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 :)

I own a GH-1 and MKii and this is how RED can truly seal the deal

David, as far as I know the FF1080p spec is supposed to be for rgb redcode, not raw or HDMI. I can't find the post that states this but I distinctly remember reading it.

Would love for someone from RED to verify or correct me on this...
 
The I/O modules support HDSDI outputs, which is an encoded standard. If they are scaling the full sensor to 1080P output, it will have to be encoded to some RGB format and by definition will not be RAW. Maybe it will be some form of the new REDRAY codec to save space, or it could be one of the industry standard I frame codecs like ProRes, which is more likely if they want to fit into existing video workflows.
 
There is NO comparison between RAW and the heavily compressed, "burned in" images these vDSLRs crank out.
 
Here is quote from another thread about the HDSDI output on RED 1. Apparently it is only available on playback with a one, not live during shooting. Perhaps the FF1080P of the new models will support 1080p HDSDI live too.

... it allows you to play back 100% of frame view at 1920 x 1080 from dual link HD-SDI from camera at 4:4:4 for capture to HDCAM-SR or other format as necessary. As long as the image is exposed properly (with optional curves set in camera) this will give you a very nice working image almost live from set (1080p is available out of camera ONLY on playback, not live).

You should definitely shoot some variant of 4K though, as the downconvert oversampling will give you a remarkable picture, as well as giving true Super35 depth of field characteristics. Worth the extra storage space IMHO.

HTH

Paul
__________________
Paul Leeming
Director, CEO
Visceral Psyche Films
Click to expand...
 
Tom said:
There is NO comparison between RAW and the heavily compressed, "burned in" images these vDSLRs crank out.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more Tom. I shot a job last week using two 5DIIs and whilst we produced some cool images, the dynamic range and color reproduction were very limited and fell way short of even the cheapest purpose built professional video camera.
 
Apart from 35mm DOF and superb low light sensitivity, the video from a 5D is inferior to Canon's own XH series 1/3" HDV cams.
 
David Rasberry said:
Apart from 35mm DOF and superb low light sensitivity, the video from a 5D is inferior to Canon's own XH series 1/3" HDV cams.
Click to expand...

Please post examples that back up this statement. Are you talking about IMAGE or just ergonomics?

I'm really sorry, but if you're talking about image I'm inclined to think that you've done none of your own comparison testing at all.
 
David Rasberry said:
Major differences from the VDSLRS: poor ergonomics for motion shooting, poor audio support, no SMPTE timecode and limited continuous recording times. The 5d is also hampered by the anachronism of a reflex mirror, a totally useless mechanism on a digital camera.
Click to expand...

Ergonomics -- Without added support, the Scarlet looked no different from what I remember. But I haven't seen the latest mock-ups... just haven't paid any attention.

Audio Support -- Scarlet, last I saw, needed an extra module right? Or did it have built-in XLR ports. If it's the former, then it costs more. And you can do the same with an MKii or GH-1 thanks to Beachtek's audio converter.

Timecode -- Me has a feeling that the MKii is going to get a timecode feed. Mostly because Canon underhandedly seemed to say so. LoL. But as of now, you're right, no timecode.

Record Times -- This would hinder you for takes longer than 12 minutes. But right, limited recording times.

Mirror -- I say get rid of the mirror. For sure.
 
I agree with Kholi...

Having worked with video from the 5D and Canons XH camera there is no way to compare them. The 5D video easily looks much better in nearly any way you can measure. Better colors, saturation, sharper, less artifacts, much higher dynamic range, and better codec. The 42 Mbit/s h.264 codec is one of the best in the price range and will take a fair amount of color work, much better than any HDV.

Dynamic range in video mode has been measured at just over 8 stops, which puts it at nearly the same performance as the RED One.

I'm not suggesting that the 5D is better than the RED One, or any kind of threat. However, it is a very capable camera in the right hands.

Just my two cents :)

By the way.. Here is a test video of the 5D and the Canon XH-A1: http://www.vimeo.com/4445879
 
Deanan said:
That's like saying how often do you shoot RAW vs Jpeg for stills.
Mostly everyone I know shoots RAW for stills almost all the with the exception being when they're shooting stuff they don't care much about.

I often ask people at parties (from parents at kids parties to serious shooters) what they shoot and if they aren't stuck in auto mode all the time and know how to setup their cameras, they're shooting RAW.

IMHO, shooting massively compressed 8bit video has it's place but not when you're serious about the images you capture.
Click to expand...


Hi Deanan,

Someone else already said thsi but I agree with them. These are moving images, larger files. The choice of shooting RAW here versus stills is different.

Even then, I find that most people I know shooting stills are using RAW+JPEG modes, not just strictly raw.

And, it does have it's place. I can't say that I agree with the statement "but not when you're serious about the images you capture"... there are still several operations that are not using RED and are still capturing "burned in" video. Would you tell those guys that they aren't being serious about what they're doing?

Just recently, DP Rodney Charters employed several MKii's for his work.

"Rodney Charters, the DP for the tv series "24", used a total of FIVE, 5D mkII's on the set of the new CBS pilot, "Washington Field" (production wrapped April 7). They planned on using all five of them to run continuously during the takes and provide different POV's, in addition to what was being shot by the main unit. Rodney also said that the 5D would be used for creating a variety of "plates" (i.e. background footage in driving scenes in studio)." So, these in addition to RED.

You can find more info here:

http://www.fxguide.com/redcentre

and here:

http://washingtonfield.wordpress.com/

and here:

http://nabshowdaily.com/TuesdayEdition/79644

By the statement above, Rodney isn't serious about the images he's capturing. That might be slightly true, who knows?
 
David Rasberry said:
Apart from 35mm DOF and superb low light sensitivity, the video from a 5D is inferior to Canon's own XH series 1/3" HDV cams.
Click to expand...
nonsense :attention9ha: :hanged: no more autoerotic games dude.. test it for real
 
Kholi said:
Hi Deanan,

Someone else already said thsi but I agree with them. These are moving images, larger files. The choice of shooting RAW here versus stills is different.
Click to expand...

I disagree. So it's acceptable to drop quality dramatically because it's stills instead of motion? High quality motion images are just as important as high quality stills. If you look at REDcode, you can deal with the files in a manner quite close to dealing still raw frames. You can play them back in realtime on laptops and imacs and the data rates are quite manageable.
 
That's not exactly what I said, though. RAW is just not necessary to acquire a more-than-acceptable image. In still or moving environments. I understand the importance of RAW, the benefits and the drawbacks, it's just not universally detrimental that everyone must capture raw.

But that's not even why this thread was started. It has less to do with RAW and much more to do with a tangible product on the market. There are aluminum prototypes in the hands of the creators while outside of those walls there are working, and currently being updated, models of cameras that are fundamentally the same thing.

I think we all just want to see Scarlet working, shipping, and with an adjusted MSRP that matches the competition. To say that the MKii and everything coming after it isn'tthe competition may be accurate on a technical level, but not so much as a whole, where we can get similar results at half the cost.

Again, not downplaying the importance of RAW, but it's not needed for everything.
 
RAW video is relatively new territory, RAW stills is supported by the fact that we all have photoshop and have done for years.
 
I agree with Deanan 100%. The comparison between RAW for stills vs JPEG, and RAW for motion vs AVCHD, is a perfectly valid one. Shooting RAW for stills is a big pain in the ass vs JPEG, but we do it because of the huge advantages. Sooner or later all pro cinema cameras will offer RAW. Red is just waaay ahead of the curve. I guarantee you that Canon and others are rushing to figure out motion RAW right this very minute.
 
Carsten Fenstermacher said:
I'd agree with that but I think you're overly up-playing the usefullness of h.264 capture. It's ok for some things but it's being spun up like it can actually used in the same situations as pro formats. It's fine for some quick and dirty stuff but it'll fall apart if you tried to push it through the same rigors of post that other more robust formats go through.

The 5D2 data rates and compression from the full sensors:
5d2: raw 25.8MB frame
5d2: jpeg 8bit normal 3.0 MB/frame = 8.6:1 compression
5d2: video 158k per frame 163:1 compression compared to raw

The Jpeg compression ratio is not too bad but the video is shockingly compressed in both resolution (and horribly subsampled at that), bit depth, and data rate.
Click to expand...

Right-o...

This thread really isn't about RAW, though. Or H264 compression or compression in general. I was just agreeing with what Bruce said and still agree.

The question is: is RAW the only differentiating factor between a future-planned SCARLET and what's available now? It seems like the only thing people keep going back to...

It's important, but what other differences are we talking aside from RAW now that we've gotten that out of the way.
 
Kholi, thats overlooking other huge differences such as still vs cine lense, proper audio, remote options and the list goes on.
 
It is a fact that there is truly no comparison between the 5D MkII & the Red One in this room. It is simply in the dynamic range! The 5d's limited h264 simply does not support it! However, owning both and cutting between them both the layman would be hard pressed to tell the difference. The 5D produces incredible images that have filled the void of my old HVX and any curiosities i had for the EX1. I purchased a 5dMkII for the 21mp stills performance at a bargain price, but have ended up with a very able B-Cam/Crash Cam/Underwatercam.

Yesterday I upgraded the firmware and now have manual controls for iso, shutter & aperture and there are already rumors of the 24p. I once thought that this move by Canon was frivolous and exploratory but now I am considering the real thought of them possibly figuring out how to do the same thing with there Raw information. They do have a bit of resource & talent???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top