Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

A Response To Jim Jannard and 1080P

shashbugu said:
I am really looking forward to a Red Ray.
Click to expand...

And so am I.

And I am looking foreward to the workflow.

All material which is to be transcoded for RedcodeRGB won't be RAW, I guess on a good day, 70% of the material will be RAW, many times less than 50%

All that RGB material will need to be 4k, too.

I think I may, just for kicks, try to do a 4k finnish on a couple of small projects, just to get an idea...

(There you go Jim. Despite my reluctancy, I might do 4k finnish on some 2k planned projects... )
 
M Most said:
Nothing other than the ability to scale material that's considerably less than 4K (since there is no available 4K 3D material at this point in time) and the ability to refresh the screen at a refresh rate required by the particular 3D system and either sync it with active glasses (which would retain the resolution) or display the two eyes on sequential lines (halving the resolution in the process and defeating the point of the system in the first place), which depending on the frame rate of the particular material could be anywhere from about 96fps (double flash, 2x24 images) to 360fps (triple flash, 2x60 images). Depending on the technology and how the full 4K image is architected within that technology (in theatrical projectors it's currently 4 "stitched" panels, each representing approximately 1 HD frame, all fed simultaneously and reintegrated by the projector), the refresh rate may or may not be an issue. Displaying 3D using current techniques is really just a matter of increased refresh rates combined with a delivery system (currently glasses) that separates the two images that are being fed sequentially. The only system that does this differently at the moment is the Sony/RealD system that "splits" the 4K imager into 2 2K imagers and projects the two images with no temporal displacement. For that to work as a 4K system would require 8K imaging chips, something Sony to my knowledge does not currently manufacture. One of the promises of 4K DLP technology is the ability to deliver true 4K stereoscopic projection using the same triple flash approach the 2K systems use now, only with chips that have 4 times the number of micromirrors.

Of course, future technology could be developed for LCD that could act much as a RealD Z-screen does now, changing the polarization of the image being emitted from the screen to allow for image separation by the glasses. That technology does not currently exist as far as I know, the only passive technology for LCD screens at the moment is based on lenticular surfaces, which, again, halves the vertical resolution.
Click to expand...

Mike, my point was that 4K and 3D tech for display at home will probably advance simultaneously, not sequentially. In other words, a 4K display should be able to handle 1080p 3D just fine, and later, 4K 3D as well. Buying a 4K display will not prevent someone from viewing "Avatar" in 3D, for example.

Of course, when it comes to all of this 4K display talk, my mind tends to think about large computer monitors, not big TVs for the house. Imagine a million amateur photographers around the world suddenly being able to color correct their stills in Photoshop on a lovely 40-inch 4K display, for example. Not to mention gamers, editors, etc. I bet those would be very popular.
 
Honestly the idea of the Red Ray brings up so many business models its actually insane. I was listening to Mark from Offhollywood on the Redcenter podcast, he made a lot of sense. The Red Ray will do to distribution and exhibition what the Red1 has done to production and post production. Think about how many new smaller theaters will pop up or be revived in the US and around the world. A 4k 3D projector wont cost over a 100K anymore. Theaters, festivals, Village roadshows, etc will be able to bring on a new Golden age of Green cinema to the planet saving millions of cows in the process.
 
With something like Red Ray the move to 4k distribution and broadcast won't be nearly as onerous as the shift from analog SD to digital HD has been. Now that we are in a digital world, upgrading codecs within an allotted bandwidth is not so expensive.
 
David Rasberry said:
With something like Red Ray the move to 4k distribution and broadcast won't be nearly as onerous as the shift from analog SD to digital HD has been. Now that we are in a digital world, upgrading codecs within an allotted bandwidth is not so expensive.
Click to expand...

For broadcast, there are still a few things to consider.

For web distribution, you are closer...
 
Hrvoje Simic said:
Average public is not the first targeted group. In most cases like these it never is.


Also, cinema is not the deciding factor for 4K deployment.
Click to expand...

4k monitors have been available for many years for professional uses. Hasn't gotten us any closer to 4k distribution - or even mastering - for media. A recent post here really showed me how far away that is. The Social Network was shot on Red One MX and the first thing they did was turn each frame into a 2048x1024 frame. Obviously that group doesn't see 4k mass distribution coming any time soon.
 
Lee Fingersh said:
4k monitors have been available for many years for professional uses. Hasn't gotten us any closer to 4k distribution - or even mastering - for media. A recent post here really showed me how far away that is. The Social Network was shot on Red One MX and the first thing they did was turn each frame into a 2048x1024 frame. Obviously that group doesn't see 4k mass distribution coming any time soon.
Click to expand...

4K monitors which have been available were crap, either by contrast, colour rendition, refresh rates or motion performance, plus they were hugely overpriced. Hardware to run 4K monitors has been only high end.

2011. will bring much wider usage of 4K resolution in many different fields, cinema not being a deciding factor.



Gunleik Groven said:
How?
Click to expand...

One "n" added a nice geography setup.

Hope you don't mind. All good vibes. :)
 
Last edited:
RE 4k displays in the home:
I'm all for large 4k displays for home. I think Jim has made it pretty loud and clear, that 4k distribution is around the corner. What I'm unsure of, is the notion that affordable 4k display technology is going to come fast enough for the consumer home entertainment market. If 4k TVs are going to survive the consumer market, they'll need to be under 4 grand at least, and would need to be at least 80 inches to provide a decent experience for more than 2 people watching. If they release 4k TVs smaller than that...sitting distance gets pretty ridiculous. At that point, you're just counting on the same ignorance of anyone who bought a 40inch 1080p TV to sit more than 10 feet away, or the same folks go who go to IMAX and sit in the back row:banghead: Might as well be watching DVD, unless you have binoculars or 20/10 vision.

Monitors are obviously going to be popular at the 30-50" size for professionals, and the elite gamers and whatnot, so 4k youtube, games, etc will probably be popular in the next year or 2. But large TVs just don't seem possible at an affordable price. Hopefully CES 2011 will prove me wrong.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
The debate isn't over what's possible, the issue is what's probable within a time-span of a couple of years. Eventually, anything is possible. As usual, we are mainly arguing over timelines, the technology is not really the main hurdle for a faster conversion to / adoption of 4K for home use. There are other factors in play that don't necessarily conform to Moore's Law.
Click to expand...

My own background was in years of 35mm film exhibition where I came to know virtually every aspect of running an independent cinema (in the UK). I've also done the home cinema routine using a 3 chip DLP projector in my setup. My understanding is that this debate started with Mr Jannard essentially saying that 1080p was wholly inadequate compared to the "gold standard" of 35mm film.

In my view this cannot be emphasised enough, and 1080p is to regarded as far closer to VHS than 35mm. After all, "HD" compared to what? The quality of my ordinary 35mm holiday snaps from 1989 smoke dead anything shot on “HD” or released on Blu Ray.

When great cinematographers talk about "painting with light", it is film stock (whether nitrate, acetate or polyester) which is the canvas, with a solid international track record of 100 years. It is interesting to note that the studios are scanning some of their negatives (eg North by Northwest) at 8K. I became aware of Red when I projected Che, shot on the Red and printed to 35mm. A projectionist friend also showed the film digitally in another venue. We were agreed it looked stunning.

It is in this context I find Mr Jannard's achievement so absolutely remarkable, that he has gone out of his way to offer something approaching that very “gold standard” in the hands of relatively ordinary people. I never imagined this would be practically possible, let alone in my lifetime. I salute Mr Jannard for that.

Saied

Sorry if my first post is “loud” – I’m a bit nervous.
 
Tom Lowe said:
nice! that's what i like to hear.

are there any more in the size range of 40 inches, for example, to serve as computer monitors?
Click to expand...

They are coming, but you will need to sit very close (1.0-1.2x screen width) to reap the full benefit of 4K. If you sit further out, you will get a softer image than 1080p. For a 1.78 40" screen (34.9" wide), that's about a 3ft viewing distance. 65" = 5ft. That's why larger screens and projection make more sense with 4K. You can sit at a comfortable viewing distance with say, a 12ft wide screen.
 
Saied_M said:
My understanding is that this debate started with Mr Jannard essentially saying that 1080p was wholly inadequate compared to the "gold standard" of 35mm film.

In my view this cannot be emphasised enough, and 1080p is to regarded as far closer to VHS than 35mm. After all, "HD" compared to what? The quality of my ordinary 35mm holiday snaps from 1989 smoke dead anything shot on “HD” or released on Blu Ray.
Click to expand...

That depends.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=18601806&postcount=2
"35mm as a display medium, rather than a capture format, is nowhere near the performance of 4k. Its ability to display detail is actually significantly lower than 1080p/2k systems. This confusion of capture and display performance of film has led to a huge amount of misunderstanding in this area. Kodak Vision 200T color negative 5274, as an example, can capture 4000 lines, but that is not representative of a release print with its cascading generational MTF reductions. Thats even before it meets the PJ, let alone the image that actually falls onto the screen.

I can display a pristine print back to back with its BD equivalent and very easily see the superior small area contrast and detail, ie resolution and MTF, of the digital system. Thats with a 35mm image well beyond a normal commercial cinema."
​
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=18603478&postcount=7
"Genuine 2k content is another factor, as a DCP (Digital Cinema Package ie the DCI movie) is a very significant step up from domestic 1080p content. Better colour, less compression and much higher data rate."
​
DCP = 12 bit, JPEG2000, 2K, 200MBPS
Older titles are usually 100MBPS.

There was a push last year to get consumer rights to DCI content but it failed. Studios want to protect the theatrical market.

Digital Cinema 4K releases:
http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/mkt-di...igicinema-latest-4kmoviereleaseslisting.shtml

All 35mm or 2K upconversions so far, nothing that was shot in 4K (except some scenes in Green Hornet).
 
Last edited:
Lee Fingersh said:
4k monitors have been available for many years for professional uses. Hasn't gotten us any closer to 4k distribution - or even mastering - for media. A recent post here really showed me how far away that is. The Social Network was shot on Red One MX and the first thing they did was turn each frame into a 2048x1024 frame. Obviously that group doesn't see 4k mass distribution coming any time soon.
Click to expand...

That "group" (Sony) does see an immediate 4K future. They are leading the way to convert theaters to 4K projection and have other 4K displays in the works. Social Network can be conformed quickly to 4K whenever they feel like a 4K release. That is exactly the point. Put something out now 1080P or 2K. But just like film, release as 4K when necessary. I know that the decision to release now or later in 4K was a close call...

Jim
 
RED RAY

RED RAY

"Genuine 2k content is another factor, as a DCP (Digital Cinema Package ie the DCI movie) is a very significant step up from domestic 1080p content. Better colour, less compression and much higher data rate."
​
DCP = 12 bit, JPEG2000, 2K, 200MBPS
Click to expand...

I agree DCP has much better color and an absence of compression errors (banding, macro-blocking) that can plague DCT compression based HDTV products. However the data rate used (Mbps) is only one indicator of signal quality, as RED RAY uses less than 10% of that data rate to deliver pristine 4K content.

I became aware of Red when I projected Che, shot on the Red and printed to 35mm. A projectionist friend also showed the film digitally in another venue. We were agreed it looked stunning.
Click to expand...

Saied, thank you for that comment and welcome to RED USER. If you are ever in Los Angles, please come visit RED Studios. Watching 5K EPIC source footage being projected onto a 35ft wide screen by a 4K Sony SXRD projector fed by RED RAY PRO is a (re)defining moment.
 
Can a nice PC or Mac Pro computer play 4K Redray, on a 2560 x1600 LCD, for example?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top