New REDCODE vs. Uncompressed

[Jannard]

REDCODE is one of the major reasons for RED's success and usefulness in the field. It allows huge files to be recorded on inexpensive media.

The new versions of REDCODE that will come in Scarlet and EPIC (especially) are even better for two reasons. We keep improving the code and we are providing less compressed options.

But every once in awhile we hear those that want to still shoot uncompressed. So we can build a box for uncompressed that will handle the Mysterium-X, S35 sensor to 100fps uncompressed. That is over 2GB/sec. Cost of the box will be $150K and will record 13 minutes of 100fps or about 50 minutes of 24/25fps. We can also make a box for Monstro FF35, 100fps uncompressed, which is 4.8GB/sec. For similar recording times, the box will sell for $300K.

We cannot afford to guess if there is a real market for these so we will need firm orders for 20 units of each with a 50% deposit before we build them.

I need to go on record here and say that we see absolutely no reason to shoot uncompressed and every reason to shoot REDCODE, especially given the advancements I have spoken of above. But we are keeping our ears to the ground and want to serve our customers, even if they are asking for something we believe to be totally unnecessary. At least we will be open about our view before collecting any money.

We finally recommend that anyone sitting on the fence should wait and see what the REDCODE 225, 250 and 500 can do before ever considering an uncompressed solution. But if you are hell-bent on an uncompressed box, send us a deposit. If we do not get enough deposits to build the boxes, we will refund the deposits. Otherwise, the deposits are non-refundable.

You can contact me directly if you have interest in this program.

Jim

 

[donatello b]

about time Red started having a few prices near sony prices !

 

[Jannard]

about time Red started having a few prices near sony prices !

We have prices like Sony's prices... I'm sure there is a Sony camera that sells for about $17,500 somewhere in their lineup.

As for the boxes, I don't think anyone has made a box that records 4.8GB/sec at any price. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I certainly don't think there is one in Sony's catalog.

If you do the math on this... the numbers run up incredibly fast. I can't imagine how many terabytes of footage you would have in just a days worth of shooting, let alone several months! I guess that's why REDCODE was born.

Jim

 

[Rodrigo Lizana]

Just for the pleasure of asking, not to criticize the actual product...how much would have cost an optical viewfinder/mirror shutter Epic version ?.

To stay on topic : Don´t see any good reason for the uncompressed boxes...

 

[michael zaletel]

We finally recommend that anyone sitting on the fence should wait and see what the REDCODE 225, 250 and 500 can do before ever considering an uncompressed solution. But if you are hell-bent on an uncompressed box, send us a deposit.

Is there any way to give us 2K uncompressed at 24 FPS? Would there be ANY image quality advantages at all if I were to pull up a frame of RedCode vs. Uncompressed in Photoshop and zoom in?

What would a solution like that cost? $10,000 or something?

-shooter

 

[jaadgy akanni]

Am I the only one who saw sarcasm/irony in Jim's opening statement. Hell, if I could compress what my eyes see in my everyday life with RedCode, I would. It would probably make it more bearable, easier to manage...lol

 

[SalaTar]

I would like to process my captures with my workflow, without redcode.

 

[Alex Coelho]

Check is in the mail for one of those monstro uncompressed cameras. But dont cash it until Friday b/c my paycheck has to hit first. :bleh:

 

[Steve Sherrick]

REDCODE is one of the major reasons for RED's success and usefulness in the field. It allows huge files to be recorded on inexpensive media.

The new versions of REDCODE that will come in Scarlet and EPIC (especially) are even better for two reasons. We keep improving the code and we are providing less compressed options.

But every once in awhile we hear those that want to still shoot uncompressed. So we can build a box for uncompressed that will handle the Mysterium-X, S35 sensor to 100fps uncompressed. That is over 2GB/sec. Cost of the box will be $150K and will record 13 minutes of 100fps or about 50 minutes of 24/25fps. We can also make a box for Monstro FF35, 100fps uncompressed, which is 4.8GB/sec. For similar recording times, the box will sell for $300K.

We cannot afford to guess if there is a real market for these so we will need firm orders for 20 units of each with a 50% deposit before we build them.

I need to go on record here and say that we see absolutely no reason to shoot uncompressed and every reason to shoot REDCODE, especially given the advancements I have spoken of above. But we are keeping our ears to the ground and want to serve our customers, even if they are asking for something we believe to be totally unnecessary. At least we will be open about our view before collecting any money.

We finally recommend that anyone sitting on the fence should wait and see what the REDCODE 225, 250 and 500 can do before ever considering an uncompressed solution. But if you are hell-bent on an uncompressed box, send us a deposit. If we do not get enough deposits to build the boxes, we will refund the deposits. Otherwise, the deposits are non-refundable.

You can contact me directly if you have interest in this program.

Jim

This is a brilliant post Jim. I'm one of those who sometimes plays around with the "What ifs" and one of those has always been, I wonder what this would like in uncompressed. Could I push the image harder? Then I saw Che and realized that if the image looks that good projected on a big screen, then what more do I need to know. Redcode will continue to improve and eventually we'll probably just drop this thought about using uncompressed.

What I love about your statement, even if it's tongue and cheek, is that it's going to be costly to do uncompressed and a lot of us probably can't afford to do so. We just need to embrace Redcode, see it evolve, and realize that the images we are getting are a very good cost/performance ratio. And that is understating it.

Thanks for this post.

 

[Brook Willard]

Very cool, glad to hear there's an uncompressed option.

Will the new REDCODE be opened up to different decoding/debayering algorithms when it ships? That'll make a huge difference for those that are thinking about uncompressed but are frightened by the obvious downsides.

 

[Peter McCully]

Compressed is good. I'll stay with that.

 

[Jannard]

Very cool, glad to hear there's an uncompressed option.

Will the new REDCODE be opened up to different decoding/debayering algorithms when it ships? That'll make a huge difference for those that are thinking about uncompressed but are frightened by the obvious downsides.

There is no uncompressed option unless we get 20 deposits for at least one of the boxes. There is a lot of brain surgery we would have to do and really aren't going to do it if customers only "talk" about uncompressed.

Jim

 

[Jason Francois]

Boggles the mind to think about that much data. Boggles the mind to think that you actually could build it ...and I have little doubt that you could.

I was going to ask if I could borrow $150k, but I think I'd rather just shoot with REDCODE and use the $150k for a movie.

Still fun to think about, not that I would EVER need it (uncompressed that is).

Thanks for the offer,

J.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

There is no uncompressed option unless we get 20 deposits for at least one of the boxes. There is a lot of brain surgery we would have to do and really aren't going to do it if customers only "talk" about uncompressed.

Jim

Are you talking about a box to output uncompressed or record uncompressed?

How can bypassing compression add $300,000 to the cost of a camera? Is the special connector and cable that expensive? Or are you adding the cost of an uncompressed recorder to the mix? Or is this high cost simply to add an uncompressed-out option on the camera?

 

[Noah Kadner]

Ya know, there are some days when I sure wouldn't mind just recording straight to ProRes HQ QuickTime .MOV and be all set to edit right when I get home, foregoing the RAW workflow.

But anyways I couldn't see a need for that sort of $$$ outlay to have an uncompressed RED recorder anytime soon. Sounds more like it's worth waiting a few more years until flash media(or whatever it would involve) drops a few zeroes at the end of the price.

Noah

 

[Esteban Sosnitsky]

I would like to see an example first, or at least a render of the box!!!:biggrin: :biggrin: :innocent: :wink:
Just kiidding boss..

 

[Wesley Scoggins]

We have prices like Sony's prices... I'm sure there is a Sony camera that sells for about $17,500 somewhere in their lineup.

As for the boxes, I don't think anyone has made a box that records 4.8GB/sec at any price. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I certainly don't think there is one in Sony's catalog.

If you do the math on this... the numbers run up incredibly fast. I can't imagine how many terabytes of footage you would have in just a days worth of shooting, let alone several months! I guess that's why REDCODE was born.

Jim

Red's prices are better than Sony's prices.

We're going to be able to pick up a fully functional Scarlet platform for 6,000 next year. Compare that to 13-14k for a EX3 (don't get me wrong, i've seen some really great images come out of the EX3, it's a wonderful camera by all means) and you could literally BUY outright two Scarlet's WITH extra accessories for both, and still be under the price of a EX3.

That means that not only could you have a Scarlet, whose specs are better than an EX3, for a Student or Indie Production, BUT for the SAME PRICE you could also have a B-Camera.

OR, for a few thousand dollars more, RIGHT NOW, we could pick up a Red One.

I've seen lots of films and TV shows shot with Red, that largely look indistinguishable from 35mm film, but i've yet to see a feature length film shot with an EX3.

 

[Wesley Scoggins]

Are you talking about a box to output uncompressed or record uncompressed?

How can bypassing compression add $300,000 to the cost of a camera? Is the special connector and cable that expensive? Or are you adding the cost of an uncompressed recorder to the mix? Or is this high cost simply to add an uncompressed-out option on the camera?

From what I gathered from the first post, it sounds like an adapter that connects to the camera INTERNALLY (not just something you click on outside, but something that has to be integrated into the output from the sensor), AND records it uncompressed, so it's most likely going to be some kind of heavy duty multi-TB RAID system.

To hold 50 minutes of 2 gigabytes a second footage, it would have to be AT LEAST 6 Terabytes, so you're going to need a thick pipe to output the uncompressed signal, and some MASSIVELY FAST harddrives (or SSD drives) that have AT LEAST 6 Terabytes of space, AND 2 gigabyte a second write times.

 

[Jannard]

Are you talking about a box to output uncompressed or record uncompressed?

How can bypassing compression add $300,000 to the cost of a camera? Is the special connector and cable that expensive? Or are you adding the cost of an uncompressed recorder to the mix? Or is this high cost simply to add an uncompressed-out option on the camera?

That is for an uncompressed recorder with storage...

But, we would have to modify the brains to provide this option. We are willing to do that and spend the development money, but only if we had some real reason to do so. I hear people keep bringing up the fact that they want uncompressed at any cost. Our package is very reasonable. Now we just need to see how many will step up and pay for it.

Again... I think it is a waste of time and money, especially given the advancements in REDCODE and the increased data rates in the new cameras... but I'm all ears.

Jim

 

[David Birdy]

Great options ..thanks Jim..
I would love to see the difference between Redcode on a 4K projector and uncompressed...anyone have a opinion as to the difference we might see??

Could this be in the cards for the 2010 NAB Red booth??


Dave