Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Good enough...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Harry Clark said:
But Graeme,
We are not asking for 1080 RGB. We are asking for 1080 ProRes.
Click to expand...

But 1080 ProRes and 4k REDcode RAW are comparable data rates, so Graeme's argument holds for compressed as well as uncompressed.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Mark, unfortunately, it doesn't quite work that way. 1080p RGB would be marginally smaller than 4k RAW for instance, leading to little benefit on record times and bandwidth. To achieve an acceptable 1080p you should start at a higher rez anyway, so why not just stay there?

Also, when you work with the 4k, your quality perception threshold changes. When you compare 2k next to 4k you see the difference. Once you see it, it's not fun to go back.

The best way to achieve better DR is through better pixels - which is what we did with M-X - them being the same size as before, just a lot better.

Graeme
Click to expand...

1080p is not really the resolution limit of our eyes, at normal THX-recommended viewing distances. When more pixels are present, we perceive shading differently (more accurately). For example, a soft light hitting a facial contour will look more 3D-like and real. Any consumer can immediately see this, you don;t have to be a pixel-peeper. 4K films of the future might also, much like Imax films today, be filmed with the intention of having spectators sit closer. (So with principal action in the middle of the frame, and slow, deliberate camera movements.)

This is a separate issue from what is measured in these tests, which tends to only focus on ability to pick-out individual lines. Image perception is more than that.

That said, a solid 1080p recording medium would be very, very useful. Pro-res, Cineform, any good one. .H264 is not a good mastering codec.

Red being 4K is only one reason to love Red, and far from the top of my list. What other system allows a clean (I said clean, so Canon Betacams are excluded) F35 record using PL or still lenses on any reasonable codec? The Sony F35 (horrendously expensive?) An Ex1 + adapter (not that much cheaper in total, prone to dust issues, corrupted bokeh)? A 4/3rds Panny coming we don't know when, and recording to a prosumer codec?

To me that is the major Red selling point. Honestly, a sizeable chunk of our work (ads, music videos) has no need for future proofing. In 2015, they will be promoting other bands and brands of hairspray.

We enjoy 4K for its potential to re-crop, stabilize, etc., and in no way wish to see it go away, by any means, but there have been many jobs with limited budgets where a lower data rate 1080p (which even in RedRaw would be 1/4 the size) master cleanly scaled from the whole 4K sensor would have been much appreciated and would have made our lives far easier.
 
Here is my question...why settle for less when you can get more? This is what RED is all about...setting the bar so high and actually getting there...when Jim and the team set out to do this...they wanted to have something that superpasses what is now the
“standard“...if you set your goals so low then you will be pretty much like everyone else and there are no innovations or challenges to overcome...pioneers and leaders don't think that way...you think if RED had that mentality would you see this much competition now with all the major brands trying to give the end user as much as they can? And thats javascript:void(0);all because RED shook the entire market.

They say sky is the limit...I say ambition is the limit...

R.g.
Out
 
HD (1080) is good enough for the web and classroom projects. but I have seen some student films of the Red or a 5d and they look great on the big screen.

We have commonly used the Red for High School film productions (quite a few awards with it as well, even without mention it was shot on the Red).

And people were amazed that it was shot by 15-18 year old kids. But had they shot on HD , the story of the film would have been just as amazing.

- point being , its another tool. different tools for different things. What set the Red apart was how the shallow depth of field partially told a facet of the story where a normal HD camera would have not had that DOF. And with the Red, it forced the kids not to rely on Autofocus, or onboard Mics, or a variety of other professional level attributes the Red One (and MX) provides.

We have shot the full featured Native Film shot in the Red with our kids. And since then , had a few of these kids on a variety of shoots (below are examples of our students on "b-cam" with the Red One. With the help of Craig Keif, Alex, Richard, Jeremy, and Meiret Avis Directing (now try doing all this with an HD camera - it can be done , but probably not at this level)


Paramore (video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A63VwWz1ij0
Paramore (behind the scenes)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57LbJhePp0o&feature=related


Oranathi & Steven Vai (music video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7b-_YcACuQ

Oranathi & Steven Vai (behind the scenes)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ScZw-uokNg&feature=channel

Some commercials shot with a few of the same gear and kids.

Reflex-Tiger
http://uk.thq.com/uk/thqtv/index/?movieId=3849

Reflex-Bull
http://uk.thq.com/uk/thqtv/index/?movieId=3865

Reflex-Meat Pants
http://uk.thq.com/uk/thqtv/index/?movieId=3857
 
Jannard said:
If 1080P is really "good enough"... then there is no reason for RED.

We started this business because we believed that 1080P was NOT good enough a film alternative/replacement.

Film has much more resolution than 1080P (almost 4 times).

If the industry really believes that 1080P (or 2K) is good enough... please let us know so we can shut down and go on a forever vacation...

Jim
Click to expand...

"Good enough" is relative. 1080p is far better than "good enough" for many applications. 1080p is also nowhere near "good enough" for many other applications. So it depends on what you are doing.

RED has positioned its products outside the capabilities of the average consumer from a price point of view so one has to assume that the intended applications are other than consumer applications. If you're positioned primarily for high-end cinema, price is less relevant and quality is of a higher priority. If you're positioned for low-end cinema, price is more important and there is addition competition from the dSLRs. If you're positioned for engineering use, engineers just want tons and tons of data so frame-rate and resolution really matter, but cost may be an issue. Commercial? Not sure myself. High-end consumers like you, Jim, are not cost-conscious and tend to want to stand out. 1080p doesn't stand out.

So, I'd say you shouldn't shut down, but rather position your products for the markets that would be interested. That's one reason I suggested a 2/3" high-res EPIC for engineering uses (lower cost, high data rate, no need for shallow DOF, less need for low-light performance).
 
Nick Shaw said:
But 1080 ProRes and 4k REDcode RAW are comparable data rates, so Graeme's argument holds for compressed as well as uncompressed.
Click to expand...

OK, but I still have clients who want me to hand off something at 9:00 pm that they can start cutting at 9:30. Or don't want to transcode. Or pay me for my Red Rocket station.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Harry Clark said:
OK, but I still have clients who want me to hand off something at 9:00 pm that they can start cutting at 9:30. Or don't want to transcode. Or pay me for my Red Rocket station.
Cheers,
Harry
Click to expand...

I hear you on this Harry. I've been on many gigs where the footage needs to get handed to the producer in the format of their choosing at the end of the shoot.

A good example of this was a regular job shooting the CEO of a huge, well known corporation, who did "message to the troops" segments that were extremely time sensitive with the latest information, and needed to get edited and uploaded by their production team the same day.

Clearly this falls into the ENG/EFP category but having the capability to give clients the highest quality images in a familiar (to them) format is necessary to get and keep certain clientele.

Hopefully there will be RED ProRes module for Epic.
 
Robert Frank said:
I hear you on this Harry. I've been on many gigs where the footage needs to get handed to the producer in the format of their choosing at the end of the shoot.

A good example of this was a regular job shooting the CEO of a huge, well known corporation, who did "message to the troops" segments that were extremely time sensitive with the latest information, and needed to get edited and uploaded by their production team the same day.

Clearly this falls into the ENG/EFP category but having the capability to give clients the highest quality images in a familiar (to them) format is necessary to get and keep certain clientele.

Hopefully there will be RED ProRes module for Epic.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Of course it's best to stay in Redraw throughout post - but the option to do otherwise is sometimes a lifesaver. People here are saying "Don't settle for anything less than perfection" I would re-word that by adding "Except when you have to", and when I have to, I'd like to be able do so without ever having to rent/buy any other cam.

Options are empowering.
 
I agree with Lee above
It is subjective, after reading through the whole thread there are a lot of good thoughts. So I will add my two cents. The Red has made a dent in film, and since I shoot both still and motion, the good enough is very subjective. For still I am using Film, and hope to for many years, even when Jim gives me the 645 sensor and I can use my medium format glass, I will still shoot film, nothing today or on the near term horizon can replicate the fell you get from an 8x10 negative, the soft tonal graduations, the incredible detail. Plus I find working behind a view camera very soothing. And when you try to replicate a silver or Platinum print on Inkjet (No fancy French names here, call it what it is), it just is not the same, call it subjective, but even with hours I have spent on profiles on a top of the line printer, it cannot come close. Plus it is easier to me to go int he dark room.

Now to motion, I love my Red, and cannot wait for the Epic, in this case for me, since I never had the pleasure to shoot 35mm Film, the medium is fantastic, 5 k should be even more so. I am a happy man in this case with digital and the tools I can use. Plus the creative process is fantastic.

I do not think that in all cases Digital is always better, or can be better, and it does not have to be. Just as analogue process can be good or bad, and some replaced with digital. The 35mm still market was not replaced due to the sensor's gaining on film, it was just easer for people in that market to use, be it home snaps, or even new gathering and sports, it is fast and good enough.

To me, good enough is never, ever an answer, I try to use the tools I love to produce the best images, motion or still, that I can, and always will.

But hey, I am old, so I will die out with my last sheet of 8x10 plus X :)

Ron
 
Meryem Ersoz said:
Your EPIC-X would be a safer investment than ever.
Click to expand...
Meryem, I think this is an important point. The R-1 has held almost its full value for its entire current production run, save for possibly a little loss due to warranty running out or a larger devaluation from people not taking care of their equipment. Part of this was because of RED guaranteeing its trade in value, but mostly I think because no other company could deliver the same output for anywhere near the price of a new R-1.

A lot of people got some really good deals on used R-1s in the frenetic "dash for cash" that occurred just before the cutoff for getting into Stage 2. It took RED Epic to temporarily devalue the R-1 and I think Epic will hold value even better, longer, than the R-1 has.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
Ouch - I can't afford that. Bet they look good though.

Graeme
 
Sorry 'bout the mess I briefly made. I now cleaned up after myself. (Rather than quoting Shawn I edited his post and made it look like Tom had said something he hadn't)

Of course it was all part of my masterplan of taking over reduser...
 
lol, it's all good, thanks :-)
 
Jannard said:
The whole point of this is that you can easily scale down your original content. Scaling up... not so easy. The other point is that what is "good enough" today may not be good enough tomorrow, depending on what you shot it on.

If 4K was 4 times more expensive than shooting great 1080P, that would be a significant factor. But it isn't. In fact, it is easier and cheaper now to shoot and post the best 4K digital than it is to shoot and post the best 1080P.

Jim
Click to expand...

Depends on your post workflow. Compositing 4k takes 4x the render time, 4x the RAM, 4x the storage, and 4x the storage bandwidth, when compared to 2k.

You only get the benefits of the low data rate of REDCODE RAW if you do the digital equivalent of a contact print - just go straight from editorial to grading. Once you need to alter the image, you're looking at creating uncompressed RGBs and buying into some crazy storage solutions. Or taking a class in being very, very patient.

That said, I totally agree about scaling up vs. down. If handling 4k is not possible in your workflow, it is easy to simply render all your shots to 2k and work with that. It's still nicer to have the clean image of downscaled 4k than having 2k to start with.

It would be great if 4k really was as easy to work with as 2k, but computers (and even more so storage speeds) just aren't there yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top