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 custom sensor crop (ROI) with faster framerate ?

D

Daniel Crooks

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
Points
0
the recently announced EPIC frame rates prompted me to post a feature request I've been meaning to put up for ages.

Please RED could we have an option for custom sensor cropping with higher framerates... just putting it out there.

I have no idea what the physical limitations of the sensor and/or datarates are but I did some super chunky pixels/sec maths on the stated EPIC frame rates and it would seem to me that something like 5120x100 @ 360fps would be well under the pix/sec of the 720p crop (let alone the 5K @ 120fps).

I do a lot of work in a kind of slit-scan area and I would really REALLY REALLY love to able to record 5K x 256px high @ 360fps or over !!!!
perhaps just one extreme aspect like 5K 50:1 , or 5K 25:1... that would be so good.

maybe not possible, and almost definitely not on the priority list... but I have to ask right?!

cheers../daniel
 
I'm with you Daniel...
Just to share an example: my current timeline is 5760 x 412px...
 
I truly need 120 fps but I don't really need such hi resolution yet, at least 1920x1080 120 fps for the EPIC-S please?
 
enrique blein said:
I truly need 120 fps but I don't really need such hi resolution yet, at least 1920x1080 120 fps for the EPIC-S please?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure 2k at 120fps was mentioned in the most recent specs.
 
enrique, you're kinda missing the point of the request. R1 already does 2K @120 !

I'm hoping there is a way RED can slip in an extra 5K aspect ratio that uses the full width of the sensor but reduces the height to a point which allows for the highest frame rate possible.

I'm sure there is some technical limitation that I am unaware of with the way the sensor is read but it does at least seem plausible to me.

?
 
There was talk, a good long while ago (roughly when the first Epic specs were released, I think) of completely user-selectable record areas. Whether or not this would translate into higher framerates at those odd resolutions, or indeed if that's still part of the plan at all, I couldn't say.

What I can tell you is that the limitation on the R1 (and I would presume also the Epic-M/X) as regards framerates is not pix/sec but vertical scanlines (or in other words, sensor read/reset times). I assume that at some point pix/sec will come into the equation, but if you could set a user area to 5120x256, you could well be looking at greater speeds than the 1280x720 max of 360fps.

Very interesting question, I wonder if this will be possible down the line once more and more advanced firmware becomes available for the Epics...
 
hey Dominic, I too seem to recall something about user-selectable areas but I did a quick search and couldn't find anything.

and very interesting about the vertical scanlines, that bodes even better !

I wonder what the absolute fastest framerate possible would be ? I'd be pretty happy with even a single line if it could go over 360fps.
I actually bought a BetterLight large format scanning back last year for exactly this reason... the RGB sequencing made it unworkable thou (and it could only do 120fps!)
 
A friend of a friend, a good few years ago, did some amazing work with modified scanners at the RCA (Royal College of Art). His name was Mike Golembewski - I'll try and track down his work, you might be interested...

Interested to see what you're up to too - sounds cool!

Ah, here you go:
http://golembewski.awardspace.com/index.html
 
Why would Red take the time to develop the ability to record a 5120 x 100 pixel image at 360 fps (a 51.2 : 1 aspect ratio) for the two or three people on the planet that might use it? I would think this would be a rather low priority for them. Any recorded aspect ratio that is wider than 2.40 : 1 falls under a rare, special use application. The most extreme example I guess would be to record two 2.40 images side by side for some sort of twin-lens 3D rig, so a 4.80 : 1 aspect ratio, and even that seems a bit far-fetched. But the number of projects that need a 51 : 1 aspect ratio... well, I can't think of one example. What use is a 5K horizontal resolution when it creates unusable aspect ratios like 51 : 1? You just end up cropping the sides way, way down anyway.
 
David, do a quick search for slit-scan.

"... well, I can't think of one example"

I remember being on a photography list a few years ago and having people say the same thing about video on DSLRs...

and even longer ago being on the Max list and people asking why anyone would want to control video using music software...

it's called Convergence, which I think Mr Jannard is actually rather keen on...
 
While I agree with David Mullen as usual... the frame rate capability is determined by the height of the format. So what you are asking for is possible. However, as David suggests, we have a long list of features to be enabled before we would consider such a request. It would be low on our list.

I do think that, given enough time, we can enable just about anything possible with the EPIC specs... we just need to understand the value of getting it on to the list. A 50+:1 ratio seems like a VERY limited application.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Jannard said:
While I agree with David Mullen as usual... the frame rate capability is determined by the height of the format. So what you are asking for is possible. However, as David suggests, we have a long list of features to be enabled before we would consider such a request. It would be low on our list.

I do think that, given enough time, we can enable just about anything possible with the EPIC specs... we just need to understand the value of getting it on to the list. A 50+:1 ratio seems like a VERY limited application.

Jim
Click to expand...

What would be the maximal ratio you would consider useful, and what would be the maximal frame rate with such a ratio?
 
Jim, really appreciate the response.

I realise the request is a long way from the priority list but I'm heartened to hear you at least entertaining the remote possibility.

it is a very limited application... but so was the chronophotograph before it begat cinema.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Why would Red take the time to develop the ability to record a 5120 x 100 pixel image at 360 fps (a 51.2 : 1 aspect ratio) for the two or three people on the planet that might use it? I would think this would be a rather low priority for them. Any recorded aspect ratio that is wider than 2.40 : 1 falls under a rare, special use application. The most extreme example I guess would be to record two 2.40 images side by side for some sort of twin-lens 3D rig, so a 4.80 : 1 aspect ratio, and even that seems a bit far-fetched. But the number of projects that need a 51 : 1 aspect ratio... well, I can't think of one example. What use is a 5K horizontal resolution when it creates unusable aspect ratios like 51 : 1? You just end up cropping the sides way, way down anyway.
Click to expand...

Haha, I agree, that is truly a weird request. I just finished a 2-12 x splitscreen commercial, but that was all vertical ;-)
 
I also don't think slit-scan photography involves actually recording a final image that is a slit. You shoot a subject or piece of artwork through a slit while moving either the slit, camera, or artwork to create an image that stretches across part or all of the film frame. Nor does slit-scan involve shooting at 360 fps as far as I know, just thinking of what Trumbull did on "2001". See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slit-scan

Usually slit-scan involves very long shutter times, which is completely the opposite of high frame rate photography.

So I'm still waiting for an example of needing to record a 50:1 image at 360 fps... but since you say you actually do slit-scan work, Daniel, I assume you must have a way of using such a recorded image.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how much I'd use it, but a user definable ratio would be a nice option. I guess you could do some of those cool projections in true slow motion across a whole bunch of buildings... that would be sweet? Say you want a shot looking out of a tank or some goggles, and there's going to be an overlay in any case, you could squeeze a little bit more out of the image/framerates. Or say your output is internet quality, and you want the ability to do a super long digital pan, animation layout style, across a frame taken off a tripod, and it follows something across in slow motion... I could rationalize using something like that for a visual effects shot, if available. You could integrate some cg slow-motion creature into a slow-motion element, and have a little give, even for a 4k output if the element is out of focus slightly, as it very well could be for a shot like that.

So... those are my thoughts on limited uses of that. Couldn't hurt to have that option if it's not too much trouble. Won't hurt too much without it either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top