Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 4K?

4k pipeline via RedRay (lets say 3.2kish "real") should give solid dual 2K 3D.
We just need the broadcast 3D (ESPN, DISCO, NAT GEO, MTV), cinema, and video game/adult (sadly historically important) content to land at the same time.
No doubt RedRay will improve with time too, as will 3D deliverables.
I feel this HAS TO HAPPEN for 3D to survive. No doubt Red knows this.
 
This is why I'm saving as much as I can for an S35 Scarlet, even though it's out of my budget range and post production structure at the moment.

I'm gonna use a lot my savings on it, but I'm sure it'll pay itself both economically and creatively in no time.

I have to agree with Jim, I just can't understand how a 90 million dollar film can be shot on a 1080p camera.

I love shooting digital, but when film stock or cameras aren't a significant factor in your budget, go for the highest quality you can get.

If you gave me that budget to make a film TODAY I'd probably still shoot it on film.

I say today because I'm waiting to see some real world footage of Epic, M-X, Scarlet, etc, before I declare film dead to me, personally. =p
 
Last edited:
Jannard said:
Why shoot 4K? Because the future is 4K delivery. We think on RED Ray (RED 4K).



Jim
Click to expand...
Wish you had given us a little more on this reason.
 
Jim, do you have an opinion about frame rate also for futureproofing, or is 24fps sufficient?

I ask, because 60fps/eye 1080p seems to be the minimum for futureproofing for 3D and 8K is the theoretical next broadcast standard being proposed.
 
As the screens get bigger, and we all sit closer to them in Stadium seating style theaters you really grasp the difference of why higher resolution is better.

The 1080p and 2k world is a compromise in so many ways, sit close enough in an old style movie theater showing 2k and you will see that compromise clearly. Sit almost anywhere in a modern stadium theater with a nice big screen and you will see that compromise of 2k projection.

Having the chance to screen 4k RED footage around the world when the technology is set up to do it is absolutely stunning, ask those that have seen the various RED reels we've produced and screened in 4k and they will tell you.

Having the ability to shoot RED at 4k, soon to be 5k - and resolve over 3k, soon to be 4k resolution on the screen is really significant. If you shoot 1080p you are making a choice to starve resolution through the pipeline. Much better to start with much more resolution at the get go.

+ Ted
 
Too bad resolution isn't everything. Functionality, ease of use, capabilities, noise, compression, and sooo many more aspects contribute to the final image, which IS the most important aspect of a camera system.

Resolution alone does not determine a camera systems worth. Stop saying it does. There are cameras that exist that have more photosites, which is how you determine the resolution on Red's cameras.
 
Guys, you had me sold on all of this years ago. Now just please hurry with Epic. :beer:

The reason that 4K is the future is that it represents the *theoretical* upper limit of what 100 years worth of 35mm films and TV shows can be scanned to. Certainly well-preserved or recently shot anamorphic 35mm should look great at 4K, for example.

People say, "Well, you have have to sit ___ feet away from a 50-inch screen to notice 4K." Well, why not get a 100-inch screen, or a projector that does 150 inches? Also, keep in mind that a lot of younger people watch most of their entertainment on computer screens they sit only 3 feet away from.
 
Shelf life

Shelf life

I just went back and re-transferred a bunch of super-16 neg I shot 10 years ago on an Arri I no longer own to 1080p in order to include the footage with material from our Red which I transcoded down to preres.

Can you imagine, in 1990, when I shot this stuff, what it would have sounded like if you suggested that HD would be the required television deliverable? Now really try and imagine in 1990 if somebody described the Red One camera, and all that goes with it and that the camera would cost $17,500? Remember what it used to cost to buy a digibeta camera, or an Arri SR3?

Ten years is so short now in technology time that we can't really grasp where we will be ten years from now, but I'll tell you what, I'm really glad to access to that footage from 10 years ago, which was shot all around the world with a big crew, still available for for broadcast 10 years later.

Jim is making a pretty good point...
 
Jim & TED,

We also needs to keep in mind one thing that the current resize algorithm is not good enough for 1080p / SD finish and that is also the reason people choose those cameras.

Do we really need 4k except for 3D?
 
FINISH in 4K

FINISH in 4K

If you are posting a feature film in 2010 - you should seriously consider FINISHING in 4K as well - even if it's just for DCDM archive.

Distributors are all requiring DCDMs now - 2K or 4K which contain uncompressed (16-bit TIFF) file sequences in XYZ color space. This master can be used to create the 2K or 4k JPEG 2000 files for DCP creation (and basically any other deliverable) and soon ... they can be used to create RED RAY encoded files.

If you are working from a DI system (Scratch in our case) that grades directly from RAW files, you are resolution independent until the final RENDER.

This means, as long as you set your project up correctly, and bring in any non-RAW elements in 4K resolution (4096x2160 or 4096x1716 DCI 4K spec for 4K DCP delivery) - you render to 4K 16-bit TIFF XYZ color space.

Now your render is a bit longer - but it's not that big of a deal if your debayer is accelerated by RED Rocket and you are writing to fast storage (we use an Infortrend 8G Fibre SAS Raid).

I believe RED RAY is going to take everyone by surprise and become a significant widely accepted delivery platform. If your film is mastered to 16-bit 4K files that can be encoded to 4K RED RAY and also to 2K OR 4K DCP - without rebuilding your project, you are in a great position.

If anyone tells you mastering to 4K files is cost prohibitive - they are not running the right numbers, or they are not working from RAW files.
 
Quantel Pablo with NEO = realtime finishing in 4K... totally banking on 4K in 2010 and beyond... and we take Visa.
 
Jannard said:
We encourage you to consider the future possibilities of what your footage can be used for when making a camera selection.
Click to expand...

:thumbup1:

Scarlet is going to be a much easier pill for the military to swallow, and it won't just be our history, but a renaissance for the world's as well.
 
"640K is all the memory anybody would ever need on a computer."

I'll take all the K's I can get.
 
Changed my mind.

...8K pipeline...

Dual 4K 3D.
 
I'm mostly just a fly on the wall when it comes to the in depth discussions on the forums, but I for once have a question. And therefore I really hope its not perceived as being either rude or inappropriate, I'm just curious.

So how then with all of the talk of the future finishes being 4K-->3K and so on and so forth, does Scarlet 2/3 or even Fixed fit into the picture?

Are you guys saying that even before it is released, it is in a sense non-future resilient, and therefore close to extinction. I ask this because even though I'm only going to raise enough $ to grab a 2/3 Cinema I'm now apprehensive, due to the discussion that has arisen. Am I to think that in order to have options regarding my footage within the near future I should hold my $$$ and raise a little, well I say that loosely, a lot more so that i can instead buy an EPIC or possibly a M-X'd out RED 1. Or have I mis understood the goal of this thread, and the 2/3 should hold itself together well.

Please help me and possibly other potential Scarlet owners understand?
 
Hi Jimmy,

I'm also from the Windy City- maybe we could put our 2 Scarlet together and make a 3D movie that makes a billion and split the proceeds IF you could live on that amount after taxes... Jim J. would know that answer. hehe...

Ultimately as I understand, the Scarlet is intended for film students, aspiring pros and B-Cam footage that doesn't look nasty in the cinema if your movie ever gets distributed, goes direct to Blu-Ray or Satellite Broadcast, so I'd invest the $5K for the Scarlet Fixed or Interchangeable, and RENT the EPIC Body and Lenses for your masterpiece if budget is really a concern.

I'm excited to see who's the first person that grosses $100 million shooting with a 8X Fixed Scarlet and a six pack budget!
 
Nick D said:
Hey D,

I'm excited to see who's the first person that grosses $100 million shooting with a 8X Fixed Scarlet and a six pack budget!
Click to expand...

Welcome my fellow Chicagoan. I'm all for that, and I have another buddy on here who, is a friend before Reduser who is also going to purchase a Fixed, so we technically would have an awesome3D tracking rig for all of the VFX shots we'll use :001_tongue:

but on a lighter note I'm understanding that point you've made and also think it to be semi true, I was just curious.

Regarding the first to make a big splash via media channels with a Scarlet, I'm not sure who it will be, but i guarantee that will be the point the Press pics p on that will propel the story, which that person, and that films success, whatever it may be, will dramatically increase RED's already growing persona.

But It'll be something like this.

Interviewer: "So you shot this EPIC indie-film on a $20 budget with your RED Scarlet and Mini-Primes right"

Filmmaker: -laughing- "It wasn't quite as low as $20, but more close to $20K, and yes it was shot on the Scarlet"

Interviewer: "But you only had to put $20 worth of gas into your car to take you and the crew to that location you filmed at correct..."

Filmmaker: "Yeah, I guess."

Interviewer: "So then its settled we'll just print that" :icon_bs:
 
Jannard said:
We encourage you to consider the future possibilities of what your footage can be used for when making a camera selection. Jim
Click to expand...

I always have customers coming in and asking what camera do I think they should shoot with. Your statement above is the first thing I always ask.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top