camera did not start as a blank paper on Jarreds desk but is a red build ontop of something developed by a third party and then possibly the same features as in previous cameras could not be implemented.

    And also even if not so, the battery life etc kind of hints that it´s not really the same engine inside as before. The processor or what ever could possibly not do what DSMC1 and two does.

    Still I dont know the differnces between the the komodo codecs and the dsmc2 codecs or even the data rates for Komodo. But one can only speculate that 5:1 for exampel would look different if applied to both cameras and for that reason they found it to be better to change the naming convention for compresion.


    But agian, personally I like the old one. it´s easy math to understand that if I shot 5:1 my mag last half the shooting time compared to if I shoot 10:1 or if I want something in between I can kind of easily figure out what duration I will get. HQ LQ etc on the other hand does not say much, but those using komodo regularly likely figure it out quite quickly.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member Robert Hofmeyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    750
    Not sure if this has changed, but Phil said he was getting 1 hour per TB in HQ and only 10 minutes more in MQ (and LQ was not yet enabled). I agree with Bjorn above that it would be nice to have ratios that make for easy runtime calculations. Eg. HQ = 1h, MQ = 2h, LQ = 3h.
    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