Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: Red Ray instead of Blu-Ray?

Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 71
  1. #31  
    Senior Member Joseph Hutson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dubai/USA/Anywhere at a Moment's Notice
    Posts
    3,350
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart English View Post
    Yup, that's what we said.

    The name RED RAY came from the original design goal to put 4K on a red laser disk i.e. a DVD-R. No need for a Blu-ray media disk.

    Since then our thinking has shifted to network and solid state media delivery with an HDD archive - especially as you can buy 2TB of USB based storage for about $100.
    Does this mean y'all have decided to scratch the idea of recording to optical disc media, while keeping the same compression format...only saving it to say a CF card or SSD?
    CINEPHOTOGRAPHER | DubaiFilm

    INSTAGRAM | @JosephHutson

    The answer is "No" 100% of the time you don't ask.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #32  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Alexander Ibrahim View Post
    I commented before about why BluRay is good... but not about how I am using BluRay.

    Despite being a BluRay advocate, I only own 13 films and 3 TV seasons on BluRay.

    What I noticed when considering my DVD collection is how little I actually watch my DVD's over and over.

    I am slowly selling most of my DVD's.

    I am only replacing the ones I have watched at least 4 times since purchasing them, and which I wish to watch again.

    There are a few DVD's I'll keep, mostly items of special interest that I have not found on BluRay. ...

    The rest will be "replaced" with Netflix/Hulu or subscription broadcast (HBO, Showtime et al.)
    What interests me is the historical aspect. I get mostly only the best quality movies on BD, to play for friends and family some time down the track when they hit the bargain level. Otherwise, I might buy the odd old $1-$2 movies if I think they are worth watching (Not for collecting). The BD have premium consumer compression quality compared to what I have seen on-line. But the on line services are going to disappear one day, and as long as I maintain backups of my discs , I will have them in hand and potentially compatible playback hardware longer than these on line companies will last, I could even use them in a media center. I could even sell them, if I wanted.

    Getting into the post I'm going to reply to Stuart, the quality of Red Ray at 9 or 15mb's is another issue I would like to determine. To get the same quality per pixel as top end Bluray, do you need 15 or 36mb/s at 4K. Then when you go to 3D, high frame rate, 8K, increased pixel depth (and even 21-27 channel sound), even 100mb/s download might not be enough, but new 100GB Bluray disk standard will be. You also have to pay for that download. So, bluray is still a good key format, and if they can use Redray as an official codec, like they use h264, on BD, than I would be happy. I also think that BD 100GB disks are a nice idea for backup compared to drives.
    "We think, you do!"

    Reputation is something the unwise apply.
    But integrity is what the wise apply.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #33  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart English View Post
    Yup, that's what we said.

    The name RED RAY came from the original design goal to put 4K on a red laser disk i.e. a DVD-R. No need for a Blu-ray media disk.

    Since then our thinking has shifted to network and solid state media delivery with an HDD archive - especially as you can buy 2TB of USB based storage for about $100.
    Hi Stuart, see my post above concerning the desirability of BD over time with expansion of resolution and special features for home theater rooms.

    I agree with the solid state delivery. Down loading though might be a hassle for premium quality. I have thought long and hard to come up with technologies to put this sort of media into a plug in card at a cd like price (just had another three different cost cutting techniques run through my mind just then), a stream of very advanced methods, even just putting a solid state version along with a disk. Using red ray this might be possible, it seems to be in the league of performance I was planning of my own. The problem you might get is storage space leading to complexity. The closer we get to the size of the atom, the less potential for storage expansion past technological leaps, one day, without a leap, you will run up against a brick wall, and companies might want to charge a lot of money for the biggest products (as they have no future products to replace them with). When you get to this stage, they are likely, if practical, to go to complexity, likely to be expensive, for instance sacking memory layers. 8K is not the end either, we might be eventually looking at 70K+ for surround, not to mention the theoretical potential "holo-deck". But time for a leap is approaching.

    Most people don't think of these things, where things will head in the distant future, and work off of limited knowledge and understanding and intelligence. Red, however, has people within the ball park, that should be able to read the times a bit, to plan paths for the future.


    ey will be in the futrure, and work off
    "We think, you do!"

    Reputation is something the unwise apply.
    But integrity is what the wise apply.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #34  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    4,088
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Morellini View Post
    Down loading though might be a hassle for premium quality.
    Not really. If the rate is 10Mb, a 5Mb download pipe - not uncommon today, and probably very common tomorrow - would download in twice real time, or two hours for a one hour show. That's not unreasonable to me. And even if the rate is 15Mb - well, you get the point. Server space + bandwidth costs a lot less than physical storage and/or shelf space.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #35  
    Senior Member Detlev Eller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Everywhere ... :-)
    Posts
    965
    Quote Originally Posted by M Most View Post
    Not really. If the rate is 10Mb, a 5Mb download pipe - not uncommon today, and probably very common tomorrow - would download in twice real time, or two hours for a one hour show. That's not unreasonable to me. And even if the rate is 15Mb - well, you get the point. Server space + bandwidth costs a lot less than physical storage and/or shelf space.
    ... which brings us back to the future form of theatrical distribution ...
    looks like you have gained a new view on things, lately ... ;-)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #36  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    4,088
    Quote Originally Posted by Detlev Eller View Post
    ... which brings us back to the future form of theatrical distribution ...
    looks like you have gained a new view on things, lately ... ;-)
    If you think this is a new view for me, you haven't been reading my posts here very long, or my blog for that matter...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7.   Click here to go to the next RED TEAM post in this thread.
  #37 Data rate 
    Red Team Stuart English's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Irvine, Ca
    Posts
    3,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Morellini View Post
    To get the same quality per pixel as top end Bluray, do you need 15 or 36mb/s at 4K.
    Neither. Our projection tests show that 15Mb/s for 4K is far superior to Blue-ray, and not just in terms of resolution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wayne Morellini View Post
    Then when you go to 3D, high frame rate, 8K, increased pixel depth (and even 21-27 channel sound), even 100mb/s download might not be enough, but new 100GB Bluray disk standard will be.
    Again, we aim to be physical media agnostic Wayne. Nothing to stop you using a BD-R of that capacity for archival use.
    Workflow Wizard
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #38  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by M Most View Post
    Not really. If the rate is 10Mb, a 5Mb download pipe - not uncommon today, and probably very common tomorrow - would download in twice real time, or two hours for a one hour show. That's not unreasonable to me. And even if the rate is 15Mb - well, you get the point. Server space + bandwidth costs a lot less than physical storage and/or shelf space.
    We were talking about 36-100+mb/s. How much data does a plan have and how much for extra. I think once optical technology get going we might look at costs falling significantly, eventually. For today, how much would it cost to watch 20 15mb/s movies a month (remember we are not talking about what me or you would watch, but what the money earners for a pay per view download service would like + their regular data). Internet delivery of TV instead of cable, is another consideration for their budget. Compared to a $10 disk. The future being download is a bit of a furfy for the moment, disk still has a future for a while.

    I listened to people drone on about how slow bluray was taking, as if they expect full market dominance in less time then it has taken Scarlet to come out. I also listened to this rubbish about High Definition TV. What they did not understand is that DVD was quick because of PS2 support, and BD benefited from PS3 support. Nintendo+fans underestimated the benefit and speed of HD TV penetration. Yet here we are with DVD, then HDTV and Bluray. 3D TV is arguable at the moment, SHDTV is also arguable, but I suspect that both will come in eventually when all the 'blind' people see the difference. Download, past low quality cheap downloading, has things to overcome. So, it maybe 5 to 10 years before downloads will legitimately squash disk (unless cheap people with selective vision, decide to go for cheap downloads instead, as with low quality cable TV).

    Balance is where it is at, at the moment the balance is not with a download only life. In the end, paid to own (even pay per permanent license) download is only useful if I can archive it, and at that to separate disks for security. Pay to permanent license is also, in my opinion, anti-trust.
    "We think, you do!"

    Reputation is something the unwise apply.
    But integrity is what the wise apply.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #39  
    Moderator Gunleik Groven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    11,478
    You were talking about those rates. RedRay was originally announced like "4k delivery of films on a standard DVD"

    AFAIK the first bublic screenings was at 10MbS
    Life is good. So is RED...

    http://blog.gunleik.com

    Dragon short: "Sweet..." https://vimeo.com/74358938

    Current Indiegogo Campaign: #godtnorsk:
    https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/godtnorsk/x/541483
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #40  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart English View Post
    To get the same quality per pixel as top end Bluray, do you need 15 or 36mb/s at 4K.
    Neither. Our projection tests show that 15Mb/s for 4K is far superior to Blue-ray, and not just in terms of resolution.
    So in terms of latitude, floor, ceiling, signal to noise ratio, detail per pixel, it is better? Increased resolution makes something look better than it is per-pixel, that is why I ask on a objective pixel per pixel comparisons. You can round smooth, reduce difference between pixels (and outline edges and features for sharpness) etc to get more compression, but the hard thing is maintain accuracy. I do not trust the opinions of loud viewers, stick them in a dark room get them happy and excited, and give them some drinks, and they think everything is a lot better than it is. If I wanted to affect the outcome of a survey I could do so, simply by the way I walked into or out of the room, even more with the attitude and what I say. Real business people, and marketers understand these things. So, adding up the differences in the pixels gives a good estimate, taking a quarter of a 4K frame made from the highest quality uncompressed (not redcode) frame and comparing it to the same quarter of the uncompressed frame put through premium 40 (or was that 54) mb/s h264 bluray

    Bluray quality is far from perfect, but there is very few of us that can do what people are claiming for redray in a pixel by pixel basis. If you understand what I am meaning Stuart, and the answer per pixel is still yes, 15 mb/s Red ray is as good per pixel as top of the line bluray, then great bring it on, their is room for two genuinenesses in the world.

    Then when you go to 3D, high frame rate, 8K, increased pixel depth (and even 21-27 channel sound), even 100mb/s download might not be enough, but new 100GB Bluray disk standard will be.
    Again, we aim to be physical media agnostic Wayne. Nothing to stop you using a BD-R of that capacity for archival use.
    I mean Redray as a licensed codec on Bluray, as an option to eventual 100mb/s+ download?


    Thanks for your help Stuart.

    Wayne.
    "We think, you do!"

    Reputation is something the unwise apply.
    But integrity is what the wise apply.
    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