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 :)

EasyHDR on hold...

Jannard said:
For now, we are going to put eHDR™ on hold. As a reminder, eHDR™™ is the one that does all the processing for you in camera. You select a number (that represents stops of highlight protection) and the camera does the rest.
Click to expand...

Jim, if I were you, I would take a look at the IP this user was posting from
http://reduser.net/forum/member.php?u=37082
a.s.a.p. It was one of the last posts in the $100K thread. I mean bad English, the message, the registration info, the timing. It could be one of the guys everyone's looking for. Even if they don't have Internet subsrciptions this info could still be of great value. Didn't want to say this over at the adequate thread for obvious reasons. Sorry if this is too obvious of a thought.

Best of luck!
 
Mark Pugh said:
This is good news.
I think eHDR™ would result in a lot of tears, by being set to too high a dynamic range. When a grade is applied, you'd be effectively throwing away your bit depth, resulting in a much inferior image, and people would point a finger at the camera. I'd imagine compression artifacts would become more evident.
Click to expand...

I guess Easy HDR isn't so easy after all. Personally I would never use it. HDRx on the other hand I see as quite useful.
 
Martin Weiss said:
Will never happen.

But maybe this one:
badass.gif
Click to expand...

i immediatly tried to push the button ;)
anyway, so we also get a DR RAW kind of stuff...sounds like the future to me.
i think its
badass.gif
 
Jim I think every single professional would like to have HDRx but given M-X's abilities can live without.
On the other hand Easy HDR may just end up taking a lot of your development manpower to result in a gimmick no professional will use in real life.

One scenario where Easy HDR will be used is IF you are shooting in a remote location with just a laptop for backup where the client has no editing options AND you have limited storage space AND you need to upload directly to the internet or something equally mobile run & gun one-man-shoot

Which means it will most likely end up being used in the Scarlets with fixed lenses.

Now if you want to spend resources to develop such a feature (which will of course require onboard hardware to handle such a process) then I think you should have that as a selling point for Scarlet as potential Epic buyers will not bother much.

In my mind either RED or a third party can develop a module that reads both exposures from an HDRx shoot and outputs an HDRx'ed "preview" (in realtime?) using presets loaded from Storm or something. Which in effect gives you an eHDR of sorts.
 
Philipe Ratton said:
Never thought about using eHDR™™ anyway. It makes no sense at all.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that HDRx requires double the data rate, which cuts your record time in half, and assumingly adds a good deal of post time to the backend. You might not choose to use it, but to make a blanket statement that it "makes no sense at all" is a little silly, I think.

If money and time were never a factor... if we all had the luxury of multimillion dollar budgets every time we used the camera, if we all had Light Iron at our beck and call 24/7, if we all had 32-core machine render farms to blow through footage... then yes, I agree, there would be little point. But we're not all shooting Spider-man or the Hobbit. When fast turnaround is an issue and you just want the most range you can possibly get from your footage, I think there's still definitely a use for this.

Don't get me wrong... obviously flexibility matters and having the ability for fine control should be priority number one. But 5K HDRx RAW footage takes some pipes to deal with, and at least in the short term, being able to manage that efficiently is still part of the equation.
 
Joel Arvidsson said:
True it would save alot of "noise" in the threads!
Click to expand...

Sorry to continue the off-topic tangent, but this could be helpful: I have visited some other forums that have a "Thanked by" option with each post. I believe it is the same forum engine that runs Reduser so maybe the mods could look into it.

Here is a screen capture of a typical post that has been thanked:

Forum%20Idea%20capture.png


Just a thought.

Back to EasyHDR™™. I am all for putting this on hold. I am very hands on, and want to play with variables, which is why I love RAW.

Phil
 
Jannard said:
The overall flexibility of HDRx is just too seductive to ignore. It is like shooting RAW was a JPEG. One is infinitely flexible and one is "baked in". One is "pro" and one is not.
Click to expand...

It is not necessary to continue bandying "pro" or "professional" around as a semantic weapon. While I'm unable to personally compare eHDR and HDRx yet, I doubt the validity of claiming that one is "pro" and one is "not." I explored the meaning and etymology of "professional" in a previous thread, so I will not revisit the topic here.

RED is about to release the most technologically advanced motion picture acquisition device ever available to the public. You're preaching to the choir about EPIC being a professional tool. There's no need to belittle the choices of working professionals who operate in different environments with different needs.

If I shoot something with a baked-in codec for fast turnaround in ENG work, am I any less professional? If I decided to use eHDR to keep more control over my images with a producer poised to change my look in post, am I less professional?

I don't disagree with your underlying sentiments. I'm not sure when or even if I would ever use eHDR. However, the recent trend here suggests that if I ever dared to shoot anything less than high-speed 5k with HDRx, I would be shot on sight as an "amateur" or "prosumer." I'm confident that's not the message RED is trying to convey, but I'm also sure that others are interpreting the message in a similar fashion.

All I suggest is that we use caution when using a loaded term like professional, especially given the diversity of this forum's populace.
 
There was a single post by Jim a few months back where he mentions balancing issues of dynamic range and bit depth.

As I wrote in a post earlier in this thread, I have a feeling that Jim's issue with eHDR™™ is that shooting with it, by definition , you are probably going to create an image with a bit more latitude than you actually need, in a single stream with regular bit depth, then end up perceptively degrading the image when it comes to the grade by 'throwing away" some of the bits depth that has been recorded.
With HDRx™™, however, you're starting your grade with double usual info, and maybe peeling that back to a result where you are using all the bit depth of the 'normal' stream, and mixing in added info in the highlights. HDRx™ sounds far superior technically to me, and results would reflect positively on the Epic.
 
Ivan McCullough said:
If this is indeed the case that sucks.

I find it hard to believe that for the sake of 2fps everyone who shoots for PAL delivery cannot shoot HDRx™ on Epic-S
Click to expand...

I do not think anyone from RED has said NO to HDRx while shooting PAL on Epic-S. I'd wait for final specs before jumping to conclusions.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
I do not think anyone from RED has said NO to HDRx™ while shooting PAL on Epic-S. I'd wait for final specs before jumping to conclusions.
Click to expand...

Hi Mark,

Thats why I said I find it hard to believe :-)

Commiserations on your recent bad luck btw. I hope you get 00006 back. I know what being burgled and having your kit stolen feels like...
 
Ivan McCullough said:
If this is indeed the case that sucks.

I find it hard to believe that for the sake of 2fps everyone who shoots for PAL delivery cannot shoot HDRx™ on Epic-S
Click to expand...

What? Where are you reading this? If I haven't said it it is a guess.

25fps will be supported with HDRx in all cameras.

Jim
 
Jannard said:
What? Where are you reading this? If I haven't said it it is a guess.

25fps will be supported with HDRx™™ in all cameras.

Jim
Click to expand...

Good to know, thanks.

I was responding to a reply by a senior member, I thought it was unlikely and said so.
 
Jim, is there a chance that Epic will do 5k at 100fps, and 5k HDRx™ at 50? (or at least a full sensor - height 16:9 at those framerates, which is more to the point).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top