Ghost Towns in 8K (not Weapon...)

[Luke Neumann]

No, not shot on the Weapon.

Used the Dragon in 6K FF, turned it sideways for Portrait orientation and stitched together in post (added some camera moves with the extra resolution since some came out to 10K+).

The handheld shots were simply up scaled from 6,144 to 7,680. A 25% scale increase plus some post sharpening makes it pretty close IMO. Had some issues with the encoding process and the colors got a little messed up.

 

[Samir Patel]

Interesting Luke. Unfortunately the computer I'm working on probably will die if I try to go over the 1080p mode when viewing. I am curious how fast a pipe you needed to upload a 8K file to youtube. Mind = blown.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Looks gorgeous!

 

[PatrickFaith]

Awesome!

Question, do you have any rules of thumb when panning inside a frame, i btw couldn't tell by casually looking that you where panning in frame rather then using a dolly. Also are any of these shots panning across stitched lines ?

 

[Luke Neumann]

Some of these actually used a really slow motion control pan. Often if I do have to pan/tilt inside a frame I'd rather tilt. Seems like less parralax when you do a small tilt up vs. a pan.

 

[Brian Merlen]

i really liked the piece, very nice work! the clarity is sure like looking through a window on my retina macbook pro

 

[Patrick Grossien]

Luke, you're featured on GIZMODO

http://gizmodo.com/this-8k-youtube-video-is-too-amazing-for-your-computer-1710290439

It truly looks amazing!

 

[Jirka Silander]

This also made it to finnish magazines: http://www.itviikko.fi//uutiset/2015/06/11/klikkasimme-youtuben-8k-videota-se-oli-virhe/20157549/7
Also, my girlfriend just called and asked me if my PC runs 8k videos... It just barely runs 1080p youtube and the screen is a 1080p TV. Now she's cursing because she really wants to see this in 8k.

 

[Daniel Shojaei]

This is stunning

 

[Greg McDonald]

Luke that looks great! Really cool.

I have a question about why you shot vertically rather than horizontally. I shot some stuff for digital signage that needed to be at least 8k in resolution horizontally so we shot with 2 side by side Dragons at 6k and they were stitched together in post to get 8k-10k files (I wasn't involved in post). So if your goal was to get an 8k frame, 7680x4320, why did you shoot vertically? Doing that would mean you would need to shoot with 3 Dragons at 6k in order to get at least 7680 pixels horizontally correct? 3 x 3160=9480 and with the overlapping you need for stitching that would give you barely enough to get you to a final 7680 pixels horizontally.

Just trying to understand what the advantage to shooting vertically is if you don't need all that vertical resolution. Or did you?

 

[Greg McDonald]

I just realized I'm stupid. You need 4320 pixels vertically so you do need more. I was only thinking about horizontal resolution and forgetting the fact you need more than 3160 vertically. Okay, forget my question.

 

[Luke Neumann]

Just trying to understand what the advantage to shooting vertically is if you don't need all that vertical resolution. Or did you?

Definitely didn't need all of the extra vertical resolution that it brought but I did use that to do some "camera moves" in post. So it didn't hurt.

We actually just used one Dragon and so that meant we had to be careful how we shot (things couldn't overlap or pass between shots). Shooting with 3 Dragons would be ideal because you could move the camera a bit more.