Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

New REDCODE vs. Uncompressed

Status
Not open for further replies.
David Birdy said:
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
Click to expand...

Peter Jackson and his team couldn't tell the difference with a RED ONE, in fact... guessed wrong. People here think that the Milk Girls footage was uncompressed. It was REDCODE. There were many things along the way that changed in a RED ONE that caused image issues, but REDCODE was not one of them. REDCODE had to change to compensate for other things in the chain.
 
REDCODE is the reason I jumped onboard in the first place. More than 4K, more than S35, etc.

Keep making REDCODE better and I'm happy :)
 
Correct me if Im wrong Jim but the higher data rates available in the new flavors of REDCODE are not actually providing significantly more information per frame? For example, it is my understanding that you only reach the higher data rates when you increase your framerate and resolution so the compression ratio has only been marginally decreased on a per frame basis.

That being said, why not offer even higher REDCODE data rates? 4GB/sec is a completely unusable data rate. Even for short form with very high budgets, I cant foresee anyone being able to use that in the near future. If I could record REDCODE 300 at 24fps, now we're talking significantly less compression. REDCODE was indeed the other half of RED's revolution and it performs beautifully but it doesn't seem like its a visually lossless codec. Course I have not had the opportunity to compare it to an uncompressed RED frame. Maybe we're attributing some of the image artifacting we see to REDCODE when in fact it is not REDCODE at all. I think it would be great to see full res frames in REDCODE and uncompressed so we can compare.
 
Jannard said:
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.
Click to expand...

  • Black paint and fancy-looking LEDs: $100
  • Refrigerator filled with rocks: $200
  • RED-DRIVE sitting inside fridge: $900
  • Medical bills for back pain: $5000
  • No one can tell the difference: priceless.

There's some things uncompressed can help, for everything else, there's REDCODE.
 
$150K seems like a lot of money just to prove to yourself how good Recode is.

Sorry, this is one Red product I won't be putting a deposit on.

Redcode Rocks as it is--let alone the coming improvements.
 
Jannard said:
...There were many things along the way that changed in a RED ONE that caused image issues, but REDCODE was not one of them. REDCODE had to change to compensate for other things in the chain.
Click to expand...

Jim, could you elaborate on this a bit. What kind of changes? Or are you referring to the new Redcodes having to change, to accommodate the new brains and formats?
 
WesScog said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if it would be 2GB/s. At 24FPS, im assuming each frame is gonna be about 15MB each. That comes out to 360MB/s ( or 2.8 Gbits/s ). 50 minutes would come out to about 18TB. That's quite a bit. The box to hold that would have to be huge. Thats 12 1.5TB harddrives striped, but with that many, you'd have to put them in RAID 5(or better) because loosing all that data to one bad hard drive would suck. Thats 18 hard drives, at $130USD, which comes out to about ~$2,500. Add in the cost of a high end raid card (you'd have to buy a 24 port one), thats an extra $1,200.

Of course, that would have to be connected to a high end computer, running Linux maybe. I'm guessing a brand new Nahalem based box... another $2,000.

After that, you have to figure out how to feed the computer all that data. You could use USB 3.0, but thats not even available yet. So all the hardware would only be about $5,700 -- although I think the RED team would probably make thier own box, so a custom CNC'ed case would probably add another $5,000, making it $10,700 for hardware.

Jim is quoting $150,000. I'm guessing a LOT of that is going into getting the Scarlet to be able to output all that data and getting it into the computer.

Sorry about the tangent.
 
stevesherrick said:
Jim, could you elaborate on this a bit. What kind of changes? Or are you referring to the new Redcodes having to change, to accommodate the new brains and formats?
Click to expand...

Too much detail to give out. REDCODE has been tweaked all through the process since day one, just like a bunch of other things. But usually it has been some other issue arely on that needed improvement, not REDCODE. REDCODE has to work with a thousand other mice inside the cage. That is all I will say. Except... is anyone really unhappy with REDCODE? I haven't heard that one.

Jim
 
Emery Wells said:
Correct me if Im wrong Jim but the higher data rates available in the new flavors of REDCODE are not actually providing significantly more information per frame? For example, it is my understanding that you only reach the higher data rates when you increase your framerate and resolution so the compression ratio has only been marginally decreased on a per frame basis.

That being said, why not offer even higher REDCODE data rates? 4GB/sec is a completely unusable data rate. Even for short form with very high budgets, I cant foresee anyone being able to use that in the near future. If I could record REDCODE 300 at 24fps, now we're talking significantly less compression. REDCODE was indeed the other half of RED's revolution and it performs beautifully but it doesn't seem like its a visually lossless codec. Course I have not had the opportunity to compare it to an uncompressed RED frame. Maybe we're attributing some of the image artifacting we see to REDCODE when in fact it is not REDCODE at all. I think it would be great to see full res frames in REDCODE and uncompressed so we can compare.
Click to expand...

Read my SS post.

Peter Jackson couldn't tell them apart. Actually, no one has been able to. If you want us to post old ones, we can. But why exactly?

Oh... and the data rates ARE higher in the new cameras at 24fps. I'm not sure where you heard that, but it is inaccurate.

Jim
 
This conversation is exactly the point. We have heard that some want uncompressed at any price (why I just don't know). So we give the option at typically impossible low prices... yes, $300K for a 4.8GB/sec recorder with storage is very cheap. Especially at low quantities.

What I have heard is, "what about this, or why is that the case or can you show me what the difference is?"

I haven't heard one, "oh, my gosh... that's great! I'll send you a check right away."

Uncompressed is a mistake IMHO. Those that want higher data rates of REDCODE will be given that. But that is not what will make the image better, only make you feel better. It is other things we have worked on, are working on and will work on that will continue to improve the image.

We are going to explain how this works any further. If anyone wants uncompressed, speak up and we'll get it done. But it is not an advantage at all, let alone one we will pay development money for.

Jim
 
Jannard said:
Too much detail to give out. REDCODE has been tweaked all through the process since day one, just like a bunch of other things. But usually it has been some other issue arely on that needed improvement, not REDCODE. REDCODE has to work with a thousand other mice inside the cage. That is all I will say. Except... is anyone really unhappy with REDCODE? I haven't heard that one.

Jim
Click to expand...

Okay, got it. I understand.

I'm pretty happy with Redcode. You won't be seeing a deposit from me for the uncompressed box. Too much money for my blood and not enough ROI.:greedy:
 
seems like only yesterday - everyone was screaming for 1080 RGB on the RED ONE.

I'll take more pixels, more dynamic range and PLENTY of REDCODE please.
 
It is definitely great that Jim and the RED team are surely to be the greatest lisseners in the Industry...

I do believe that they could surely be some one willing and possibly taking Jim up on his offer, but after shooting few projects with the RED ONE, and lately the Sirens of TI here in Vegas, with SIX RED ONE cameras, here at the studios I have seen what Peter had to go true for the up load of the all the footage, and that was REDCODE RAW, the images were just stunning no matter of the horrible lighting conditions, so I can't really see any one seriously considering the UNCOMPRESSED, but again there always are exeption, for me even been as perfectionist as I 'm I just can't see it.

ciao
 
I agree images out of a RED One look very good if you don't do extreme color correction. But once you push it too hard it doesn't stay nice but gets blocky, blotchy and noisy in a nasty way. I don't know if this is due to compression or just the noise from the sensor but if there's one area I would like some improvement it would be in being able to push the image around in post more freely.
 
sander kamp said:
I agree images out of a RED One look very good if you don't do extreme color correction. But once you push it too hard it doesn't stay nice but gets blocky, blotchy and noisy in a nasty way. I don't know if this is due to compression or just the noise from the sensor but if there's one area I would like some improvement it would be in being able to push the image around in post more freely.
Click to expand...

Can You post some sample? :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top