720P and 1080P... losers

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Maybe what wer'e seeing here today is the begining of Red trying to reposition itself in the market place as a higher end product offering 2/4k only with 0-96 fps framerates.

I don't think its a repositioning within the market, but rather a streamlining of features and capabilities. IMO, I really have no desire to shoot 720p anymore. Not even for those bread and butter, gotta do it to put food on the table type of jobs. My own standards and production values won't allow it. And why should I? I don't plan to charge a premium to shoot 4K over 2K over 1080p, etc.. For me, the only attraction to shooting 720p would be higher frame rates, but that opens other issues. 720p is scaled no matter how you look at it, that means no RAW capabilities for color manipulation. If you scale from the full 35mm sensor area, you're limited to a maximum of 60fps. If you scale from the 2K s16 area, you're limited to 120fps. I would much rather sacrifice the 24fps and have 96fps in 2K RAW as that is a lot more flexible.

I do think the 1080p options should stay. I will probably use it rarely, maybe never, but it's a flexibility issue. Plenty of reasons to keep it.

Right now, I would gladly pay a bit more for the camera to have 4K REDCODE RAW at 60fps and 2K at 120fps onboard and could care less if 720p is discarded. To agree with some of the others in this thread -- I'm an HVX200 owner and an occasional Varicam shooter. The quicker I can dump 720p and move on, the better. And I'm not looking at this from just a cine point of view. Much of the video I shoot is corporate, tradeshow fodder, talking heads, etc..

Oh yeah, if for some reason pigs evolve into flying creatures or Satan starts skiing to work and someone tells me that I have to deliver in 720p, I can always convert. If I'm going to be delivering an RGB format, I would much rather be able to tweak the RAW source and then down-res from a higher resolution. 2K or 4K RAW colored and down-res'd will be far superior to shooting 720p with a native 720p system. And why compare with the HPX500? It's not even a full 720p system, it uses pixel-shifting on a lower res sensor and compressed raster DVCPROHD 4:2:2.

A lot of people mention workflow is a primary concern if the footage must be converted and/or down-res'd on the fly. I can understand that, but I also think that instead of trying to force RED into a current or desired workflow, perhaps it's better to start adapting a new workflow to RED? The client, network, etc.. should be expected to wait the few extra seconds, minutes, etc.. for a footage offload and convert. Perhaps not as convenient as simply handing over a tape, but that workflow can and will come back as computers continue to become more powerful and media becomes faster and cheaper or more expendable. Those coming from a film workflow should already be elated... Now results are viewed and can entire the workflow pipeline in a matter of minutes... It's no longer "tomorrow" or "next tuesday" or whatever your film lab's favorite line for estimates is.

 

[stephenlnoe]

I think recording these formats is a waste of time. I'm voting to delete them from the recording options. You can always "downrez" to get these, but shooting these formats seems counter-intuitive and a waste of FPGA space. Remember that shooting 2K REDCODE RAW is only about 7MB/sec. Maybe we should add a You Tube option?

What thinkest thou?

Jim

Uhhhh.... Why in the world would you want to add downrez steps to the workflow when you can go straight out to 720p or 1080p? Do you want users to be able to shoot for TV? Then you'll need quick turn around and not time wasting downrez after ingest into an NLE.

2c.

S.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Hi Stephen,

I'm glad to see you posting here. I hope one day to watch some RED videos from you and your lovely Chicago.

E.

 

[Stephen Webb]

Just curious, the guys who say that they "need" the 120fps rate - what are you shooting on now to achieve that? I'm guessing it's most likely film, or else you make great use of the Tornado. It seems to me that 100fps @ 2K (nice round figure, but I'd settle for 96fps) is still quite a bit faster than anything else (ie. Varicam).

Really the only issue would appear to be the one of downconverting. It may help to get an idea of how long that process takes.

 

[Laco Zamba]

Uhhhh.... Why in the world would you want to add downrez steps to the workflow when you can go straight out to 720p or 1080p? Do you want users to be able to shoot for TV? Then you'll need quick turn around and not time wasting downrez after ingest into an NLE.

2c.

S.

You mean 720p/1080p uncompressed RGB?
If you talk about 720p/1080p REDCODE then it must be converted to other formats.

 

[Hoffmann Films]

Jim, Thanks for the great options. I would love 2K @96fps ....

This is a great debate to have and I would NEVER shoot 720 if i could shoot 2K or 4K. RED is the future and its great to be a part of it......

 

[Antoine Baumann]

Uhhhh.... Why in the world would you want to add downrez steps to the workflow when you can go straight out to 720p or 1080p? Do you want users to be able to shoot for TV? Then you'll need quick turn around and not time wasting downrez after ingest into an NLE.

You can record from the HD-SDI port to a HD Deck, and then you will get the format/codec you want, because even if you shoot 1080p REDCODE RGB, you will need to encode it in an other codec, because I think no TV channel will accept RED codec at least at the begining.

antoine.

 

[Darren Orange]

Yeap....

I vote for 2K @ 96fps

If your going to shoot for a feature you got to have min 2K.

 

[Columbus]

4K is nearly 4 times more pixel than 2K, I would definitely prefer a scaled
1080p image of the whole sensor shot at 60fps than a 2K raw windowed at 60fps. Since the 4K will also most likely be scaled to 2K for a film out then I think the slow mo scaled 1080p will match the 4K image a lot better. Now if in the very near future 4K raw at 60fps is available then that is a whole other ball game.

 

[Jason Ramsey]

Kill 720 and do what you can with 1080 up to 4k.

Digital is the future, you are right there. And everything will continue to move to a more cinematic style, but "digital cinema" is only one part of your market, and likely only one part of the majority of your customers use for the camera.

At this price point, it will attract a broad range of customers and customer uses. It's basically in the same tax bracket as the HPX500... so, someone could easily consider stepping up from that to the RED. If you kill both 720 and 1080, you could be losing customers to the HPX500 (which will probably be highly successful) Beyond the HPX500, there really isn't anything in the same tax bracket in the broadcast world. Everything else is considerably higher priced, but with a much more watered down feature set... The choice for those folks begins to look obvious... Buy a 50k camera that only does this, or buy a fully decked out red for the same or less, and it also does this, this, this.... Huge market there for RED. Unless it doesn't offer a comparable feature set to one of those cameras they would otherwise have been buying. It won't matter to broadcast professional that you can downconvert, etc, etc to get 720 or 1080. They will see 2k and 4k and they won't give it a second look. "Oh, that's for shooting movies and stuff..." The truly indy filmmaker who also uses his/her camera for their day job would be attracted to something like the HPX for the very reason that many were attracted to the RED. "I can use it for work, and for my personal projects". The 'filmmaker' only... well, I think you already have that one locked up, regardless of whether there is 2k, 1080, or 720.

To summarize, 720? Sure, kill it... Keep everything else, and if killing 720 gives you some extra space to squeeze something more (framerates, or whatever) out of 1080, 2k, 4k... then go for it.

I would imagine a good many of your customers will do things like shoot commercials, etc. by day (their job) and make movies by night.

These are semi-vague examples, but anyways, hopefuly the point got through well.

My little ole' opinion...

Jason

 

[Purple]

120fps

120fps

My vote is for 120fps/720p.
Reason: at 720p, we're already sharp enough for most applications, plus 120fps is the bare minimum needed for many sequences I plan to shoot.

 

[Steven Parker]

720p, like HDV, is to me a temporary codec, gone in a few years. Get rid of it.

But 1080 is going to be around a while yet. Why limit the options within the camera? Options are everything - so I could conceivably shoot 1080, 2K and 4K with my RED, keeping client peace-of-mind (and work calls) by giving them what they're familiar with. RedCine seems kick-ass, but some people won't wait for the transcode, and sometimes I won't be able to do it for them as I'm off on another shoot. Unless it's real-time or faster. Then it will be REALLY kick-ass.

Higher frame rates are really great - yet how many of us will really use those high frame rates on a 'daily' basis? But I bet a lot of us have 1080p clients on a daily basis.

I'm an indie DP, not an ENG/EFP guy. But I think there's more value in extra codecs than in extra fps.

C'mon, Red-Team - chime in already!

 

[Jesper Holmström]

I don't understand where all this "keep 1080 but kill 720" came from. I thought it was pretty clear that Jim meant kill all RGB/scaling recordings both 1080 and 720 for more fps in the 2K RC RAW windowed mode.
But if we are talking wishlists then kill everything for more fps in 4K RC RAW.

Jesper Holmström
Dagsljus Filmequipment

 

[Emanuel A.]

Yes, RGB is the beef.

 

[Georg Misch]

How many high speed film cameras with frame rates beyond 100 fps are out there?

How many high speed film cameras with frame rates beyond 100 fps are out there?

Hi!

How many high speed film cameras with frame rates beyond 100 fps are out there? Very few and this shows the demand for it.

2k@96fps is great and enough in 99% of all cases.

For those that need more than 96 fps (which is a minority) there will be a future high-speed REDtwo or there are other companies out there that have it available already now.

720 and 1080 can be downrezzed with redcine, so forget it as recording option.

Keep it simple and the quality as high as possible.

Greetings to everyone

Georg

 

[Frank Weeks]

It was a little quiet tonight....

Jim

So much for the quiet night.

Great thread.

Frank

 

[Stephen Webb]

My vote is for 120fps/720p.
Reason: at 720p, we're already sharp enough for most applications, plus 120fps is the bare minimum needed for many sequences I plan to shoot.

What do you shoot these sequences with now?

 

[mezmo]

Hi all again,
On the other hand we may be seeing some good ole product
splitting here sony/pannie fashion.
A mini red model that does 720/1080p 0-120 fps only and a maxi model that
does 2/4k 0-96fps only.
Is this an option ?
Thoughts ? Mezmo
I thinkest this could be cool. (mini model about $10K)

 

[Michael Hastings]

Prefer 96@2K REsolution at the expense of workflow

Prefer 96@2K REsolution at the expense of workflow

I recognize what Sharky and the others are saying about keeping some standard Hidef formats, however my understanding is that down conversion from your red drive or CF to 1080 or 720 using a latemodel MAC would be very fast - on the order of 1 -2 times realtime. Can someone confirm this? If that is so (and to me even if it is 3 to 4 times realtime) this would make it preferable to me.

The thing that I think is key here is that most people shooting 720p these days i.e. the HVX200 types are already dealing with additional steps to copy cards for workflow. At that point the copy/downrez is not much more effort.

Once we left the world of shooting a Betacam tape and handing it to the producer everything got murky (what do your producers like now? Is it: Digibeta, Betacam SX, HDCam, DVCPro, DVCPro50, DVCPro 100, Minidv, HDV tape, XDCAM disk, AVCHD SD card, Ikegami EditcamII, Grass Valley or Hitachi whatever? You get my drift.)

I don't do a ton of rentals, but I've done about a dozen this year and there were at least 5 different formats wanted. My point is there's no way to keep them all happy anymore so you might as well just factor in that extra step - and the producers are just going to have to accept it. In talking to a number of them, they realize it, they resist it but they know that resistance is futile because there are just too many reasonable options now. In other words with another year of being inundated with formats I think even the diehards will have to capitulate.

At this point I think, since it appears that we have to choose either high resolution and 96 fps speed or low resolution and instant compatibility (and 20 percent more speed). My vote is high resolution and pretty darn high speed.

IMHO it is generally the smartest way to go since with one additional step you can achieve almost instant compatibility with ANY format, but we can never really recreate the resolution.

With all that said, it's probably not the dumbest thing to side with the gut feeling of the billionaire inventor. LOL.

These content creators don't want or need 4K. They will pay for 720p. And they won't pay you to downconvert your footage for them after you shoot it. Not having the option to reduce the overall amount of data right in camera while keeping most of the qualities of the image, aside from resolution, is a major problem. Possibly a deal breaker, pushing the camera into the possible liability category rather than the definite asset category. For me at least.

Keep 1080 for now - lose 720 and enable 96 fps @ 2K.

What does one do with 720P? Blow it up to 2K or 35mm for theatrical screening? I'll never use it and clients won't ask for it. Nat Geo Channel US accepts 720P for HD broadcast but everyone else is 1080. Since one camera alone will not serve as a production tool that does everything then 96 fps @ 2K is the hands down winner of the available no delay options for REDONE.

Losing the 1080 option for the non-fiction EFP owner/operators in the long run may not be an issue, HOWEVER, clients may need some ramp up time to get their heads around the 4K workflow - simple as we know it is with FCP or Redcode.



Yikes! Good thing your not the VP of marketing for RED. In one paragraph you just eliminated the majority of RED's future customer base. Ya sure, Indies and the Majors will/are embracing REDONE cameras to shoot their features but that is only a fractional part of the RED's market potential.

Wait until Gibby reads your post, man are you going to get schooled. How many "cinema features" are made globally each year? Now, compare that to how many HD broadcast programs are made each year. Discovery Channel US alone makes more HD programs than the world's collective annual feature output.

Let's see my EFP options per your analysis are drop more than $200K to buy a camera system to shoot 1080 to tape with Sony's compression or $30-40K to originate in 4K redcode. Rental rates will be equally as one-sided. Then again maybe you were just kidding:greedy:

 

[Hendry]

I recognize what Sharky and the others are saying about keeping some standard Hidef formats, however my understanding is that down conversion from your red drive or CF to 1080 or 720 using a latemodel MAC would be very fast - on the order of 1 -2 times realtime. Can someone confirm this? If that is so (and to me even if it is 3 to 4 times realtime) this would make it preferable to me.

The thing that I think is key here is that most people shooting 720p these days i.e. the HVX200 types are already dealing with additional steps to copy cards for workflow. At that point the copy/downrez is not much more effort.

Once we left the world of shooting a Betacam tape and handing it to the producer everything got murky (what do your producers like now? Is it: Digibeta, Betacam SX, HDCam, DVCPro, DVCPro50, DVCPro 100, Minidv, HDV tape, XDCAM disk, AVCHD SD card, Ikegami EditcamII, Grass Valley or Hitachi whatever? You get my drift.)

I don't do a ton of rentals, but I've done about a dozen this year and there were at least 5 different formats wanted. My point is there's no way to keep them all happy anymore so you might as well just factor in that extra step - and the producers are just going to have to accept it. In talking to a number of them, they realize it, they resist it but they know that resistance is futile because there are just too many reasonable options now. In other words with another year of being inundated with formats I think even the diehards will have to capitulate.

At this point I think, since it appears that we have to choose either high resolution and 96 fps speed or low resolution and instant compatibility (and 20 percent more speed). My vote is high resolution and pretty darn high speed.

IMHO it is generally the smartest way to go since with one additional step you can achieve almost instant compatibility with ANY format, but we can never really recreate the resolution.

With all that said, it's probably not the dumbest thing to side with the gut feeling of the billionaire inventor. LOL.

These are good points, the time/conversion issue seems to be minor to me. The thing that makes this decision difficult, is that by losing 1080p you are losing full frame, 35mm slow motion. 2k96fps is amazing, but its in the s16 window. I've become totally torn on this subject.

The obviously ideal situation is to be able to drop 720p, leave 1080p60 RGB and boost the 2k to 96fps. The next bext option is letting the user change it with firmware upgrades. A third way: Leave everything the way it is now (with 720 and 1080), and give the $4000 upgrade option for a superfly RED HIGHSPEED with the larger, newer FPGA, and whatever juicy specs it brings to 2k and 4k!!!

I'm getting dizzy...