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, DR, HDR and stuff...

Jamie Metzger said:
Please make an indestructible camera...4K resolution has proved to be useful to very few, while 1080P Pro Res seems to be king right now.

We want a solid camera, not more resolution at this point.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with having both, indestructibility and high resolution??
 
Bill Anderson said:
Uhm, I'm not detecting irony, or sarcasm, or even humor: you are joking, right?
Click to expand...

You will be amazed how many experienced and popular DPs would agree with him. Minus the "ProRes is king part". It is a mediocre codec, at best. But what I am saying, things like "4K", "16 bit" just confuse people used to 35mm. They just want to frame and light their shots, and judge the camera based off how it looks on the big screen. Which 2K does just fine, seeing as how it out-resolves most 35mm projection prints and 2K is the general digital projection standard today. Today being the keyword.

Unfortunately, thanks to film, resolution has stagnated for a century. A “good enough” barrier has been created at about 2K. Only with digital in the early 2010s are we breaking the tipping point. To convince them that 4K and beyond is the future, the only thing that will work is either showing them the difference between 2K and 4K on a 4K projector or more effectively, buying a time machine. Once we move to 8K (and we will sooner than you imagine) the difference between 1080p and 4K footage will be quite significant indeed.
 
Subhadip Sen said:
...or buying a time machine...
Click to expand...

Lucky for you I have a time machine for sale! Unfortunately, it doesn't go back in time, only forward. However, you can go as far into the future as you'd like and I've made it quite fast now; I got it up to "real-time".:thumbsup:
 
Resolution has stagnated for a century?

Grain size has been constantly reduced, color rendition improved. A current Super 35mm neg has tons more resolution that a turn of the century print.

I also dislike your notion that DPs are getting confused by technical terms such as bit depth.
 
Martin Weiss said:
Resolution has stagnated for a century?

Grain size has been constantly reduced, color rendition improved. A current Super 35mm neg has tons more resolution that a turn of the century print.

I also dislike your notion that DPs are getting confused by technical terms such as bit depth.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I should have added "relatively". Certainly, the difference between the DVD and Blu-ray of M is quite significant. And that is 80 years old. That must mean it resolved to somewhere between 480p and 1080p. Possibly even more! Certainly close enough to today's 2K barrier.

Color and sensitivity has been vastly improved, I agree, but again, it has been a slow improvement over the decades. The digital age is exponentiating these advancements.

As for the DPs bit, I can only speak from personal experience. Maybe I am talking for a small minority. But a popular DP that comes to mind is Roger Deakins. To quote: "I get very confused and, frankly, irritated by all the pronouncements about 'K', bit depth, latitude etc.."
 
Subhadip Sen said:
... To convince them that 4K and beyond is the future, the only thing that will work is either showing them the difference between 2K and 4K on a 4K projector or more effectively, buying a time machine.
Click to expand...

The difference between 2K and 4K aquisition is really visible even in a 2K finished product.
 
Jamie Metzger said:
Please make an indestructible camera...4K resolution has proved to be useful to very few, while 1080P Pro Res seems to be king right now.

We want a solid camera, not more resolution at this point.
Click to expand...

ummmmm, i presume you mean ALEXA...and i heard the Prores side of things isn't enabled yet...correct me if i am wrong...

But in honesty the masses of resolution only plays a part of an overall equation for me. I solid camera with no bugs (even though i am a lucky one with a good R1), more functionality, better DR and much lighter without so many hanging on components to make her work.

Also, wasn't one of the specs that the DSMC system will record a full debayered 1080p if you don't want the full res...you just won't get the frame rates? So...this will be a huge benefit for a lot of people not needing 5K and starting, working and finishing in 1080! I don't use 4K and only 1080 most of the time so i can see myself shooting this the vast majority of time and saving a LOT of rendering time...and in RAW...AND i don't have to carry a $40K shoebox around with me to get it:)
Please Jim, don't lose this spec as i do feel the vast majority of your customers don't yet use 4K but definitly want it for all the reasons your touting...it's all about options and no-one can complain about having them.
 
Dhruv Govil said:
No we use 32 bit quite a bit for the beauty renders as well and whenever we can. Different pipelines = different rendering, but 32 bits come free of cost (other than harddrive space) and give you a lot more play.
Click to expand...

Doubling your compositing footage bandwidth and storage needs can pretty significantly reduce reduce performance.

How often do you need banding free +6.0 over brights? :D
 
Will the Scarlet S35 and 2/3rds have HDR mode as well?
 
Subhadip Sen said:
But a popular DP that comes to mind is Roger Deakins. To quote: "I get very confused and, frankly, irritated by all the pronouncements about 'K', bit depth, latitude etc.."
Click to expand...

But this is confusion on an extremely high level.

;-)

Jochen
 
David Rasberry said:
3k resolution I feel is about the maximum practical for a 16mm/2/3" sized sensor. At that resolution it is going to be limited more by optics than anything else. Super 16mm size at 12.75mm wide instead of 10.1 would be nice, but to make use of it your lens choices would be more expensive and more limited. It could however get us to a 4xHD resolution. at the same pixel size. 3840 x 2150
Click to expand...

This is a very good point. At current pixel sizes we will have quite a limited range of aperture sizes that will project 3k onto the 2/3" sensor.

Diffraction comes into play pretty quickly.
 
Martin Weiss said:
Seeing his quote in context helps: http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1440#p7201
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Like I said, there aren't really enough 4K displays that can show the potential of RED's image. In many cases, professionals will judge the image quality "by eye", and on a 2K projection on the big screen, 1080p footage will hold up well enough. Telling them "Oh, but it has 4K and 16-bit, thus future-proof". But that isn't enough. They will choose the image that looks better to them today. However, on 4K projectors, I am certain the RED's image will shine through.
 
Please, there was already a "good enough", long enough, boring enough, discussion in this forum were everyone expressed his/her opinions.

This thread should have nothing to do with that. Remember it's about: "EPIC, DR, HDR and stuff..."

Ok, some think 1080p is good enough. We are lucky that Jim and the RED TEAM doesn't feel like that. Keep it this way, please! The great majority ends with a 1080p finish, alright. But oversampling always gives you more detail. We all would be happy if they keep the EPIC specs of being able to record in a 1080p full-debayered (will make the post workflow faster and easier for a lot of people). But we don't need another "only 1080p" camera.

Thanks to everyone!
 
Jordi Figueras said:
The difference between 2K and 4K aquisition is really visible even in a 2K finished product.
Click to expand...

I'd be curious how you arrived at that conclusion.

RED's 2K capture looks nowhere near as good as its' 4K capture because the camera is not really getting 2K lines when in 2K mode. Another camera that's truly grabbing 2K lines at capture is going to look just as good in the finish. You also have to consider some downrezzing can mess up the image. HD guys have seen it happen when going to SD. A native SD camera could actually look better at the final resolution in cases where moire gets introduced when downrezzing. I usually shoot in 4KHD for that reason. It's a perfect downrez to 1080P - no weird scaling.

To me the real value of high resolution is the ability to crop. I suppose pulling still for printing purposes could be another really good argument.

Back to HDR... Interiors with very blown out exteriors are a daily problem. That's one place where big dynamic range would really, really help. And it's VERY common. I was in a really great mansion with windows everywhere recently. I didn't have the money and team to ND the whole place. VFX to replace the exteriors would be tough - though possible. And I couldn't bring the interior light levels up enough... big place and that would have been a huge lighting job. So I avoided windows in the background and waited for light levels to drop outside for the wides - which we had to shoot quickly.

It's clear to me that dynamic range is way more important than 6K or 8K for most situations. Now if 6K is required in order to have more dynamic range for some technical reason then fine. I think 4K or 5K is going to keep most of us going for a pretty long time.

I think it's reasonable to argue for more than 2K though - again, that ability to crop is a true benefit.
 
Joofa said:
I could be wrong but I think it's the producers who have the last word. Directors are given creative freedom, but that does not necessarily mean they own the film. Perhaps that is why you have these "Directors cuts" for one reason being if the "director's imagination" differed from the "producers vision".

Joofa
Click to expand...
You are right, even though we should separate economic from moral rights aka artist rights coming from what the americans don't even consider, known as common practice in accordance with the 'droit d'auteur' realm at least in Europe.

Yes, 'cause the movies are beyond a mere business, also as art form. Despite the american influence, more nowadays than ever before. Or perhaps not, with the current HDSLR revolution to be succeeded with upcoming tools such as Scarlet and so on, we foresee... US and Europe are still worlds apart as far as this industry/craft/art(s) concerns.

I was referring between DoP vs. Director (original discussion) and... (Part II) too much involved in the european way of making pictures :-)
 
Not sure what this all means... sometimes the DP decides, sometimes the director, sometimes it is someone else, sometimes a combination. It all depends. Long and short of it is that most of the time the correct decision is made for the movie at that time.

All we know is that we are working hard to give everyone a good option. It seems that the more work we do, the better the chances are that stuff will be shot on RED.

I can tell you that there is a ton of stuff currently being shot on RED and more in the works. We are not the only option, but we are certainly one of the considered options at the highest level. Good for us.

Jim
 
Martin Weiss said:
Seeing his quote in context helps: http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1440#p7201
Click to expand...

I just read that they are talking about an optical viewfinder for EPIC.

If RED is not interested to make one there are some other third party companies like a P+S Technik (that made 4K OVF for Dalsa Origin digital 4K cameras and are still making OVF for Aaton cameras).

I saw with EPIC is like this situation that you have to remove 4 screws to take off PL mount and then you are free to access OLPF/Sensor frame.

All that means is possible easy to attach or to accommodate already existing OVF designs for 4K digital or 35mm film cameras.

And of course it will cost more but if you have cinematographer or DP that want that it could be doable with EPIC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top