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 :)

redcode36 vs 28?

Brandon Fraley

Brandon Fraley

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2007
Messages
2,269
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
41
Location
Bay Area, Ca.
i tried to find info in the manual and couldn't find it. What's the difference?

THANKS!
 
can u tell the difference by eye, or is it more for pushing it farther in post? Are most people shooting 28 or 36?

sry, don't have my camera yet and hungry for info :)
 
We're planning for film-out, and may have to do reframing. Is it a given that we use 36? I heard that 36 was only required if you're doing really critical green screen. Otherwise 28 is fine. Is this true? What about in low-light?

Or is it just not worth the debate? Are most people going for 36 because you may as well get the best image available?
 
I did some quick tests on focus charts to find the difference but could not see any. Only some wierd artifacts in REDAlert but not in REDCine. (jagged colored edges when enlarging >400%)
It also runs through the Scratch it seems.
The RED team must have put the option in for a good reason so I assume we will see the difference when projecting on the big screen or in critical situations.

Bastiaan Houtkooper NSC
 
Higher compressionrates will take no effect on stills. De- or increasing compression-rate will only be visible with moving objects or moving camera. That´s the reason why you didn´t see an effect with still charts. Try panning camera while shooting a cornfield...
 
TAFKAR said:
Higher compressionrates will take no effect on stills. De- or increasing compression-rate will only be visible with moving objects or moving camera. That´s the reason why you didn´t see an effect with still charts. Try panning camera while shooting a cornfield...
Click to expand...

That's not true.

REDCODE applies intraframe compression and not interframe compression. So the difference from frame to frame has absolutely no effect on image quality.

It's only about the amount of high frequency details in an image. More bits for those is good news.
 
manuelwenger said:
36MB(ytes) / second vs. 28MB/s. Older Builds all recorder 28MB/s.

Manuel
Click to expand...

Actually, RED ONE records REDCODE in variable bit rates (VBR) depending on the complexity of each shot you take. Thus REDCODE 36 and REDCODE 28 are not hard and fast bit rate designations (MB/s), but rather categories to differentiate between two different recording level options.
 
This is all very good information.. But back to the origional question which I have a keen interest in.

Has anyone SEEN the difference..

Steve, you shoot a lot.. See anything?
Jay
 
I heard a rumour (it's all I've got to go on) that it's to solve the massive codec problems that have been known to arise when shooting some moving objects/ camera movement. I've had the big blocky codec error when panning through leaves against a bright sky. (Build 14). I heard Redcode36 fights against this. Haven't done a test yet to compare the compression rates in a situation like this.
 
Jay A. Kelley said:
Has anyone SEEN the difference..

Steve, you shoot a lot.. See anything?
Jay
Click to expand...

In our studio we have a 4k projector and a 24 foot screen. We've shot lots of RC36 and RC28, mostly natural light subjects (nature, sports, people, etc.). In the studio we've also shot various test charts in RC36 and RC28 with identical lens and camera setups, output 4k TIFFs, and projected them in 4k on the big screen.

My "unofficial" take on your question Jay, is: yes, there is a difference, but you have to look for it. Both look very good. To me, for each production we're shooting we need to ask ourselves these questions:

"What is the end use of the footage/project?"
"Will we be layering a lot of effects?"
"What are our frames per second requirements (high fps or low)?"
"What recording medium will we need to use (CF or drive)?"

Whenever we gain something, we necessarily give something up. RC36 looks great and IMO is the better choice for footage destined for the big screen and/or filmout - assuming that you don't need higher frame rates than RC36 can be shot in. RC28 supports higher frame rates, thus if you really need them I'd say shoot RC28 to get them, no matter whether the footage is destined for the big screen, HDTV, or wherever. If higher frame rates aren't needed, and your recording medium will support the frame rate and storage length times you want/need to shoot your footage in, then IMO it makes great sense to shoot in RC36.

I really like having the option we now have with RED ONE to analyze our specific needs and requirements for each footage sequence we're shooting - and then be able to select between RC36 and RC28. IMO having those different REDCODE options definitely increases the utility and flexibility of RED ONE.

Note: For shooting stock footage, I'd check with your stock footage representative about their format (4k, 3k, 2k), RC36/RC28, and fps recommendations relative to each genre of footage you're thinking about shooting. They'll have some good tips about what will work best for them - and what will license out the easiest. (We're both represented by Mammoth HD, so I'd definitely check with Clark Dunbar for tips on your footage parameters)

Bottom line: RC36 and RC28 both rock - they're just different options to choose from depending on the needs of what you're shooting.

Hope this helps...
 
markp said:
it's to solve the massive codec problems that have been known to arise when shooting some moving objects/ camera movement. I've had the big blocky codec error when panning through leaves against a bright sky.
Click to expand...

I've never seen that, but the blue channel is much nicer in Redcode 36. If you plan on shooting any darker or low-light footage RC36 is invaluable.
 
Someone else once posted about that codec problem. I forgot all about it and then shot panning through trees a couple of weeks ago. I couldn't believe the result. yikes. was shot RC28. The pan was slow, but clearly tripped the encoding.
I imagine panning through a cornfield may yield similar issues, and RC36 may fix it. Definitely worth a test.
 
markp said:
Someone else once posted about that codec problem. I forgot all about it and then shot panning through trees a couple of weeks ago. I couldn't believe the result. yikes. was shot RC28.
Click to expand...

We shoot tons of adventure travel, nature and sports subjects with RED ONE in various resolutions, frame rates, shutter speeds, and panning speeds - and we've yet to experience a problem using RC28 that you described. What combination of resolution, frame rate, shutter speed, and panning speed were you using on the footage you describe?
 
Gibby said:
In our studio we have a 4k projector and a 24 foot screen. We've shot lots of RC36 and RC28, mostly natural light subjects (nature, sports, people, etc.). In the studio we've also shot various test charts in RC36 and RC28 with identical lens and camera setups, output 4k TIFFs, and projected them in 4k on the big screen.

My "unofficial" take on your question Jay, is: yes, there is a difference, but you have to look for it. Both look very good. To me, for each production we're shooting we need to ask ourselves these questions:

"What is the end use of the footage/project?"
"Will we be layering a lot of effects?"
"What are our frames per second requirements (high fps or low)?"
"What recording medium will we need to use (CF or drive)?"

Whenever we gain something, we necessarily give something up. RC36 looks great and IMO is the better choice for footage destined for the big screen and/or filmout - assuming that you don't need higher frame rates than RC36 can be shot in. RC28 supports higher frame rates, thus if you really need them I'd say shoot RC28 to get them, no matter whether the footage is destined for the big screen, HDTV, or wherever. If higher frame rates aren't needed, and your recording medium will support the frame rate and storage length times you want/need to shoot your footage in, then IMO it makes great sense to shoot in RC36.

I really like having the option we now have with RED ONE to analyze our specific needs and requirements for each footage sequence we're shooting - and then be able to select between RC36 and RC28. IMO having those different REDCODE options definitely increases the utility and flexibility of RED ONE.

Note: For shooting stock footage, I'd check with your stock footage representative about their format (4k, 3k, 2k), RC36/RC28, and fps recommendations relative to each genre of footage you're thinking about shooting. They'll have some good tips about what will work best for them - and what will license out the easiest. (We're both represented by Mammoth HD, so I'd definitely check with Clark Dunbar for tips on your footage parameters)

Bottom line: RC36 and RC28 both rock - they're just different options to choose from depending on the needs of what you're shooting.

Hope this helps...
Click to expand...

Thanks Steve,

This helps a lot

Jay
 
One thing is for sure... Soderberg must have shot on RC28.
 
sparkhope said:
One thing is for sure... Soderberg must have shot on RC28.
Click to expand...

Soderbergh shot everything RC24 (it really had no name at that time) or RC28... remember he shot "Guerrilla" on very early prototypes.

Jim
 
almost a triple RED response.. heh heh heh..
 
Err I wouldn't make any critical judgements on the sony 4k about compression.
It amazed me last year when they showed the F23 footage on a sony 4k at Cinegear . They made the exact same footage that helped us decide to buy it, and everyone in that room walked away thinking meh whats the big deal. When I had one in for 2 weeks it couldn't reproduce a true Rec 709 consistently let alone a P3 space. I hope others have had better luck, and I still wouldn't know how to monitor the red really other than mapping sections of the image onto a 2k projector.

That aside the key bit is the fact that its still a variable bit rate codec and as such you can't do any kind of a static test, the only difference will show up when you're shooting low light in downtown LA and the noise appears less globby on the 36. To be honest I'm rather happy that they added the mode.

Now if they had the RAW port ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top