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-W - 4k recording with full s35 frame

Zack McTee

Zack McTee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 30, 2011
Messages
186
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NYC
Curious why these cameras can record 4k Pro-res using the full sensor readout, but not 4k redcode. I can't make sense of it.
 
Zack McTee said:
Curious why these cameras can record 4k Pro-res using the full sensor readout, but not 4k redcode. I can't make sense of it.
Click to expand...

You've left out the important word. Raw.

REDCODE RAW is a compressed raw codec, which is rather different than Intermediate Codecs like ProRes or DNxHD/HR or whatever else.
 
Zack McTee said:
Curious why these cameras can record 4k Pro-res using the full sensor readout, but not 4k redcode. I can't make sense of it.
Click to expand...

Redcode is pre-debayer RAW record of the sensor, and it's mapped pixel to pixel. So 8K Helium is full sensor, 4K Helium is S16.

Prores is a debayered image FROM THE FULL SENSOR, and can be of numerous QT sizes/flavors. Because it's debayered, it's not raw.
 
Holland,


I have the utmost respect from you man, but I'm going to have to agree. These cameras seem powerful enough to downscale in cam to redcode. To me it seems like a software/programming issue. I'm not a developer, but I believe it should be capable. I just think it might need a complete rebuild of the OS software from the ground up. Not sure if they have the time/resource/money to achieve it. That's just what it seems like to me.
 
Phil Holland said:
You've left out the important word. Raw.

REDCODE RAW is a compressed raw codec, which is rather different than Intermediate Codecs like ProRes or DNxHD/HR or whatever else.
Click to expand...

Thanks Phil. Is there a world in which it would be possible, or is it a technical limitation of raw?
 
Hi Zack,

I'm not sure you have seen these webpages on RED Camera site. If not, check these pages to obtain information related to your questions:

http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/cinema-color-management

http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/sensor-crop-factors

Different resolutions require their own sensor sizes to keep pixel-to-pixel ratios. For an example, to resolve 4k UHD (3840 x 2160) at 1:1 pixel ratio requires a sensor which can output 3840 pixels horizontally and 2160 lines of (horizontally laid) 3840 pixels vertically. If you are working with true 4k Digital Cinema Initiatives (DCI) based camera, the resolution would be 4096 x 2160.

{8K resolution or 8K UHD is the current highest ultra-high definition television (UHDTV) resolution in digital television and digital cinematography. 8K refers to the horizontal resolution of 7,680 pixels, forming the total image dimensions of (7680×4320). Otherwise known as 4320p

8K UHD has two times the horizontal and vertical resolution of the 4K UHD with four times as many pixels overall, or sixteen times as many pixels as Full HD. {source: Wikipedia}}

RED Camera has gone beyond these limits "as usual" by offering their cameras with capture resolutions much higher. Weapon-W gives the user 60 fps at 8K Full Format (8192 x 4320) while Epic-W specs at 30 fps at 8K Full Format (8192 x 4320). Both these cameras comes with super 35 size sensors. Weapon 8k Vista Vision gives you full frame at 40.96 mm x 21.60 mm (Diagonal: 46.31 mm).

To get a general idea of down scaling possibilities, let's look at 4k specs. At DCI 4k the sensor has a resolution of 8,847,360 pixels. Conversely, RED camera sensor at 8k resolution has 35,389,440 pixels. That is 4 times the resolution of 4k (8,847,360 x 4 = 35,389,440).

So, to answer your question "Curious why these cameras can record 4k Pro-res using the full sensor readout, but not 4k redcode.” one should look into how a computer handle RAW image data. Without going into an in depth discussion on advanced Physics, one could ask the question: "How can we somehow fit 35,389,440 pixels in to an area made to fit 8,847,360 pixels?” Well you can NOT do this without throwing 3 out of 4 pixels (since 8k has 4 times more pixels compared to 4k). This practice is also known as "Data Binning". It is no longer a "lossless" file. A RAW file generally means a lossless file structure. When your throw out pixels the result is not that good. The image look bad with jaggy edges and other artifacts not so desirable.

This subject is somewhat complicated and to explain it in a simple manner is rather a difficult task. If you are still looking for more information than what is written on those pages, I could post a detailed scientific explanation on this subject. Please be advised that to decipher terms and content of such an article would require you to be familiar with more than Physics 101 & Engineering 101.

And if you still need more clarification on this subject, do not hesitate to reach out.
 
I believe your asking for scaled raw, which some still cameras do
 
Seems probable that the camera could discard every other line of info during the redcode compression. I have asked for this feature since the Red MX and Epic MX days. I have gathered the limitation comes from RED's philosophical point of view and not a technical consideration.
 
I brought this up before knowing the reasoning why it hasn't been done. But if it ever were possible, now that we have 8k sensors theoretically it would be easiest since it's a 50% scale. A pixel skipping method would probably work. It would be a handy feature. I don't understand why some are so against a feature they don't have to use if they don't want. I love that I can shoot 4k prores don't get me wrong, but 4k raw off the full sensor would be pretty sweet, can't really argue that.
 
Jarek Zabczynski said:
I brought this up before knowing the reasoning why it hasn't been done. But if it ever were possible, now that we have 8k sensors theoretically it would be easiest since it's a 50% scale. A pixel skipping method would probably work. It would be a handy feature. I don't understand why some are so against a feature they don't have to use if they don't want. I love that I can shoot 4k prores don't get me wrong, but 4k raw off the full sensor would be pretty sweet, can't really argue that.
Click to expand...

+1 i agree
 
Cineform had a Export to Raw a few years back no ? It was kinda ressource hungry if I recall.

But, I'd rather not have this option.
It would be messy. Between the guy not understanding what raw is, the arri guy afraid of Red, the post-houses with demands from 2003, the rookie, the experienced, the misinformation... Yeah. Let's Raw stay raw, and intermediate's RGB.
It's simple. You have compressed raw in LOG3G10+Lut or RGB in log+lut Especially now that they pretty much works the same.

I just wish there were some kind of Prores 4k 444 in-camera so I don't feel I'm pushing away some informations on productions using Prores only.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top