3K...

[Poi Boy]

tomorrow ????
-A

[Paul Lee]

"The answer comes tomorrow... "

Something tells me I will be home very late and the computers will be very warm...

[Brook Willard]

Nope. Maybe I didn't understand your question. Email me.

Jim

Done and done.

[Poi Boy]

tomorrow !!! I'm on a shoot tomorrow and won't be able to concentrate all day. Email me.
Aloha

-A

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Do I sense a possibility of a 3K 3072x2304 mode for use with 1.33x anamorphics? That would give us a final un-squeezed 4K 16:9 image with some anamorphic effects and without sacrificing as much horizontal resolution as using 2:1 anamorphics.

Edit> 3072x2304 could be useful just as a 4:3 aspect shooting mode too.

[Kjetil Haugen]

Its important to understand that REDCODE 36 and REDCODE 28 are quality levels and not necessarily the actual numbers of MB/s.

They are based off of MB/s peak at 4k 2:1 at 24fps .. i.e. REDCODE 36 has a peak limit of 36MB/s in 4k 2:1 24fps.

2k 2:1 does not have the same MB/s as 4k 2:1, but it does have the same compression ratio.

So how much 3k can we squeeze into an 8gb CF at best?

[Mark Pugh]

2k 2:1 does not have the same MB/s as 4k 2:1, but it does have the same compression ratio.

How about 2k Redcode 48 then.

Thanks for what you've given today, though.

[Alexander Nikishin]

Do I sense a possibility of a 3K 3072x2304 mode for use with 1.33x anamorphics?

The numbers point to a yes. :holloween:

[Nathan Buxton]

Do I sense a possibility of a 3K 3072x2304 mode for use with 1.33x anamorphics? That would give us a final un-squeezed 4K 16:9 image with some anamorphic effects and without sacrificing as much horizontal resolution as using 2:1 anamorphics.

wow that is a better solution than i could have imagined. In fact thats more of an added feature not exactly a workaround.

[Mark Toia]

Ooooo man, this is all getting so technically crazy and a little frustrating, 4k this, 3k that Redcode 36, don't do this, don't do that, do this before you do that.... whens it all going to stop.

Before I start to rant and rave about simplicity and ease, I just want to say, RED you guys rule and thats never going to change. BUT!!!!...the KISS method (Keep it simple stupid) is the way it should all be.

I'm so hanging for my 4 red cameras, but the more I read these forums, the more scared I am getting about the ease of use on set and the ease of use getting it in and out of the computer. Im hearing silly words like RENDER!!!

At the moment I stick my roll of film on the camera, take a light reading, press the button....I'm shooting. take the film off, soup it, stick it on a TC chain, grade it, done.
Even though RED camera is going to eliminate film and processing, (AWESOME). it seems to be adding a multitude of other things you have to do pre shooting, post shooting, pre import, post import, rendering files??? yeeeek.

I really thought this camera was supposed to be easier, faster, better, cheaper, than using film. Its cheaper, ill give you that.

As our cameras haven't arrived yet, Can someone that has actually used it in a real fast shoot day situation (not back room test) please tell me that its fast to use on set,(well as fast as a 435) fast to get into a computer and fast to edit.
Or do I have to go though miles of menu pages to set things up every time we turn it on and every time we change shots.
I'm really hoping that all i have to do is turn it on, set a camera speed and f-stop and shoot, Just like I do now with our 435.

RED, (jim) if its not as easy as a film or even as easy to use as video camera, question is, is it going to be once you get all your bugs sorted out.

This is not a dig at anyone, its just a question from a worried consumer.