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 :)

Optical Port Please

D

dave_garcia

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
130
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi,

I don't post much, but i wanted to voice my desire for bringing back the optical port feature on the RED one.

I visited Band Pro's demonstration of the Codex system at NAB and looked sadly at the little metal cover on the port that would have received the optical in from the RED and recorded it in 4 to 1 compression (versus 12 to one.)

I think the main reason why there "is not demand" for the optical port on Red One is that it was an either/or proposition. if we could some how get an operator swappable interface or a discreet input I believe devices like the Codex make it very viable.

The guy from Codex told me that a dozen people had asked him about it in the day I'd been there alone. He said the only thing that would make Red change its mind would be enough people asking for it. So I'm asking.

I'm hoping that the other folks who share my desire for the port will ask as well. I'd like options.

Thank you Red for your time.
 
dave_garcia said:
...I personally think that 4K at roughly a third of my DVCPRO HD data rate is a tad scary...
Click to expand...

You got your little and big "bees" mixed up. DVCPRO HD is 100 Mb/s (read Mega bit per second) that is about 12 MB/s (read Mega Byte per second). Remember, there are 8 bits per byte.

RED's .r3d structure is near 28 MB/s, so its not "a third of..." its over twice the data rate of your DVCPRO HD.

Your calculations are off by a factor of 6:1.
 
Well that makes me feel pretty stupid. I'll take that out. Please don't let my misinformation detract from the gist of the post.

I don't mean to be snippy. I can't wait to shoot some Red on CF. But I'd still like the optical port and I don't think I'm alone.
 
dave_garcia said:
I visited Band Pro's demonstration of the Codex system at NAB and looked sadly at the little metal cover on the port that would have received the optical in from the RED and recorded it in 4 to 1 compression (versus 12 to one.)
Click to expand...

It doesn't seem impossible that the Red One might get the same 100 MB/s REDCODE that's being discussed for the Epic and Scarlet. I obviously don't know enough details to say for sure, but it seems fairly probable that the hardware could handle it, with a faster (presumably flash based) digital magazine attached in place of the Red Drive. Assuming the full data rate was used at 24 fps (rather than just being reserved for high speed recording), this would be a compression ratio of less than 4:1 with on-board recording. That seems like a superior solution in virtually every way.
 
dave_garcia said:
Well that makes me feel pretty stupid. I'll take that out. Please don't let my misinformation detract from the gist of the post.

I don't mean to be snippy. I can't wait to shoot some Red on CF. But I'd still like the optical port and I don't think I'm alone.
Click to expand...

In my opinion there are very few situations where an uncompressed data path would justify the considerable effort and expense required to make use of it. Having the option is fine, but I seriously doubt many would actually make much use of it.

If you have never shot REDCODE, it might be a bit premature to make the assumption that you will need an uncompressed data set. Considering that codec performance will only get better over time, I think we have little to worry about. For me, I have seen enough CF originated RED footage projected at 4k to know that I won't be needing an uncompressed data path anytime soon.
 
I think 100 MB/s onto high speed solid state will be a very nice solution.
 
How much is it really needed? The footage I've had to play with has been very malleable, and the results at the end have been arse crazy good.

In light of that I just don't see the reason to load up rooms full of HDDs with data for no reason. Really the best thing about the camera and the most genius part, is the fact that its more like a film camera and less like a 'lets lug around a fridge of HDDs and a 10ft screen every where we go' camera.
The Red lets you move, its like a 435 but more budget friendly... I will say no more.
 
Personally in this sort of situation I want the compression - the datarate is hard enough to deal with anyway, making more data (for little appreciable benefit) isn't really appealing.

I've never seen what an uncompressed RED frame would look like - but the footage I have worked with doesn't show any obvious compression artifacts generally, certainly nothing like you might expect from a "12:1" ratio or whatever it is (considering DV is 5:1, roughly).
 
Sycophant said:
I've never seen what an uncompressed RED frame would look like - but the footage I have worked with doesn't show any obvious compression artifacts generally, certainly nothing like you might expect from a "12:1" ratio or whatever it is (considering DV is 5:1, roughly).
Click to expand...

If you havent seen compression, you are either using a very small monitor or you aren't looking for it. There is a fair amount of visible compression in the current build. Hopefully build 16 will resolve alot of this.
 
I agree that 100MB/s would go a long ways towards easing concerns. Will this codec be implemented on Red One as well?

I guess there are two main reasons for wanting the optical port.

1) Sometimes Redcode doesn't seem completely visually lossless. Sometimes details and foliage look a little smudgy to my eyes. I was looking at a bunch of Phantom footage at NAB and it was very crisp and clear (granted not technical terms.) Of course the Phantom is $250K, but I can only figure the main chasm between the two cameras' image quality is the Data rate and the Phantom's 14bits. I think 100MB/s would go a long ways towards addressing this if it was in Red One.

2) Integration into other workflows. I personally really like the realtime workflow of the Codex. It seems like a great way to capture and manage footage. Also, and I could be wrong here, but it seems like I could generate a 1080 monitor signal coming through the Codex. Sending this to a Cine-tal with a LUT programmed could be a great workflow. In my mind this presents a great real time WYSIWYG digital workflow. Choosing between spending $30K-$40K on Scratch Cine (a self described 4K deck) or a Codex portable leaves me looking at Codex. It's just so small and futuristic and tough looking.

My thoughts on why there is still a market for the optical port. Take them for what they are worth.
 
Well, a good solution is to make a 2k out max quality with the redcode 36 mb/s just for 24 fps this will increase a lot the quality of the compression
Or a 2.5k because the bayer system. when downsize to 2k be max quality.
a lot of people just need 2k.
F23 is 2k
si2k is 2k
...
 
Well I believe the dual link HD-SDI in the forthcoming RGB build will do just that. For 2K Red should be good. I am assuming RED is still intending to deliver this and they have not said otherwise.

To me it's more about preserving a 4K raw negative along with the flexibility of a realtime system like the Codex. And the Data Rate of course.
 
digitalfx said:
The problem with shooting 2K is that you are windowing the sensor, not ideal.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that RGB mode with dual link would be scaled not windowed due to the fact that that was all the camera would be doing.

If what your saying is right then it's another reason for wanting an optical port to go to the Codex.
 
digitalfx said:
If you havent seen compression, you are either using a very small monitor or you aren't looking for it. There is a fair amount of visible compression in the current build. Hopefully build 16 will resolve alot of this.
Click to expand...

I can certainly find evidence in some circumstances, but I can't "see it" really - in so much as nothing in the frame during playback looks wrong or broken. Or something like that.

Hell compared to Varicam it's practically pristine.
 
Also there are a few other advantdages to the idea of the onset server as well. Automatically generating all editorial formats in their native format ie codex will spit out avid 14:1 natively that will work with 10 year old avid editing systems, so it will not burn DP's that want to shoot with the latest camera. Also for a lot of productions that we've been doing with our Stwo and codex workflows. Well... ProRes is pretty kick ass for finishing.

Also red has nothing on codex for the whole live streaming to your Iphone of your dailies onset via wifi (its so cool).

High end is a different beast, I hope they add the raw port too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top