EPIC Recording Resolutions

[Brook Willard]

Epic S35
30mm x 15mm sensor
5,120 x 2,700

Epic FF35
36mm x 24mm
6,000 x 4,000

4-perforation Super 35mm
24.89mm x 18.67mm

3-perforation Super 35mm
24.89mm x 13.89mm

RED ONE 4K
22.11mm x 12.44mm
4,096 x 2,304


I'll start with the Epic S35.

To start with, the resolution confuses me. The sensor's dimension is 2:1 but the pixel dimension is 1.896:1. Since some of the sensor is probably blocked off for black calibration, I will assume that the 30mm x 15mm sensor area refers to the 2:1 pixel resolution of 5,120 x 2,560.

If we shoot the standard 24.89mm x 13.89mm 3-perforation Super 35mm size on the Epic S35 sensor, I come up with a recorded pixel area of 4,248 x 2,371.

Moving onto the Epic FF35. By the same math, I come up with a 3-perf resolution of 4,148 x 2,315 and a 4-perf resolution of 4,148 x 3,112.

Conversely, if we decided to shoot the RED ONE's 4K sensor size, the S35 would capture 3,774 x 2,123 and the FF35 would capture 3,685 x 2,074. Not that this is a desirable sensor size... but it's valid for comparison.

This doesn't bother me personally - I'm more excited about the dynamic range, frame rates and body design. Just wanted to let people know what they'll be getting by the current math.

So, to sum it up:

Epic S35 3-perforation recording resolution
4,248 x 2,371

Epic FF35 3-perforation recording resolution
4,148 x 2,315

Epic FF35 4-perforation recording resolution
4,148 x 3,112

[david farland]

Thanks for the maths.....

[Harrison Diamond]

Are we sure that the sensor size listed isn't for a lookaround area that isn't recorded versus the recorded max of 5120?

[Brook Willard]

They haven't given any of those details yet. That said, if it was actually a ~6.5K or 7K in the camera for look-around's sake... I feel like that would've been in the marketing materials.

[Mark Pugh]

They haven't given any of those details yet. That said, if it was actually a ~6.5K or 7K in the camera for look-around's sake... I feel like that would've been in the marketing materials.

Numbers are being pushed around this way and that for marketing purposes.
The S35 is only a 5k camera if:
a) there is no lookaround
b) you're finishing in 2.40:1
It's basically a 2:1 sensor
Shooting 16:9 requires the sides to be cropped.
When it's described as a S35 chip, it's S35 in the theatrical cinemascope release sense of the term. (2-perf).
So yeah, maybe it's a 5k camera, but certainly not for the vast majority of shoots that will be done on it.
I've being raising this for a few days in other threads - no responses.

[Bruce Allen]

Brook, you might want to round your numbers to the nearest multiple of 4.

EDIT: ...and has anyone figured out the discrepancies in pixel count?

BTW, have you noticed 1620 = 1080 x 1.5
...and 2700 = 1080 * 2.5

I think 16:9 rec modes may have no vertical lookaround.

Doing my best guess table now for you man...

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Brook Willard]

Eh, these numbers are by the math, rounded up to the nearest pixel.

[Bruce Allen]

Eh, these numbers are by the math, rounded up to the nearest pixel.

It's a programming thing. Compression algorithms generally work best on resolutions that are multiples of 4.

My table attempt so far (pure guess):

FILM REFERENCES
16mm film: 9.6 x 7
super16 film: 11.75 x 7
super35 3-perf film: 24.9 x 13.9
anamorphic 4-perf film: 24.9 x 18.6

SCARLET 2/3
Listed sensor size: 10.1 x 5.35 (3072x1620)
Rec area 16:9 mode: 9.5 x 5.35 (2880x1620 - 1.5x HD)
NOTE: Normal 16mm lenses should work?
NOTE: No lookaround?

RED ONE
Listed sensor size: 24.4 x 13.7 (4900x2580)
Rec area 16:9 mode: 22.11 x 12.44 (4096x2304)
Rec area anamorphic mode: 14.62 x 12.44 (2707x2304??)

EPIC & SCARLET S35
UPDATE: FOR EPIC THIS ONLY HINTS AT THE AWESOMENESS, SEE JIM'S POST BELOW
Listed sensor size: 30 x 15 (5120x2700 - doesn't match)
Likely active sensor: 28.4 x 15 (5120x2700 - that's better)
Rec area 16:9 mode: 24.9 x 15 (4800x2700 - 2.5x HD)
Rec area 1.85 spherical crop: 24.9 x 13.46 (4480x2420 or so)
Rec area 2.35 spherical crop: 24.9 x 10.6 (4480x1908 or so)
Rec area anamorphic lens crop: 17.6 x 15 (3172x2700)

EPIC & SCARLET FF35
UPDATE: FOR EPIC THIS ONLY HINTS AT THE AWESOMENESS, SEE JIM'S POST BELOW
Listed sensor size: 36 x 24 (6000x4000 - DOES match)
Rec area PL spherical 16:9: 24.9 x 15 (4150x2330 or so)
Rec area PL anamorphic: 24.9 x 18.6 (4150x3112??)
Rec area FF lens 16:9 crop: 36 x 20.25 (6000x3376)
Rec area FF lens 1.85 crop: 36 x 19.46 (6000x3244)
Rec area FF lens 2.35 crop: 36 x 15.32 (6000x2556)
Rec area hypothetical FF anamorphic lens 2.35: 28.2 x 24 (4700 x 4000)
NOTE: a very nice lookaround with PL mount lenses (as the movie industry expects?)
NOTE: no lookaround with larger still lenses (as the still industry expects?)
NOTE: that hypothetical FF anamorphic lens would give 18.8 megapixels and 676 sq.mm surface area - vs Red One's 6.2 megapixels and 262 sq.mm surface area! Someone build it!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Brook Willard]

It's a programming thing. Compression algorithms generally work best on resolutions that are multiples of 4.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Of course. I assume that's RED's job to round the numbers off... :)

I also expect the sensor size or pixel dimension [or at least the recording area] to change by the time the camera ships.

[david farland]

I assumed another reason Red choose 6K for the FF35 was to get 4K of pixel chrominance (when down rezzed)without interpolation (4K bayer = 2.7K)
D