Cook Anamorphic Lenses & Red S8K Helium Camera

[Reuben Evans]

This thread is blowing my mind. Maybe one day I'll ascend these heights, but you guys are awesome for having this discussion here for us to learn about the next level.

 

[Humberto Rivera]

Well David I will say it aging, your Insight and Contribution to Cinematography and this “red.user” web site is without equal, you have my humble respect.

I’m just talking about another S35 alternative Helium Sensor that can be created on a limited version, that can be offered to those that have specifically expressed an interest, and all the Rental Companies that already own the Cooke Anaphoric Lenses or any other Anamorphic Lens, that’s all, Thank you!

All I’m saying that this Limited Helium Sensor, that HAS A height 18 mm be considered by Red as an “out of the box” way of thinking, and let the sides of the sensor go wherever they go BEYOND 24 mm, to a full 35.4 MP for an 8K size, that all. There will be less to cut to out of the edges in the picture of an Anaphoric Image that would also have a virtual 2X extension, not an actual resolution, but a virtual one, the resolution would be 8K “more or less” but it will have a much wider appearance, all with the New Helium Technology. Think about that for a minute, cut of the edges much less, and have an appearance of a wider picture that it really-is, shot with a truly professional well-made Cine Lens, but not sacrificing the 8K resolution. The Image could be for 2:1 or a DCI 2.39:1, it’s just a matter of how much to cut out the sides of the of the Anaphoric Image, that has that benefit of the Virtual Image that occurs in just ours in our brain. The DCI Image has the benefit of being able to be reduced to whatever a DCI can be reduced-too.

Humberto Rivera

 

[David Mullen ASC]

You can't have it both ways, if you go to the 18mm height but keep the 8K width, then your total megapixel count will end up higher than 35.4MP with the current Helium sensor photosite size.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

It's basic math -- if you keep the 8192 pixel dimension horizontally and you make the sensor shape 1.20 : 1, then the vertical has to become 6827 pixels, so the total megapixel count becomes 55.93MP. If you reduce the height to lower that number, then when you shoot anamorphic you'd be cropping the sides to get a 2.40 : 1 image once unsqueezed.

As I said, if you want to keep the 35.4MP total, make the height 18mm, and are working with the pitch size of the Helium photosites, you could cut it to 26 x 18mm and it would be 7158 x 4944 pixels / 35.4MP. If you expand beyond 26mm / 7158 pixels wide then the total pixel count will rise.

I think what you are asking Humberto, to have a sensor that is 18mm tall and 8192 pixels wide and has a total megapixel count of 34.5MP, would require an entirely new sensor with a different sized photosite, so it wouldn't be a modification of the Helium, it would be a totally new sensor.

let the sides of the sensor go wherever they go BEYOND 24 mm, to a full 35.4 MP for an 8K size, that all.

As I said, you can only go to 26mm wide / 7158 pixels if you want an 18mm tall sensor that totals 35.4MP. The size of each individual photosite is determining the dimensions in relation to the pixel count. No matter what, 18mm = 4944 pixels with the Helium pixel pitch size.

 

[Humberto Rivera]

Absolutely David, it would be a totally new S 35 Helium Sensor (it would need a slight change in the NAME), made with EXCITING technology that would be employed beyond the Currently Planed 29.9 mm X 15.77 mm sensor. We’re not inventing anything NEW just modifying its application for TWO sensors, without a question. I don’t know what the horizontal would be, but I know that it would be 18 mm vertical, because of the Professional Cine Lenses that are available in more than just Cooke. The current plan is to have the horizontal be 29.9 mm, that can be changed to anything that it wants-to beyond 24 mm, so if we have the “horizontal-whatever-it-is”, let-it be between 24 mm and 26 mm to play with the horizontal, that fine, so long as the vertical is 18 mm, that’s the basis of my thinking. The megapixels will be whatever they are, we got plenty of them to play with.

I say-it again, it’s just a request with my thinking “out of the box”, that’s all.

Another important consideration is IMAX with its two Vertical and Horizontal “Aspect Rations” of 1.43:1 and 1.91.1. The more vertical we have in the frame, the closer we’ll be to satisfying those two “Aspect Ratios”, with the number of megapixels in the image that could in fact come from a “Cooke Anamorphic Prime /i Lens Technology”, because of the virtual and vertical factor of the Anamorphic or a Master Prime. All reduced for screening at 4K or 2K DCI. Feature film screen in the ever growing IMAX format contribute a lot to any Motion Picture release Worldwide. That safety feature would be in its Megapixels count contained within the image.

Humberto Rivera

 

[David Mullen ASC]

It wouldn't be a modification it would be an entirely new sensor development and construction if you are talking about changing the size of the photosites. You'd be starting from scratch, just as Helium is not a modification of the Dragon sensor, it is a totally new sensor because of the size of the photosites. A modification would be something like cutting the sensor to a different dimension from the original wafer.

Like I calculated with the Helium technology, you could make the sensor 26mm x 18mm / 7158 x 4944 / 35.4MP. But if you increase the horizontal dimensions back to 29.9mm / 8192 pixels but make the height 18mm / 4944 pixels, then the total pixel count that you have to record becomes 40.5MP.

Which I'm sure is possible but it may reduce your high-speed frame rate options.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

Which I'm sure is possible but it may reduce your high-speed frame rate options.

But does only the horizontal crop of the sensor matter in the highspeed FPS specifications?

Does 8000k X 4000k have the same FPS capabilities than 8000k X 2000k?

Pat

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I would assume that it's the total amount of data coming off of the sensor that affects the processing capabilities. With the current Dragon sensor, you can increase the max frame rates when you crop the sensor area being recorded, see:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?126607-Red-Dragon-fps-range

6k FF / 6144 x 3160 / 19.42MP = 82.806 fps

6K WS / 6144 x 2592 / 15.93MP = 100.67 fps

6K HD / 5568 x 3132 / 17.44MP = 83.331 fps

 

[Christopher Probst]

David,

My preference would be to keep the sensor width the same at 8192 across, BUT regardless of aspect ratio, increase the height to around 18mm... Doing some quick math, 18mm tall gives a vertical resolution of 4,932

That's pretty damn close to 5K spec, so I'd then just recommend going for a 5120 vertical yielding a sensor height of 18.688mm.

Cleave out your 1.2:1 aspect ratio for your 6Kx5K Anamophic mode and crop vertically for all of the rest of the spherical modes.

That's my Win-Win dream right there!

 

[Humberto Rivera]

Here is a citation to Jarred Land Facebook Page posted by Billy Jim from NYC;

https://www.facebook.com/jarred.land/posts/10153849794055415

"I think Jarred nervously gives me these early cameras to test because I don't pull any punches with him. Ok. So here I am thinking VV has stolen the show. And I'm getting the baby 8k to test thinking it's going to be a slight increase in performance like going from MX to Dragon.

But!!! How wrong I was... I really don't think Team Red realizes just what they have made here. Or did they!

This completely new sensor design with half sized pixels squeezed down into S35 (which is only unique to this camera) gives image attributes far greater than I thought possible. Clean!!!! Is the word. So far this camera has way surpassed my expectations. I'm actually not sure how to describe what I'm actually seeing at the moment. It's like going from HD to 4K for the very first time... This is as close as I can describe the gap “between 6k to 8k”. This is game changing as much if not more than the VV in some aspects. As these tiny pixels have taken this camera into a zone that complete kills dead professional stills cameras.... Put it this way. Shooting at 1600 - 2500 ASA is like as clean as 800 in 6k. Most of my tests so far have been low light at 3200 and upwards in mixed lighting. I'm trying to find the weak point.

Short answer is. This thing will shake the world probably more than its big brother. Especially knowing that all your favourite S35 cinema glass that you thought you may have to throw out just got turbo charged. IMAX performance in your pocket is now.

I'd love both the VV and the Helium in my kit now. But reality is. Helium will be my work house for at least another 5 years.

I haven't even started my real testing yet. I'm suspecting even more surprises" - Mark Toia

Humberto Rivera

 

[Humberto Rivera]

David Muller; “A modification would be something like cutting the sensor to a different dimension from the original wafer” David Muller. I suppose it may be a NEW sensor, but that is not that far from what it has been ALREADY designed for the “S35 Helium Sensor Camera”, I personally think that if anyone can do-it, is the “Red Digital Camera Company”. One thing is going from the “old sensor” to the Helium Sensor, the other is a completely new sensor, which this is not, it-is a MODIFICATION to a soon to be announced S35 Helium Sensor! I know that it does involves some work and expense, but consider the benefits. All that professional glass that could be put to work again!

I agree with Christopher Probst, so long as the “height or vertical” is 18 mm or slightly more, it really doesn’t matter what the horizontal is, as long as it’s more than 24 mm to wherever it may go too. To keep it slightly larger than the “Silent Cine Aperture”. That’s the measure we’re talking about here so the “Cooke Anamorphic Prime /i Lens Technology” or any other Anamorphic Lens, in order to utilize the Virtual benefit that we can get from its 2X extension. The extremes on both side of the frame will serve 2.39:1, 2:1, 1.91:1 IMAX, and the regular size derived from a DCI for various reasons, like 1.85:1, even 16:9, and others.

In the case of the high-speed tables were talking about using the entire height of the 18 mm a modified “Silent Cine Aperture”. We don’t know what the high-speed capabilities will be until they are published for the S35 Helium Sensor, this is a new technology, for that we have to wait, but whatever they are that what we have to accept them.

When operating in a Red 8K35 Helium Sensor environment, we’re in a “Megapixels Rich Environment” that’s why we can cut off the edges for 2.39:1, shrink the horizontal for IMAX 1.48:1 or 1.91:1 “Pan & Scan” or do anything else that we want. It would probably look closer to 65 mm film rather than a 35 mm film territory. It’s an S35 Helium that records in the Raw format with a 5:1 compression ratio, so the files can be rendered in just about anything you want, including up to 4:4:4 at 16-bit dynamic range, at God only know what ISO.

The digital IMAX at 1.9:1 is so close to the 2:1 Aspect Ratio that I often see it on my Television, and can’t tell one from the other without going on the screen to measure it. That’s another advantage, you can elect to shoot at 2:1 that where the extra vertical height of 18 mm will come in handy. Those “Cooke Anamorphic Prime /i Lens Technology” will defiantly help on the horizontal, with its virtual extension of 2X beyond the “Silent Cine Aperture”.

Humberto Rivera

 

[David Mullen ASC]

David,

My preference would be to keep the sensor width the same at 8192 across, BUT regardless of aspect ratio, increase the height to around 18mm... Doing some quick math, 18mm tall gives a vertical resolution of 4,932

That's pretty damn close to 5K spec, so I'd then just recommend going for a 5120 vertical yielding a sensor height of 18.688mm.

Cleave out your 1.2:1 aspect ratio for your 6Kx5K Anamophic mode and crop vertically for all of the rest of the spherical modes.

That's my Win-Win dream right there!

You bring up a good point, which is that even though the increase to 18mm would make the total pixel count larger, most people aren't going to record the full aperture anyway, they'd either record 6:5 (1.20 : 1) for 2X anamorphic 2.40, cropping the sides, or record some widescreen shape using spherical lenses from 1.78 to 2.40, cropping top & bottom.

 

[Humberto Rivera]

Mark Toia with prototype for S 35 Helium Camera!

Humberto Rivera

 

[Steven Abrams]

I would assume that it's the total amount of data coming off of the sensor that affects the processing capabilities.

6k FF / 6144 x 3160 / 19.42MP = 82.806 fps

6K WS / 6144 x 2592 / 15.93MP = 100.67 fps

6K HD / 5568 x 3132 / 17.44MP = 83.331 fps

It's not always total amount of data affecting max fps. Some sensors allow vertical ROI, horizontal ROI, or both. It's most common for just vertical ROI and to do horizontal as off-chip processing and based on the numbers you posted from Red this seems the case here. Otherwise based on your example 6K HD would be getting more like 90+fps. Do it just based on the rows (vertical resolution) and it matches the numbers closer. So it's row read-out speed of the sensor that will define the max fps, and then from there processing restrictions. As an aside, some sensors will read-out multiple rows simultaneously to achieve a higher speed, which can affect the appearance of the rolling shutter subtlety since multiple rows happen at once before the next set.

 

[Humberto Rivera]

The New FD Times came out today Saturday, July 30, 2016, it’s full of all kinds of stuff from the International Space Station, whether IMAX shooting with a Canon C 500 using ARRI/ZEISS 12 mm T1.3 Master Prime for the C500. But weather were talking about 4K or whatever all those Megapixel’s seem rather small compare to the gargantuan amount of “Megapixels” which makes the S35 Helium Camera a “Megapixels Rich Environment”” at 3.65 u within the S35 Helium Sensor. So I hope the next incarnation of the S35 Helium is 18 mm in the vertical. It will “kick-ass” to anything out there. And those “Cooke Anamorphic Prime /i Lens Technology” will shine.

Humberto Rivera

http://www.fdtimes.com/pdfs/subscriber/76FDTimes-3.05s-150.pdf

 

[Humberto Rivera]

I don’t know, and I’m NOT SURE, but if I had to guess on the photo below, we’re in Mark Toia’s office. That package sitting on one of his chairs is the Red S35 Helium Sensor Camera he just received from the United States. Just a guess!

Humberto Rivera

 

[Humberto Rivera]

Here are a couple of post from Mark Toia’s S35 Helium camera, what a difference they are; from his Facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/mark.toia?fref=ts

Humberto Rivera

 

[Humberto Rivera]

IBC will have a surprise, here is the “Press Release” for “Cooke Anamorphic Zoom /i Lens Technology” the Cooke T 3.1 - 35-140 Anamorphic Zooms for presentation IBC 2016 latter in September of this year. However it’s possible to be able to view the new telephoto with the Cooke T 4.5 - 45-405mm Anamorphic/i zoom with 9x zoom ratio (shipping 2017). Two zoom lenses for outdoors or indoors without a question! The zoom lenses matched the Prime Lenses very well.

http://www.cookeoptics.com/u/news.html?Open&v=99&c=1&y=99&d=5BC22F7C367E673685257FF0005EBF60

If we can keep the “Aspect Ratio” of the S35 Helium Sensor at a vertical of 18 mm and let the horizontal that go beyond 24 mm to wherever its end up at, in my opinion Red will have a WINNER. “It features T3.1-22 aperture and anamorphic oval bokeh, and the colour and depth of field characteristics are matched to the existing Anamorphic/i primes”. Cooke

“Cooke “The Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i zoom is a true, front anamorphic with oval bokeh throughout zoom and focus with patented optical zoom. The new lens benefits from a unique combination of attributes allowing shooting from very wide angle to telephoto with a 4x zoom ratio and 2x Anamorphic squeeze. It features T3.1-22 aperture and anamorphic oval bokeh, and the colour and depth of field characteristics are matched to the existing Anamorphic/i primes.” Cooke.

As we also know there is T 4.5 - 45-405 Anamorphic Zoom looming in the wings, so the Cooke expansion continues and nobody know where they will STOP.” All at an Image Circle is ø 33.50, what a delight, and an opportunity for Red.

I was reading how I keep on going about Cooke, I just want to say; “I don’t work for them”, but thought is; their Image Circle is ø 33.50 mm. Then we got a “sweet spot” with a Red S35 Helium Camera IF it has a vertical of 18 mm, that’s the “answered to maximum coverage” with the Red S35 Helium Camera with existing lenses, it’s a no brainer to me.

In addition to adding 2X to the virtual image across the horizontal, on top of the S35 Helium Camera, well who will complain about that? That would be a “God-Send” to the “Rental House” that already bought Cooke Anamorphic Lenses or who are about to do-so, or anybody else who is interested in the lenses; I would predict they will buy a bunch of “Red S35 Helium Cameras”, and therefore Red would have a new business model to add to its highly successful line of Camera, it so simple that it begs the question; WHY NOT? This is Humberto Rivera, “thinking out loud” for whatever it’s worth. And don’t forget all the other Master Primes out there, and the lenses by Leica and others.

Humberto Rivera

 

[Jens Jakob Thorsen]

THIS!

David,

My preference would be to keep the sensor width the same at 8192 across, BUT regardless of aspect ratio, increase the height to around 18mm... Doing some quick math, 18mm tall gives a vertical resolution of 4,932

That's pretty damn close to 5K spec, so I'd then just recommend going for a 5120 vertical yielding a sensor height of 18.688mm.

Cleave out your 1.2:1 aspect ratio for your 6Kx5K Anamophic mode and crop vertically for all of the rest of the spherical modes.

That's my Win-Win dream right there!

 

[Humberto Rivera]

Let’s go for two manufactures’ going for a 4:3 Aspect Ratio, Arri of course with it limited Sensor Technology is already in place, and the “News 35 Helium Camera Sensor” with double the resolution (or 4X more) can be the other one (not there yet), the differences in Look could be enhanced by the “Cooke Look” Here are a few words between Jon Fauer and Les Zellan from Cooke.

”What was it that convinced you that it was time to do build anamorphic?

LES ZELLAN: Digital. The anamorphic market was prestigious, but it was basically Hollywood, London, New York, Paris, and India, except India wanted anamorphic lenses for nothing. Panavision more or less owned that business, and then Hawk gained a lot of market share, and the rest of the field was using older or modified designs.

But predominantly, if you were going do a major film, you were going to use Panavision or Hawk.

If you’re really want to make money doing anamorphic work, you’ve got to get the Panavision type big budget features, and so you can’t do that with one set of lenses. You can’t do that with two. You’re going to need at least 3 to 5 sets of lenses--and probably at least 5--to take on a large 9-figure movie. So before you start buying anamorphic viewfinders for your film cameras, we assumed that an anamorphic S4 would cost twice as much as a regular S4, so around $35,000.

And let’s you have 6 lenses in a set, that’s around a quarter of a million dollars for one set. Multiply that by 5 sets, it’s over a million dollars in glass, and you haven’t even started to buy anamorphic finders or ground-glasses for your cameras yet. You still want to play? And I lost people pretty much right there.

Then digital happened. And digital anamorphic became much easier to do. You just flipped the switch of the Electronic Viewfinder, and you’re unsqueezing anamorphic. That was a big plus.

And then, going back to my usual mantra that when digital was born, it became almost immediately obvious that digital looked inherently boring, and people immediately started looking for the old speed Panchros and other vintage lenses, as you’ve heard me say too many times before.

So all of a sudden, from a worldwide market of 200 or 300 Rental Houses where maybe only a dozen of them were serious about anamorphics in the film days, we’ve now gone to 10s of thousands of new digital cameras and users who are hungry for digital personality. So the market has gone from maybe tens of sets to hundreds of sets.

And maybe even more. Are more companies building 4:3 sensor cameras?

LES ZELLAN: We certainly hope that other manufacturers will embrace a 4:3 aspect ratio or larger sensors. We’re talking to any camera manufacturer who will listen that they should jump on board with 4:3 sensors instead of 16:9. But I think the driving force is still to get interesting images. The real driving force is character and personality.” Cooke Lenses

I just want to say that someone like “Cooke” has taken the last few years and it’s about to complete their sets of Cooke Anamorphic Prime and Zoom lenses importing it “Cooke Look” with an Image Circle is ø 33.50 mm, it’s lobbing Camera Company’s, at the moment only Arri has listen, I’m sure they are at Red they got to be looking at this seriously, it’s a NO BRAINER, no more Arri over Red at Camera Rentals Companies, just because of the 4:3 Aspect Ratio. Think “outside the box”, 18 mm is the vertical to shoot for, S 35 Helium with its 4X the size of an Arri, and their Image Circle is ø 33.50 at a 3.65 ur, it grows exponentially! Hopefully as we write this down, THE CONVERSATION IS GOING ON! That’s a “Win-Win” situation!

Humberto Rivera