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 :)

720P and 1080P... losers

Status
Not open for further replies.
96 fps @ 2K

96 fps @ 2K

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.

Haskell said:
I always thought the RED ONE was truly a cinema camera at heart and would personally vote out the 720 and even the 1080 options if it meant more fps at 2k. There are plenty 1080 cameras on the market to suit the needs of those interested in ENG/EFP applications. RED ONE is a Cinema Camera. ;)
Click to expand...

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:
 
1080p should be stay - I think many B4 Lenses will not cover 2K - and I feel many users will use their B4 lenses.
we do not need 720p - 96fps@1080 would be fine enough !
 
Jannard said:
We can leave the spec as it is OR we can get creative at the last minute.
Click to expand...

He, he. No one can accuse you of playing it safe :-)

I think it all depends on how optimized the 4k RAW playback codec will be.
If you can make high quality 1080 playback in realtime from 4k RAW and 2k RAW, most of your customers could care less about if it is RAW or RGB, and RGB would be a moot point.

The RGB modes currently promises two important things: Maximum framerate, and instant 1080p delivery.

Maximum framerate is mostly a "feel good" feature. You would only use it in special cases.

RGB recording for me is about being able to persuade more Sony/Panasonic productions into moving over. There is certainly a big market where RAW processing will never click with the producers due to time and budget constraints, they basically trust the photographer to do his thing and then just use the final look that he chose. No funds/time in the budget to have someone use time in Redcine.
But all of this becomes less meaningful if high quality realtime downscaling is possible from the full 35mm sensor in redcode RAW. If not, RGB is still very much needed, although we all love the RAW format better.

If realtime HQ 1080p playback is not possible from a 4k redcode RAW file on a highend system, I'd say: keep 1080p RGB (From 2k and 4k), loose 720p and work on optimizing the RAW options.
 
2k@96

2k@96

2k@96, definitely. And if Redcode 4k got faster, I'd be willing to pay that $4k extra for that option extra - it's still a laugh compared to what you pay Sony for any extra on the HDW 750 / 790.

Regards, Friedrich
 
One more vote for 2K @ 96 fps.

What would people do with 720p, they would UP-REZ!!!!! That controverts the whole idea of the Red if you ask me. "PIXEL SHIFTING AND UP-REZZING NOT SPOKEN HERE", please stay true to that paradigm.

So please kick 720p and give us the amazing option of 2K @ 96 fps. I mean, just listen to that: 2K @ 96 fps. That's almost as amazing as being able to shoot in 4K.

ENG guys: CPUs are getting so fast and so cheap, downrezzing to 720p will be fast as hell anyway. But there is no way to ever get 2K @ 96 fps in the Red One if Jim doesn't decide to change the spec now.

MAKE THAT 2K @ 96 fps!
Pretty please!
 
2k@96fps (or beyond) would be my choice.

Man, this place is great! :)
 
Never a dull moment

Never a dull moment

Anders Holck said:
He, he. No one can accuse you of playing it safe :-)

I think it all depends on how optimized the 4k RAW playback codec will be.
If you can make high quality 1080 playback in realtime from 4k RAW and 2k RAW, most of your customers could care less about if it is RAW or RGB, and RGB would be a moot point.
Click to expand...

The RGB modes currently promises two important things: Maximum framerate, and instant 1080p delivery.

If realtime HQ 1080p playback is not possible from a 4k redcode RAW file on a highend system, I'd say: keep 1080p RGB (From 2k and 4k), loose 720p and work on optimizing the RAW options.
Click to expand...


The ability to live feed is an important asset at the highest resolution possible, if this can be accomplished without 720p. Thats fine.

The more functional possibilities on RED the better but not at the expense at comprimising its usability to its users whether its ENG, EFP or Digital Cinema Production. There in lies the paradox if one RED user is going to lose functionality over another user because their choice maybe limited.

At the moment everyone is on board with whats avialiable on the first RED production model.

"It's better looking at it than looking for it!":devil:

Jim you must have found a big wooden spoon last night, your really going to stir it up with this one!:biggrin:
 
Emanuel put up a poll please put in a vote..lets see where we are at!
 
Jim,

Since it's a one-or the-other option, why not give each rez member and/or future customers, the option of enabling one function or the other in their own cameras, like you have with custom made automobiles. In other words, I for one, prefers the 2k @96FPS; this will come enabled as a standard option with my R1. that way, everybody is happy, plus we'll have no one but ourselves to blame when things change later, like you always say "things are bound to change".

BTW, I think you're a real nutter to lay it all out like you did, tonight. One can certainly make a crazed suspense thriller out of tonight's session on these boards, jeez!:)
 
2K@96fps

2K@96fps

2K@96fps
Go for it!!!
 
why 2k

why 2k

Jannard said:
We have room for what we advertised... I'm just wondering if all these options are really necessary. We can't ever think of why we would shoot 2K (except for high frame rates), let alone shoot 720P or 1080P (ugh!). If we wouldn't ever shoot that, we are wondering why anyone would. We can certainly give our customers these options. Just seems dumb to me... at least tonight.

Jim
Click to expand...

About shooting 2k, I think like me, a lot of people are planning to shoot at that res. The reason why I plan on doing that : I have a nice Zeiss S16 zoom and the footage takes up less space. Is that figure you mentioned of 7 MBps for real ? That's awesome, 1/4 the size of 4k ! This is important for documentary work when one is travelling the world and shooting a lot. Also, S16 lenses are smaller so better for shooting handheld and the greater depth of field is welcome for documentary work.

As a side note, remember HD was initally developed for digital cinema, so in a sense it is also digital cinema !

About 720p, I don't believe it's got much of a future. Compared to Pal, it's not much higher res. So over here (on the old continent) everybody is going with 1080. And with chanels broadcasting 1080i and going for 1080p, who's gonna want 720p content a few years from now.

However I think 1080 content has a long life ahead, so I think 1080 recording will be usefull, I'll personall be shooting 2k and outputtng to 1080 from there.

Cheers,
Damien
 
i'll go for 720/120p.
Most of the high speed work is for commercials for tv, and since this kind of job requires really high speeds most than high frame sizes, I prefer the higher speed.
In other hand, if you go with the highest frame rate, later, with a retime software you can do much better slow motion (from a 120p you can easily get an interpolated 300p)
remember... digital cinematography is not only film movies... and how many film movies contains slow motion? (ok Michael Bay and John woo doesn't counts!)
 
earthling said:
About shooting 2k, I think like me, a lot of people are planning to shoot at that res. The reason why I plan on doing that : I have a nice Zeiss S16 zoom and the footage takes up less space. Is that figure you mentioned of 7 MBps for real ? That's awesome, 1/4 the size of 4k ! This is important for documentary work when one is travelling the world and shooting a lot. Also, S16 lenses are smaller so better for shooting handheld and the greater depth of field is welcome for documentary work.

As a side note, remember HD was initally developed for digital cinema, so in a sense it is also digital cinema !

About 720p, I don't believe it's got much of a future. Compared to Pal, it's not much higher res. So over here (on the old continent) everybody is going with 1080. And with chanels broadcasting 1080i and going for 1080p, who's gonna want 720p content a few years from now.

However I think 1080 content has a long life ahead, so I think 1080 recording will be usefull, I'll personall be shooting 2k and outputtng to 1080 from there.

Cheers,
Damien
Click to expand...

You are talking about tv... so probably the standard in europe will be 720p instead of 1080i.
It's not only about resolution, but frame rate. Progressive mode is much better than interlaced, and if you do the math you would see that 1080i is not much better than 720p. This is clearly explained by the BBC and the EBU.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top