Renders from QT wrappers VS. REDCINE

[Curran Giddens]

I also understand that sh*t happens and things (workflows) change, but with all the talk emphasized on QT proxies, is FCP going to be a Proxy only solution? Are there plans for a native R3D editing in any other NLE besides Scratch?

Doesn't RED have an exclusive deal in place with Assimilate for an certain amount of time? I'm sure this was necessary to get a working solution (RedCine) ready ASAP. Otherwise we would all still be waiting ... while RED makes a solution from ... scratch. (pardon the pun)

This is why I was looking for an FCP workflow that doesn't use (lower-quality debayer) QT wrappers or a Scratch conform. The problem is that it involves manually creating a shot list, and then manually exporting those shots from RedCine.

 

[Jim Arthurs]

Boyd Shermis, VFX Designer and Supervisor for Swordfish, posted a phenomenal endorsement of Fusion on one of the product’s most prominent user groups, Pigsfly.com.

Boyd Shermis is one of the greats in the industry. He told me at the time that that Swordfish shot was the single most expensive individual shot in movie history.

Boyd has also pushed for 4K FX work since the beginning on all the jobs he supervises. Especially with Super 35mm cropping from a nominal 2K scan... there ain't much vertical rez left.

As to Fusion, god it's great. And fast. I've been with it since DOS days, the team is whip smart and fantastic... get this... the whimsical names of the spill control settings in the ultra keyer come from the subject matter in some of my bluescreen footage I sent them to trouble-shoot.

I'm doing some 2K comp work on a feature this weekend with Fusion and love the performance and ease it mixes footage of multiple bit depths... It's comping multiple streams of DPX files with color-correction and grain tools added faster than REDCINE can de-bayer down to 2K...

 

[Häakon]

Yes, quality improvements are coming to the QuickTime codec. I call it high quality, but not yet ultra-high quality

I think from Robs posts you can figure that we're working very hard on aspects of the RED workflow right now, and we fully understand the need for the full quality demosaic in the Quicktime codec...

"High" quality or even "ultra-high" quality are not the same as "full" quality. I think what most of us are asking for is a way to access the full (raw? bayer?) image within Final Cut. As was pointed out on post one of this topic, the current QT-wrapped files are no substitute for files output from REDCINE at full quality. This needs to be addressed.

Chris Kenny has made some extremely valid points in this topic that have seemed to be glossed over. For one, I am totally happy cutting from the "standard" level 1K QT proxy in Final Cut, provided that I can then go back and re-link to 4K source material for the final render. Right now, there is no way to do this. Converting to uncompressed DPX or TIFF sequences is a monstrous chore - especially for feature work - and the time and space requirements are massive. The whole point of REDCODE is that we don't have to work uncompressed... and yet FCP doesn't understand R3D. Also, there is no QT-wrapped 4K file to reference; I've been told that this is because QT doesn't support 4K. But I can bring a 12MP still image into my FCP timeline, so there ought to be a way to bring in a full-quality, 4K RED image in similar manner.

Also, understand that I am not wanting, intending, or asking to finish in 4K. The whole point of having the 4K material to work from is so that we may reap the benefits of oversampling in post. Rendering from the current 2K QT proxy does not give us this benefit at all.

It's apparent that RED doesn't want to discuss many of these issues at the moment (it seems like something is being saved for NAB?), but there are shoots going on now that can't wait until April for an answer. It also seems odd that such a crucial piece of the RED puzzle is being left in the dark.

Personally, I've been stoked because the image quality in-camera is top-notch and I have been capturing some amazing stuff. But I wholeheartedly sympathize with the post guys who are ripping their hair out trying to find an efficient and affordable way to get the best images possible from the camera into their NLE, because without that, the in-camera quality is moot.

 

[I Bloom]

It's apparent that RED doesn't want to discuss many of these issues at the moment (it seems like something is being saved for NAB?), but there are shoots going on now that can't wait until April for an answer. It also seems odd that such a crucial piece of the RED puzzle is being left in the dark.

I can't speak for Graeme or Rob but I understand that answering some of my specific questions about the future of Final Cut Pro, might mean vioating a possible NDA with Apple. That alone explains why Red can't be open about that specific item, they can't comprimise Apple's competitive strategy. And damaging that relationship is bad for all of us. As far as the full quality codec goes though, I think it's clear, it's in the works.

Ian

 

[Deanan]

But I wholeheartedly sympathize with the post guys who are ripping their hair out trying to find an efficient and affordable way to get the best images possible from the camera into their NLE, because without that, the in-camera quality is moot.

Unfortunately, Quicktime is like kryptonite to Graeme's magic pixies
so the magic button to put full quality into FCP tomorrow is broken.

 

[Häakon]

Unfortunately, Quicktime is like kryptonite to Graeme's magic pixies
so the magic button to put full quality into FCP tomorrow is broken.

Is this an issue with Apple just being stubborn? You'd think it would only benefit both parties to get out a workable solution sooner than later.

 

[Deanan]

It's an issue with the complexity on the FCP/Quicktime side that makes it far from trivial. This sort of workflow is new to FCP so properly integrating it takes time.

It's also a chicken and egg thing. If you had high quality first and don't have reasonable speed, you won't use it anyway. So the decision was to work on
speed first and tackle the more complex full quality issues in parallel.

 

[Rob Lohman]

Okay, we are confusing a couple of things I think.

1) I'm putting in higher quality, that takes time, don't need help from Apple for that

2) FCP 6.0.2 supports different resolution/quality levels with the REDCODE codec, since it's already there we don't need Apple's help to change which processing paths this selects in our codec

3) Of course we continue to evaluate integration and any changes with that would indeed require help from Apple on the FCP side.

Rest assured we're working hard to enhance post integration on all levels.

 

[Rob Lohman]

That's why we currently hsve three QT wrappers generated instead of one?

We have more reasons to have three wrappers than just FCP. QuickTime player being one (which by the way also instructs the codec for medium or high quality depending on the high-quality decode flag you have or have not set in the preferences).

What you can't do in FCP is select which specific resolution you want to extract from the 4K source. Hence we have wrappers to help out in that area. Pick the one closest to your final output resolution or the 2K one. Then the RT menu will allow you to select half the resolution of what you put in (so if you load the 2K file you'll get 1K on playback for example) and a lower quality if you drop down all the way.

 

[Sean Michael Johnston]

But that's exactly what the FCP RT engine does together with the RED (or any of the supported) codec. For final render it will auto select full quality, but on the timeline you can select a lower quality for faster perf.

When we enable the ultra high quality mode it will tie into this, just as it is doing that today.

So does this mean that a round trip through Color will eventually be able to access this same ultra high quality without having to pre-process in RedCine?

 

[I Bloom]

We have more reasons to have three wrappers than just FCP. QuickTime player being one (which by the way also instructs the codec for medium or high quality depending on the high-quality decode flag you have or have not set in the preferences).

What you can't do in FCP is select which specific resolution you want to extract from the 4K source. Hence we have wrappers to help out in that area. Pick the one closest to your final output resolution or the 2K one. Then the RT menu will allow you to select half the resolution of what you put in (so if you load the 2K file you'll get 1K on playback for example) and a lower quality if you drop down all the way.

Got it. Unfortunately that means if you want to cut a project that finishes to 2K you'll be limited to the realtime performance characteristics of the 2K codec? Whereas, one would desire, in my case to cut in 1K and finish in 2. I know I'm muddling something hear...

So does this mean that a round trip through Color will eventually be able to access this same ultra high quality without having to pre-process in RedCine?

Likely any Quicktime aware app. So add to that list AfterEffects, Shake...

Ian

 

[Deanan]

Got it. Unfortunately that means if you want to cut a project that finishes to 2K you'll be limited to the realtime performance characteristics of the 2K codec? Whereas, one would desire, in my case to cut in 1K and finish in 2. I know I'm muddling something hear...

That what the RT menu does. Your project is 2k resolution but the lower quality setting uses 1k.

 

[Simon Blackledge]

Deanan: Is RT in fcp doing the same as ticking the Hi-Quality button on a clip in QT on and off ?

s

 

[Cail Young]

Pliny (our Director of Operations & chief mad scientist)

Any relation to this one? LINK

What you can't do in FCP is select which specific resolution you want to extract from the 4K source. Hence we have wrappers to help out in that area. Pick the one closest to your final output resolution or the 2K one. Then the RT menu will allow you to select half the resolution of what you put in (so if you load the 2K file you'll get 1K on playback for example) and a lower quality if you drop down all the way.

So, to clarify:

a) The three proxy wrappers specify maximum decoded resolution, not quality

b) The larger proxy wrappers allow for optional maximal (currently "high" but not "full"?) quality debayer at the expense of performance in either QT Player with the High Quality option or in FCP through RT Extreme

c) Very soon*, the REDCODE QT Component will support this "full quality" debayer for the wrapped files, and the forthcoming FCP 6.0.2 will allow RT Extreme to get at it

Is that correct?

 

[Rob Lohman]

Deanan: Is RT in fcp doing the same as ticking the Hi-Quality button on a clip in QT on and off ?

more or less, FCP has three levels instead of two (on/off)

 

[Rob Lohman]

a) The three proxy wrappers specify maximum decoded resolution, not quality

Correct, with one exception. At the moment the codec is not doing a proper downsample, so the lower resolution the more stair stepping etc. you **might** (or not!) see. This will be fixed very soon

b) The larger proxy wrappers allow for optional maximal (currently "high" but not "full"?) quality debayer at the expense of performance in either QT Player with the High Quality option or in FCP through RT Extreme

All proxy wrappers allow for this

c) Very soon*, the REDCODE QT Component will support this "full quality" debayer for the wrapped files, and the forthcoming FCP 6.0.2 will allow RT Extreme to get at it

FCP 6.0.2 has been out since November.

Okay, let's get quite specific. Currently you have three levels:

high = full resolution of wrapper
medium = half resolution of wrapper
low = half resolution of wrapper in lower quality

If I remember correctly the high-quality setting in QuickTime player toggles between high & medium.

With the new codec high will be changed to "full resolution of wrapper with proper down sample". We'll have to see if we change the other two or not

That's how it currently stands

 

[Cail Young]

That's how it currently stands

Excellent; and I blame my brainfart on 6.0.2 on the last 7 days.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Okay, let's get quite specific. Currently you have three levels:

high = full resolution of wrapper

full resolution of wrapper does not equal full quality debayer. just makin' sure we are all clear here.

 

[Simon Blackledge]

So you can get a full resoloution (High 2k) from a wrapper but the de-bayer is still not the best.
De-Bayer in wrappers are Medium or High quality but not "full quality"

Best debayer (full quality) + any rez (1080/2k/4k)needs exporting from RC or RA

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Best debayer (full quality) + any rez (1080/2k/4k)needs exporting from RC or RA

or Scratch. Yes - that is my understanding of where we are at this current moment - and the exact reason I started this thread. To clarify that.