Jim, how about a 5K 1000fps camera?

[Tom Lowe]

With the forthcoming acceptance of 4K RGB as a finishing and projection standard, I see a big, glaring gap in high-speed cinematography. Specifically, we need a 5K RAW camera that can use fast existing lenses like Master Primes to produce 4K RGB high-speed footage.

The existing Phantom 65mm can only do 4096 x 2304 (16:9) at 150fps.. which to me, at best, makes it a wash with Epic X (lenses?). There will be new "Planet Earth" and IMAX productions finishing at 4K RGB that will need at least 400fps.... better at 600fps... but truly the need is for 1000fps at 5K RAW.

Thanks if you are able to consider it. :beer:

 

[Joseph S.]

brains

brains

Since it's all going to be "BRAIN" modules now, maybe down the line we can buy a RED high-speed version of the brain, and it'll work with all the existing Epic modules, etc. Regular 5K Epic shoot, then swap with the high-speed brain when required. I don't know the science behind the sensors, but is it safe to assume it would be a whole new system?

I guess we'll be using our "brains" (sorry, couldn't resist).

 

[James Bender]

Since it's all going to be "BRAIN" modules now, maybe down the line we can buy a RED high-speed version of the brain, and it'll work with all the existing Epic modules, etc. Regular 5K Epic shoot, then swap with the high-speed brain when required. I don't know the science behind the sensors, but is it safe to assume it would be a whole new system?

I guess we'll be using our "brains" (sorry, couldn't resist).

I think I just got a boner

 

[Brad Webb]

Since it's all going to be "BRAIN" modules now, maybe down the line we can buy a RED high-speed version of the brain, and it'll work with all the existing Epic modules, etc. Regular 5K Epic shoot, then swap with the high-speed brain when required. I don't know the science behind the sensors, but is it safe to assume it would be a whole new system?

I guess we'll be using our "brains" (sorry, couldn't resist).

I wouldn't be surprised one bit if RED is already working on this.

 

[Mitch Martinez]

in addition to a future brain that might have that high speed capacity, there's also the data rates that will need to write to the recordable media - so with the new brain, there might also be a need for new media too

 

[Andrew Luczenczyn]

The issue with going with this idea, is that physics is limiting.

At its core, film works at high speeds because if you blast enough light at a subject, you can shoot very fast and still get that chemical reaction to get a negative.

But electronics relies on a much slower development process that is subject to the confines of the circuit board. ICs, capacitors, even the copper in the board offer more resistance, more heat, and a slower process. Electronics have come to the point where the clock speed in a computer is limited to the speed that electrons can travel through copper - 1000FPS at 5k is not just asking for a rework of the camera, but of electronics down to the resistors and transistors.

 

[Joseph S.]

The issue with going with this idea, is that physics is limiting.

At its core, film works at high speeds because if you blast enough light at a subject, you can shoot very fast and still get that chemical reaction to get a negative.

But electronics relies on a much slower development process that is subject to the confines of the circuit board. ICs, capacitors, even the copper in the board offer more resistance, more heat, and a slower process. Electronics have come to the point where the clock speed in a computer is limited to the speed that electrons can travel through copper - 1000FPS at 5k is not just asking for a rework of the camera, but of electronics down to the resistors and transistors.

Great point. Like planning the moon landing 50 years before it was doable. Easy on paper, but tough to make the rocket. Hard to imagine the physics of what goes on at 5K/100fps, let alone 5K/1,000fps. Pretty mind boggling when you think about it.

Wiki link about Moore's Law (even mentions sensors and pixels). Seems everyone was surprised that it was so accurate many years later. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law

There's hope

 

[Danish P.V.]

The issue with going with this idea, is that physics is limiting.

At its core, film works at high speeds because if you blast enough light at a subject, you can shoot very fast and still get that chemical reaction to get a negative.

But electronics relies on a much slower development process that is subject to the confines of the circuit board. ICs, capacitors, even the copper in the board offer more resistance, more heat, and a slower process. Electronics have come to the point where the clock speed in a computer is limited to the speed that electrons can travel through copper - 1000FPS at 5k is not just asking for a rework of the camera, but of electronics down to the resistors and transistors.

Not only that but also the demands of the majority of customers. Currently there`s so much experimentation going on with highspeed cinematography which doesn`t reflect regular production demands. And I believe most (80%) of users will only use 50 to 150 fps for certain shots.

 

[Brad Webb]

Not only that but also the demands of the majority of customers. Currently there`s so much experimentation going on with highspeed cinematography which doesn`t reflect regular production demands. And I believe most (80%) of users will only use 50 to 150 fps for certain shots.

If RED builds it... they will come.

 

[Rick Burnett]

The main limiting factor is the read/reset. Given that it is 5ms, the fastest you could go would be limited by that amount, which is 200fps.

From what I gather from Jim, the design of the circuitry in the sensor doesn't benefit from reading less pixels on a row, but can be made faster by ignoring rows at the top and bottom (which means the read/reset time will reduced since you don't have to go through as many for the read/reset). But, there may be other limiting factors in the design other than the read/reset. But, this also means a lower than 5k image.

This is what Jim said when someone asked about high speed in Epic (which wasn't your request)

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=581537#post581537

 

[Jannard]

Very difficult trick... even for us.

Jim

 

[Vico Martin]

...a spacetime continuum ropture proxy module! ;-))

 

[Thomas Wright]

You just need to attach the flux capacitor module

 

[Gary Paul Walker]

Apple Motion Optical Flow?

(I am, of course, joking)

 

[A. Clint Litton]

maybe a special pixel array hooked up with 5 or so different processors, each linked to one another to fire/read in quick succession, so lines 1, 6, 11, 16, etc are read by the first processor, lines 2, 7, 12, 17 are read by the second, lines 3, 8, 13, 18 are read by the third, etc...

of course, i'm sure that could maybe just be an "on paper" thought, as getting those five processors and sensor arrays to run in perfect sync (essentially offset by 1ms increments each) sounds challenging to say the least.

yeah, it seems like cost could be one of the smaller issues here...

 

[PatrickW]

Very difficult trick... even for us.

Jim

However, you failed to deem said task impossible.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Very difficult trick... even for us.

Jim

He he, I particularly like the "even for us" note.

But this means not impossible, just difficult, which leaves me to believe the possibility for a future Epic High Speed Brain, could be there.

It is obvious that the price point of an HS Epic Brain will come at a Price, understandably, so that no one thinks that this could be achieved even close to the cost of any of the current Brains, especially also giving that this Brain will likely be of limited production.

Nonetheless I would definitely be one of those in line to buy one...

Epic-X Brain .. swap to Epic 645 Brain.. swap to Epic HS Brain.. swap swap, unlimited possibilities as new Brains get developed.. I love this Company!!

 

[Rick Burnett]

maybe a special pixel array hooked up with 5 or so different processors, each linked to one another to fire/read in quick succession, so lines 1, 6, 11, 16, etc are read by the first processor, lines 2, 7, 12, 17 are read by the second, lines 3, 8, 13, 18 are read by the third, etc...

of course, i'm sure that could maybe just be an "on paper" thought, as getting those five processors and sensor arrays to run in perfect sync (essentially offset by 1ms increments each) sounds challenging to say the least.

yeah, it seems like cost could be one of the smaller issues here...

1ms is forever in microelectronics, we work mostly with picoseconds (10^-12), so sync is not an issue. The problem is just the amount of data being processed. 5K images at 1000 frames a second is a lot of data. Also, with that much circuitry pumping, heat starts to be a factor as well.

Also, since many times you are capturing something that is moving VERY fast, you'd want to minimize the read/reset as much as possible so the image isn't distorted when slowed down.

 

[Graham_C]

Am i right in the assumption that increasing framerates is not really something an add on module could accomplish..it is in fact a facility that needs to be engineered into the brain unit itself ?

However,Dear Red,if i am wrong then please consider offering a higher framerate module for the Scarlet ,maybe double(triple?) the advertised 150 fps burst.I`d happily pay well for such a unit.Indeed my business could use quite a number of these.Secretly i`m hoping that with a 2/3rds chip, engineering a high speed scarlet brain may be a little easier, thermally speaking, than doing the same in Epic?

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Am i right in the assumption that increasing framerates is not really something an add on module could accomplish..it is in fact a facility that needs to be engineered into the brain unit itself ?

Correct.. and a very complex one at that.