Is Film the Great Equalizer?

[Bruce Allen]

4k vs 2k debate is why I still believe that maybe the Red should have been a 2k camera but with the same physical sized sensor. It would have allowed for larger / faster pixels. Plus the work-flow and data management would have been easier.

Except for the odd FX job, I can't imagine where you would need 4k over 2k.

Just my thoughts.
chris

I think there's no way you can get full 2K RGB data from a single-CCD 2K sensor, with an optical low-pass filter. 1.5K probably.

But yes I agree 3K with larger sensor sites (which would make a lovely 2K RGB image) would have been great too.

EDIT: of course my beloved HV20 would fit into your category. So I guess 1.5K is all you need?

Actually, come to think of it, wasn't the original Toy Story only rendered at around 1.5K? Ah yes, 1536 × 922...

Anyone remember watching the original Toy Story and thinking "man, that looks soft"? Hahahaaaa... I certainly didn't.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Chris Pickle]

I think there's no way you can get full 2K RGB data from a single-CCD 2K sensor, with an optical low-pass filter. 1.5K probably.

But yes I agree 3K with larger sensor sites (which would make a lovely 2K RGB image) would have been great too.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Yes, you're right. I thought of that after I posted. There is some loss by the time it gets written to a file. And you're right on the 3k, or whatever it needed to be to get down to 2k.

Someone could have down the math to figure out what they would have needed to start with to get to 2k. Say a 20% loss, then a 2.5k sensor to give a true 2k file. It would have allowed for much bigger pixels.

I helped produce on a 3 day commercial shoot, and we were all very surprised at how slow the camera is. I spoke with the camera tech department at a big rental house in Toronto. (they have several dozen Reds on order) The tech said he "bench tested" the Red in the mid 200s. After our shoot, I was inclined to believe him.

Chris