5K 9K come on whats going on!?

[Nova Invicta]

correction

correction

I meant K not MB!

 

[John Moores]

"Why increasing K numbers..."

But your photosites can't just grow along with the chip size because bigger photosites are less sensitive. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Monstro's dynamic range and readout speed sure has a lot to do with a certain pixel size.

Yes, you're wrong. Larger photosites are *more* sensitive, with less noise. Increasing the pixel count for any given frame size must by definition result in smaller pixels, therefore less DR and more noise.
jm

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Yes, you're wrong. Larger photosites are *more* sensitive, with less noise. Increasing the pixel count for any given frame size must by definition result in smaller pixels, therefore less DR and more noise.
jm

That'd be right, if it was the same technology.
But if other parts of the signal chain and the sensor itself was swapped, there'd be a new situation.

 

[Daniel Browning]

Yes, you're wrong. Larger photosites are *more* sensitive, with less noise. Increasing the pixel count for any given frame size must by definition result in smaller pixels, therefore less DR and more noise.
jm

This is a common misconception. If the small pixels have proportionately smaller sensitivity (and FWC and noise), then when they are resampled to the same size as large pixels, the final image is the same.

But they don't tend to scale proportionately: they tend to scale *better*. For example, cheap little digicams have had gapless microlenses for a long time, which is only now starting to trickle down to DSLR cameras. For that and other reasons, the QE/area, FWC/area, and read noise per area on digicams is better than DSLR. For example, the LX3 has 50% higher QE/area than even the D3: 2.20 e-/16-bit raw level [4].

Eric Fossum, inventor of the CMOS APS, the technology behind almost all new DSLR cameras, coined [1] Agranov's Law: "More pixels improve image quality even in the presence of noise". This is based on a paper presented by G. Agranov at 2007 International Image Sensor Workshop, where it was demonstrated that pixels sizes between 5.6 and 1.7 microns all give the same low light performance, but improved performance with more light.

Eric also said that FWC tends to increase with smaller pixels [3]: "What we really want to know is storage capacity per unit area, that is, electrons per um^2. Generally, as technology advances to smaller dimensions, this number also increases. So, in your terms, smaller pixels have greater depth (per unit area) and saturate 'later in time'".

[1] Eric Fossum coining Agranov's Law: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=24828114

[2] G. Agranov's paper: http://www.imagesensors.org/Past Workshops/2007 Workshop/2007 Papers/079 Agranov et al.pdf

[3] Eric fossum http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=30017021

[4] http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=29866728

 

[Bing Bailey]

IMAX cameras used for dark knight weighed a tonne and couldn't hold more than a minute or so of footage and couldn't be handheld for very long without crippling the camera guy. if RED creates the digital equivalent its most likely to be used more on other films including the next batman flick. storage costs go down, storage sizes go up. that won't change using imax film based cameras. so yeah there could be a good reason to go for larger chip sizes and higher RES not for indies although nothing would surprise me but definitely for larger studio films

 

[Weston Ford]

We have reached the peak,

thats a stupid thing to say.

 

[Stephen Grubb]

Hello everyone. My first post. Please be kind

I would just like to throw in my penny/dimes worth.

Assuming that I have the processing power to edit in 4k or above and then down res my finished indie masterpiece to well.... whatevever resolution to post on the net, burn to dvd or sell to my family and friends. Then, if by some miracle my film gains global interest and somebody kindly offers to screen it at every international film festival and cinema chain and hail me as the new Hitchcock then I would be in a position to give them a copy good enough for my adoring audiance to enjoy on the big screen.

"I am so glad I shot that in 4k." I would say....

.....and then I woke up.

The point being that you might curse the day you only shot in HD.

 

[Jannard]

The answers are very simple.

1. I wanted to do it.
2. We can do it.
3. We do sell cameras to guys that are pushing the quality levels past current limits "at all costs".

If you have no need to use a 28K camera, we have other solutions. But just because you may choose not to use one doesn't mean there aren't others that want to explore well beyond the horizon.

BTW... we do know of companies that are now quickly seeing how to provide a post solution. It may be a bit of "build it and they will come"... but it appears that we have already motivated some to mobilize their troops.

Jim

 

[Rami Mustakim]

The answers are very simple.

1. I wanted to do it.

Jim

That's why I like RED so much.
Freedom is everything!

 

[Steve Sherrick]

BTW... we do know of companies that are now quickly seeing how to provide a post solution. It may be a bit of "build it and they will come"... but it appears that we have already motivated some to mobilize their troops.

Jim

If they get a head start on this and refine the workflow before the camera ships, that is going to be huge. I believe all of the camera's in the second generation of RED digital cinema will benefit from post solutions that are in place upon release/shipping of cameras. It instills confidence from the post community which then gets passed along to the producers, who then pass along confidence to employ the cameras on their shoots.

There has been a lot of progress made over the past year in regards to Red and post workflow. All of the major players are involved in some capacity and the acceptance of Red media has increased quite a bit. I expect that in the next 6 months, it will increase further to the point where it's fairly commonplace and the only issues will be platform stability, using compatible systems that can handle the workload, and getting render speeds improved.

Should be really exciting to see what products are unveiled in the near future.

 

[shannyla]

The Genesis is, while built very well, built on the older HD tech. I feel it will have a ceiling that CMOS will and are already moving past. For instance:

To get a GREAT over sampled 4k image out of a CMOS I am looking at the 6k camera. 4k film out or 4k digital projection. To get a straight 4k image, not over sampled, out of a CCD (current Panavision / Sony builds) I need almost a 12k sensor. As is evident by RED's announcement I fell pretty comfortable saying a 6k CMOS will happen before a 12k CCD.

Both Genesis and the D21 are CMOS. D21 works exactly the same way as Red, Genesis uses a 12mp row array sensor which is arguably better than a bayer pattern sensor in terms of color accuracy. These aren't 3CCD HD cameras which is what you seem to be suggesting, nor are they "older" HD tech in any way, unless you consider a S35-sized single CMOS sensor to be in some way obsolete. You could maybe argue about recording onto tape, but SR is reliable, known, proven in production, easy to post and easy to archive. The only downside to HDCAM-SR is the cost of the decks but in every other way it's a wonder format if you've been around this business for any length of time.

The sensor on the Panavision Genesis is 12 megapixel, which is approximatley 4K. They are downsampling in the camera to 1080p. So why not have the option of using all the resolution a chip can produce?

You're misunderstanding the purpose of the Genesis (and by definition the Sony F35, for they are the same...) resolution. It seems to me that Panavision decided, with good reason in my opinion, that for moviemaking colour resolution was more important than spatial resolution. So for each pixel there is a dedicated red, green and blue sensor. In a bayer pattern sensor like the Red and the D21, 50% of the photosites sample green, 25% each for red and blue, and the quality of the raw decoding software determines your color accuracy.

The other reason that the Genesis is a 1080 camera is because thats the format of the SR deck that is used to record the signal.

Don't knock the Genesis until you've tried it, of all the digital cinema film replacement cameras it's the one that I would be most comfortable, in terms of the things that professional filmmakers enjoy such as say "will it work when I turn it on..?", shooting a production with. And we've shot productions with literally all of them, starting with the Viper in 2002.

 

[John K]

Both Genesis and the D21 are CMOS. .

Genesis uses a 12 MP CCD sensor.
So does the Dalsa Origin.

There seems to be quite a bit of confusion between Bayer masking, RGB masking, single chip CMOS, single chip CCD and 3-chip Prism cameraas.

Either chip technology can be used with any of the color separation technologies; they are two entirely different things.

 

[Daniel Browning]

It seems to me that Panavision decided, with good reason in my opinion, that for moviemaking colour resolution was more important than spatial resolution. So for each pixel there is a dedicated red, green and blue sensor. In a bayer pattern sensor like the Red and the D21, 50% of the photosites sample green, 25% each for red and blue, and the quality of the raw decoding software determines your color accuracy.

At the native 4K size, yes, chroma resolution is only half, which makes RED's chroma resolution only 2K. Of course, that's still more color resolution than the 1080p cameras.

Anyway, if sampling color at half-res is so bad, why does Panavision specifically recommend 4:2:2 over 4:4:4 for post production? Even for special effects and green screen? They say the difference isn't visible for most applications. In the same way, Bayer pattern sensors simulate the human eye by having higher luma resolution.

For whatever reason (weak OLPF or a bug in thier magic), the Genesis output suffers some aliasing artifacts. 4K, on the other hand, lets you choose from a variety of software low pass filtration techniques as you resample to 1080, and isn't limited by the physics of birefringent filters like a native 1080p camera is. This nets an effective 15+% resolution gain without aliasing artifacts: 4K makes a better 1080p than a native 1080p camera.

The other reason that the Genesis is a 1080 camera is because thats the format of the SR deck that is used to record the signal.

My guess is that is the primary reason.

 

[Eric Ulbrich]

The answers are very simple.

1. I wanted to do it.
2. We can do it.
3. We do sell cameras to guys that are pushing the quality levels past current limits "at all costs".

If you have no need to use a 28K camera, we have other solutions. But just because you may choose not to use one doesn't mean there aren't others that want to explore well beyond the horizon.

BTW... we do know of companies that are now quickly seeing how to provide a post solution. It may be a bit of "build it and they will come"... but it appears that we have already motivated some to mobilize their troops.

Jim

I agree. As a cinematographer Lazlo Kovacks ASC once said all someone needs to be a cinematographer is a camera and the will to point it and shoot. As long as RED will make em' I will shoot on em'. If I can shoot IMAX format for little under 100 grand for a complete package im in. Also, there is much mention of The Dark Knight and its use of IMAX. Does anybody remember the American Cinematographer article on it? How Wally Pfisters Key grip and crane operators were pulling their hair out modifing ultimate arms and technocranes merely to hold an IMAX camera? The 28K 617 may be a big guy, bit its no way in size to the smallest IMAX camera. Thats why progression is a good thing.

 

[Jannard]

At the native 4K size, yes, chroma resolution is only half, which makes RED's chroma resolution only 2K.

Just to be clear, so there isn't any misunderstanding of Bayer pattern resolution numbers, there are a lot of variables that determine what final output resolution is from a CMOS Bayer pattern sensor.

The RED ONE, shooting 4K, has been accurately measured by RED's own Graeme Nattress, and several additional independent testers, to be 3.2K (or 80%) of the Bayer pattern. We consider that to be much higher than the "norm". Which also goes to show you that making sweeping generalizations is dangerous business now and going forward with CMOS sensors. The nuances between different company's sensor and pixel designs is creating a huge difference in performance characteristics.

Jim

 

[Stephen Williams]

Hi Jim,

I have no reason to doubt your figures, however shooting bluescreen is clearly worse than shooting a green screen due to far less chroma information.

Best

Stephen

Just to be clear, so there isn't any misunderstanding of Bayer pattern resolution numbers, there are a lot of variables that determine what final output resolution is from a CMOS Bayer pattern sensor.

The RED ONE, shooting 4K, has been accurately measured by RED's own Graeme Nattress, and several additional independent testers, to be 3.2K (or 80%) of the Bayer pattern. We consider that to be much higher than the "norm". Which also goes to show you that making sweeping generalizations is dangerous business now and going forward with CMOS sensors. The nuances between different company's sensor and pixel designs is creating a huge difference in performance characteristics.

Jim

 

[Jannard]

Hi Jim,

I have no reason to doubt your figures, however shooting bluescreen is clearly worse than shooting a green screen due to far less chroma information.

Best

Stephen

I know that you believe the numbers, I think at least one of the independent tests was posted on your forum.

You are absolutely correct about green screen being preferable to blue screen. All CMOS sensors struggle with the blue channel compared to the green. RED is no different in that regard.

Jim

 

[Bruce Allen]

Just to be clear, so there isn't any misunderstanding of Bayer pattern resolution numbers, there are a lot of variables that determine what final output resolution is from a CMOS Bayer pattern sensor.

The RED ONE, shooting 4K, has been accurately measured by RED's own Graeme Nattress, and several additional independent testers, to be 3.2K (or 80%) of the Bayer pattern.

Jim, isn't that for luma?

Stephen is talking about individual color channels. RED's green resolution is high. RED's blue and red resolution is not so high. Because there are very few pixels that sense red and blue.

Certainly RED is not 3.2k for red or blue channels. What do you guys think it is? You know me - I don't care about 4K or 3K - as long as it's over 1.5K it's fine for my purposes

But definitely the bayer sensor means that the red and blue channels will always be more "difficult" on the RED. Maybe one day you guys will do one of those crazy sensors like the RGBE one (with little cyan pixels interspersed in the pattern) to compensate for this?

Personally I find the greens wonderful to work with on RED, but find it difficult to keep the reds red on the RED. They clip easily and quite quickly go towards brown or pink. I think one way to fix this would be to have a few more red / blue / cyan / pink sensors?

Or you guys could just add secondary CC for the reds to REDCINE / Red Alert / etc and then we can just knock those reds into the right place in post? That would be fine with me.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Pawel Achtel]

1. Ability to re-frame in post
2. Higher MTF at small detail (after downconverting to 1080 or 720)
3. No alising
4. Large imager delivers higher sensitivity.
5. Lower noise after downsample.

That about somes it up for me.

It is an acquisition format, not delivery format. As long as it is managable in compressed size, there is no downside to 5K or 9K that I can see.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Jim, isn't that for luma?

There is no luma (or chroma) in Raw sensor output. The resolving power of individual colours will vary and, for 4k RAW, it will be less than 2k for Red and Blue colours.

Our eyes are very poor at resolving colour resolution, though.