1080p-RGB-scaled or 2K-RAW-windowed?

[Emanuel A.]

Aside the frame rates issue and its realistic range for now, what would your choice be?

 

[Dustin Cross]

What's the difference between Raw and RGB?

I prefer Scaled to Windowed.

 

[Stephen Webb]

If the frame-rate thing isn't an issue, 4K Redcode RAW every time.

 

[Emanuel A.]

LOL I'm sorry but you should open a new poll then. That option is only available on RED ONE ;-)

When I'm saying apart the frame rates issue, I want to mean beyond the frame rate range now and after that discussion around the 96fps vs. 120fps. There are other places to go. It just doesn't necessarily mean up to 30 fps.

My intention is to promote the approach to a healthy debate on scaled vs. windowed. And please, don't say that scaled is impossible or something like so. Because there were a lot of people who said the same while and after my 1st RED ONE reservation on April 25, 2006 (and now we are more than 2,000).

 

[Jason Murphy]

This poll really seems to get down to the heart of much of the debate that's gone on here over the past few days or so. Much of what it seems to boil down to is the increased dynamic range & flexibility of working with 2K RAW vs the 35mm DOF characteristics of scaled 1080p.

I personally would prefer RAW with S16 DOF, but it's a tough call. I see both as having really legit uses.

 

[Emanuel A.]

What's the difference between Raw and RGB?

Actually, RAW is lighter than RGB. You'll need less data resources. However, it cannot be scaled. You/we cannot have all the women of the world on the same bedroom.

On the other hand, RGB can be scaled from 35mm sensor size and RAW not.

My bet would be the 2K RGB scaled (aside the frame rate graal) but again we would have to open a new thread in order to request it.


EDIT -- And as Jason wisely said: there's the «increased dynamic range & flexibility of working with 2K RAW vs the 35mm DOF characteristics of scaled 1080p.»

 

[Häakon]

On the other hand, RGB can be scaled from 35mm sensor size and RAW not.

My bet would be the 2K RGB scaled (aside the frame rate graal) but again we would have to open a new thread in order to request it.

Here's why I think 1080p scaled (from the full sensor) is a superior option to 2K scaled:

The primary advantages I see in shooting a lower-res format scaled are savings of time in post and having access to more framerate options. This time savings is, of course, a huge factor for many people - whether you need to get deliverables to a client immediately or just save that extra transcoding step so you can get to work right away. Lots of projects don't have a huge window for time in post, and if you can save that time but still get a quality picture, that may definitely be the way to go.

Shooting in scaled 2K, however, would mean that you *still* have to do a downres step in post (because most HD projects are going to need to be either delivered or finished in 1080 anyway), so now you've taken away the primary advantage to shooting scaled in the first place. If you're going to be doing that additional step in post, you might as well be shooting the full 4K and save your ability to crop in post - and get all the benefits of the RAW workflow at the same time. Plus, as others have pointed out, RGB data is quite larger than RAW data at the same resolutions, so the filesize of shooting the 4K RAW is also less of a problem. Therefore, I *do* see that keeping 1080p RGB scaled from the full sensor is mandatory - especially because it doubles the amount of framerate choices you have when shooting in full 4K - but I wouldn't ask for reinstating the provision for 2K scaled. It's just not very logical (and that's probably the reason they canned it in the first place).

As for the topic/poll question of 1080p scaled vs. 2K RAW, I have a feeling that is going to very much be up to the individual, his/her shooting needs, and some will even have a need for both. *Personally* I can only see myself shooting either 4K RAW or 1080p scaled, as these take advantage of the DOF, FOV, and resolution characteristics of the camera that I am interested in. Because the resolution difference between 2K and 1080 is pretty negligible, I think a 1080p oversampled picture may look better than a 2K windowed one anwyway, and you still get all of the advantages of shooting with the full sensor. Who knows, it is yet to be seen. But I don't personally have a use for the windowed feature for *my* own needs.

 

[Michael Ragen]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here, but if you shoot windowed with the 18-50 for example, it would basically be like shooting with a doubler on the lens and only recording 2k worth of data. So you would really only be losing the 35mm dof benefits on the wide end of the lens spectrum because you couldn't get the full benefit of 18mm without a s16 lens.

So as far as shooting 96fps at 2k Raw with a 35mm lens, it would be the same as shooting with a longer lens with the same 35mm dof as that longer lens.

Something I've been confused about is what would the 18-50 lens become in windowed mode? Is it 36-100mm or do you multiply by 4 because 4k is 4x larger than 2k?

I hope that made sense...

 

[Nils Ruinet]

Something I've been confused about is what would the 18-50 lens become in windowed mode? Is it 36-100mm or do you multiply by 4 because 4k is 4x larger than 2k?

Yes, 18-50 would become something like 36-100mm if used with 2K windowed.
So you'd need a 9mm lens to cover the same field than with the 18mm in 4K full frame.

 

[Michael Ragen]

It would also be nice to hear if there was any new news about the possibility of higher frame rates at 4k with a wider aspect ratio. Would you guys give up 1080p rgb for that option?

 

[Jaime Vallés]

The resolution difference between 1080p and 2K is negligible. But for me, having the full field of view of the lens is very important, and that can only be achieved with a scaled image, not windowed.

 

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Important that this topic came up, because many people in the other topic said that they didn't need 720p, but they would have liked to keep 1080p.

That's also my choice: be able to work in HD with the 35mm portion of the sensor seems more of a benefit.
And you immediately can shoot 1080p straight ahead, without downconverting in post, making the RED ALSO a Varicam-, Cinealta- and Genesis-killer.
I also think 1080p won't go away for a looong time (even if 4k is better for cinema projects)

 

[MikeCurtis]

I see this as a complete and total "It depends" issue - do you want depth of field or higher frame rate? Wider or narrower depth of field? What kind of lenses do you have handy, and what look are you going for? How sensitive is your final deliverable to source resolution? Where does budget fit into this - are 16 lenses cheaper and/or more available in your area than 35?

Etc. etc. etc.

Sort of a "blue vs. green" kind of a question (in the generic, not keying, context!)


-mike

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

What constitutes EFP friendly?

What constitutes EFP friendly?

Good points Mike, but I get the impression from reading way too many posts that the crux of the biscuit is not stylistic choices but client/producer expectation management and workflow paradigm shifts.

I think the overcrank issues are overblown and I agree they are edge applications, better done on the Phantom or some other camera. Obviously if you are one of the folks who really needs to shoot a lot of slo-mo you are posting your butt off on this topic but I sense this is a vocal minority issue.

Lets get back to the more critical item - will having 1080P RGB as a recordable format make this camera more "EFP friendly"?

IMHO, unless you can hand someone a tape at the end of the day then you are very likely to have issues. The HVX puts out several industry standard formats but still causes headaches since the data on the P2 cards needs to become "transportable" in close to real time, often out in the field.

IF your clients have to have the footage at the end of the day then you need to either record to an outboard device via the HD-SDI outs
OR
they need to have FCP6.1 (available soon...???) or some other post solution of their own that can handle the RedCode QT files. Like P2 this will require cloning to hard disk in the field.

If they are cool with getting the rushes the next day then what format you use in camera is unlikely to matter, just transcode it to fit their specs.

Bottom line - many producers love the convenience of tape and don't really give a rats ass about the finer points of image quality or the costs of tape mechanisms. My advice is to appeal to directors with all the advantages of data based workflows and let them slap the producers around for us :blush:

 

[albert rudnicki]

None
CROP IS CRAP...
4k RAW or 2K scaled
Albert

 

[Patrick Tresch]

I definitly prefer scaling. Over here (Switzerland) a new trend is to shoot with mini35 on HDV format...

BUT don't forget that 4K CMO don't look good when corped to 2k or 1080 (based on other CMO testing (as REDONE is not yet available...))...

 

[Mr. Paul White]

Scaled is the way. As higher resolution as possible. Who has voted for 1080p is now happy with the change for 2K.