16Bit Redcode RGB

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Graeme I know this isn't necessarily in the realm of RED's obligations but I hope to move as much of our pipeline to REDCode as possible if it turns out to be high enough in quality. This would require 16 bit support though for CGI renders.

Any chance this might be a codec option?

Also I assume REDCode RGB on the PC end will offer a quality slider or equivalent?

 

[Graeme Nattress]

I'll put that in my thinking pot!

Graeme

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Put that in your thinking pot and this in your wishlist pot:

Some way to use REDCode as a compression option in OpenEXR. I know new compression options can be added. It's in the spec just like quicktime. But I don't know the specifics.

Extensibility. New compression codecs and image types can easily be added by extending the C++ classes included in the OpenEXR software distribution. New image attributes (strings, vectors, integers, etc.) can be added to OpenEXR image headers without affecting backward compatibility with existing OpenEXR applications.

I'm sure in this case "easily" is a relative term.

 

[Bruce Allen]

It'd be super if RedCode could be a finishing standard.

ProRES will never be a universal standard while it remains Mac only and requires Final Cut Studio 2. Cineform might become a standard but is expensive and there isn't a fully working Mac version. DNxHD is cool, free and Mac / PC compatible (finally, I think?) but doesn't support Alpha channels.

I agree about OpenEXR, but to be honest, I'd just be happy with 16 bit RedCode RGB and an Alpha channel that behaved the same (Gamma, etc) on Mac and PC

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Anders Holck]

And what about this:

4) Why would you love for us to integrate with Cineforms NEO 12-bit lossless codec? We have our own 12-bit codec in both lossy and lossless forms.

This is all about outputting to REDCODE. As it looks now you'll be able to set bitrate options including an archive option.

Is this still in the thinking pot?

 

[Joe Carney]

I believe JJ stated that output to OpenExr was included in RedCine. Is that still true?

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I believe JJ stated that output to OpenExr was included in RedCine. Is that still true?

Probably, however, that doesn't indicate that they're using REDCode as the compression scheme. It would be akin to saving out to an uncompressed Tiff sequence.

 

[Stokestack]

Why would you want you want to finish in a lossy format? Your camera original was already lossily compressed, and the final delivery medium most likely will be too. That's two rounds of compression already; adding a third in the middle is worse than pointless.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Finishing lossy makes sense if you can't see the loss, but can see the cheque for the extra hard drives. If you accept lossy acquisition, there's no point being totally dogmatic about any other losses along the way, if and only if they're not to the detriment of the picture, given whatever budgetary constraints you have.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I found that even after multiple generations wavelet compression doesn't degrade after having been applied once.

The damage has already been done. And the data requirements of an uncompressed 4k workflow are enormously taxing to both a network and a local machine. An uncompressed project with 20 layers per shot could quickly add up to petabytes of data.

 

[GlennChan]

I don't know if Red really wants to get into the market of codecs and formats, but it would be very nice if there were a widely-compatible intermediary format.

A- It is very useful if a format is commonly supported... e.g. if it's Quicktime, it should have both a PC and Mac codec. That way you can do things like capture FCP, edit in Premiere/whatever. It's such a PITA when a particular codec is not supported on your system.
Better yet would be if there was a tool that could deal with wrapper issues by re-wrapping the essence without loss.
B- Mild compression ratio like DNxHD and Prores. By doing this you avoid the need for ridiculously big RAID arrays. And you can potentially offline+online in that codec.
C- A wavelet-based codec will (likely) have better quality than DNxHD and Prores. Ideally what you want is if the lossy part of the codec applied noise reduction... if we are to lose information, we definitely prefer to lose noise. Going 4:4:4 also improves quality... any 4:2:2 codec inherently has problems (e.g. generation loss, not visually lossless).

D- It would also be nice if the format worked well with insert editing for people who need to make minor changes.
E- It would also be nice if there was some sort of VTR or virtual VTR that let SDI-based devices interface with the material.

You can ingest HD-SDI material (from HDCAM, HDCAM SR, telecine, etc.) and then transcode to this format. You can copy it quickly onto a firewire drive. And the editor can do both the offline+online from the footage, bypassing online conform issues.

 

[Yuval Shrem]

I don't know if Red really wants to get into the market of codecs and formats, but it would be very nice if there were a widely-compatible intermediary format.

A- It is very useful if a format is commonly supported... e.g. if it's Quicktime, it should have both a PC and Mac codec. That way you can do things like capture FCP, edit in Premiere/whatever. It's such a PITA when a particular codec is not supported on your system.
Better yet would be if there was a tool that could deal with wrapper issues by re-wrapping the essence without loss.
B- Mild compression ratio like DNxHD and Prores. By doing this you avoid the need for ridiculously big RAID arrays. And you can potentially offline+online in that codec.
C- A wavelet-based codec will (likely) have better quality than DNxHD and Prores. Ideally what you want is if the lossy part of the codec applied noise reduction... if we are to lose information, we definitely prefer to lose noise. Going 4:4:4 also improves quality... any 4:2:2 codec inherently has problems (e.g. generation loss, not visually lossless).

D- It would also be nice if the format worked well with insert editing for people who need to make minor changes.
E- It would also be nice if there was some sort of VTR or virtual VTR that let SDI-based devices interface with the material.

You can ingest HD-SDI material (from HDCAM, HDCAM SR, telecine, etc.) and then transcode to this format. You can copy it quickly onto a firewire drive. And the editor can do both the offline+online from the footage, bypassing online conform issues.

GlennChan,

It seems that the codec you're describing already exists!
The "Cineform RAW" codec is exactly what you are describing and already supports 4k resolutions at 12bit and 4:4:4 color-space.
Cineform also offers real-time capture via HD-SDI using AJA capture cards for HDCAM, HDCAM SR and other formats, and it currently works both with Quicktime and AVI for both PC and MAC.
I was kind of hoping that we wouldn't have to convert RED CODE RAW footage at all before working with it, but as much as RED-CODE RAW is absolutely astonishingly wonderful for acquisition, for post-production purposes, the Cineform Raw codec might even have some advantages over it. I guess we'lll just have to wait and see how things turn out. I personally am going to probably take my chances with adobe on PC due to the glaring advanteges of renderless workflow and better integrated compositing tools ("After Effects"), and I TRUST THE RED TEAM TO DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO OFFER CODEC COMPATIBILITY FOR PEOPLE LIKE ME.:bye2:
Of course if RED-CODE RAW will be natively supported on the Adobe package (including reasonable render times, which will also enable a smooth workflow with renderless RT previews) I'd prefer to avoid any conversions altogether.

I hope more information about this will become available soon.
All the best,

Yuval

 

[Gunleik Groven]

If I'm not totally mistaken, you're talking about the Cineform, not the Cineform RAW codec.

Cineform RAW is a raw (sensor dependant) codec, as it captures and compresses RAW sensor data. Developed for the SI workflow.

Cineform is a wavelet based "standard" codec, basically applying compression to "any" video data.

Like Redcode vs Redcode RAW

Or am I wrong?

Cheers!

Gunleik

 

[Larry]

Gunleik, there is no reason why a raw file could not be converted to another format. Depending on the technical details, such as which wavelet basis is exploited, all data is preserved or some may be lost. Nevertheless, in any reasonable conversion the amount of lost data is insignificant. The fact that data is sensor dependent is not an issue, for in this sense all data depends on something. Usually the dependency is just open implying the recipe to reconstruct the image is known.

Just discovered that it will be possible to edit Red material with Cineform codec. So, from day one it will be possible to shoot in 4K, store on-board 2K in 25p/50p and edit real time at some point in the (near) future with Adobe software and Cineform codec. Not that bad at all, in fact quite a miracle. It's exciting to follow such developments and something which sounded more like a dream only a few years ago.

 

[David Newman]

Yes we will do our best to support the Red camera.

Gunleik, is correct in that CineForm has different codec flavors, we now have three primarily CineForm codecs -- yet one decoder can handle all three source types.

The three are:
CineForm Intermediate (the classic 4:2:2 10-bit codec, now nearly 4 years old although is it still getting cool upgrades.)
CineForm RAW -- Not developed for SI, but are one of the licensees -- yes it will do 4K and above.
CineForm 444 -- Developed for real-time dual link HDSDI capture -- 12-bit.
CineForm 444 is about to get an alpha channel also.

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

Yes we will do our best to support the Red camera.

David, what kind of processor is needed to edit 4K Cineform projects?

 

[David Newman]

David, what kind of processor is needed to edit 4K Cineform projects?

I've have done it on a 2.8GHz P4, but a would want to edit a feature that way. Any Core 2 Duo is a good starting point. Also a disk system that sustains at least 50MB/s -- so two SATA drives in RAID 0.

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

Any Core 2 Duo is a good starting point. Also a disk system that sustains at least 50MB/s

David, thank you for the answer. This is pretty amazing.

Some other threads in this forum give the understanding it may take some time before the 4K 25p format is available. If one has 4K 24p files, how would you convert those to 25p? What comes immediately in mind is to speed up a bit and play the 24p files frame by frame in a 25p Cineform project. How can that be done in practice, is it possible in HDLink?

It's not that I'm thinking of editing in 4K in the near future --2K should be fine for my needs for the time being-- but to archieve some clips it would be nice to have them in 4K. Also, if the clip is taken from an airplane or helicopter, then 4K format probably yields more space to eliminate possible oscillations.

 

[Yuval Shrem]

If one has 4K 24p files, how would you convert those to 25p? What comes immediately in mind is to speed up a bit and play the 24p files frame by frame in a 25p Cineform project. How can that be done in practice, is it possible in HDLink?

Yes, HDLink can convert a 24p file to 25p cineform file by speeding it up during the conversion. You can also choose if you want the pitch of the sound to be maintained (by applying pitch shifting) or not.

If your delivery format is not 25p I would refrain from applying the pitch correction in HDLink, as applying pitch-shifting twice can yield audio processing artifacts and ultimately harm the audio quality.
Also, even if your delivery is in 25p, if the audio is going to be handled by professional audio people, there are very high-quality algoritms out there for pitch-shifting, that are only available in high-end audio programs, and it would be better (if the audio quality is a priority) to convert via HDLink without the pitch correction and apply pitch shofting seperately with a high-end audio program. The two algoritms that I would recomand are the AMPEX2 (included in Steinberg - Cubase) and even better is the newest generation of Celemony "Melodyne" (must be their polyphonic algoritm that's included in their top packege only).

I hope this helps,

Yuval

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

Yes, HDLink can convert a 24p file to 25p cineform file by speeding it up during the conversion. You can also choose if you want the pitch of the sound to be maintained (by applying pitch shifting) or not.

Yuval, thanks alot for your kind comment. At this part of world everything delivered to broadcasting companies is 25p possibly embedded as 50i. Any idea how good Adobe Soundbooth (the former Adobe Audition) is in the audio conversion?