Got 6K ? ( link to my LA vista shoot test )

[Michel Rabe]

Les, so you're coding yourself? Anything in the making for release and if so, any schedule/roadmap already?

 

[Bill Anderson]

Les, I'm not sure how well you'll be able to sustain your claims if the images you use to compare are from other sources, using different methodology and lenses and post …etc.. You know how things tend to go with "tests". If you can run a couple of side by sides, it might help your cause somewhat.

Assuming you have a clever method of doing what you claim, what are your plans for it: Is this witchery something that can be easily emulated by others? Shared? Packaged?

 

[Les Dittert]

Les, I'm not sure how well you'll be able to sustain your claims if the images you use to compare are from other sources, using different methodology and lenses and post …etc.. You know how things tend to go with "tests". If you can run a couple of side by sides, it might help your cause somewhat.

Assuming you have a clever method of doing what you claim, what are your plans for it: Is this witchery something that can be easily emulated by others? Shared? Packaged?

The idea that I cheated this is false.
The AVI is a 1:1 crop, but yes, it is not actually from the exact center. I picked something more interesting then image dead center.
I added some sharpening to subsequent experiments with it, and it really helps with the haze. There is about 2 miles of LA atmosphere between the lens and the buildings.

Matthew: Looks good. Was your image shot at 5K or 4K , then resized down to 3840 across ? I'm shooting 4K and producing 6140.

I will try to shoot the two camera test today, to compare 'stock' workflow with my tests. I'll use the exact same lens on both so it can't be blamed for softness.

 

[Matthew Scott]

Hey Les, it was shot at 4K....your image is amazing though, I'm excited!

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

You may have something there Les and I appreciate the effort and sharing. :yesnod:
Les I suggest you shoot a test chart that clearly shows the actual lines resolution. Then peeps can extract 1:1 from it and pixel peep.
Otherwise it's just talk.
You can come up with excuses all day long but until you have a test chart to prove it they are just excuses.
I agree the panorama you posted is nowhere near 6K

 

[Peter Moretti]

it is easier to get sharp images from a close up than a wide shot.
;-)

Using a close-up makes more sense when testing resolution. Which is why I and others have suggested that Les shoot a rez chart, not a miles far away wide exterior shot. You want to get the lens and the air out of the equation as much as possible.

 

[Mark Pavy]

Les, please don't think I'm inferring you cheated. Your panaromic shot interests me because that's very similar to my stock line of work and yep, that shot is the sharpest image I've seen from a Scarlet.

What ratio of improved resolution would you put down to removing the OLPF compared to your "special sauce" processing?

 

[Peter Majtan]

Les - you have been asking for 4K or larger samples all over this board in various threads. Many have told You that there are tons of such a samples and links, myself including. You have asked for full RAW frame from Monochrome - and I have posted it in this thread - yet after all the crying for it you have completely ignored this. You have replied several times since I have posted the monochrome RAW link, yet you did not even acknowledge it...

If You have something legible to show - so please show it. But stop with this endless bashing of the forum where "it is strange that nobody posts full size frame or links" - you (and everyone else) know it is utter nonsense...

Peter

 

[Peter Moretti]

Well I guess you missed this reply directed at you, LOL!:

...
@Peter , thanks for the 4K mono Jpeg link. Looks great, must look even better with more light, can't wait to see more stills like that posted.

 

[Les Dittert]

Some more 6K samples

Some more 6K samples

I shot this test at the Rose Bowl.

The same lens was used on both cameras, a 50mm zeiss at f8. Both cameras shot 4K 24fps, redcode 6:1.

First, here are some 1:1 crops. On the camera with OLPF, I processed in RCX and resized to 6K ( lanczos ) and sharpened in Fusion.
The other is my 6K process.

And my method:

------------------------------------------------------------
Again, 'regular camera' :

My 6K :

 

[Les Dittert]

and some other related images.

and some other related images.

In response to the requests for 4K files, etc :

The R3D from Scarlet WITH OLPF : http://www.mediafire.com/file/zndrtwl8tgn8tlt/A010_C003_1122S8.0000200F.R3D

The R3D without OLPF : http://www.mediafire.com/file/smf6ehga8fgffmf/A010_C006_1122GS.0000000F.R3D

The full sized 6K image from my experimental process : http://www.mediafire.com/view/?3h9yw3pd236ni2u

The movie of a 1920 crop ( 1:1) inside the 6K using my process : http://www.mediafire.com/file/demgrq94x3djkd5/A010_C006_6K_1920crop.mp4


I also shot with a $29 lens I got on ebay, a Vivitar 70-210 zoom. Just for fun I'll post some high resolution from that when I get around to it.
It will be interesting to see if a $29 lens can make 4K footage !

 

[Les Dittert]

You may have something there Les and I appreciate the effort and sharing. :yesnod:
Les I suggest you shoot a test chart that clearly shows the actual lines resolution. Then peeps can extract 1:1 from it and pixel peep.
Otherwise it's just talk.
You can come up with excuses all day long but until you have a test chart to prove it they are just excuses.
I agree the panorama you posted is nowhere near 6K

Hi, Thanks for looking !
Please look at my latest posts, with direct A/B comparisons using same glass, contrasting the two processes.
If people call the Scarlet a 4K camera, then my images are significantly more detailed. Wouldn't you agree ?
Getting closer to 6K ? Maybe.
I will shoot some resolution charts sometime soon. I promise. I want to quantify the results.

@Peter: It sure would be nice if all the 4K+ images were in a handy dandy dedicated section, perhaps the Forum administrator can make a place?

 

[Les Dittert]

Mark, I posted the R3D's from my latest test, so you can play with it yourself.
In summary, the lack of blur filter gets most of the sharpness, but the aliasing needs to be controlled, is the issue.

Les, please don't think I'm inferring you cheated. Your panaromic shot interests me because that's very similar to my stock line of work and yep, that shot is the sharpest image I've seen from a Scarlet.

What ratio of improved resolution would you put down to removing the OLPF compared to your "special sauce" processing?

 

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

What especially interests me is whether this helps 2k look more useable, since currently 2k is too soft for 1080p delivery, meaning 60fps on scarlet and 240fps on epic are not workable for most projects.

How hard is it to remove the olpf?

 

[Mark Pavy]

Les, I have no idea what you're doing but I would certainly agree that it works. You really should post a close up of the seating in the UCLA Bruins poster on the right as an example. Just not too sure about the gamma shifts, I like my concrete grey not green.

 

[Les Dittert]

What especially interests me is whether this helps 2k look more useable, since currently 2k is too soft for 1080p delivery, meaning 60fps on scarlet and 240fps on epic are not workable for most projects.

How hard is it to remove the olpf?

See my old test, shot on Scarlet in 1K mode , both 120 fps and 90 fps:
( shot with 8mm lens at Venice beach skate park )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UD-DhqUc3JM ( be sure to set Youtube to 'original quality' for best viewing experience.

OLPF is easy to remove, but you have to substitute an IR cut filter to keep back focus good.
Enjoy.

 

[Les Dittert]

I saw a short post by someone just a few posts above here, with a nice link to some more side by side comparisons : http://imgur.com/a/HaZUh

Then that post mysteriously vanished. He has sized up the 4k in After Effects, and put them next to my 6K.

If you don't like the post ..... PM me. I don't bite. I am not the enemy.

This is post number 97 in the thread.

 

[Peter Moretti]

Les,

FWIW, I've looked at that comparison pretty closely. And it does indeed look like you are getting more real resolution w/o the OLPF, not just increased sharpening and contrast.

 

[Elan Gunos]

That was me! I don't know why my posts kept getting deleted. Anyway, to reiterate, I upscaled 4k to 6k in After Effects, but it's evident from the pictures no amount of enhancement can reproduce that actual detail.

I saw a short post by someone just a few posts above here, with a nice link to some more side by side comparisons : http://imgur.com/a/HaZUh

Then that post mysteriously vanished. He has sized up the 4k in After Effects, and put them next to my 6K.

If you don't like the post ..... PM me. I don't bite. I am not the enemy.

This is post number 97 in the thread.

 

[Eric Z]

Now this is getting much more interesting!
Using an IR cut filter instead of the OLPF produces sharper images.

Any down-side to this method? Aliasing / moire?