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 :)

why 5k? go after uncompressed instead please

5k->4k.
Such a great oversampling, followed by clever compression, is a method that offers a lot more important (opposite to redundant) image information then barely mantain an inferior stream as it is.
you can have a roughly imilar example of the concept when you compare photos from a digital still camera:
The full resolution jpg always look better then the uncompressed stills taken at half resolution. You may be tempted to think the data is there, because it was not compressed, but let's be honest: you don't normally see jpg artifacts from profesisonal cameras nowadays. So, the data is not there, to begin with, since you start with half resolution. Uncompressed is not bad, it's just magre. If you cannot have more resolution, then of course you wish that at least what you have is not degraded. That's okay. But if you start at double resolution, you can piss on it and it is still better.
Gaining is preferable to saving. it's the same thing. Sort of. Anyway, just try with stills and you'll see.
Uncompressed is just marketing. It doesn't cost a penny for companies to give you uncompressed, actually it's their gain aand your loss, because they also sell you a storage car, and still don't give you a better, bigger sensor.
and you and up with what? the same sensor as the past years, just not further degraded? and speaking about workflow... there is no comparison either. Try to manage uncompress 4k.
F...k!
I want more, but not more shit.
Incredible.
Red gives you Redcode, which is most sofisticated, efficient and best format in the world, and some one wants to go back to uncompressed. Maybe he is an intruder?
 
the same thing but in percentage:
5K is more than 1,5 times 4K - let's call it an increase of quality of 50% from 4k.
It's a lot! Hell, when have you experienced all of a sudden something like that in your career?
Now, unless you can show me that Redcode RAW degrades image to 50%, therefore demonstrating that compressed 5k is equal or worse then uncompressed 4k, to this silly advocacy for uncompressed data we should put an end.
But everybody knows that any attempt to preserve the inferior solution - at least in this field now that it is beginning to change and it has already changed - is going to die.
good night.
 
Tetsuo said:
the same thing but in percentage:
5K is more than 1,5 times 4K - let's call it an increase of quality of 50% from 4k.
It's a lot! Hell, when have you experienced all of a sudden something like that in your career?
Now, unless you can show me that Redcode RAW degrades image to 50%, therefore demonstrating that compressed 5k is equal or worse then uncompressed 4k, to this silly advocacy for uncompressed data we should put an end.
But everybody knows that any attempt to preserve the inferior solution - at least in this field now that it is beginning to change and it has already changed - is going to die.
good night.
Click to expand...

I would like to see the differences with a Red Test? I think most would stick with RedCode Raw unless storage/computers gets better? Options are never bad, as long as we still have RedCode.:wink:
 
Thanks to Red, thousands of people has finally find a proper use for the powerful personal computers they are forced to buy year after year. (So, buying a fast PC for Red purpose is a sure investment that maximize the use of this PC)
Bad luck! Just now that miniPC and ultra small notebook came into the market.
They introduce slower computer now just because everyone already has a fast one, but at the same time, he will need another even faster soon, thanks to the evolution/involution of browsers and the lesser important curtains' GUI and all the virus-like hidden processes.
Using them for Red instead of internet multi searching on 100 pages at the same time like I do, is certainly more satisfactory.
 
I'd always take a well compressed (something link REDCODE) higher resolution image over an uncompressed image of less than half the resolution.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
I'd always take a well compressed (something link REDCODE) higher resolution image over an uncompressed image of less than half the resolution.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Speaking of this, and to go slightly off topic, would it not be better overall to try to get up to the current Mysterium sensor's max 4K frame rate of 60fps with higher compression, than going down to 3K or 2K for higher frame rates? Would a 4K image at say, Redcode 18, down sampled to 2K, be better than a 2K Redcode 36 image?

I feel like, at least in some cases, I'd rather have higher resolution and higher compression (while maintaining FOV) to get to the higher frame rates, than having lower resolution, lower compression and less FOV to get to the same place.
 
Peter Majtan said:
Jim did mention before that the new 100 MB/s rate will also allow for lesser compression. So I think besides of RC28 and RC36, we can expect some higher rates - ideally variable... :)

And I am always for more DR, just for the record... :)

In any case You need 5.12K to resolve pristine 4K when taking in account the 78% resolving power of the RED sensor (might change with Epic)...
Click to expand...

Either lesser compression or, more likely, more data to compress resulting from higher resolution, higher dynamic range (facilitated with higher quantization, 14-16 bit) and, let's not forget, higher frame rates.

I see absolutely no other reason for lower compression. Why fix a problem that is not there? (and suffer even longer processing times and higher storage cost)

Back to original question:

Yes, you are wrong. Why would one want another DALSA Origin? If this is what you really want, you can try it first and see how you like it :clown2:
 
daveb said:
Has any one seen any compression artefacts yet ?

Dave
UK
Click to expand...

Yes, but the footage was taken with a Sony camera. LOL
 
daveb said:
OK, smart guy :-)... How about from Red ?

Dave
UK
Click to expand...

Nope, not even at 28MBps.

It is by far the best compression I have seen in any camera and, because it is applied on RAW instead of RGB, the end result is substantially better than even that of an uncompressed 4:4:4 RGB.

The whole concept is brilliant and very well thought out.
 
daveb said:
Has any one seen any compression artefacts yet ?

Dave
UK
Click to expand...

Yes. If you have a high detail scene where most of the shot is in focus (foliage, animal fur or sea) you're going to see compression artifacts, depending on the individual perception. On a still image. At 1:1.
Scaled down to 2k and during play much harder to notice but it's there, and you slightly loose that ultra clean image you get with shallow DOF scenes.

I'm very happy with Redcode and in most cases it does a great job at 36MB/s, but I'm really looking forward to reasonably priced SSD raid and ~72MB/s and 5:1 or maybe 4:1 compression for these high detail scene shots. I'd also like to see if there would be any benefit in the colour grading multileveled workflow.
 
In 4K RAW with Red's compression one is able to shoot green screen footage that is on par with 35mm. There is no quality issue, IMO. In 2K RAW however, the compression is visible. But then the RedOne is a 4K RAW camera and the cropped sensor modes are a makeshift until 50-100 fps can be recorded off a uncropped sensor.

Personally I find the Red's concept of mildly compressing RAW data and hence able to record huge 4K pictures onto a CF crad brilliant. Please stick to this.

There are cameras around which record uncompressed RAW, such as Arri's D21. But none of those can be just taken off the shelf and shot handheld. If one needs uncompressed for studio work there are viable alternatives already.

Hans
 
Hans von Sonntag said:
In 4K RAW with Red's compression one is able to shoot green screen footage that is on par with 35mm.
Click to expand...

I've actually had two heavy post jobs (commercials) where we had loads of problems with the compression.

It all looked fine on all channels but on the blue channel alone it was a disaster.

This was very noticeable in reflective/ translucent material and shadows and my post house had to use approx 18 settings to get around it. To compare with 35mm where they generally use 3 settings, it was A LOT of headache.

It all came down to compression - so I can't wait until we have less compression.
 
I fight with this all the time. On one hand, I want uncompressed output for the cleanest image possible. On the other hand, I love that I don't need a snake out the back of the RED ONE. The uncompressed route seems like a great deal for certain scenarios, so why not put it in, right?

The fear I have is that every show is suddenly going to want to go uncompressed. If there's a "good" mode and a "better" mode, why not shoot "better"? If people have been shooting with tethered cameras for years... shooting with the Epic tethered is not going to bother them. Shooting onboard would be cheaper, yes... but it would also "look worse" and be "low quality mode" when compared to uncompressed. Nobody wants that.

So as much as I want uncompressed on the Epic and as much as I know an uncompressed option still lurks deep in center of the RED ONE camera body, I'm fairly tempted to just say no to it. Give the producers an uncompressed option and the compressed option will disappear in their eyes. Looks better? Costs about what we're used to with other digital cameras? Go for it. Everybody will want it and part of the genius and appeal of the RED ONE will vanish.

If the RED ONE always needed a tether and a fridge-sized box... I would've gone back to film a long time ago. An enormous part of the genius and appeal of this camera is its ability to be shot like film. I don't want to have some crew member lug a Codex box to the top of the hill for the sunset shot we need to get in the next 60 seconds.

Enabling an uncompressed option might as well eliminate the compressed option on larger productions. The only solution is to make it so complex, unwieldy and expensive that nobody wants it unless they REALLY need it. :)

The solution that I like is just to lower the compression on the footage. Uncompressed 4.5K RAW is roughly 323MB/s. By that math, uncompressed 5K RAW would be roughly 415MB/s. With 3:1-5:1 compression, we're into a range which is completely attainable with a few off-the-shelf SSDs and a port-multiplied SATA enclosure. Higher frame rates? Well, we'd need faster storage or higher compression. Higher compression is free to the end user and faster storage would cost a few grand. Make both options available!

Backing the compression off to something in the 3-5:1 range will do the trick in my mind. I hope.
 
tillHavis said:
....Native Raw output means producers /vested interests cannot bitch about the workflow and is yet another selling point for Red/Epic.
Click to expand...

Another solution to that is to say that it already does (uncompressed RAW). Do you seriously think any producer on a large budget feature would know or notice?
No more bitching :biggrin:
 
tillHavis said:
Native Raw output means producers /vested interests cannot bitch about the workflow and is yet another selling point for Red/Epic.
Click to expand...

1.2TB for each hour shot is a HUGE workflow problem. On a multi camera shoot backing up and managing 3-5TB of data per day is a huge nightmare.
Producers will bitch about that guaranteed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top