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 :)

I was wrrr...wrrrrong.

Status
Not open for further replies.
They are multiple reasons for scaled over cropped:

-Better overall resolution (sharpness)
-Reduced noise
-Easier inter-cuts between "normal" and "cropped" frame
-wide angle
-Better picture quality, when blown back to 4K (?)
-Easier to hide mistakes (soft focus)
-less visible compression issues (if any:))
I am not a TechWiz, and may be wrong on some of the points.
Cheers
 
Häakon said:
Here's a quick visual for you:

scaledmode.jpg
Click to expand...
Häakon,
Very well laid out...nice visual....
 
The truth is that as much I love the idea of 4K, I will do a 99% of my work in 2K.
Indy features, commercial, video clips, documentaries and live shows will not require from me to finish in 4K. Also the realistic workflow I can afford will be in 2K.
"Today" I will use a 4K only for CGI, still frames and special request...
I thing REDONE will benefit a great deal when the 2K scaled is enabled.
It will feel completed.

My two cents
 
Häakon said:
While it's the lens and aperture that directly control the DOF range, the sensor absolutely plays a part in the equation because it dictates what range of lenses you can use...... In essence, it's all about the sensor. :-)
Click to expand...

No, it's not. You're assuming the camera is going to stay in the same place. It doesn't have to, unless there are physical limitations, as I noted. My point it that DOF field is controllable by the cameraman if he/she is wiling to use that control. In many practical situations, what you say is true because the camera location is dictated by that situation. But it is not technically true, and that was what I was pointing out.

But I'm not going to argue.
 
S16 DOF can be pretty helpful on those fastmoving steadicam-action shots.
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi Häakon,

I may be missing something but the DOF is identical in all 3 examples you posted.

Stephen
Click to expand...

That why he wrote - illustrative purposes only, i suppose.
 
But with REDCODE compression, is it that hard to shoot in 4K and just downrez it to 2K later? There may be some advantages to having a 4K original recording that you can go back to someday, even if you finish the project in 2K.

Just because the majority of D.I.'s are done at 2K, doesn't mean I think that's a good thing.

Also, consider that often they are scanning 35mm neg these days at 4K and then downrezzing to 2K for post on a D.I. -- again, this suggests that it would be better to capture in 4K on the RED and downrez it to 2K if desired.

And also remember that a 2K window-mode crop is a 2K Bayer-filtered RAW image that has to be converted to 2K RGB. You'd get better results starting out with a 4K Bayer-filtered RAW image to get down to 2K RGB.
 
Hi David

1. Of course 4K bayer raw will be better, than 2K raw when either is re-sampled to RGB such as HDCam or Cineon, since I have not seen an example yet will it be better in a way the audience can see in a theatre? Especially will they notice the difference on their home HD screen?

2. I cannot find anything about capability to correct for exposure differences while ramping recording speeds or for that matter an ability to ramp recording speeds. Is this in the pipeline?

3. Will capturing 4K on the RED and downrezzing to 2K involve a lot more rendering time than, recording in 2K to start with. Since final cut will put the raw on the timeline rendering to Rgb for editing will be a bit resource intensive imo? So if one wants to edit on 2K raw they will have to render twice?

Hi Albert.

"albert rudnicki"

"There are multiple reasons for scaled over cropped:

-Better overall resolution (sharpness)
-Reduced noise
-Easier inter-cuts between "normal" and "cropped" frame
-wide angle
-Better picture quality, when blown back to 4K (?)"

I sure agree about the dof part of course, how do you know yet that the quoted above quality differences between scaled and cropped are true? given that they are technically true, how do you know they will be noticeable?
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi Häakon,

I may be missing something but the DOF is identical in all 3 examples you posted.

Stephen
Click to expand...
Stephen,

Yes it is - but the "windowed" image has a much narrower FOV. In order to get your shot to look like the 4K or scaled images, you have to use a much wider lens - and this will affect your DOF.

One could get a 2/3" chip camera to display the same DOF characteristics a camera with a 35mm sensor if certain conditions were met, but the point is that these conditions are inconvenient and sometimes not even possible. The reason that most lower-res cameras have expanded DOF is because they are using wider lenses in the first place. If it was possible to attach a 35mm lens directly to a DVX (I'm not talking about the "cine adapters" which require you to shoot through two pieces of glass), your FOV would be so narrow that the camera would be completely useless. But yes - you would have 35mm DOF. :-)

Some might say about the windowed mode, "use the same lens, just back up!" but this is extremely inconvenient in many situations and simply impossible in others. If you're shooting any kind of interior work on location (a pretty standard scenario), there's often no way to "back the camera up" as far as you would need in order to maintain the same FOV. Even outside, such a distance may present other shooting difficulties not worth the tradeoff.

I think the point I was trying to get across was that none of the three solutions is the "holy grail;" they all have one sort of tradeoff or another. 4K at 60p onboard would probably be that apex for a whole lot of people, but that's not feasible for the near future, so one must decide how they want to deal with overcranked footage. Shoot in 4K for everything but offspeed stuff and then use scaled when you want to go faster? Shoot everything in 2K windowed so that the image characteristics match seamlessly throughout the entire picture? There are a bunch of combinations; it's just important to know exactly what the different options are and how they function so that you can make the best choice for your particular project.

I think the windowed option definitely has its merits (the expanded DOF may actually be a lifesaving help in certain situations), but I do think that once all of the features are enabled we will see more people choose to shoot scaled for their cine-type projects; 60p will be sufficient for most work, and this mode will maintain the best picture quality for the final output.

Best,

Häakon
 
tj williams said:
Hi David
1. Of course 4K bayer raw will be better, than 2K raw when either is re-sampled to RGB such as HDCam or Cineon, since I have not seen an example yet will it be better in a way the audience can see in a theatre?
Click to expand...

Can an average audience member tell 200T stock from 500T stock?

I don't like to get into "what's good enough to getaway with" types of discussions when it comes to theatrical presentation. That sort of thinking led a lot of people into believing that 1080P HDCAM was the future for theatrical movies.

Also, I don't like generalizing too often about what an "audience" can see -- I can see the difference between a Cooke S4 and a Primo lens in a movie theater (usually) and I can tell HDCAM-to-35mm versus 35mm, I can even tell HDCAM photography on standard def TV sets... and I consider myself an audience member who's opinion on theatrical presentations matter.

I certainly don't want to see us all choosing to work at the lowest quality level we think we can get past the least discriminating viewer. I still cherish my own viewing experiences in a movie theater -- I'm selfish!

And as artists, we work to our own standards, which tend to always be higher than the average consumer/viewer. Ultimately, the only satisfaction in our line of work is pleasing our own aesthetic sensibility and struggling to improve our skills to meet our high standards. So I really don't care if the "average" viewer notices or cares whether I used a double-net flag to darken a bookshelf behind some actor's head, or if I raised the camera two more inches for a more flattering close-up. The devil is in the details. Audiences (generally) expect movies to be made by professionals who know more than they do about moviemaking. When I go to see a doctor, I hope they care more about medical learning and knowledge than I do. I hope the guy who built my house has higher standards for construction than I do.

So my guess is that 2K RAW to 2K RGB will look "fine" on the big screen, probably in the ballpark of 1080P Panavision Genesis photography, sharpness-wise, maybe slightly better, which I consider sort of acceptable... but not preferable unless you want a certain softness for creative reasons (period movie or romantic comedy or fantasy.)

There are other 2K-ish single-sensor cameras on the market, but besides the Dalsa, the RED is the only practical 4K Bayer-filtered single-sensor camera on the market, so it's my general feeling that one should try and get the maximum quality/resolution possible out of the camera except when you have a good reason not to (shooting for HDTV broadcast, needing a slo-mo shot, etc.)

I'm not stuck on that concept though because I know there are a lot of practical reasons to work in 2K, but my hope is that if I get to shoot a project on the RED, I'd work in 4K RAW for the capture even if everything after that is 2K RGB.

(I don't mean to lecture you in particular, it's just that the whole issue of what's "good enough" always sets me off... Obviously the RED team is working to ridiculously high standards.)
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Can an average audience member tell 200T stock from 500T stock?

I don't like to get into "what's good enough to getaway with" types of discussions when it comes to theatrical presentation. That sort of thinking led a lot of people into believing that 1080P HDCAM was the future for theatrical movies.

Also, I don't like generalizing too often about what an "audience" can see -- I can see the difference between a Cooke S4 and a Primo lens in a movie theater (usually) and I can tell HDCAM-to-35mm versus 35mm, I can even tell HDCAM photography on standard def TV sets... and I consider myself an audience member who's opinion on theatrical presentations matter.

I certainly don't want to see us all choosing to work at the lowest quality level we think we can get past the least discriminating viewer. I still cherish my own viewing experiences in a movie theater -- I'm selfish!

And as artists, we work to our own standards, which tend to always be higher than the average consumer/viewer. Ultimately, the only satisfaction in our line of work is pleasing our own aesthetic sensibility and struggling to improve our skills to meet our high standards. So I really don't care if the "average" viewer notices or cares whether I used a double-net flag to darken a bookshelf behind some actor's head, or if I raised the camera two more inches for a more flattering close-up. The devil is in the details. Audiences (generally) expect movies to be made by professionals who know more than they do about moviemaking. When I go to see a doctor, I hope they care more about medical learning and knowledge than I do. I hope the guy who built my house has higher standards for construction than I do.

So my guess is that 2K RAW to 2K RGB will look "fine" on the big screen, probably in the ballpark of 1080P Panavision Genesis photography, sharpness-wise, maybe slightly better, which I consider sort of acceptable... but not preferable unless you want a certain softness for creative reasons (period movie or romantic comedy or fantasy.)

There are other 2K-ish single-sensor cameras on the market, but besides the Dalsa, the RED is the only practical 4K Bayer-filtered single-sensor camera on the market, so it's my general feeling that one should try and get the maximum quality/resolution possible out of the camera except when you have a good reason not to (shooting for HDTV broadcast, needing a slo-mo shot, etc.)

I'm not stuck on that concept though because I know there are a lot of practical reasons to work in 2K, but my hope is that if I get to shoot a project on the RED, I'd work in 4K RAW for the capture even if everything after that is 2K RGB.

(I don't mean to lecture you in particular, it's just that the whole issue of what's "good enough" always sets me off... Obviously the RED team is working to ridiculously high standards.)
Click to expand...

I've nothing to add, I'm just quoting your entire post for agreement :)
 
Also, 2K window-mode crop does beg the question as to whether a 3-CCD camera with 2MP per color would be similar in resolution (not to mention, depth of field characteristics), whereas a 4K Bayer-filter camera seems to be delivering superior resolution over a 3-CCD HD camera.

In other words, in 4K mode, the RED camera is rather unique (dare I use the term... "revolutionary"?), but in 2K windowed-mode, it starts to seem less unique (to me). We've been seeing HD & 2K quality for years and 2/3" CCD depth of field -- but 4K photography, hopefully combined with 4K projection, with 35mm depth of field, that seems something to get excited about.

Surely there must have been a good reason for the RED team to choose to make the camera 4K rather than 2K. If 2K is "good enough" for almost every application you can think of short of IMAX, then what's the point of 4K? I think the point really is similar to why we use 35mm for high-end TV work -- i.e. oversampling works. And for theatrical work, it's a chance to stop the dropping of standards over the years and reverse the trend.
 
David.

You just summed up why I did not order SI...
(besides Graeme, of course -;)

But I can see a lot of use for 2k scaled (in-camera from 4k)

Not for Cinematic stuff, but commercials and material with a shorter production time-span, smaller crew, less funding.

You will (theoretically) get a superior full-raster 2k image with the 35mmm carracteristics (if you so wish), but still an easier workflow where you eliminate much of the transcoding time.

I can see the use for that.

Cheers!

Gunleik
 
David Mullen ASC said:
In other words, in 4K mode, the RED camera is rather unique (dare I use the term... "revolutionary"?), but in 2K windowed-mode, it starts to seem less unique (to me). We've been seeing HD & 2K quality for years -- but 4K photography, hopefully combined with 4K projection, with 35mm depth of field, that seems something to get excited about.
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree. And I think oversampling is the key as well. I can't imagine I will be shooting anything but 4K with the camera - with the notable exception of offspeed shots, and we just have to personally decide what mode gives us the best footage in those circumstances.

Also, 2K windowed mode - even if it's of comparible quality to other 3CCD HD cameras on the market - does afford some extra flexibility for the documentary shooter who benefits from the expanded depth of field, or for the event shooter who needs absolutely as much recording time as possible and where 4K oversampled quality isn't the absolute top priority. Someday we'll get the 4K (or more) camera with 60p (or more) onboard, and then we'll find something new to nit pick. :-) But until then, it seems that RED ONE offers arguably the nicest array of format options, choices, and quality of any other camera in its class - unarguably any others at this price point.
 
Obviously I'm just speaking from my own perspective, bias, prejudice, whatnot, towards theatrical presentation.

Now from a practical standpoint, obviously there are a lot of good arguments for working below 4K, especially for projects not designed for a theatrical presentation. My general rule has always been to shoot for the worst potential (i.e. most critical) distribution scenario (theatrical, next to that, HDTV broadcast), not the most typical or likely one (i.e. straight to DVD, NTSC broadcast). But that's something you have to decide project-by-project.
 
tj williams said:
Hi David
"There are multiple reasons for scaled over cropped:

-Better overall resolution (sharpness)
-Reduced noise
-Easier inter-cuts between "normal" and "cropped" frame
-wide angle
-Better picture quality, when blown back to 4K (?)"

I sure agree about the dof part of course, how do you know yet that the quoted above quality differences between scaled and cropped are true? given that they are technically true, how do you know they will be noticeable?
Click to expand...

I am saying it based on my experience with HD and finishing in SD (mostly for commercial work).
The process was done in post, so I had a lot more control over it.
I guess in case of RED, everything has to be done in real time and IN-CAM; that's a lot of data to process!
 
I really want to see some filmouts. I wonder how much difference we are going to see between the 4k shots and the 2K shots when they have been scanned by a 2K FILM SCANNER.

We know that the digital files will contain "more information" but do we actually have a 2K test written to film to see the acquisition differences.

I am for scaled because the idea of loosing the DOF is a big drag. Let's face it, we want the lens DOF to look the same between 4K and 2K. Sure, I'll loose the DOF and the f-stops when recording over cranked shots in 2K, but I'd rather have the full field of view that 2K scaled has to offer. Wouldn't that maximize what I get out of the 18-50 zoom.

David
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top