Good enough...

[Graeme Nattress]

Graeme, do you hope redray will be used in cinemas?

Personally, I'm going to do more than hope!

Graeme

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Maybe I'm forgetting but could someone please enlighten me to one of these dramatic and rapid shifts in the industry?

- I remember a few years where I could only a small handful of DVDs at Blockbuster.
- Internet streaming only just this last year has become viable and it's only 480p for the most part. It's been possible to distribute movies and TV shows over the internet on DIVX for almost 10 years.
- HD-DVD dramatically died. That something of a dramatic shift in the industry.
- Online game distribution took about 10 years to catch up with the capability and only this year are AAA games on consoles available on consoles (after a long delay).
- 1080p TV sales seemingly took forever to become affordable.
- I still can't get over the air 1080p at my apartment.
- Satellite only in the last year really finished transitioning to 1080p (comedy central etc...)
- iTunes, the world's largest music store, started selling MP3s ... last year?

I'm trying to remember a dramatic shift and I can't think of one. I can only think of the industry repeatedly getting dragged kicking and screaming nearly a half decade after the technology was available and economical.

 

[Elsie N]

I'm trying to remember a dramatic shift and I can't think of one. I can only think of the industry repeatedly getting dragged kicking and screaming nearly a half decade after the technology was available and economical.

Still, a change of this magnitude in only 5 years is pretty dramatic.

 

[scott william]

Personally, I'm going to do more than hope!

Graeme

In that case Redray will be as exciting as the red one was/ is.

Probably end up being more important.

 

[Mark Phelan]

I think part of what is going on here is sedentary narcosis, the idea that a person would rather sit and watch what is on the television rather than getting up to change the channel. How many of you actually own a blu-ray, or 1080p television or have DirectTV HD? And this is the "with it" crowd. To get the masses to move, will take Archimedes lever. But that doesn't mean that 1080p is "good enough". Just means we're too lazy to get up and get with the program. Color was a novelty back in the day of black and white, or even "talkies". And why is it that some feel the "absolute" compulsion to dictate what is good enough for the rest of us? I've seen 4K and it's WAY better than 1080p, no question. I also used to have a computer with a 20MB hard drive too.

 

[Stacey Spears]

Internet streaming only just this last year has become viable and it's only 480p for the most part.

Netflix introduced 720p streaming last year, albeit only a small handful of titles. Xbox launched 1080p streaming last November and it covers the majority of the catalog. In fact, shows like Lost are only available in 1080p from the Xbox service or Blu-ray. OTA, Cable, and Sat are only offering Lost in 720p. I would argue that most displays can't resolve true 1080p. As good as some find the new Sony 4k, its soft compared to 4k DLP.

During one of the seminars at NAB, they said consumers had a difficult time telling the difference between SD and HD. They then went on to say that they can all see the difference between 2D and 3D. They went on to demo some really poor 3D content from Sky on a Sony 4k display. I would argue that most have not seen HD.

My motto for pushing the envelope on image processing has always been, "When good enough isn't."

 

[Tom Lowe]

I'm trying to remember a dramatic shift and I can't think of one. I can only think of the industry repeatedly getting dragged kicking and screaming nearly a half decade after the technology was available and economical.

In June 2006, Warner Brothers Home Entertainment revealed 'Planet Earth' had become the biggest high definition moneymaker ever. In only four months, the Blu-ray and HD DVD had generated $3.2M in sales from about 42,000 units sold.

Starting in 2008, 'The Dark Knight' sold 2.7 million Bluray discs in 15 months.

In April 2010, 'Avatar' sold 2.7 million Bluray discs in four days.

And by the way, Bluray accounted for over 70% of Avatar's home market sales, with DVD in rapid decline. I guess all the talk about "Can't tell the difference between HD and SD while seated x number of feet from the screen" turned out to be nonsense after all, just like all this anti-4K talk will be proven to be.

I remember debating a bunch of people on the Rotten Tomatoes forum about two years ago, telling them that Bluray would soon overtake DVD. 75% of the people there laughed and said there was no way it would happen, because people had already built up expensive DVD collections, because their was not enough of an image-quality gain, the HDTVs were too expensive, etc. Of course, it was all nonsense.

To me, this is almost like Déjà vu.

 

[Brad Olsen]

In June 2006, Warner Brothers Home Entertainment revealed 'Planet Earth' had become the biggest high definition moneymaker ever. In only four months, the Blu-ray and HD DVD had generated $3.2M in sales from about 42,000 units sold.

Starting in 2008, 'The Dark Knight' sold 2.7 million Bluray discs in 15 months.

In April 2010, 'Avatar' sold 2.7 million Bluray discs in four days.

So popular movies are released and their sales are good? I don't think that proves the point you think it does...

 

[Tom Lowe]

So popular movies are released and their sales are good? I don't think that proves the point you think it does...

Brad, the point was to illustrate the rapid adoption of Bluray (especially vs DVD), my friend. Again, this gets us back to the Law of Accelerating Returns.

 

[Robert Frank]

I'm trying to remember a dramatic shift and I can't think of one. I can only think of the industry repeatedly getting dragged kicking and screaming nearly a half decade after the technology was available and economical.

Corporate inertia is clearly evident everywhere.

Ahem... but I can think of a company that has only been around a very short time, has changed the industry, and is gaining greater and greater momentum by rejecting the "good enough" mindset.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

Personally, I can't help but wonder if this is all leading up to Scarlet being 4K or more from top to bottom. I know, probably not very likely but we can dream. I guess we'll know more on May 15.

 

[M Most]

Brad, the point was to illustrate the rapid adoption of Bluray (especially vs DVD), my friend. Again, this gets us back to the Law of Accelerating Returns.

It also has to do with the Law of Marketing, which says that if you put something in front of the buying public, particularly something based on a single project whose popularity is an anomaly, they will likely buy what you're selling. And in every store that I've seen the Avatar disk, the BluRay version is front and center. Not to mention the "event" status of the movie itself.

I'll agree with you when things like television show boxed sets have BluRay versions that are outselling the DVD's. That hasn't happened yet.

 

[M Most]

It's got nothing to do with the absolute size of the screen. It's the combination of viewing distance and size of screen that you need to think of - angle of view in other words.

I did say "screen size and field of view."

 

[Anson Fogel]

A small festival audience saw the difference yesterday

A small festival audience saw the difference yesterday

We just screened a short at an adventure film festival, last night. It played alongside pieces all shot on "1080" cams - 5D, Sony EFP HD cams, EX's, and Panny EFP it appeared. Some pieces received good treatment in post, some not so much. All films were shown on BluRay on a (not very well calibrated) new high quality 2K DLP projector. Our piece was shot largely on R1, and we did our own post carefully. So all films were 1080 captured and projected. Ours was the only film shot at 4K (with a lot of 2K and 3K for overcranking).

The audience was about 800 people last night, the usual adventure fest audience. Not industry people, not even really film buffs. Residents of a small mountain town.

At least 20 audience members mentioned to me how much "sharper" or "crisper" our film looked compared to the others. They mentioned that often along with the usual wow that was great, etc - but mentioned clarity as often as not. Beyond those 20 or so strangers, my own father said the same thing, and he is far from a trained eye.

Frankly, we were surprised by this. Our piece was more image driven, with less of a narrative than other pieces and that may have drawn more attention to it (the image quality technically). One might attribute the processes downstream of capture as more of the responsible factor - rightly, as many of the films clearly did not get treated well in post. But the fact remains: a normal audience noted a difference.

And as a filmmaker, I do think that helped us communicate with the audience more effectively. They got it. They responded very well to the piece (cheering often, which sure is nice!). And having better technical quality (resolution, color accuracy and range, better compression, etc etc) in this case DID translate clearly and directly to a better film from the audience's perspective.

If we had shot on an F23, maybe that flavor of fine 1080 would have gotten the same result. Maybe not. In our case, we are comparing very high quality 4K capture and post with mediocre quality 1080 capture and post. But in any case:

Our festival audience said hey, 1080 is cool, but 4K is a lot cooler

 

[Tom Lowe]

It also has to do with the Law of Marketing, which says that if you put something in front of the buying public, particularly something based on a single project whose popularity is an anomaly, they will likely buy what you're selling. And in every store that I've seen the Avatar disk, the BluRay version is front and center. Not to mention the "event" status of the movie itself.

I'll agree with you when things like television show boxed sets have BluRay versions that are outselling the DVD's. That hasn't happened yet.

The Bluray boxset of 'Planet Earth' is already outselling the DVD boxset of 'Planet Earth':

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/dvd/ref=pd_ts_pg_3?ie=UTF8&pg=3

 

[Shawn R]

Anson, is the trailer for this on your site? Is it the "Whitewater"?

Thanks, looking forward to seeing some clips.

 

[Brad Olsen]

Our festival audience said hey, 1080 is cool, but 4K is a lot cooler

But they were all projected in HD...?

 

[Rick Burnett]

The problem with the argument is there isn't enough resources out there to show people that >1080p is better. In other words, people can't make an educated decision because they don't have both sides of the story.

I'm the first to advocate shooting always higher than your target because it gives you other sorts of latitude you'd not have else wise. That said, there is a balance pertaining to microelectronics that has to be watched for, which I know RED is doing, that determines the point where greater resolutions fall prey to limitations in the electronics. I just think 1080p is no where near that limit and I am glad that Jim, et al, are pushing past that limit.

You know mp3 audio files are supposedly "good enough" but when someone hears music recorded and played back at 24bits/96khz on excellent monitors their reaction is purely visceral.

It's usually silence followed by spontaneous smiling if not joy filled laughter.

Good enough is only good enough until you experience how good great is.

Comparing an MP3 to uncompressed higher resolution audio is an argument for compression loss in detail due to the compression itself, here we are talking about spacial resolution.

I own an Apogee Rosetta 200 audio interface and use ADAM monitors in my studio which top at at 40khz, so more than twice as high as my ears can hear. I REFUSE to record at anything higher than 48kHz because the difference in quality in the faster sampling rate DOES NOT translate into a better sound through these monitors. I've run my system as high as 192kHz just to see and the difference and if anything the noise floor sounded different, but not less (as I examined the waveforms very closely).

That said, the 24-bit depth IS a huge difference and I can say all my experiments with 24 bit versus 16 bit absolutely have a profound impact on sound. I always work at 24-bit as it offers the most improvement and dither down to 16 if the delivery format requires as such.

But these arguments are not the same. Delivery and acquisition are two separate situations. I would ALWAYS want my acquisition to be higher quality than my target if I can. ALWAYS. This is one of the BIGGEST reasons I want to work with the Scarlet cameras.

 

[Anson Fogel]

Yes, all projected at 1920x1080 fed HDMI from a consumer Sony BluRay player. The festival asked for BluRay or DVD, and msot submitted BluRay or a 1080 file of one form or another which was then mastered to BluRay by the projectionist.

 

[scott william]

most festivals down under still screen on digibeta.