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 :)

3K on RED ONE MX - very bad quality, is something wrong?

S

Sakari Mäkelä

Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Finland
Hello everyone! This is my first post to this forum despite having been an avid reader since 2009. My private & company's biggest wish came true last winter when it was possible to invest to a BT RED ONE MX w/SSD. It's a great, great camera and I'm loving it very much!

I have shot several projects with it without any problems, but now I discovered a weird issue - I was shooting a moving shot of a walking girl in 3K 60 fps and with REDCODE 36. The result is awful considering the image compression - all the detail in her dress and in many trees is almost completely gone and looks like some super-low-quality JPG; almost worse than video with some DSLR:s. Image linked below (taken with REDCINE-X PRO). Is something wrong with some settings / debayering etc. or is it so that the compression on 3K / 60 fps / RC36 can't handle the image and the result is so badly blurred on the dress fabric etc.? If it is so, is it better to shoot in 2K / 60 fps considering compression artifacts?

JPG (1,7 MB): http://sakari.pp.fi/temp/3K_still.jpg
TIFF version (28 MB): http://sakari.pp.fi/temp/3K_still.tif
R3D clip (50 MB): http://sakari.pp.fi/temp/A024_C005_081746_001.R3D

Thanks & best regards,
Sakari
 
Last edited:
A sec of r3d would be good, but I can figure you could run upon some issues with RED1 at those settings.
Besides the image being soft.

This situation (plenty of detail, shades of green, high contrast, every detail is moving, relatively high aperture), is where I would always recommend going as LOW as you can on compression and as HIGH as you can on resolution. Or you'll risk getting compression artefacts.

It's also typically a situation where HDRx (on Epic) is not a very strong plan...
 
Ok, thanks for answers! Here's a short R3D clip (50,4 MB): http://sakari.pp.fi/temp/A024_C005_081746_001.R3D

Yes, as Gunleik you said, that situation was a nightmare to any compression - super detailed surroundings with both camera & model moving, and with 3K / 60 fps there is even more pixels per second to pack than with 4K / 24 or 25 fps, if I counted correctly, so the camera is pushed definitely to it's limits. I have to test some day again with REDCODE 42 if it can handle it better, though I don't believe there would be big difference because the compression difference to RC36 is relatively small as far as I have understood.

Anyway - if this is the case, though the disappointment about the final clip, these kind of shots / problems are important learning lessons to find the limits what work technically and what doesn't to prevent them in the future!
 
There's a lot of colors and a lot of details in that image. It's understandable that compression destroys most of it.
 
Ok, thanks for all your answers! :) Next time I have to shoot such a detailed moving scene in slow motion, I will try to do it in RC42 and 2K / 60 fps instead of 3K / 60 fps, so that there's less raw data to compress to the 42 MB/s final rate. 2K might be even better than 3K despite lower resolution, but more bitrate to use per pixel.
 
Sakari Mäkelä said:
Ok, thanks for all your answers! :) Next time I have to shoot such a detailed moving scene in slow motion, I will try to do it in RC42 and 2K / 60 fps instead of 3K / 60 fps, so that there's less raw data to compress to the 42 MB/s final rate. 2K might be even better than 3K despite lower resolution, but more bitrate to use per pixel.
Click to expand...

What Bjørn said and DO NOT GO 2K!!! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top