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 :)

720P and 1080P... losers

Status
Not open for further replies.
NO 720p STUFF!

NO 720p STUFF!

First, hello to jim and all other reds out there. i am new on this, just ordered my red package two weeks before.
this is a very important thread here, so i will try to make it short:
i ordered a 4K camera to have the maximum quality. i don´t like video and even HD does not make me happy. to this time, i shot and shoot everything on 35mm. i would prefer the 2K options very much, i don´t need 720p stuff. 96f/s in 2K is so much better than 120f/s in poor 720p resolution.
i want to continue my work for the big screen with red, so 720p is completely useless for me, and 96f/s are a solid slowmotion indeed. so i hope jim and his team will deliver that camera, they started to develop - not a HD cam, we want and need the best digital cinema tool, and i am sure the best way is to have 4K and 2K options on board.

so my vote is: forget 720p stuff, we want the 96f/s at 2K.
 
The reason I ordered my Red with the RAW data port option is because I would never be happy uprezzing 720p RGB @ 120fps to 4k. I want to always shoot RAW for the most flexibility in post. If I could shoot 2k Redcode RAW @ 96fps, I might even consider skipping the RAW data port option and using the $6500 saved towards other Red accessories. I was going to uprez and interpolate the 2k @ 120fps to 4k @ 240-250fps anyway (to look like the movie "300"). It wouldn't be much different to do the same thing starting with 2k @ 96fps.

I vote for 2k @ 96fps! Seems like a no-brainer....
 
Jannard said:
I think recording these formats is a waste of time. I'm voting to delete them from the recording options. You can always "downrez" to get these, but shooting these formats seems counter-intuitive and a waste of FPGA space. Remember that shooting 2K REDCODE RAW is only about 7MB/sec. Maybe we should add a You Tube option? :-)

What thinkest thou?

Jim
Click to expand...

I agree Jim. While 1080i/p and 720p are the favorite distribution formats du jour, they represent the present state of the art. Your Red camera is the architecture of the future. A future, I might add, that has yet to be written since 4K projector/ display technology is still evolving. A future that you and Red team are writing right now. Why are you even considering backwards compatibility to a format like 720p? Because of the comfort level of the professionals that post on this board? You guys have done an excellent job developing forward. Forget HD. Once people see native 4K in their homes and at the theatre, HD will be the new SD. I give it 10 years.

You have charted a fine course thus far as captain of the Red ship. I see no reason to second-guess your decisions now. As you said, if anyone needs 1080 or 720 they can easily downconvert to them. 1080 and 720 is the neighborhood that Sony and Panasonic inhabit. Don't try to compete directly with them, there's no reason to do that. If anyone thinks that 720p is superior to 2K, then they're not a Red user, regardless of the frame rate issue.

Please don't let the Red engineers waste time trying to integrate 720 and 1080 recording into Red's monumentally robust 4K architecture. It may only delay the camera's delivery schedule. Push the envelope. Make this camera truely future-proof. There are so many frame-rate converion algorithms now in After-Effects and there are more on the way. Software MUST solve the frame-rate issue, because hardware should be tasked with more important duties like capturing the most data/resolution per frame.

Your solution of 96fps @2K would provide the data necessary to convert to many different rates in post. If anyone needs a different solution, they should rent a PhantomHD for those shots.

Will the HDMI out on the Camera still function under the 96fps@2k scenario, or would that feature be disabled on higher frame rate shooting? Could one hook up a deck to the HDMI if a lower-resolution/higher frame rate were required?
 
polispol said:
You are talking about tv... so probably the standard in europe will be 720p instead of 1080i.
It's not only about resolution, but frame rate. Progressive mode is much better than interlaced, and if you do the math you would see that 1080i is not much better than 720p. This is clearly explained by the BBC and the EBU.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know progressive is better than interlaced, and as I said, many broadcasters are pushing for 1080p delivery. Also, now that HDready TVs are pretty common, the big selling line is Full HD 1080p.

I don't think the standard here will be 720p, but I may be wrong. I know however there is very little shooting in 720p. As I said the increase in resolution between PAL (576) and 720 is quite minimal, although progressive adds it's load of detail. Everybody here tailkng about HD, is thinking 1080, wether i or p.

We'll see, but I see a short life for 720p material, at least here in Europe. Obviously the gain between NTSC and 720 is much more substancial. As we, in Europe, are late in the HD game, we will jump directly to 1080, i for the time being and maybe p in the near future.

Time will tell, cheers,
Damien
 
I don't think calling "moron" people who care about frame rate over resolution for their current business is the good attitude on this forum.

You gotta understand that for a lot of shops like us in Europe most of our clients don't care of anything above SD and they won't for another two good years. But we do have some significant demand for SD projects that require higher frame rates or that need to be shot in a harsh environment where the 12-stop lattitude is a key element.

So of course we love to think of the Red as a tool to make great 4k programs and convince channels to broadcast 4k or even 2k, but trust me they won't.

Now as for the true filmmaking aspect of the Red, believe me we'll have tons of projects to shoot in 4k; and we'll make them, but these don't pay the bills and they certainly don't pay for the Red Ones!!!

So excuse us for being pragmatic but for some people here, money and clients is a concern and keeping that 120fps option that we partly based our purchase on is crucial.

Now if Jim wants to change that one month before final production we won't bash him and we'll surely keep our feet in the line. But it does have some consequences on our businesses.

We wish we could live of revolutionary filmmaking, but we don't...

Arnaud, one of the "morons" wishing to keep the 120 fps feature (no matter what kind of resolution, even if it was simple SD)
 
i think those who want a 720p with higher framerates will get this on one of the next panasonic models for sure. but red shouldn´t touch this field, i mean, we have a big block car here and talk about the 1st gear.
there are so many other cams for the 720p market.
i repeat: in my opinion 96fps are very solid for the most of stuff you need, even commercials.
 
I will do all my projects in 4K or 2K, and then deliver the most in HD (after intermediate). So in IMHO you may remove the 720 and 1080 - BUT - keep the 120fps option somewhere. Most of my work is comercial and a nice slow-mo here and there often make it (for me anyway).
 
Hey Jim, I'm with you on the 2K@96fps
but if the people want then why not give it to them?
Can't you play on the "modularity" concept of the camera and offer a different FPGA upon request?
Sounds to me like the FPGA that includes the signal processors for HD is already in some way or other built.
While you and many other customers like myself would rather go for the 2K@96fps so it sounds like you will make one fpga with these features to cater your needs. so why not offer that as an upgrade opton?
Swap one fpga for the other upon request.

But here is my real question;
By excluding HD, aren't you saving space? Wouldn't that offer more room for features in the future or larger cooling (yeah, I have no idea how the internals are designed so I could be waaay off the mark)
I am going to take a leap here and suppose you will be saving about 1/20th of a cubic inch of physical space by removing the HD section so that could be used for something else :)

Also, according to this diagram wouldn't excluding HD also exclude the B4 lens system?
 
Arnaud,

I think you've made some valid points. I would like to add that Red will succeed eitherway but I believe the global impact of Red will be much broader -and beneficial for all of you- if they don't just throw away native 1080p and people depending on quick turnaround. And that's coming from someone who isn't on the broadcasting side.

Sorry Jim, I don't think recording 1080p is a waste of time.
 
The development time, engineering talent and cost of developing this camera seems to some degree wasted if the marketplace, which has always accomodated higher resolutions (if slowly), requires the hardware to capture an inferior image.
I find it difficult to understand that somehow 720p, by the sole virtue of it's precarious toe-hold in SOME distribution schemes, should take valuable (priceless and precious) engineering time away from 2K implementation. If your business model cannot absorb the time required to output a 720p deliverable, then perhaps this camera is not for you.
Have we not all lived through the age of the Compact Disc? The format that just 20 years ago destroyed the Cassette and the LP Record, is now threatened by the mp3 or it's latest downloadable cousin.
Although this camera is affordable, it's still quite a grip of money to acquire. Adopting a 2K workflow from the outset will create a buffer against obsolescence for your CONTENT. Do any of us still believe that HD is the format for the next fifty years? C'mon. The SECOND that HD (1080 or 720) reaches market saturation (6 to 7 years off) the manufacturers will create an even better home entertainment experience just to stay afloat.
Anyone that chooses 720p is obviously not a student of history and I doubt has plans to be in business as a serious content provider in ten years. You heard me right, you choose 720p - you choose extinction. Maybe not in five years, but certainly in ten.
The human race has yet to create an algorithm that can create pixels for a digital image that weren't there when the image was captured. You can go down in resolution-- but you can't go up.
 
Our company will be shooting 4k and down converting in RC for client's needs. 2k will be used for higher frame rates. 1080 and 720 are not in our cards anymore. Please make room for the future.

G
 
What I don't understand is why you need more computing power for 2K @ 120fps than for 4K @ 30 fps. It is the same number of pixels to process in one second.
 
Haskell said:
There are plenty 1080 cameras on the market to suit the needs of those interested in ENG/EFP applications. RED ONE is a Cinema Camera. ;)
Click to expand...

I think that Gibby will disagree strongly with this statement.

Oh, and Jim - 2K at 96fps would rock! (shows which camp i'm in!). I have a question, Does the Red One make nice toast as well? :biggrin: (aside from making 'toast' of the competition!) :ninja:
 
Red South West said:
i think those who want a 720p with higher framerates will get this on one of the next panasonic models for sure. but red shouldn´t touch this field, i mean, we have a big block car here and talk about the 1st gear.
there are so many other cams for the 720p market.
i repeat: in my opinion 96fps are very solid for the most of stuff you need, even commercials.
Click to expand...

So you suggest we buy a Red One and the coming Panasonic...
I think this thread is seriously changing the idea of modularity that people had about the Red at the beginings.
 
Adíos, 720P

Adíos, 720P

Quote:
"If realtime HQ 1080p playback is not possible from a 4k redcode RAW file on a highend system, I'd say: keep 1080p RGB (From 2k and 4k), loose 720p and work on optimizing the RAW options." - A. Holck

I definitely agree on that. I would need 2k RAW up to 96 fps a lot more often than 120fps/720p. Keeping 1080 RGB still gives a quick deliverable format for everything non-cinema.
 
i go with the 2k@96fps! 1080p would be nice when you do TV stuff but if it doesn´t fit it has to go i favour of the 2k.
/Christian
 
Red South West said:
i repeat: in my opinion 96fps are very solid for the most of stuff you need, even commercials.
Click to expand...

96fps is for shooting people in slow motion, but if I want to shoot liquids, food, or any other product shoot, I need, at least 200fps.

Everybody is talking about making movies, but, we have to be realistic. How many movies are going to be shoot, and how many commercials or products for tv?

I use to shoot also with the weisscam and the phantom HD cameras, and since this cameras allow to shoot high frame rates at lower resolutions, I know lots of products that have been shoot at pal resolution and almost 2000fps with this cameras.

in resolution terms, you don't need to kill flies with a missile (it's a spanish phrase!) when shooting for tv. Even if you shoot for HDTV.

(ironic mode on) BTW... what a terrible thing the 720p! BBC's Planet earth looks AWFUL! (/ironic mode off)
 
Jim, Although I plan on shooting 4k for my own stuff, I shoot documentary TV primarily. I have lots of s16 lenses I plan on using. One of my main specialty lenses is one of a kind and will not cover on s35. Also, I don't own any of the footage I shoot for Nat Geo, BBC, etc. Why would I want to give them anything better than what they need? I would rather have them pay me more to reshoot animals in 4k years from now. Shooting in remote locations for extended periods of time may cause memory headaches also. Please, please, please don't give up the other formats. Thanks for the amazing work you guys are doing.

Keith
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top