Why...

[Jannard]

So why did we choose 5K and a 30x15mm sensor for Epic-X?

There have been a ton of formats in the past. 8mm, Super 8, 16mm, S16, 35mm, S35mm, 2:1 Anamorphic, 1.33 Anamorphic, Vista Vision, IMAX... you get the idea. These are just some of the motion formats... add stills and the list goes on forever (almost).

So why did RED choose another oddball format? Two reasons.

1. 5K RED bayer capture is roughly the equivalent of 4K measured output resolution. It takes something under a 30mm wide sensor to deliver that. Add "lookaround" and you get to 30mm.

2. While all the other film formats were pretty much "one format options", RED is many. Inside of our 30x15mm sensor lies many formats. RED 5K, S35, 35mm, S16, 16, 2/3", special ratios (2:1, 2.40:1. 16:9, etc.) and anamorphic of different flavors. You can use RPPs or Master Primes to shoot full 5K resolution, full frame. You can use S4s or Ultra Primes to shoot 4.5K. You can use shoot 2K with just about anything, including S16 lenses and B4 with our adaptor.

The downside to EPIC-X is that you have a ton of choices and need to put your thinking cap on to use them all. Or just pick what you know and stick with it.

The upside to EPIC-X is that you have versatility like no other camera ever made. Interchangeable everything. Formats forever.

Jim

 

[SandeepDey]

"5K RED bayer capture is roughly the equivalent of 4K measured resolution."

Now it all makes sense....

-Sandeep

 

[Steve Gibby]

Sounds good to me Jim...

I have a lot of uses for Epic X. Bring it on...

 

[Jannard]

"5K RED bayer capture is roughly the equivalent of 4K measured resolution."

Now it all makes sense....

-Sandeep

Just to put this all in context, I have posted before that the highest measured resolution of a 4K film scan from S35 film is 3.1/3.2K (one of the major studios tech department told us that last year). And that was from ISO 50 film.

Jim

 

[albert rudnicki]

All I know is that you make all those hard drive makers very happy

 

[Austin Glass]

options options options. Damn, Jim, why do you make me make so many decisions? Can't you give me a camera that only shoots one way? ;-)

 

[Tim Hole]

the highest measured resolution of a 4K film scan from S35 film is 3.1/3.2K (one of the major studios tech department told us that last year).
Jim

So does that mean that the majority of the 4K film scans were not true 4K then? Or they never are [4k] because the highest possible resolution up until now was 3.1/3.2? But I take it aspects shot on 65mm are usually true 4K like The Dark Knight etc...or am I missing the point here.

 

[Jannard]

So does that mean that none of the 4K film scans were true 4K then?

Correct. They were true 4K scans (from a 4K sensor in the scanner) but the measured output results are not 4K. Just like the RED ONE shoots a real 4096 pixel image that measures 3.2K output.

Easier said this way... S35 film does not resolve 4K. Not matter what you scan it with. You could scan it with an 8K scanner and it will still only resolve just over 3K of measured resolution.

Jim

 

[Jason Diamond]

So does that mean that none of the 4K film scans were true 4K then?

there's data loss as you resolve the image just as there is in the RED sensor from current 4K to 3.2K so makes sense 5K goes to 4K resolved and roughly the same for 4K film scan resolving to 3.1(2)K-ish

now if the new cams would just come out already...:sifone:

 

[James Brundige]

So does that mean that the majority of the 4K film scans were true 4K then? Or they rarely are [4k]. But I take it aspects shot on 65mm are usually true 4K...or am I missing the point here.

Rarely 4K. Now which is why we need to get 4K projectors into theaters. I've read all sorts of specs about most projection systems, all of them WAY under 4K.

It's nice to have all that extra resolution for the future. Next steps will be about dynamic range.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

This is of course, to avoid the excesses of aliasing that can cause great issues after the fact. And as detail goes higher, it's MTF drops, and hence it gets harder to see the detail. That is why many video cameras have excessive "sharpness" controls. Best I've measured from 4k RED is around 3.2k, but really, there's a tad more detail beyond that, albeit at a very low level. Starting with 5k allows a downsample to smaller formats, retaining better detail and much better control over aliasing.

Graeme

 

[Joseph Ward]

So why did we choose 5K and a 30x15mm sensor for Epic-X?

There have been a ton of formats in the past. 8mm, Super 8, 16mm, S16, 35mm, S35mm, 2:1 Anamorphic, 1.33 Anamorphic, Vista Vision, IMAX... you get the idea. These are just some of the motion formats... add stills and the list goes on forever (almost).

Jim

I was always wondering about your choices of sensor sizes. For example, for RedOnes, why didn't you start off with the S35 sensor size instead of RedOnes 16:9? Just wondering. Was the initial intention because of price or wanted to be used for HDTV capable or something else? What about the other sensor sizes? Thanks:blushing:

 

[Pawel Achtel]

...You can use RPPs or Master Primes to shoot full 5K resolution, full frame.

I think I will use both, thank you Sir! :happyhappy:

 

[James Brundige]

I have become deeply confused about the ramifications of the pixel (photosite) size on the new sensors, and how that relates to both dynamic range and depth of field. Clearly 5K is plenty of resolution, but more DR would be great. I gather bigger photsites improve dynamic range, but won't that change DOF characteristics?

Edit - just found this from Jim

Mysterium-X pixels are 5.4 micron. Mysterium Monstro pixels are 6.0 micron.

 

[Jannard]

I have become deeply confused about the pixel (photo site) size on the new sensors, and how that relates to both dynamic range and depth of field. Clearly 5K is plenty of resolution, but more DR would be great.

Sorry if there is a thread on this already, but there a so many now, a search is pretty hard.

Mysterium-X has over 1 stop greater DR than Mysterium (RED ONE). Actually closer to 1.5 stops.

Jim

 

[Tim Hole]

Thanks Jim, Jason, James and Graeme! I understand now. Always an educational experience on here.

So does this mean Jim that you and the RED team will be getting an honourary Professorship from someone for all this...

(Graeme had a chance to see the Dwarf yet? )

 

[david farland]

Wow Jim, you just give us one more choice after the other.

The hits just keep on coming so now(soon) we'll be sooo spoilt for format choice.....it looks like it'll never stp!
It'll never stop cos in 9 months 6K is coming (5K luma/4K chroma rez) plus the additional DR.
The extra dynamic range and full 4K colour.
I cannot wait for that!! We I can, I'll just upgrade my R1 till then.

But the thing I'm really excited about is what technologies Red is putting into the FF35 cine hybrid lenses.
Putting out the RPPs and the playing the big boys at their lens game is great, but when the FF35 cine lenses & cameras come out, that'll be something!
Keep on giving us choices Jim...we love it!!!
D

 

[Etienne Caron]

Mysterium-X has over 1 stop greater DR than Mysterium (RED ONE). Actually closer to 1.5 stops.

Jim

Could Mysterium-X be more sensitive by one stop from the Mysterium ? 1 Stop in DR is great, but one stop more sensitive is pretty amazing and combine with the RPP at 1.9, its gonna be a great match...

 

[Jannard]

Could Mysterium-X be more sensitive by one stop from the Mysterium ? 1 Stop in DR is great, but one stop more sensitive is pretty amazing and combine with the RPP at 1.9, its gonna be a great match...

DR does not directly equate to sensitivity.

Jim

 

[Graeme Nattress]

(Graeme had a chance to see the Dwarf yet? )

Yes, and I really enjoyed it.