EPIC HDR...

[Terry VerHaar]

Truth of the matter is that NOTHING is truly linear in this industry...

Jim

I like that quote. Sort of poetic. Deep meanings... :thumbsup:

Certainly applies to getting from "here" to "there." :001_cool:

 

[Peter Majtan]

Truth of the matter is that NOTHING is truly linear in this industry...

Jim

Jim, I am sure if someone plotted a diagram showing on the X axis time and on the Y axis Your dedication ranging from MIN to MAX, it will be pretty linear...

:sifone: Peter

 

[Jannard]

Jim, I am sure if someone plotted a diagram showing on the X axis time and on the Y axis Your dedication ranging from MIN to MAX, it will be pretty linear...

:sifone: Peter

Terry got my "not so clever" post...

Jim

 

[Martin Stevens]

When I watch the Magic Easy HDRx Red footage Vegas sample I can't help but think that
perhaps our "persistence of vision" is the key to it looking so smooth
without the high shutter speed look we expect from it.

My compliments to the chefs.

 

[Robert Parent]

Nice picture under the chart.

Nice picture under the chart.

Here is a chart and a quick ungraded pic...

Jim

Is that Dunedin, Otago Pennisula, New Zealand?

 

[Axel Mertes]

HDRx in RED ONE M-X at 3K/60Hz=30Hz or 2K/120Hz=60Hz thinkable?

HDRx in RED ONE M-X at 3K/60Hz=30Hz or 2K/120Hz=60Hz thinkable?

Hi All,

I did a quick search on this and it didn't actually reveal any hits - maybe I've just overseen a statement on this...

I know that I am warming up an old thread, but maybe that idea I have in mind may be new (please correct me if I am wrong, and point me to where to read).


I do understand that RED ONE with the M-X sensor update is not capable of doing HDRx or full resolution recordings as an EPIC could do.

Given the 120 Hz capabilities of RED ONE with 2K, or 60 Hz with 3K, I just wonder if HDRx could be introduced in these "low res" modes instead?

If we would be able to record e.g. 24 times two exposures at 3K, the RED ONE M-X would be still a great deal for many uses, PLUS give users a real world experience of HDRx results.

I assume the sensor can be driven that way with a firmware upgrade - given it fits into the firmware memory space of the RED ONE?

To me that sounds like an interesting option.

We are just updating our RED ONE to M-X (no time slot before to do it, fully booked), and we want to keep it when our stage 2 EPIC is going to ship. And as we see the RED ONE M-X as a 2nd unit and backup camera for many situations, I would say that its backup value would be even better, if we could do HDRx in a lower res mode as well.

IMHO it can be better to have consistently exposed HDRx at 3K or 2K vs. EPIC HDRx at 5K, rather than inconsistent exposures between EPIC HDRx™ at 5K and RED ONE M-X at 4K - when our target will be in most cases 1080p.

Many of us still need to produce for a 2K or HD release market. And as much we agree that 4K+ is the holy grail (NHK working on and demoing live 8K is giving answers...), many production budgets or producers won't pay for it. So giving them 2K "GREAT" is fine. And most of them do not even pay for archiving the sources, nor would be re-doing the film post in 4K at a later point in time be anyhow feasable for most productions. It is unfortunately very unlikely that such films become accidentially "world hits" and earn so much money that one would immediately start re-releasing it in 4K from the originally better footage.

Its just a thought, and it could bring HDRx to many out there. I guess it could even trigger more buyings of EPIC or SCARLET than reduce them, because poeple always want resolution AND dynamic range AND frame rate in the end. RED ONE M-X would be still part of the game, but limited. So it would be a valid playground to get teased. Getting trained to it in a low res mode makes perfectly sense to me.

I expect our RED ONE M-X to be the camera that in future is booked by the students etc. for their small to no budget stuff. Why prevent them the "good" stuff? But 1080p is the format they are going to use, for BluRay, Youtube, sometimes theater screens. So that might be a good fit. And with the frame rate limitation, the RED ONE M-X is still no real competitor to the SCARLET program anyway, not to talk about weight at all.

Thoughts and comments welcome!

Especially from Jim


Axel

 

[Jannard]

Hi All,

I did a quick search on this and it didn't actually reveal any hits - maybe I've just overseen a statement on this...

I know that I am warming up an old thread, but maybe that idea I have in mind may be new (please correct me if I am wrong, and point me to where to read).


I do understand that RED ONE with the M-X sensor update is not capable of doing HDRx™ or full resolution recordings as an EPIC could do.

Given the 120 Hz capabilities of RED ONE with 2K, or 60 Hz with 3K, I just wonder if HDRx™ could be introduced in these "low res" modes instead?

If we would be able to record e.g. 24 times two exposures at 3K, the RED ONE M-X would be still a great deal for many uses, PLUS give users a real world experience of HDRx™ results.

I assume the sensor can be driven that way with a firmware upgrade - given it fits into the firmware memory space of the RED ONE?

To me that sounds like an interesting option.

We are just updating our RED ONE to M-X (no time slot before to do it, fully booked), and we want to keep it when our stage 2 EPIC is going to ship. And as we see the RED ONE M-X as a 2nd unit and backup camera for many situations, I would say that its backup value would be even better, if we could do HDRx™ in a lower res mode as well.

IMHO it can be better to have consistently exposed HDRx™ at 3K or 2K vs. EPIC HDRx™ at 5K, rather than inconsistent exposures between EPIC HDRx™™ at 5K and RED ONE M-X at 4K - when our target will be in most cases 1080p.

Many of us still need to produce for a 2K or HD release market. And as much we agree that 4K+ is the holy grail (NHK working on and demoing live 8K is giving answers...), many production budgets or producers won't pay for it. So giving them 2K "GREAT" is fine. And most of them do not even pay for archiving the sources, nor would be re-doing the film post in 4K at a later point in time be anyhow feasable for most productions. It is unfortunately very unlikely that such films become accidentially "world hits" and earn so much money that one would immediately start re-releasing it in 4K from the originally better footage.

Its just a thought, and it could bring HDRx™ to many out there. I guess it could even trigger more buyings of EPIC or SCARLET than reduce them, because poeple always want resolution AND dynamic range AND frame rate in the end. RED ONE M-X would be still part of the game, but limited. So it would be a valid playground to get teased. Getting trained to it in a low res mode makes perfectly sense to me.

I expect our RED ONE M-X to be the camera that in future is booked by the students etc. for their small to no budget stuff. Why prevent them the "good" stuff? But 1080p is the format they are going to use, for BluRay, Youtube, sometimes theater screens. So that might be a good fit. And with the frame rate limitation, the RED ONE M-X is still no real competitor to the SCARLET program anyway, not to talk about weight at all.

Thoughts and comments welcome!

Especially from Jim


Axel

Unfortunately, the RED ONE does not have the electronics to do HDRx at any resolution.

Jim

 

[Shane Betts]

And we all know that, if it did, you would have given us the firmware update already to implement it. This is not a company that holds anything back ...

 

[Shawn Nelson]

Unfortunately, the RED ONE does not have the electronics to do HDRx™ at any resolution.

Jim

What about at 3k?

At 3k, Red1 can easily do 48fps. Since HDRx is a double read, surely the Red1 could do 24fps of double signal HDRx at 3k? Though granted I can see the perspective of not wanting to develop further features on R1.

A side question...will EpicX have a crop mode to make it perfectly the same frame as Red1 4.5k 2.33:1? I'd love that, so I can use my Epic and RedMX as A-B cams. 4.5k 2.33:1 is far and away my favorite framing on Red1.

 

[Jannard]

What about at 3k?

At 3k, Red1 can easily do 48fps. Since HDRx™ is a double read, surely the Red1 could do 24fps of double signal HDRx™ at 3k? Though granted I can see the perspective of not wanting to develop further features on R1.

A side question...will EpicX have a crop mode to make it perfectly the same frame as Red1 4.5k 2.33:1? I'd love that, so I can use my Epic and RedMX as A-B cams. 4.5k 2.33:1 is far and away my favorite framing on Red1.

Shawn... again, the electronics are not capable of HDRx in the RED ONE or RED ONE M-X. It has nothing to do with not wanting to develop more for the R1. HDRx is a lot more than just double the frame rate.

Epic will have a ton of frame options so you can match to R1... and them some.

Jim

 

[Axel Mertes]

Unfortunately, the RED ONE does not have the electronics to do HDRx™ at any resolution.

Jim

Hi Jim,

Thanks for the quick response - even if it is not what we hoped for. Looking forward to get our EPIC then.

Cheers,
Axel

 

[Shawn Nelson]

Shawn... again, the electronics are not capable of HDRx™ in the RED ONE or RED ONE M-X. It has nothing to do with not wanting to develop more for the R1. HDRx™ is a lot more than just double the frame rate.

makes sense! thanks

Epic will have a ton of frame options so you can match to R1... and them some.

Jim

Awesome! So what are your thoughts on how well Epic will match a Red1 with MX if the Epic is cropped to the same size?

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Unfortunately, the RED ONE does not have the electronics to do HDRx™ at any resolution.

Jim

If doesn't have hardware then we can do it with software step by step, pretty longer but maybe somebody at the end could find also effective if you don't get any other better solution.