Good enough...

[Tim Martin]

I don't think the question is whether 1080p is "good enough". For the majority of individuals working currently 1080p (2k) is more than good enough.

But, Jim if all you set out to do was create a camera that shot high resolution why did you give yourself so many headaches by trying to make it affordable & upgradeable, with a good workflow, providing high dynamic range, with high frame rates and built around a good codec in Redcode.

Is it perfect? No. Otherwise you would be on a long vacation.

But, I would not look at Red and say it's defined by resolution.

 

[Jeff Coatney]

The question was about 1080p, not some cameras that say 1080p but are not.

An F35 resolves to perfect 1080p, just like Scarlet will (and alexa). Is that 1080p not good enough? If not, then what are the Scarlets for, to learn... for tv only?

Where do the 2/3" scarlets fit into Jim's philosophy, if he doesn't believe in 1080p/2k delivery?

I know i'm treading on thin ice persuing this... but as a potential buyer, I feel it needs to be asked by someone.

The point is the oversampling to arrive at 2K. I don't think Jim expects Scarlet 2/3" (or any other version) to remain 3K for the next 15 years. Scarlet is entry level and post-able on desktop computers now. That's a huge market. It can also be projected and look as good as any movie at any cineplex today, IMAX excepted. But if you have doubts-- don't buy it.

 

[Terry Wester]

I think that 1080p is "good enough" for delivery right now, in my world anyway (indie films, and reality TV). For us the thing that is really great about shooting in 4K is the ability to pan and scan around the digital negative. Our editors know they can zoom in 190% without softening the image, and it really allows for lots of problem solving in post.

I had a director setting behind me in our Scratch suite and he was blown away that on a 2 shot from a hood mounted camera on a car, he could pull single close-ups of each of the actors. He made the comment to me that "this is what Red should be telling people about, If I had know I could do this it would have saved me 2 days of production"

Right now, we are in production on Gator 911, a reality show about a alligator conservationist in Beaumont Tx. I can't wait to shoot this on Epic so we have the freedom to to pan and scan on the negative. The show is shot ENG style, and the Red One is just not designed for this kind of shooting. I think once the Epic/Scarlet get into the wild they will be the norm for shooting reality shows for this feature alone.

I love the idea of delivering in 4K, but don't want to loose this pan and scan feature, so I guess It will be an option when we can shoot and acquire in 9K.

- Terry

 

[Danish P.V.]

I have to wonder if it will be "good enough" for you tomorrow. ???

Jim

You`re totally right when it comes to shooting those projects with a long "shelf life" and those which require 4K or maybe even 5K. But when looking at the stacks of MiniDV, BetaSP and Digibeta tapes and Super16/ Normal16mm cans we collected over the years I don`t see a single one I would have shot or postproduced at 4K - a couple of them didn`t even require 1080HD but simple PAL.

But you`re surely having a different view ;-) Keeping Redray and therefore 4K as a general distribution format in mind - I`m speaking of our past and current productions which had/have a certain purpose and limited "lifetime". And for us, 1080 is a nice and easy to handle format in terms of postpro, fx, motion graphics and finishing, and as long as our customers don`t explicitly ask (and pay!) for 4K I won`t/can`t go that route. So I`m one of those waiting impatiently for your new cameras with 1080 FF shooting modes!

 

[Tim Morten]

My background is as a 25 year veteran music recording engineer, and like many of us, I've alway been about the quality of sound and the recording medium.

The quality standard that is the audio CD is far below what is possible with digital audio. Every attempt to to introduce a higher quality consumer deliverable (mainly DVD-A) has been met with consumer indifference.

When people had their music collection on cassette tapes, it was not difficult to convince them to purchase the CD, because the benefits were obvious. Hardly anyone perceived DVD-A as being enough of an improvement in spite of greatly improved sonics and 5.1 surround. It didn't commercially matter, and in fact the way music is sold (or not sold) today is in the form of the online MP3 which sounds even worse than the CD. I watch TV shows online.

I see this repeated in the slow acceptance of Blu-ray. I may rent or purchase a new Blu-ray, but most people are not likely to replace 10 years of DVDs.

This shouldn't keep us from using the best acquisition formats possible. But history tells me there is a point from a consumer standpoint that is good enough.

STeve

Great point (I don't agree about Blu-Ray though... I think it is absolutely being embraced by consumers). I guess the question is what to equate the 1080p -> 4k transition to. I believe it's more like casette to CD (and we all know how that turned out) rather than CD to SACD. Everyone could see the improvement going from casette to CD... only the audiophiles seem to care about the improvement going from CD to SACD.

I believe the average consumer can appreciate the difference between 1080p and 4k. Certainly on a theater screen, and even in their living room. Thanks to BestBuy, Costco, etc. home screens are only getting bigger. The number of consumers with 50" and larger screens is astonishing.

- Tim

 

[Damien Molineaux]

Stephen, you argue that 1080 is indeed "good enough", yet you have over 3,000 posts on this forum. You are taking the position that the camera you have commented on over three thousand times has too much resolution, is too affordable and it is not being taken seriously by the professional community, in spite of the fact that over seven thousand cameras have been shipped-- more than any other professional 35mm cinema camera in the same time-frame.

You have the right to hold any position, of course. But I can't reconcile the stark divide between your stated positions and your actions (3,000+ posts). What exactly are you doing here?

Jeff,

You are misunderstanding Stephen.

You obviously haven't read through this thread, nor many of Stephen's 3000+ posts...

Please read through this thread form the begining, and pay particular attention to Stephen's posts...

Cheers,
Damien

 

[Tim H.]

Why did Lucas shoot 1080p? Digital acquisition has clear advantages for a VFX film. 1080p was the highest quality format available at the time. Would Lucas choose 1080p today? Doubt it.

What are the clear advantages? For a low budget company it might be cheaper but not for Lucas. He can scan in 35mm all day long at ILM which will give them a much better starting point than 1080p. I've always had an easier time pulling keys off of 35mm originated images than HD.

I also noticed some posts suggesting that Cameron and Lucas and what they shoot with is some indicator of what is better or good enough. The fact is that Avatar had very little 1080p footage in it. It was almost entirely computer generated. Most ASC members laughed when it won for best cinematography. What an insult to the craft.

The original Star Wars and Indy series were successful because of story not because of what they were shot on. That is why the new crop of Star Wars movies were horrible. Lucas could have shot this on 35mm, 4K, 10K, it wouldn't have mattered. The story sucked but the effects were good (for the time), but again this had nothing to do with it's originating format. Oh and Indy4 - Ummm? Hello? Shot on 35mm but what a dissapointing 4th chapter, especially after such a long wait. They should be embarrased. Red wouldn't have saved that movie.

As far as 4K and 1080p. Yeah 1080p is plenty good enough for now in regards to broadcast because most of us watch TV via local cable, DirectTV/DISH or FIOS. If you are not at least 6 feet away from the HD TV it looks like pure compressed garbage. Until we get the delivery in place, it might be overkill for most projects and workflows. Now, Cinema and other high resolution playbacks could def use the 4K and eventually everything will move up the ladder like we have been doing since VHS. Lets just not get too ahead of ourselves.

Lets light a fire under the other supporting companies to come up with better compression schemes, better delivery methods, etc, etc. so we can actually watch the pristine images cameras like Red will deliver.

Oh and one last thing. If 1080p is not good enough then the Scarlet is already obsolete. That is kinda scary.

 

[Billy Summers]

1080p is good enough!
...for my iphone

 

[David Battistella]

If 1080P is really "good enough"... then there is no reason for RED.

We started this business because we believed that 1080P was NOT good enough a film alternative/replacement.

Film has much more resolution than 1080P (almost 4 times).

If the industry really believes that 1080P (or 2K) is good enough... please let us know so we can shut down and go on a forever vacation...

Jim

Jim,

I'm curious to know what prompted this question? Is it the whole ARRI Alexa thing?

David

 

[Tim Morten]

What are the clear advantages?

No wobble correction, no grain correction, no colorspace correction... the list goes on.

 

[Erik Franzén]

I think the thing is that unless you can demonstrate to the end-user why it is a significant improvement then...well, it isn't. Bluray was demonstrated to be better than DVD and hence had a great following. Now, 4K can (if properly done) be demonstrated to blow the socks off 1080P. So now it all turns down to marketing.
And knowing the resounding success RED has already enjoyed...well, let's just say I won't be one of the naysayers x)

 

[Michael Stanmore]

I just want my Scarlet.

:emote_head_explode:

 

[Tim H.]

No wobble correction, no grain correction, no colorspace correction... the list goes on.

Nope, just a bunch of other issues to correct for.

 

[Santiago Marti]

Adding 1080p and prores capabilities to a RED would be a step backwards, please, don't do it. I need to be sure that anything originated with my camera will look the best way possible. I am tired of post houses cutting corners just because they don't have what it takes to handle R3d accordingly. It took time but now you have RedRocket and a lot more solutions out there. 1080p is the best delivery format for tv, not the best acquisition format. The same goes for editing and color correcting, If you can work with native R3d, do it. We waited and shouted, we got Avid, Adobe, Vegas, Scratch, etc to give us incredible native raw support. Red made the rocket, an incredible piece of hardware.

I just don't get it, we are able now to work in raw and 4k, but people screams for 1080p prores? Please, don't do it. If FCP is having problems with updates, it's FCP's problem. Let's push fordward.

Jim, with all due respect, why go to a war we've already won? They must be squeezing their heads just to deliver a 4k raw codec that weights as little as redcode, then, they will have to implement post solutions. Arri may have the best hd cam, good for them. They are 3 years behind, lets run faster.

Please, don't waste time at Red headquarters going backwards. Please put those incredible brains on something new and revolutionary, that, in the first place, put us here.

The proxy module is around the corner, and is best as a fast proxy module, not a raw master format. It is even accessible wireless from a laptop?!?! How cool is that?!?!

Again, thank you Jim, Graeme, Deannan, and all for letting us be part of a revolution. I love my R1, so much i will keep it, and get an epic in stage 2.


Santiago Marti.

 

[Pascal Scheffers]

1080p enough... right. The vendors selling that probably have trouble providing a credible 4K workflow. Or just trouble getting the data from the sensor to a disk.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

An F35 resolves to perfect 1080p,

Sorry, no, it doesn't. It's very aliasy vertically, horizontally, the resolution is much lower than 1920 and is compromised by chroma moire and that the three RGB channels don't line up with each other.

Graeme

 

[NEIL ANDREW BATES]

I just want my Scarlet.

Ditto. If 1080 was good enough, I wouldn't have chosen to delay my film project and wait for scarlet instead of just buying any of the 1080 HD consumer choices out there

 

[Jeff Coatney]

Jeff,

You are misunderstanding Stephen.

You obviously haven't read through this thread, nor many of Stephen's 3000+ posts...

Please read through this thread form the begining, and pay particular attention to Stephen's posts...

Cheers,
Damien

I arrived at my conclusion by reading his posts, both in this thread and historically. I respect Stephen's experience, he has the right to say whatever he wants, I have the right to agree or not. Someday we'll hash it out over a whisky or two.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Some of you are missing the point -- I did a TV series in 1080P 4:2:2 and I wasn't allowed to shoot Log mode because the production wanted to only make straight dubs for editorial, no Log to Rec 709 step despite the fact that it would only add a few bucks to the cost of post and give me another two stops of dynamic range to work with in the final color-correction.

So with that mentality, how do you convince them to shoot 4K RAW and spend the time & money doing conversions in post to 1080P, even if it's very little time & money?

It's not a question of passing the image purity test here, we are just acknowledging that some TV productions want broadcast-ready 1080P material right out of the camera, they don't even want to wait for a real-time Red Rocket conversion in post and they certainly don't want to pay for it if anyone is charging.

 

[Gary Paul Walker]

1080P is the VHS of the future... mark my words.

Jim

or maybe Betamax?