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...

Häakon said:
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.
Click to expand...


I absolutely agree. +1
 
Eric Strunz said:
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.
Click to expand...

The definition of "pro" will always slide back and forth by people who want to be included (or excluded) by the spread and who are relying on usually emotional reasons of self-worth. When you use the word "belittle", that seems to suggest you have an emotional investment in how you are viewed.

Arguing where the line exists could be seen as semantic, but it is not semantic for RED to decide that they don't have a desire to be everything for everyone.

They are running a business, designing and manufacturing a camera and need to make choices that are both business based and include philosophical based decisions.

eHDR is a tipping point for the RED team at this moment, and I think that's fair enough and philosophically I think it's an important choice with which I agree. I do not think the choice has anything to do with belittling you personally; no-one can do that to you, only yourself.

Personally the more I learn the more I realise I have no idea what I'm doing and gladly embrace the thought of nincompoop amateur.
 
Heh heh... relax guys. Using the term "pro" and "not" has nothing to do with the person. It only has to do with the equipment.

If you have a camera that is fully automatic, it is hard to qualify that as a "pro" tool... even if professionals use them and get great images from them. It is only that an "auto-only" device does not allow for a trained person to over-ride it when the creative opportunity arises.

eHDR (currently) doesn't allow for any over-rides or manipulation by the operator. What you select is what you get. That means it isn't a "pro" tool, by my definition. It doesn't mean there isn't value to the tool.

We have some ideas we are working on that may actually be better options. If everyone can relax a bit, it will hurt less.

Jim
 
Fan of easyHDR here too, if you can get it to work. If I have to mess around and do a lot of post processing/rendering (HDRx) then it would be something I would only use occasionally for specific shots. I think many were hoping for be a simple, easy way to extend your DR 'out of the box' for when they shot outside against the sky or want to retain highlight detail in windows etc with the touch of a button.

So if you can do it , please do, I'm sure Im not the only one who wants hassle free HDR. If you don't like the look you can crush it out surely? Dont get why people say it's less pro (unless Magic Motion is actually causing problems for many situations)
 
Ivan McCullough said:
Good to know, thanks.

I was responding to a reply by a senior member, I thought it was unlikely and said so.
Click to expand...

Hi Ivan,

I didn't say HDRx wouldn't support 25fps on an EPIC-S. ;-)
I said that the EPIC-S will support about half the data rate of an EPIC-X.

The EPIC-X can shoot HDRx 5K at 48fps (or 60fps at 2.35:1).
The EPIC-S will have half of these frame rates.

So, you could shoot up to 5K HDRx at 30fps (2.35:1) on the EPIC-S.
 
Stefan Antonescu said:
Hi Ivan,

I didn't say HDRx™ wouldn't support 25fps on an EPIC-S. ;-)
I said that the EPIC-S will support about half the data rate of an EPIC-X.

The EPIC-X can shoot HDRx™ 5K at 48fps (or 60fps at 2.35:1).
The EPIC-S will have half of these frame rates.

So, you could shoot up to 5K HDRx™ at 30fps (2.35:1) on the EPIC-S.
Click to expand...

I understand that Stefan, but I think you mean 4.5k at 30fps, anyway Jim has cleared it up and 5k HDRx at 25fps (full sensor) is in the spec. This means the specs are a little above 1/2 of what the x/m can do.
 
I'm planning to buy an Epic-S and I would have a lot of use for eHDR going straight to the 1080p RGB output. Not everything is for cinema output. I'm assuming this option is on hold because it's proving hard to implement in time, not because it offends some kind of 'professional' ego.
 
Jim, since HDRx is going to be there regardless of eHDR, why not offer something like the H264 module that takes the HDRx material and outputs an eHDR image of sorts where using an SD card (or other loading mechanism) you can apply the settings used in Storm like a preset and saves in H264 or whatever.

Yeah, I know in theory it sounds all good and fine and probably the coding guys will want to come over and smack me in the back of the head but hey!
:emote_whack:
 
Häakon said:
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.
Click to expand...

Agree with Haakon. On the other hand, Jim is seeing it, we are not. These are new technologies and will undoubtedly take some sorting out.

On the other, other hand - shooting in thin Colorado air and bright sunny days - I believe that I will make a lot more use of HDRx than Jim says we will. That shot he took at RED Ranch is kind of a way of life here - very typical of the degree of latitude we could use every day.
 
Lee Saxon said:
Extremely smart move. eHDR™ was pointless. Bake nothing in.
Click to expand...

Numerous jobs will groan under twice the data processing requirement, for many it will be an issue.
As I understand it easy HDR would have been recorded to a single file?


The mantra of "bake nothing in" ignores the facts that we bake in focus and exposure, not to mention lighting and framing:)




Mike Brennan
 
yes but we all want control so having as little baked in as possible is quite desirable, not to all though. I hate using point and shot camera's for exactly this lack of manual controls.
 
eHDR may find more use with scarlet users. I'd be interested in using it when I simply want highlight protection and don't want twice the data; more for corporate video where I don't need the feature capability of HDRx, I just want to easily improve the lighting situation.

For cinematic, I'd mostly use HDRx on scarlet or epic.

Putting eHDR on hold for now while you develop other things, then coming back to it is fine by me, especially since scarlet isn't out yet.

Cory
 
OK... last post on this. The title of the thread is "eHDR is on HOLD". I didn't say it is off the table or "killed". We have some ideas to get the best of both worlds. eHDR is not the "pro" part of RED HDR so it is easy to say that HDRx, with all it's post tools, will come with the camera. Please allow us to do our job. We truly have your best interests in mind.

Jim
 
From what we've seen so far, yes, it certainly looks that way. From the little I've seen it looks the most pleasing motion I've ever seen - gorgeous. Who knows, once we get our hands on this stuff, perhaps we will find it's shortcomings.
 
Mark Pugh said:
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).
Click to expand...

I think you will find the answer is no. I asked a similar question about EPIC going to 125 fps instead of 120fps which would be great for all the 25fps people but the answer was no, and he didn't seem to happy about me asking. But i must agree, 50fps instead of 48fps with HDRX is a MASSIVE plus for everyone in PAL land which is where i think all the posts were leading. It can be gotten with the frame size or redcode one would imagine, but it would have been a great thing. But heh...i guess the answer is to look at the rest of the package:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top