Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: Have the compression algorithms improved on Dragon?

Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1 Have the compression algorithms improved on Dragon? 
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Montreal - Toronto - NYC
    Posts
    1,706
    Looking at Mark's tests, it would seem that they have.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    307
    My understanding is that because of the new color science, etc. compression artifacts are reduced. But I'm sure some code had to be rewritten in order to accommodate the substantially larger data pipeline required for 6k(?).
    Epic-M Dragon #1271
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Joseph Coleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    413
    Yeh it has been stated a few times that the increased signal to noise ratio and lower noise floor helps the compression a lot. I'm truly shocked at the detail in the 17:1 shots, especially the last shot with the water breaking in black and white. Just incredible. I'm pumped to see some R3D's to see if its as good as it looks.

    Its weird I noticed a lot more noise in the stills that Mark posted compared to the footage. It make me wonder if Mark ran the footage through some noise reduction or if the noise being so small just got lost in the h.264 compression, Or was it the Jpeg compression from the photos that introduced noise that wasn't actually there...could be a lot of things.

    All around I can't wait to get my hands on one
    J.H.C Epic-X #03520 (Sherry Baby)
    http://Coleman-Media.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Coleman View Post
    Yeh it has been stated a few times that the increased signal to noise ratio and lower noise floor helps the compression a lot. I'm truly shocked at the detail in the 17:1 shots, especially the last shot with the water breaking in black and white. Just incredible. I'm pumped to see some R3D's to see if its as good as it looks.

    Its weird I noticed a lot more noise in the stills that Mark posted compared to the footage. It make me wonder if Mark ran the footage through some noise reduction or if the noise being so small just got lost in the h.264 compression, Or was it the Jpeg compression from the photos that introduced noise that wasn't actually there...could be a lot of things.

    All around I can't wait to get my hands on one
    When we get our hands on TIFFs we'll know better.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,039
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Ruffo New View Post
    Looking at Mark's tests, it would seem that they have.
    Doubtful, the compression per pixel stays the same but there are more pixels so it's a higher bitrate for the same ratio and you are still watching it on the same size 1080p screen. 6k 17:1 is still ~40MBps which is about the same as 4k 8:1 which looks more than fine for 1080p delivery... Now if you were to look pixel for pixel you might see a different story, but 1:1 pixel magnification is a higher magnification for 6k than for 4k for the same delivery size...

    The algorithm seems to be the same but likely does compress a bit more efficiently due to lower noise levels.
    Noah Yuan-Vogel | noahyv.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Tom Gleeson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,360
    Just guessing that the R3D algorithm may have been tweaked as no software will run Dragon footage without a rewrite or a plugin?
    Tom Gleeson
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member Roberto Lequeux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    5,404
    I wouldn't be surprised if they tweaked things a touch, but as I understand it is at least mostly because the bigger the image the more efficient their math gets. It makes perfect sense. So file size is not linear with respect to resolution.
    Writer - Director
    Crowing Lakes.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    155
    Uncompressed would be rad for the big shows.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto & Vancouver
    Posts
    3,996
    RED/Jim has said that because the larger Signal to Noise ratio and improved noise floor that 12:1 is equivalent to 6:1 or 8:1 or something like that...

    ... in any case, yes, it has been improved. I mean, shit, 20mp instead of 14mp is a substantial difference (almost 33%).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member Eric Haase's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Coleman View Post

    Its weird I noticed a lot more noise in the stills that Mark posted compared to the footage. It make me wonder if Mark ran the footage through some noise reduction or if the noise being so small just got lost in the h.264 compression, Or was it the Jpeg compression from the photos that introduced noise that wasn't actually there...could be a lot of things.

    All around I can't wait to get my hands on one
    the stills are always noisier. Do a test in rcx. I think it's because r3d is compression designed for motion and not stills. The Mx at 800 in tungsten produces noisy stills but when it moves it looks good.
    Eric
    cinematographer
    www.ericjhaase.com
    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