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 :)

Epic At 2K

Perry Wilson said:
P.S. the Adidas commercial is soft
Click to expand...

yes perry - it's on YouTube at 360p or 480p. I wasn't the focus puller, or the person who posted to YouTube so you aren't breaking my heart.

Does that mean that it's not entertaining, interesting, refreshing, different OR that Adidas didn't spend a bunch of money paying people to have it made- me being one of them?

My argument would be that you could technically do the same thing with the footage shot at 120fps at 5k+Twixtor or 60fps on a GH2 with the same lighting and sets. It might even look sharper for those 300fps moments, but if it originated at 1280x720@60 you would still have less starting resolution.

But you know what? They chose epic, they finished the commercial, and we all got paid.

They were going to rent a Phantom - but they decided not to.

Not only did I acknowledge that 2048x854 is "soft" I explained why it appears "soft" and even some workflow possibilities to make it appear "Less Soft"

I posted a "real world" example of a "real commercial" that utilized this extra feature of the Epic early on.
If you read the release notes and do hands on testing you will see that the 300fps has improved over the builds.

So, I'm not sure what is delusional about that. And as I said before I can be somewhat of an Internet dick. Do I need to quote "Team America - World Police" to remind everyone of what Dicks sometimes do?
 
Last edited:
Josh Snyder said:
Huh? Because reality has no place in your day dreams? Should I lie and say that 2K on EPIC is sharper and more detailed than any consumer 1080p camera? Would you be happy then?

Here is second opinion from Bloom:



You might want to inform him that you would like to get him banned too.
Click to expand...

I have no interest in adding fuel to this fire, but Bloom's Epic had a problem that required a trip back to Red to fix. Blocky is not at all what Epic 2k widescreen footage looks like. Soft is a very different thing.

Yes, it is soft at HD size if shot in 2k WS.
Yes, it is useable in the right circumstances.
No, it is not "blocky."
 
Dan Kanes said:
Let me give some Hard hitting truth here myself - the "2k" 2.40:1 aspect ratio on epic isn't really 2k. Its actually more like 2048 x 854.

Since a lot of the time we are measuring by the vertical resolution (as well as horizontal) this would be the equivalent of somewhere in between 720p and 1080p.
Click to expand...
Video resolutions are measured by the number of vertical pixels. Digital cinema resolutions are measured by the number of horizontal pixels (and the aspect ratio determines the number of vertical). A 2.40:1 frame with 2048 pixels in width is very much 2K.

Dan Kanes said:
Just to clarify:

We are in a subforum Called Epic - so any kind of _Speculative_ Article by Philip Bloom about Scarlet doesn't belong in here as a point of meaningful, factual, grounded in the Real World, hands-on, scientific or otherwise reference.
Click to expand...
It has been stated many times by the people at RED (including Jim's mouth directly at the Scarlet event) that the sensor in Scarlet is the same as the one in Epic; it's the ASIC and some of the board components that are different and those parts simply limit the camera's ability to capture and process images at a very high frame rate. We should expect Scarlet images to look identical to Epic images at the same resolution if all other things are equal (lenses, filters, framerate, etc.). They have stated this much as well.
 
I do find it a little weird that RED's mantra is "only 4K is good enough" and Scarlet was bumped up to 4K spec to keep it professional and in line with that train of thought (a very good thing, imo), but then they turn around and make silly crop modes like 2K (the Scarlet even has 1K, doesn't it??) just so they can eek out a few more framerate options with the camera. Besides the fact that the lens cropping is so severe at those low resolutions that you need a really wide lens just to get a useable frame, the images are absolutely reduced in quality. I would very much agree with the original poster that 2K is soft, the noise is much more apparent, and obviously resolution suffers quite a bit. The solution for this is simple: stop shooting 2K. With Epic we can get 120fps (!) all the way at 5K (!), which for the vast majority of projects is more overcranking than you will ever need. For the times when you need crazy, bullet-stopping motion, I would rent a solution that is made specifically for that purpose. Obviously we all have our own threshold limits as to what we deem "acceptable" (I don't care to even shoot 3K, myself), but if you just pretend the 2K mode doesn't exist then suddenly all of these problems go away.
 
... even at 5k, and high framerates/ compression, shooting at a lower ISO will help a lot.

The 16mm lens suggestion for 2k also is a good suggestion, though it doesn't fit into everyone's real- life scenario.
 
Well I'm assuming the 4K good enough argument is because of modes like 2K etc. are supposedly soft,

Soft isn't always bad, everything has its time and place in terms of looks, better to start sharp though and go soft since from soft to go sharp I'm sure is a lot harder but a natural soft look is probably also difficult to come by?

the 300fps and all you get a 2K is rather nice but it's not something people are going to use 24/7 I think, which is why its also a selective kind of thing, rather you'd go 5K 120fps (which i believe I remember being said is more like 4.6K or something?)

Twixtor (if you REALLY want to keep some sharpness but increase FPS) then down to 4K/2K out...depending, maybe even 1080p...

All this arguing gets tiring so lets agree to disagree, tests are great, they help you strengthen your argument but in this case, there are people that say 2K is too soft and others that its soft and some say its ok. Just like the whole 3 little bears and the porridge.

I'm sure Dragon would hopefully mean that you can get beyond the regular 120 on 5K, perhaps 200-250fps? Though the more important factor here is that it'll jump up to 6K, hopefully meaning your 2K is sharper then it was before, not sure by how much....

Though I do wonder if firmware upgrades could help enable the sensor to be sharper in the 2K crop?

Long story short, 2K for some is good others too soft. Shoot at 5K, then downrez at the end of your post process if you want sharper then what you would get shooting at 2K...

I'd find shooting at anything lower than 4K only for selective artistic reasons... (but thats me personally, ever will differ)
 
Neither EPIC nor Scarlet does in camera sharpening. Actually... neither does the RED ONE. All consumer or prosumer grade video cameras do add in camera sharpening.

Take a frame grab from 2K and import into an app that does unsharp mask. Add some. And then compare to what comes out of the consumer/prosumer cameras.

RED makes professional cameras. We let you take RAW footage and grade it. Consumer/prosumer cameras "help" you in camera.

BTW... we don't like sharpening. That's why we prefer high resolution capture... so you don't have to add it.

Jim
 
Jannard said:
Neither EPIC nor Scarlet does in camera sharpening. Actually... neither does the RED ONE. All consumer or prosumer grade video cameras do add in camera sharpening.

Take a frame grab from 2K and import into an app that does unsharp mask. Add some. And then compare to what comes out of the consumer/prosumer cameras.

RED makes professional cameras. We let you take RAW footage and grade it. Consumer/prosumer cameras "help" you in camera.

BTW... we don't like sharpening. That's why we prefer high resolution capture... so you don't have to add it.

Jim
Click to expand...


For good composites and advanced S-3d work and algorithms it’s really important to leave the image alone and keep the essential spatial and tonal “data” as pure as possible. Compression as it is presents enough problems in that regard. I am really happy that RED respects the NEEDS of professionals. If people really knew what the “pure” image un tweaked and unsharpened and not chromatically pushed or contrast boosted etc. (from other “off the shelf products”), they would be absolutely shocked as to what the ACTUAL “data” looks like. It’s an endless frustration (of mine) to normally have to deal with so called “off the shelf” products as so many assumption have been made that are almost hard wired into a system that it is not possible to bypass these “data corrupting” elements. At least to a large degree RED has the maturity to have a more hands off approach, that way one can really get to the value and core of “RAW”.

Cheers,

Eric
 
Häakon said:
I do find it a little weird that RED's mantra is "only 4K is good enough" and Scarlet was bumped up to 4K spec to keep it professional and in line with that train of thought (a very good thing, imo), but then they turn around and make silly crop modes like 2K (the Scarlet even has 1K, doesn't it??) just so they can eek out a few more framerate options with the camera. Besides the fact that the lens cropping is so severe at those low resolutions that you need a really wide lens just to get a useable frame, the images are absolutely reduced in quality. I would very much agree with the original poster that 2K is soft, the noise is much more apparent, and obviously resolution suffers quite a bit. The solution for this is simple: stop shooting 2K. With Epic we can get 120fps (!) all the way at 5K (!), which for the vast majority of projects is more overcranking than you will ever need. For the times when you need crazy, bullet-stopping motion, I would rent a solution that is made specifically for that purpose. Obviously we all have our own threshold limits as to what we deem "acceptable" (I don't care to even shoot 3K, myself), but if you just pretend the 2K mode doesn't exist then suddenly all of these problems go away.
Click to expand...

There are lots of reasons why having smaller crops with higher framerates is useful. Including them is not wierd or contradictory.
 
The other thing I would say is that it IS useful that people report things that are NOT going as expected. One of the main planks of science is that someone else can repeat the results anywhere and at any time (pretty much). So when I read something like OP’s “report” I file it away in my mind as potentially important or useful information. I have hunch as to the combination of elements that might or could be causing such an effect (that has not been mentioned). BUT until I have equipment in hand and are able to test relevant things under “laboratory” conditions I will keep my mouth firmly shut. If in a broader sense that an issue has been systematically identified, then other REDUSER’s can replicate the results. That in my mind is one of the collective strengths of REDUSER is the ability to collectively draw on each other’s principal strengths, and collectively solve the problems one by one.

Cheers,

Eric
 
I see it this way.

The EPIC is a 5k camera for 4k, 2k, 1080p finish (keep going all the way to 240p on YouTube if you want)

With 5k being the principle acquisition and offering up to 96 fps (amazing at 5k) the I would need a very compelling reason to go below 3k for offspeed shots (assuming I have to blow those shots up for a 4k finish or reconform down the road).

For these reasons I stay away from the 2k windowed modes. The Descision is based on possibly needing to finish at 4k one day. 300fps is a tempting offering but I'd take less fps and higher resolution I a second.

As for putting on a b4 adapter and always shooting 2k on an EPIC.

Sure, send me that Ferrari but make sure it can never come out of first gear. Maybe ducati will release a three wheeled motorcycle. Maybe Rolex will come out with a Swatch.

My point. Just get some super35 mm glass and shoot 4k at 150. Your girlfriends hairdo and brothers garden hose shots will look just as good. :)

David
 
Jannard said:
BTW... we don't like sharpening. That's why we prefer high resolution capture... so you don't have to add it.

Jim
Click to expand...

Thanks a million for this! Love it!
 
OK kids... enough. Or both of you will get a timeout.

Jim
 
OK, to the science:

Which produces better 1080 delivered results at 120fps?
5K @ RC13:1
3K @ RC6:1

Would love to see extensive compression testing in a lab environment running from 3:1 to 15:1 to make better decisions. Anyone know if this exists somewhere?
 
2k for me would be a good general utility video format for work that would otherwise be done with a small chip HD camera or typically finished in SD. Quality seems to be more than adequate for that application, comparable to or better than most sub $10k prosumer level HD cameras, certainly better than what comes out of most DSLR's.
 
Oy. Vey.
Sorry that I started such a fuss, Mr. Jannard. I was actually seeking useful information and am sorry to see the thread devolve.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Deanan said:
There are lots of reasons why having smaller crops with higher framerates is useful. Including them is not wierd or contradictory.
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree. :) You guys do so much I am grateful for that it's not worth getting into. Besides, we have truly pristine 5K in addition to the cropped modes so there's the power of choice for those who want it. I just think it's important to understand the limits of 2K should one choose to use it, and not pick it apart too much. It is what it is.

You're one of my favorites at RED, Deanan... don't take the critique personally. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top