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 :)

3.1.6 tested and it's worst then before

Martin Preiss

Martin Preiss

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Los Angeles, Prague
Website
www.martinpreiss.cz
So I loaded this morning before shooting 3.1.6 and it was worse then before. Some codec errors, but most a playback errors and artifact in every another frame. 3 frames bad 28 good 3 frames bad 56 frames good and so on.

4K 16:9 25p RED28 @ CF Cards
Steadicam in forrest.

First picture with the artifact error and second just comparison to normal bit from it...
 
Why Redcode 28? I just shot stuff with trees today at 4K 16:9 23.98 Redcode 36 and no problems.
 
No codec errors, but...

No codec errors, but...

One take had the same artifact trash in the very first frame of the take. This was a very high contrast scene with lot of trees.

I've shot very few tests with build 3.1.6, but you can bet I'll be doing a lot more on Monday. I've got a killer shoot coming up and can't afford this to pop up in the middle of a take.

Best regards to all,

Leo
 
PM Stuart.. he has a build for you that should fix most of the Codec/Compression issues.
 
issic said:
So I loaded this morning before shooting 3.1.6 and it was worse then before. Some codec errors, but most a playback errors and artifact in every another frame. 3 frames bad 28 good 3 frames bad 56 frames good and so on.

4K 16:9 25p RED28
Steadicam in forrest.
Click to expand...

What were you shooting to... Red Drive or CF cards?

Matthew
 
stevesherrick said:
Why Redcode 28? I just shot stuff with trees today at 4K 16:9 23.98 Redcode 36 and no problems.
Click to expand...

I was using Redcode 28 instead of 36 because I wanted to shoot 30 fps over 23.98 for subtle slow motion.

I really dislike shooting 2:1; because it limits the wide angle.

If my further tests show problems, I'll have to just learn to love it and shoot 2:1 or even 3K.

Best regards,

Leo
 
I'll post something soon to show my tree test. I intentionally panned and tilted the camera erratically to see if I could cause errors and I couldn't.
 
stevesherrick said:
I'll post something soon to show my tree test. I intentionally panned and tilted the camera erratically to see if I could cause errors and I couldn't.
Click to expand...

That's pretty typical in a rock video and other types of shooting. I was able to create about 6 codec errors with 3.1.6 this morning. Backlit trees and some zooming. Seemed like longer takes and shots that dramatically changed content/exposure may have been worse. Kinda hard to nail down the variables perfectly. RC36 16:9. But I do love this build and the look of 16. It's all good really.
 
I must be lost in a haze. . .

I must be lost in a haze. . .

WHAT THE HECK is "3.1.6"???? Last I heard I was shooting using Build 15 and then Build 16 comes out (which I won't go to until my film is over). . . and now there is 3.1.6??? Is this REDAlert or something?

Stephen
 
I stand corrected. I did find this after carefully going through frame by frame.
161_1215147136.jpg
 
Yikes! I've got this build on three cameras for a big "no take 2" shoot tomorrow. I assumed it would at least be better. I hope I can downgrade if this is probable.

Stuart? Is this build less reliable than earlier 16's? I just had a few 3k 60fps crashes. I can live with that here and there but his blocking is .....well.......any thoughts?
 
Just to clarify, this is from 3.1.2, so I guess it has been there from the beginning of publicly released beta. So I apologize on two fronts, first that I missed this on first look, and second that I am not even shooting on Build 3.1.6. But interesting that it is showing up in 3.1.2 as well. Sounds like there is a fix right around the corner.
 
Beta Build 16

Beta Build 16

As we are seeing different practical results - many see no errors at all - this is why its so useful to have the on-going feedback (and the .LOG files)

So to answer the question - can you revert from 3.1.6 to 3.1.5 or 3.1.2 - yes you can if you wish.

What was different about 3.1.6 - we addressed "codec issues" in these types of environments.

a) cyc wall or green screen

b) 2K and 3K high frame rate ( up to 110 fps for 2K )

c) we believed, but it sounds like we didn't help so much, 4K 16:9 25 fps

Again, thanks for the .LOG files, they are very valuable, we will have another update Beta code-wise soon.

p.s Steve, we have a pretty good idea of what that example frame issue is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top