Red not true 4k

[Daniel S Williams]

I want to apologize if I've seemed rude or ruffled feathers.

It is just frustrating seeing people first off dismiss Galt's article, saying he's biased, and for that reason he should not be listened to. Are you kidding me? I also don't enjoy being labeled a troll. We can all be big boys here.

Galt brought up some very good points. And no, Red is not completely up front with their specs, but then again neither is anyone. I'll drop this argument because, for one, these are the Reduser boards, and two, graeme has been kind and understanding, but still. Read the article. Decide for yourself.
Better yet, watch the Panavision conference he was involved with. It's a massive load of info.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

All I'd say Gavin is to "compare and contrast" my responses to those of your favoured "other camera company person".

Graeme

 

[Daniel S Williams]

Personally I want a really badass 2k camera with 15 stops of latitude and a global sensor. I would prefer that to an 8k camera.
.

I second that.

 

[Costelloe Michael]

Daniel,

I read the article a few days ago, after being referred to, in the UK on 'Shooting People'.

I still say, not dismissively, it is bound to reflect his own opinions (sic) of his companies technology. Read that how you will. It is not one bit a comment on anything Red, fanboyism or whatever, just my thought and opinion on an article published by a company man.

Regards

Mike Costelloe

 

[LEON]

Mr. Daniel S Williams
What do you have against trolls ? Not real 4K also ?

 

[Daniel S Williams]

Mr Jean Luc Leon.

Thank you for proving you're 12 years old

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Come on - we can discuss this for the benefit of everyone reading if we don't resort to name calling!

 

[jpp]

But specs are important.
Knowing how the camera works from the inside out.

If you're contending that Red lacks adequate resolution for dramatic material, or that its performance is marginal for big-screen projection, or that its resolution is inferior to Genesis, then at least you have an arguable position, which we could test and settle more or less objectively.

But there's not much useful discussion to be had over specs in the abstract, when there are no universally accepted quantitative methods for assessing quality and performance (not to mention aesthetics), and when you're selling media and movies to general audiences, not to engineers for analysis.

I'm not just going to look at the screen and go "hm that looks good"
Because I'm not stupid.

Stupid? What better test has ever been devised, then looking at the results of the camera? There's no other way to do it. The only "stupid" course is to trust in published specs.

I want to know what I'm looking at. And how it works, what makes it tick.

Graeme has been more than generous with that information, within the limits of his NDA(?)

And I simply brought up the point that Red advertises their camera as 4k, and producers get on me about it, when really it's all marketing. Like saying the hvx200 is true 1080p ect

Maybe Red brought this on itself, by encouraging the resolution fetish, and with some questionable advertising copy. But again, we're not dealing with a consumer product. Any competent professional is going to test, beforehand. If the camera failed to deliver, the company would have been dead and gone months ago.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

All I'd say Gavin is to "compare and contrast" my responses to those of your favoured "other camera company person".

Graeme

But you are my favoured "other camera company person"!

Tell me why the *other other* guy is overselling his product with pixel shifting. And why that sort of thing doesn't fly in your neck of the woods.

 

[Daniel S Williams]

You're right Graeme. It's just those kind of comments from Mr. Luc get on everyone's nerves.



I always thought it was funny how defensive and passionate people get about defending the cameras they've spend thousands on, only to dismiss them 2 years later when a better one comes out

 

[Daniel S Williams]

I'm not targeting the end resulting image the Red is capable of producing, so stop calling me out about it. I KNOW it looks good.

I'm discussing the marketing and the whole 4k fetish that gets directors and producers spending more money for a bigger number. It's stupid.

it IS about the end result. That's my point. I just thought, on the side, that it was interested to read Mr. Galt's article. I've love for any of you to prove his points wrong in that article. He did his research. What he's saying holds value in this argument.
But anyways, yeah, what's important is how the visuals serve the story, ultimately. Not the specs. But as a DP, I like understanding a camera inside and out, as I've said.

 

[Daniel S Williams]

Yes, my title was inflammatory. Perhaps I should have chosen another. But my statement still stands. And I don't appreciate the instant abuse I garner by just speaking my mind.
I end by saying this,

if you're going to purchase or rent the red for your production, don't give into the marketing, and the pixel count fetish, and do your OWN research. And know the limitations/benefits of a bayer array, and understand that you're not going to get 4k of true RGB pixels.

 

[Michael Neborak]

I hope I don't start an all out war for this comment as this post seems to be getting quite hot... if the 4k mode really is 3.2k, what is the 2k? I love Red and only ask as I shot a production entirely in 2k for space saving purposes which did come out great, however.

 

[Brandon Fraley]

Ok actually Graeme I'm going to take that back. If we're talking "Marketing" then Red isn't completly up front. Yes they say 12mp but who can do 4k RGB to megapixel conversion in their head?

Now anyone who is planning on spending 24k on a camera should probably do some good research at which point they will certainly ascertain the details of the mysterium chip. But it's even called the "Mysterium" chip.

Show me where on Red.com you use the word "Bayer".

"Pixel shifting not spoken here." No you need to go to Reduser.net and speak about pixel shifting and bayer patterns.

actually have to agree with this as well. Marketing is what it is, and you guys are no worse than anyone else, but is doesn't really seem in the spirit of what RED is doing.

 

[Brandon Fraley]

I'm discussing the marketing and the whole 4k fetish that gets directors and producers spending more money for a bigger number. It's stupid.

do you know producers that are spending more money on a RED package than on a Genesis or F950 package? Then I would definitely agree with you, that's stupid.

 

[Perry Ho]

Hi Daniel!

Apologize for my poor English, as I try to point out the difference between the Cameras from another crop, the price is very important point,
I been used the Arri D20 for Adidas world wide tvc project 2 years ago in Shanghai - Mainland China, personally I'd like the camera, but it seems to be a camera suitable for the stage shooting, therefore, if you try to compare to the Sony or either other brand HD cameras, the price are very big difference, so, I wanna said, please do thinking about how much moneys you had spend on kind of camera, and what's the camera paymet you are planning to pay for, this very important.

So far I'd enjoy shooting with mine Red Cam... Money's always important for everythings

Cheers

Perry Ho

 

[Chris Pickle]

While I think the OP's post could be viewed as somewhat inflammatory, I do sometimes take issue with the way the Red seems to be marketed. Especially as it applies to open debate, discussion, and problem solving.

"it's 4k"

"no it's not"

"Ok, you're right, it's not 4k, it's actually 3.2k, but that's still better then 1080"

"well, maybe it is, but 1080 seems to satisfy a lot of professional filmmakers"

"ok, that may be true, but.... well the camera is only 17k" or "in the end, it's all about the pictures"

"so now you're saying 4k is irrelevant?"

I've been saying this a lot lately, but I wish we could be fans AND beat it up a bit. That would seem more healthy. I'm a true blue Mac fan, but there are days I want to pour gasoline on my computer.

Chris

 

[Jay A. Kelley]

Yes, my title was inflammatory. Perhaps I should have chosen another. But my statement still stands. And I don't appreciate the instant abuse I garner by just speaking my mind.
I end by saying this,

if you're going to purchase or rent the red for your production, don't give into the marketing, and the pixel count fetish, and do your OWN research. And know the limitations/benefits of a Bayer array, and understand that you're not going to get 4k of true RGB pixels.

Daniel,

You win the award for "most unoriginal thread" I swear if I had a nickel for every time someone wandered into REDuser and started this subject (I won't say WHY they do.. They just do). I would guess in the last two years you must be number 30.

So numbers matter to you, RED is not a REAL 4k camera, the earth is round, the sky is blue and goodie two shoes for you.

RED rents... RED gets work... RED has sold very well and continues to sell.. And finally, here's the big one: it looks good..

By the way I love how you said you won't judge a camera by just looking at the screen cause you're not stupid.. Hey Mr. Mullen, did you hear that?!

But your right.. Producers, especially the good ones, won't go NEAR RED if it's not EXACTLY what they think it is. I mean, if you were doing a multimillion dollar TV Show or movie, I have no doubt your opinion is the one that people would follow.. And furthermore....

oops... Wait... I gotta go.

ER's on!!.



Jay

 

[Daniel S Williams]

yeah man, unfortunately this new age of digital cinematography has different groups sticking to different technologies, and denying the effectiveness of all others, causing bad cases of "fanboyism" and the like. In the past I've actually been called names by Sony users for using the HVX200 on a shoot. People are so intensely protective of their respective cameras. Really, a confident, intelligent, seasoned cinematographer should learn both the abilities and limitations of the vast array of technologies.

Again, sorry if the post seemed inflammatory.

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

I hope I don't start an all out war for this comment as this post seems to be getting quite hot... if the 4k mode really is 3.2k, what is the 2k? I love Red and only ask as I shot a production entirely in 2k for space saving purposes which did come out great, however.

2K RAW 16:9 with a debayer/antialiasing factor of approx. .75-.80 delivers roughly 1640 x 920p resolution in a 2048 x 1152 RGB/YUV file. For a 1080p delivery you will do a slight center crop of the 2048x1152 source to 1920x1080 which again will bring down resolution even further. 2K RAW does not deliver full resolution 1080p. You can easily eyeball this.

Nevertheless, there are many 1080p cameras out there which don't do that any better and claim to deliver 1080p YUV...

1080p off a 3K RAW or 4K RAW source is a different story, obviously.

We had that many times on this board: no one would argue that the RedOne is a native 4K RGB cam. Down scaled to 2K or 1080p the Red is delivering pristine quality and great footage for all kind of work including green screen.

Please bare in mind that the RedOne is a steal. I know that this is scientifically not relevant but pratically it is.

Hans