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 :)

Peter Jackson clips and grabs...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Even if these artifacts were camera original (which i know they weren't) They are still pretty damn incredible.

_mike
 
Micron said:
I'm simply stating that looking at these particular screen grabs as if they were shot on a DSLR isn't going to be useful. Again, for that sort of analysis, we will have to get uncompressed raw captures.
Click to expand...

Of course you cannot really judge a camera this way. I think most Redusers don't need to be convinced that the artifacts aren't caused by neither the sensor nor the Redcode. I am merely afraid stuff like this will easily lighten up more bashing of the camera. Some people maybe will say: you see? It's just a very noisy camera with a built-in denoising device or whatever they will think of.
 
remember guys.. the 4k JPG stills and the video im about to post.. has gone through many generations of compression, grading, and then back out and re-compressed. your gonna see compression artifacts, without a doubt.
 
Is this a greenscreen shot by chance? Look at the background. Zoom in, it looks like a matte painting. It feels painted.
 
The thing is that the bashing has been here from day one and will continue no matter what is posted for a year or so. After that enough people will be doing amazing things with the camera that it will become THE CAMERA that everyone wants. It is only a matter of time and I plan on taking advantage of the head start, I'm tired of trying to convince the naysayers.
Aloha
-A
 
Jarred Land said:
remember guys.. the 4k JPG stills and the video im about to post.. has gone through many generations of compression, grading, and then back out and re-compressed. your gonna see compression artifacts, without a doubt.
Click to expand...

Jarred, we understand that. But will new customers and the competion?
I think it is very unwise to post pics as promotional stills that have gone through unknown routes and contain artifacts that even Graeme admits he hasn't seen before. I'd rather wait and still my curiosity for PJ's movie than see Red's imago go down the drain for some ill-denoised pics.
 
Thank you so much for posting these.
BUT NOW COME ON !!!
The wide plane shot is completly screwed up and should be removed AT ONCE.
This is really asking for trouble guys, unless you've got mud in your eyes, this one picture looks like oil painting, with a great composition skill by the way.
But who wants this picture all over the net.
I can perfectly understand that something be posted by mistake, but now you have been WARNED several times, so leaving this pic up is something I am not getting at all.

Yours "quiet furious at the moment" Emmanuel
 
Bruce Dunn said:
Try using millions of colours and a resolution of 1024 x 768 or above. The pics look great on my machine.
Click to expand...

Are you serious ???:blink:
 
I'm using 1280 x 960 resolution on a mac with millions of colours, viewing the images with quicktime pro using full screen view. (you have to loop the image or it only stays on the screen briefly) and the image is quite detailed.
 
Thanks for posting the pics, guys. It means a lot to us over the seas...

The images are really great (with some compression issues). Rich colurs, great latitude.


Jannard said:
We could post TIFFs, but download size is a problem. We'll probably do that for a couple of them.

Jim
Click to expand...

I think you might have a much larger problem if new people check the site and the first thing they see on the first pic are the artifacts.
Remember - many people are not familiar with compression artifacts and haven't seen milkgirls 4k framegrabs. People often jump to conclusions and the blame will go down either on Mysterium or Redcode.

I'm sure the real deal is phenomenal, though.
 
I am talking about one single frame who looks weird behind reason, and it's 4k picture so please stop that nonsens with screen resolution.
Anyway nothing personal here Bruce, I'm going to bed now and I've done my work on this issue, so leave this picture online and we'll have a good time defending the RedOne one boards all over the net.
By the way I'm using a calibrated (2.2gamma) Apple 30'' monitor on which any other Red grab looks allright if not great.

Emmanuel
 
All the images show the same artifacts; it's not JPEG.

All the images show the same artifacts; it's not JPEG.

People often don't examine close-ups critically, because the objects depicted (and "little" things like eyelashes, buttons, and so forth) are bigger. It's not just the wide shot of the plane that's revealing:

740_1177371577.png


Also, to put the JPEG speculation to rest, the 4K bubble-blowing JPEG is smaller (5.5 MB) than the Crossing the Line stills, and look at the nice smooth bokeh and lack of the artifacts found above:

740_1177372091.png


Another one from the bubble still. Note the smooth falloff of reflections in the eye.

740_1177372686.png


Granted, the bubble shot is less complicated (black background) and thus will compress smaller, but the plane still is almost 20 percent bigger.
 
Those Jpegs look horrrrrrible. I'm going to assume that's because of the Jpeg compression and isn't reflective of RED or else all of the comments from NAB would have been. "Worst HD camera ever."
 
The point of the post above is that it does NOT seem to be the JPEG compression. The bottom two images are also from a 4K JPEG (bubblegum shot from Red), which was only 5.5 MB. The wide plane JPEG, for example, was about the same file size as the bubblegum shot but a smaller image overall. The other Crossing the Line stills were about 1 MB bigger than the bubblegum shot, and the image area smaller. Therefore one would expect at least comparable quality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top