3.1.6 tested and it's worst then before

[Stuart English]

Do you think certain cameras are more susceptible than others? Or is it just settings and subject matter?

That is a great question, but no I don't think that certain cameras are more susceptible than others.

 

[Dan Hudgins]

ND0.9 help?

ND0.9 help?

Unlike the beach shot that came up before (see my other posts) you cannot add more sky to reduce the load on the compressor in the forest, but you can add ND filters and shoot wide open, the OLPF should blur the edges more with the lens at f/1.2 so that may reduce the load on the compressor enough to not have it overload?

Maybe they are Alpha testing indoors with the lens open, or outdoors with sky in the shot, they shoud develop a test pattern of moving fine random shapes like fire and water fountains to confuse the compressor to see if they can get their compersor to overload? You should have noticed that early footage had large dark (black) areas in the frame, those are parts that freed the compressor to work on other parts.

 

[Daniel Reichenbach]

I still believe, that 16:9 isn't as perfect as 2:1 in B16, it is not a sience proof, but I realized more noise/mistakes/artifacts, so I will stay with my beloved 2:1.

 

[Dj Joofa]

... those are parts that freed the compressor to work on other parts.

That is a characteristic of a multi-pass compressor. Otherwise a compressor has no way of preempting future image local characteristics to dynamically change the allocation of bits.

If you notice the image posted by Steve Sherrick in post # 15, there is a seam through the middle of the image --- I am not sure if Red's compressor is multi-pass.

 

[Dan Hudgins]

Content matters?

Content matters?

I am not sure if Red's compressor is multi-pass.

From what I can make out from things that are said, the camera seems to be sensitive to the amount of detail in the whole frame.

If the camera would record RAW then there would be no issues with content and the images would not care what software version was being used for the de-Bayer, you could take old footage and re-process it with newer software. But with the camera disturbing the RAW data, there is no way to recover damaged pixels.

I wish they would change course and offer a 24fps RAW recording option to a memory module made of 48 parallel CF cards, that would let you record RAW data and be sure your takes are usable.

 

[Dj Joofa]

I wish they would change course and offer a 24fps RAW recording option to a memory module made of 48 parallel CF cards, that would let you record RAW data and be sure your takes are usable.

Agree in principle, but don't know how to accomplish this on a practical level.

On a different note, I think if Red allows the custom programming of stuff such as quantization parameters, etc., for the adventurous, that will be really great.

 

[Martin Preiss]

Unlike the beach shot that came up before (see my other posts) you cannot add more sky to reduce the load on the compressor in the forest, but you can add ND filters and shoot wide open, the OLPF should blur the edges more with the lens at f/1.2 so that may reduce the load on the compressor enough to not have it overload?

Well that's is nice idea, but killer to work with. A steadicam in 50mm at 1.3? Did it on the same picture use see here, because of this firmware error I lost one hour of production time and light as well. With ND which adds IR/Purple to blacks it's not help at all as well. So you will solve one compressor error you will add more two or three. Out of focus @ 1.3, Purple Blacks and lens performance issue. Most lenses are constructed to perform best at 4 and 5.6.So helping reduce load to compressor in standard shooting environment is unpractical.

 

[reality]

Martin, what do your purple blacks look like the same in redalert as they do on the monitor?

I wouldn't have had the balls to shoot with a fresh beta like you are.

 

[Martin Preiss]

Martin, what do your purple blacks look like the same in redalert as they do on the monitor?

I wouldn't have had the balls to shoot with a fresh beta like you are.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=15805

first pic R3D from Red Alert, Second pic on set

no ND filters or any filters in front of camera. Just standard Zeiss Ultra Primes.

 

[Leo Ticheli]

PM Stuart.. he has a build for you that should fix most of the Codec/Compression issues.

Happy 4th, Jarred,

Are you saying there is a build beyond 3.1.6?

Do you recommend returning to 3.1.5 at this point? As I mentioned, I've got an important shoot coming and I can't afford to find random bad frames.

Best regards,

Leo

 

[Stuart English]

Beta Build 16 status

Beta Build 16 status

Are you saying there is a build beyond 3.1.6?

Do you recommend returning to 3.1.5 at this point? As I mentioned, I've got an important shoot coming and I can't afford to find random bad frames.

No new beta build just yet Leo, we are digesting the feedback from the 3.1.6 tests. So it may be best to go back to 3.1.5 for now (which is our public beta) and consider 3.1.6 a test build.

 

[Dan Hudgins]

Far RED or near IR? Doing what you can...

Far RED or near IR? Doing what you can...

Well that's is nice idea, but killer to work with. A steadicam in 50mm at 1.3? Did it on the same picture use see here, because of this firmware error I lost one hour of production time and light as well. With ND which adds IR/Purple to blacks it's not help at all as well. So you will solve one compressor error you will add more two or three. Out of focus @ 1.3, Purple Blacks and lens performance issue. Most lenses are constructed to perform best at 4 and 5.6.So helping reduce load to compressor in standard shooting environment is unpractical.

I left a post for you here on the RED light through the blue Bayer filter issue,

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=247441&posted=1#post247441

It may not be just near IR far deep RED light may also make a shift.

I take it that you did not try shooting with an ND0.9 to see if that would reduse the frames lost to compression artifacts.

It really upset me to see your fine footage F***ED up with those compression artifacts, but your actors are standing around, you need to shoot something, so I was just trying to give something you could try to see if the error msg stop, a clue to the issue, i.e. no sky or large black areas to add in the forest in the shot so add ND. Maybe they raised the black level since the compressor was messing up the dark areas, now there is too much detail in the dark areas so the codec fails? The smoke would rase the black level more and make more work for the cmpressor as well. Try using an ND without opening the lens, this will shift some detail into the foot of the sensor curve and the compressor will spend less time on it, maybe.

"You can't always get what you want,
But if you try sometimes well you might find,
You get what you need", Rolling Stones.

 

[Martin Preiss]

I take it that you did not try shooting with an ND0.9 to see if that would reduse the frames lost to compression artifacts.

"You can't always get what you want,
But if you try sometimes well you might find,
You get what you need", Rolling Stones.

Well I didn't. First of all, I don't have times for experiments any more...in preproduction maybe, but now?! So no I will not or I didn't try to use ND.9. And when we downgrade camera firmware to 3.1.5 it was already so dark I was shooting T1.3!!! (we had shifted time-schedule that day, 1/4 day 3/4 night)

If you pointing to purple effect, yes I did try to shoot it with ND6 and ND9 and was it more purple then without filters, but that topic was covered here already before, so I just pointed it's happening in forest without filters as well.

Rolling Stones quote: I'm trying what I need, otherwise I won't be shooting with RED.

 

[Dan Hudgins]

IR, vs. far RED.

IR, vs. far RED.

Well I didn't. First of all, I don't have times for experiments any more...in preproduction maybe, but now?! So no I will not or I didn't try to use ND.9. And when we downgrade camera firmware to 3.1.5 it was already so dark I was shooting T1.3!!! (we had shifted time-schedule that day, 1/4 day 3/4 night)

If you pointing to purple effect, yes I did try to shoot it with ND6 and ND9 and was it more purple then without filters, but that topic was covered here already before, so I just pointed it's happening in forest without filters as well.

Rolling Stones quote: I'm trying what I need, otherwise I won't be shooting with RED.

I was talking about using heat absorbing glass as a far visable red cut off filter, rather than a heat mirror, and when you can getting a XB29 filter adding that, the link is in my post there to click on. The problem may not be limited to IR as the blue filter in the Bayer may pass visable RED past 625nm, the eye can see out to about 700nm, so can film, but far red colors can get shifted on Bayer filter cameras if the blue (and or green) filter passes far red light.

The RED ONE (tm) seems to be an experiment... so don't say no (any) more?

Your footage does not look underexposed, so you may be able to cut down two more stops and time up in post later...

Does it give codec errors with the body cap on?

 

[SF Geek]

Hi Dancad,
As a DP you don't set your stop depending on what works best for the camera. There are a whole slew of reasons for what you want your shooting stop to be and because the camera can't handle it is not an acceptable reason. All of Issic's posts are valid and I understand you're just trying to help. Your knowledge of sensors and processing and all that shit sounds very substantial and way over my head, but the fact remains that we shouldn't be a slave to the camera's problems. I have faith that these issues will be fixed and I for one am glad I am hearing about them here and not having to deal with them on set.

Good luck Issic. Problems aside, your shoot looks good.

 

[Dan Hudgins]

Get the shot any way you can?

Get the shot any way you can?

Hi Dancad,
As a DP you don't set your stop depending on what works best for the camera.

As no body thinks looking for the problem is useful, I will try to shut up about this I was just trying to understand where the problem was, and thought that would be of general interest. I have been shooting movie film for 43 years, I know what an iris ring is for, but when push comes to shove and you cannot come back to reshoot, it is good for a DP to know how to get the shot any way he can, without that knowledge you are left standing around saying "its not my fault the camera does not work like it said in the brochure". Its the DP's job to get the shot, good light or none, good camera or bad camera, come hell or high water. Thats why they made the Super Farron, to get the shot.

Good luck Issic. Problems aside, your shoot looks good.

Yes, I second that, aside from the hair cuts being out of period, it looks great, and makes me sick to think that without RAW frames to fall back on, he is stuck, at least with a movie camera scratch or hair you can retuch the frames in a paint program, but what can you do with those blobs?

 

[David Battistella]

I still believe, that 16:9 isn't as perfect as 2:1 in B16, it is not a sience proof, but I realized more noise/mistakes/artifacts, so I will stay with my beloved 2:1.

I am doing this too.

I love 2:1. Prints beautifully too. It just seems so clean.

David

 

[Martin Preiss]

I was talking about using heat absorbing glass as a far visable red cut off filter, rather than a heat mirror, and when you can getting a XB29 filter adding that,Your footage does not look underexposed, so you may be able to cut down two more stops and time up in post later..Does it give codec errors with the body cap on?

Well thanks for trying to find the error. It's nice, but I'm sorry it's no interest for me, maybe for Stuart, but truly and honestly I don't care what's the cause, I just don't want it. But understand to know what is the cause is better then not to know, that's true.

There are a whole slew of reasons for what you want your shooting stop to be and because the camera can't handle it is not an acceptable reason. All of Issic's posts are valid and I understand you're just trying to help. Good luck Issic. Problems aside, your shoot looks good.

I totally agree, I don't need experiment camera and as this camera is sold it's not experimental, it's consumer product. Well I understand we breaking the borders in cinema with competitive price, but that's not excuse for standard performance of the camera. And forest is standard environment, what else can be? Thanks for the support!

Its the DP's job to get the shot, good light or none, good camera or bad camera, come hell or high water.
Yes, I second that, aside from the hair cuts being out of period,...at least with a movie camera scratch or hair you can retuch the frames in a paint program, but what can you do with those blobs?

Well it's DP responsible to support the story, not to shoot bad pictures good light or none. And camera is your workhorse, if the workhorse is lame i will not take it, if somebody does it's wrong trying to support it with stick...when he is LAME!

Hair...true...but look at LOTR...

Hair or scratch, truly if this production will have money for 2x 35mm cameras and lots of stock I will rather shoot 35mm. But I'm happy I can achieve the same look with RED. Thanks for the opportunity Jim and the TEAM!

 

[Steve Sherrick]

playing devil's advocate here Martin, but it is a beta build. Red has said not to use it on "real" gigs. I couln't resist doing the upgrade, so I am in same boat, but this was the chance I took because there are a lot of positive things in this build. Let's just hope the solution is right around the corner.

 

[David Wyatt]

Why are people using Build 16 Beta on professional shoots?? Seems suicidal to me...at best it's a gamble - if I was an investor I'd be pissed off...