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 :)

16:8:8 Color Sampling?

Michael M.,

If 16:8:8 is being used to correct previous confusion, it's not doing a very good job of it. We had come to accept that 4:2:2, et al, expresses the ratio of luminance resolution to vertical and horizontal chroma resolution. It's bastardized, but the bastardization had stopped and we all knew what it meant (with a little digging).

What Sony has now done is throw a new catalyst into a mixture that had simmered down. And they did this probably b/c they were pissed at the F35, with all its pixels, being called "only a 1080p camera." So they're trying their hand at messing with terminology for their benefit.


As for you Mr. Graeme,

Maker of a "pixel shifting and uprezing not spoken here" single sensor 14MP camera. You can't pixel shift a single sensor and demosaicing is uprezing. And while the sensor is 13.8MP, the recordable image area is 10.3MP with a max recordable frame size of 9.4MP (4K 16:9, 4096 X 2304). I think I'll duck tape eight spark plugs to the valve cover of my Saturn and call it a V-12 << chill out Red Stormtroopers, the exaggeration was for dramatic effect.


Now that was just brill. of me; piss everyone off.
 
Peter Moretti said:
Michael M.,

If 16:8:8 is being used to correct previous confusion, it's not doing a very good job of it. We had come to accept that 4:2:2, et al, expresses the ratio of luminance resolution to vertical and horizontal chroma resolution. It's bastardized, but the bastardization had stopped and we all knew what it meant (with a little digging).
Click to expand...

Well, it seems to me we don't all know what it meant because it has nothing at all to do with resolution and never did. It has to do with sampling rate, which is something quite different than resolution. And it has to do with the sampling rate of luminance with regard to chroma, even if you use the colloquial definition rather than the actual one.
 
Oh please, this historical and technical literalism is really pretty absurd. If you read my post again, it says "We had come to accept..." That's how it's commonly interpreted today (negating any impact by Sony's 16:8:8 nomenclature).

It's like how YUV is frequently used, it's not really YUV, it Y'CbCr. But we can tell from the context what is meant.

I'm not sure how 16:8:8 makes things any clearer for anyone.
 
Peter Moretti said:
Oh please, this historical and technical literalism is really pretty absurd. If you read my post again, it says "We had come to accept..." That's how it's interpreted today (negating any impact by Sony's 16:8:8 nomenclature).
Click to expand...

That's how it's interpreted by you. Not by everyone.

In your context, maybe we should start calling basketball "football" because today it's much more about what the players do with their feet than it is the baskets. Historical "literalism" (as you want to call it) is simply using terminology to mean what it actually does mean, rather than have a free for all in which anyone can call anything by any name they want. I prefer to call a cat a cat, a dog a dog, a car a car, and a sampling system a sampling system, no matter how absurd that may seem.
 
Peter Moretti said:
And while the sensor is 13.8MP, the recordable image area is 10.3MP with a max recordable frame size of 9.4MP (4K 16:9, 4096 X 2304).
Click to expand...

Peter, EPIC recordable area is 14MP.

We don’t know what recordable area of Sony 8Kx2.3K sensor is.
Also the way Sony wants to do demosicing on it will make this sensor 4K RGB with RGB recordable area of 9.2MP

Also 16:8:8 comes from Jon articles of FD. I didn’t see it so far on any Sony official release.

People use some aberrations in nomenclature that sometime doesn’t make sense but makes imagination going.

Aberration:
deviation, abnormality, irregularity, peculiarity, eccentricity, oddness...
 
Michael,

Actually "football" and "soccer" are a good analogy. In the US when we say "football" we know what we are talking about. When in Europe "football" is used, it's understood what's being talked about.

You said:

"It has to do with sampling rate, which is something quite different than resolution."

Now you know more about all this than I do, but I can't recall a single instance where sampling rate doesn't correlate exactly to luma vs chroma resolution of the subsmapling scheme. So I don't know why you are saying that sampling rate is "quite different" than resolution?

Now if you mean measurable image resolution or resolution of the entire system, then yes what you're saying makes sense. E.g., the Red supplies a 4:4:4 image but chroma resolution is less than luma resolution. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the nomenclature used for chroma subsampling and how it affects image accuracy. So the resolution of the original image is irrelevant. Putting ten pound boulders on a scale accurate to one ounce doesn't make the scale any less accurate.

Y'CbCr notation describes the storage scheme's sampling rate which is exactly proportional to its chroma resolution. It has to be, b/c the sampling rate is decreased by decreasing the number of chroma samples. So sampling rate and measuring resolution are directly correlated. For example, 4:2:0 means that over a 4 pixel horizontal area the first row has two chroma samples and the second row has no additional chroma samples. Now if you feed the encoding scheme a black image, its resolution is still 4:2:0 (and I don't see how calling it 8:4:0 could have any benefit).

The implication of halving the sampling rate is halving the resolution. So why cry foul? (To use another sports analogy ;) .)

And again, how does Sony's use of 16:8:8 relate to anything? It's just more confusion.

Do you really think Sony is doing this to make things more clear? Y'CbCr notation should not be used to describe a sensor design. It's not acceptably used for that, even colloquially. It's for describing one aspect of encoding of an image to save bandwidth, not a sensor's pattern.

So is Sony saying that 16:8:8 is how Q67 images are going to be encoded? I doubt it. And how is this ratio different than 4:2:2? IDK. Are they using it to describe the Q67 pattern? Well what excatly is horizontal in a sensor pattern of 45 degree rotated photosites? And Q67 uses 13 photosites to construct a pixel, so where does 16 come from?

Sony is making this more confusing, not less. And I can only assume that they see some marketing advantage to 16:8:8. But if 16:8:8 makes things clearer, then please tell how.
 
Andrew M. said:
...
Also 16:8:8 comes from Jon articles of FD. I didn’t see it so far on any Sony official release.

People use some aberrations in nomenclature that sometime doesn’t make sense but makes imagination going.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought Jon's article was a Sony press release. JUST KIDDING!! :001_tongue:

You're probably right, it's most likely just an abbreviation that we've jumped all over to vilify Sony.
 
Peter Moretti said:
Andrew, they are not five years old. They are the specs today that Red publishes today for a the only Red camera that you or I can purchase today.
Click to expand...

Peter I guess you were for last 10 months on some National Geographic assignment:-)

Let me bring you up to date.
EPIC is shipping since 5 months or so.

Some several movies are filming with EPIC now, including Spider man:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/07/spider-man-reboot-is-being-shot-in-red-epic-3d-has-jason-schwar/

You can order M version of EPIC right now.
 
Andrew M. said:
Peter I guess you were for last 10 months on some National Geographic assignment.

Let me bring you up to date.
EPIC is shipping since 5 months or so.

Some several movies are filming with EPIC now, including Spider man:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/07/spider-man-reboot-is-being-shot-in-red-epic-3d-has-jason-schwar/

You can order M version right now.
Click to expand...

Andrew,

I don't think you are getting what I'm saying. Seriously, just take a moment.

I was not refering to Epic. That should have been crystal clear, as I didn't mention 5K.

I was refering to how Red has been marketing the Red One. They say 14MP sensor. Yes it IS a 14MP sensor. But you can't actually record 14MP and some of the sensor goes completely unused. Is this a cardinal sin? No. But all companies try to make their products sound best. And to most people 14MP sounds better than 9.4MP.
 
Yes, Peter, sorry.
I was thinking that you are comparing not released Sony camera that nobody is using yet on any film feature with RED ONE that is old camera.

BTW if you want to order EPIC -M (machined) just send e-mail to kelly@red.com
I think there is only 3 to 5 months waiting period for delivery.
 
16:8:8

16:8:8

Tell you what, to draw line under this (until Sony or whomever it was that invented the term explains what 16:8:8 means)

We'll continue to use 4:2:2 and 4:2:0 and 4:4:4 in their accepted meaning: the ratio of samples used for the signal components Y, Cb, Cr or R, G, B.
 
No engineer will use this notation.

Michael Grotticelli is just reporting what already was reported with this error before.
 
Andrew M. said:
Yes, Peter, sorry.
I was thinking that you are comparing not released Sony camera that nobody is using yet on any film feature with RED ONE that is old camera.

BTW if you want to order EPIC -M (machined) just send e-mail to kelly@red.com
I think there is only 3 to 5 months waiting period for delivery.
Click to expand...

Andrew,

I was not comparing cameras. I was simply pointing out that Red also markets its products to sound best.

There is nothing more to read into it than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top