Message for Jarred

[Gunleik Groven]

"everyone here is seriously missing the point"

"Bringing in a subject matter into the forums that doesn't highlight how AMAZING Red is... is like walking into a forest with 10lbs of raw meat strapped to your belt, you never make it 100 yards before you're attacked by a bunch of wolves.

First off: fill your bellies, you might be less aggressive."

"We might end up with a cell phone camera, which is great if you do youtube cat "
"I like the chatter about how they remember "

" but all of this negativity is neither helpful for Red or yourselves."


I think there are noone having issues about discussing new sensor Tech here.
There has been a lot of those, the latest around Sony's new development.

I guess what makes me react, is the attitude that everyone here is digging their heads into their negative unprofessional sand, as a way to try to start a real discussion on a relevant theme. That approach is sometimes pretty counter-productive.

G

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

I know for myself, moire and grain are the two other DP's on every shoot I do. And quite frankly, I'm tiered of them lingering around the set.

You are welcome to present examples pointing moire issues with Red cameras and Foveon's superiority with noise.

All things put aside, I do realize that most of you guys are primarily shooters and haven't dug deep into image manipulation constraints. But there is a better way and embrace "change", isn't that the motto around here?

If one disregards the generalization and something which might be interpreted as underestimation of this community, it is helpful to mention that all high-end UHD professional motion imaging camera manufacturers use Bayer CMOS, high end DSLRs use Bayer CMOS, and recently medium format digital cameras have switched to Bayer CMOS.

62 db compared to 80 db means you have 3 stops less of DR.

So far - DR is inferior, sensitivity is inferior, required data rate would be higher for same acuity raw and in approaching extremes performance falls drastically, either in under or overexposure.

You are welcome to bring more and new information to the discussion proving superiority if some recent advances have adressed the issues already discussed on this forum.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Raw sensor tech is always superior to the products we use. There's so much else going on to create the actual image we use. I'd like to see the raw sensor tech specs of the Dragon sensor because I figure it would look way beyond what we know it can do in our cameras.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

Oh, forgot to mention... for the love of god, FF sensor please... I can't express how annoying it is that FOV, DOF and Depth Perception never feels correct. A 50mm should still be a 50mm, if needed, develop a scaling algorithm and add another chip to the camera, whatever it takes.

It's always off putting when someone starts a discussion here with "if you don't agree with me, you must just be a simple minded fan boy." I'll leave that for another day.

As far as your comment above, for anyone coming from a motion picture background, s35 is "normal" and FF is not.

 

[Martin Stevens]

Also, a 50mm lens is always a 50mm lens.

 

[Björn Benckert]

That is one hell of an image, it's hard to believe that came straight out of the camera. Makes me want to try and recreate that garbage. Anyhow, everyone here is seriously missing the point. Bringing in a subject matter into the forums that doesn't highlight how AMAZING Red is... is like walking into a forest with 10lbs of raw meat strapped to your belt, you never make it 100 yards before you're attacked by a bunch of wolves.

First off: fill your bellies, you might be less aggressive.
Second: the idea behind the tech is a pretty sound solution even though the tech has some issues, but that is exactly what Red is good at. Solving issues!
Third: we all know what happens when you cram megapixels in a sensor. We might end up with a cell phone camera, which is great if you do youtube cat videos.
Fourth: I like the chatter about how they remember hearing about the tech 15 years ago, but it is also worth noting that the Bayer system was developed in the 70's (45 years ago, yeah, 45 years ago) Megapixels does not always mean better image, that is a prosumer marketing war and I would rather not see Red follow suit.

I would love to see Red's inventive, problem solving, no nonsense attitude crack the nut that Sigma is slowly gaining ground on. Grab the bull by the horns and knock the socks off motion image processing. FFS people, have faith! Logic only tells me that the race towards megapixels will only result in diminishing returns in both image quality and computation power in resolving the image.

Oh, forgot to mention... for the love of god, FF sensor please... I can't express how annoying it is that FOV, DOF and Depth Perception never feels correct. A 50mm should still be a 50mm, if needed, develop a scaling algorithm and add another chip to the camera, whatever it takes.

Not sure if this will strike a cord with you guys, but all of this negativity is neither helpful for Red or yourselves.

It´s not about being negative, it´s just that your posts and suggestions kind of question common knowledge.

A 50mm lens will always be a 50mm lens, if not it´s not, then it´s not a 50mm lens.... Focal length = distance from the sensor plane to the point where the light intersect. For a 50mm lens that distance is always 5cm... on a 8mm sensor it is still 5cm, on a large 65mm sensor it´s still 5cm... so what makes "FF" (which in cinema terms is referred to as "vista vision") the only format that gives the only right " depth Perception"? FF / Vista Vision has not really been used in films for much more than in the old days of optical printing VFX work. For still cameras it´s been a used standard, but for film not so much. And not really possible to make an algorithm that makes a sensor bigger than it actually is... an optical solution can, like a speed booster but using such would be quite problematic with most cinema glas as they are not built for the FF format and a lot of the protrude quite close to the lens so not so easy to get that extra element of glas between the sensor and lens and still resolve a good image.

Also so far red is not really racing for pixel count. I´m sure they could go much higher than what they do now, but they are at 6k for a reason and that being 6k is quite optimal for downsampling to 4k which is the standard people will most likely aim for in the near future. As a lot of the Cmos debayer artefacts and lost sharpness are cleared after a 1/3 downscale to 4k.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

I realize this is a thread from 2007 but just to show how far back this discussion has been going on.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?2901-Foveon-sensor-for-digital-cinema

I think it's good to keep an open mind about any technology, as things advance all of the time. Just know that Graeme and Jarred are very well aware of Foveon and a bunch of other technology as well. They don't operate in a bubble. They have chosen the path that offers best price/quality performance for their business model and I would suspect if something comes along that strikes their fancy they will be on top of it. These guys are pretty smart and have been at this for a while. You don't have to agree with their approach. But rest assured they aren't blind to what's out there.

 

[Bill Anderson]

Kinda like asking an Irishman if he's aware of Guinness.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

Recently upgraded to Dragon, which is great for the current path of tech Red is going. But, there is a better option out there.

The fact that you want RED to succeed is a good thing. I do, too, and I'm not a RED user or owner. I want RED to be #1 in the digital movie camera business, simply because that's the kind of world I want to live in. I'm sure Jarred appreciates this kind of input. I have suggested a few things, too.

There are a few things which you did not understand about RED and the industry as a whole. This does not matter, as it's better to share your ideas than to keep them secret just in case you discover you're wrong about this or that fact. But the gaps in your knowledge do not flatter you when you are aggressive towards other members of these forums. They are no less experienced and knowledgeable than you, so perhaps you ought to treat them that way.