REDRAY NOW SHIPPING...

[Sergio Perez]

Just got the 4K Sony player .
The bad news: You have to go to www.4kactivation.com to set it up, with the serial number of your SONY UHD set.
They didn't ship the 4 Sony monitors we ordered, so I can't play anything yet.

The fact that it is locked to a Sony monitor just makes no sense at all! Les, can you answer some quick questions?

Can it actually ingest any sort of 4K files encoded by us, or does it have to accept only the Sony download files? What formats does it support? What ports does it come with excluding obvioulsy HDMI (1.4b?)

Cheers,

Sergio

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Hi Blair, I would not hold my breath if I were you...
IMHO - Apple will bring two different display products to the market: (big snip)

Your scenario is possible and would dovetail with reports of a 5,120 x 2,880 wallpaper format in Mavericks. It would also fit with the orthodoxy that because a computer monitor and a TV are typically used differently - particularly viewing distance, text legibility and what room they live in - no single form factor can fit both bills.

I see it from a different perspective. A screen is a screen. People will locate and interact with them in whatever way suits them. I wouldn't be surprised to see multiple sizes of 3840x2160 Apple displays, a small-ish one for sitting on a desk or in a small room (32-42" diag.), a bigger one - 50 or 65" - for TV replacement and perhaps even an 84" bomber. I wouldn't be surprised if the only port is Thunderbolt with optional adapters to accept HDMI/DVI/DP just because that's how Apple likes to roll.

FWIW I expect Apple to stick with 3840x2160 in the first generation. It's still a lot more pixels than current offerings, it simplifies things - particularly integrating into television broadcast standards (1080x4) and helps them keep the selling price more accessible to the mass market they covet. I also expect it to be essentially a big iMac that can manage most tasks independently and only be fed by another device like a MacPro cylinder when it suits the user. More typical might be an iPad and AirPlay using their new wireless standard.

Care to wager Peter? ;-)

Cheers - #19

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Your scenario is possible and would dovetail with reports of a 5,120 x 2,880 wallpaper format in Mavericks. It would also fit with the orthodoxy that because a computer monitor and a TV are typically used differently - particularly viewing distance, text legibility and what room they live in - no single form factor can fit both bills.

I see it from a different perspective. A screen is a screen. People will locate and interact with them in whatever way suits them. I wouldn't be surprised to see multiple sizes of 3840x2160 Apple displays, a small-ish one for sitting on a desk or in a small room (32-42" diag.), a bigger one - 50 or 65" - for TV replacement and perhaps even an 84" bomber. I wouldn't be surprised if the only port is Thunderbolt with optional adapters to accept HDMI/DVI/DP just because that's how Apple likes to roll.

FWIW I expect Apple to stick with 3840x2160 in the first generation. It's still a lot more pixels than current offerings, it simplifies things - particularly integrating into television broadcast standards (1080x4) and helps them keep the selling price more accessible to the mass market they covet. I also expect it to be essentially a big iMac that can manage most tasks independently and only be fed by another device like a MacPro cylinder when it suits the user. More typical might be an iPad and AirPlay using their new wireless standard.

Care to wager Peter? ;-)

Cheers - #19

I'll wager Blair. Apple is thinking bigger than 3840x2160.

 

[Neil W. Smith]

3840 v. 4096?

3840 v. 4096?

I'll wager Blair. Apple is thinking bigger than 3840x2160.

How much of a wager, Mark? ... about $4096 perhaps?

Neil

 

[mark haflich]

Just got the 4K Sony player .
The bad news: You have to go to www.4kactivation.com to set it up, with the serial number of your SONY UHD set.
They didn't ship the 4 Sony monitors we ordered, so I can't play anything yet.

The server won't work even if activated on the Sony panels previously shipped with an in house service call by a Sony tech to perform a modification. It won't work either with a Sony VPL-vw1000ES projectors. Sony does not have a fix for that yet. Likely projectors will have to be shipped to the Sony projector repair center in Texas for that but nothing is known yet. The problem with server panel compatibility is edid related with Sony HE changing what the server will accept as an Edid at the last minute.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I'll wager Blair. Apple is thinking bigger than 3840x2160.

Fine with me and nice for multitasking on all that real estate. Apple has a history of setting standards rather than following them so, as I noted in my post, not shocking if they go rouge.

I also see a potential upside for Apple in terms of controlling their own ecosystem since, at least for a while, they will be virtually the only ones who can properly drive that resolution.

As long as they manage the scaling well mo' pixels is mo' bettah. That said, if many available sources are natively a different resolution scaling presents a potential failure point in terms of IQ. OTOH, perhaps they are looking to use the scaling step as a way to implement sophisticated upscaling algorithms designed to make lower rez sources look decent rather than nasty. Of course that would require some pretty serious processing power built into the display - perhaps Apple is leveraging their portfolio to bring such capabilities to market at a cost point only they could achieve.

Apple, ever inscrutable.

Cheers - #19

 

[Bob Gundu]

How much of a wager, Mark? ... about $4096 perhaps?

Neil

Ha ha ha...

 

[Casey Green]

FYI: RED released a REDRAY firmware update today that allows the device to automatically check for updates every day via logging into RED's network.

(Previously you had to update via USB)

I'd guest that this means future firmware updates will be coming frequently. Looking forward to the adventures ahead!

 

[Peter Majtan]

I wouldn't be surprised if the only port is Thunderbolt with optional adapters to accept HDMI/DVI/DP just because that's how Apple likes to roll.

I don't think this would work. The way TB is designed any such a adaptor will need to sit on the computer's end. No A/V device could output a standard HDMI / SDI / DP signal that could be converted to TB2 (or TB1 for that matter). For this to work on the TV end - the TV would need to have a internal HW capable of driving TB tech and the drivers. Since the TV is expected to be fully interactive - this is not perhaps that far fetched...

:sifone: Peter

 

[Peter Proniewicz-Brooks]

I don't think this would work. The way TB is designed any such a adaptor will need to sit on the computer's end. No A/V device could output a standard HDMI / SDI / DP signal that could be converted to TB2 (or TB1 for that matter). For this to work on the TV end - the TV would need to have a internal HW capable of driving TB tech and the drivers. Since the TV is expected to be fully interactive - this is not perhaps that far fetched...

:sifone: Peter

Thunderbolt 1's video doesn't work like that, the video signal if present is transmitted as a digital video signal, not a TB signal as it were, if it wasn't then you couldn't use it with a standard Mini DP to HDMI cable (which you can). The issue is the TV would need the ability to pull the video signal out, it's a standard video signal it's looking for, this is likely simple enough, the thunderbolt displays were likely deliberately designed not to work with mini-DP etc before them in the chain, there are a number of potential reasons for this, sells more up to date macs and makes support easier (stops people plugging it into mini DP getting video but nothing else) among them.

 

[Peter Majtan]

Thunderbolt 1's video doesn't work like that, the video signal if present is transmitted as a digital video signal, not a TB signal as it were, if it wasn't then you couldn't use it with a standard Mini DP to HDMI cable (which you can). The issue is the TV would need the ability to pull the video signal out, it's a standard video signal it's looking for, this is likely simple enough, the thunderbolt displays were likely deliberately designed not to work with mini-DP etc before them in the chain, there are a number of potential reasons for this, sells more up to date macs and makes support easier (stops people plugging it into mini DP getting video but nothing else) among them.

Peter - you have misunderstood. What Blair was thinking off is that the Apple TV could be TB-only. Normal TB display (like the current TB Cinema Display) is fine, as it is designed to be fed from TB. But an (Apple) TV has to (also) serve as a monitor to accept standard video signal from A/V devices. Think about a PS3 feeding the TV with HDMI. What Blair thought was that a TB-only Apple TV could use a HDMI->TB adapter converting the HDMI signal to TB input on the Apple TV. The reverse works fine. But devices (like the current Apple computer lineup) use TB to send out signal, not to receive. Video signal is a one-way trip. This is why you can not have a HD-SDI or HDMI port that is input and output at the same time. The interfaces can handle both - bot not at the same time - you need to choose. With TB things get a lot messier. You could in theory build an adapter that took HDMI video and converted it to TB data stream, but such an adapter would need to be a tiny computer on its own and end up being prohibitively expensive. Converting TB output to any standard video format / interface is easy. Doing it the other way round is neither easy, nor practical...

:sifone: Peter

 

[Peter Proniewicz-Brooks]

Peter - you have misunderstood. What Blair was thinking off is that the Apple TV could be TB-only. Normal TB display (like the current TB Cinema Display) is fine, as it is designed to be fed from TB. But an (Apple) TV has to (also) serve as a monitor to accept standard video signal from A/V devices. Think about a PS3 feeding the TV with HDMI. What Blair thought was that a TB-only Apple TV could use a HDMI->TB adapter converting the HDMI signal to TB input on the Apple TV. The reverse works fine. But devices (like the current Apple computer lineup) use TB to send out signal, not to receive. Video signal is a one-way trip. This is why you can not have a HD-SDI or HDMI port that is input and output at the same time. The interfaces can handle both - bot not at the same time - you need to choose. With TB things get a lot messier. You could in theory build an adapter that took HDMI video and converted it to TB data stream, but such an adapter would need to be a tiny computer on its own and end up being prohibitively expensive. Converting TB output to any standard video format / interface is easy. Doing it the other way round is neither easy, nor practical...

:sifone: Peter

Fairly sure it's still you that has misunderstood. There is no such thing as a TB video signal, the video signal is the same as that over HDMI and display port, no conversion goes on, Thunderbolt can also deal with both at the same time, otherwise you couldn't have a HDMI at the end of a multi device daisy without an expensive adapter to convert the signal. The only reason you cannot connect an apple Thunderbolt monitor to a non-thunderbolt output is that Apple have decided to not enable it.



The thunderbolt spec is comprised of 2 basic things, a PCIE system and a Display port controller, they are to moat intents and purposes separate, this means that if they built a TV there is no real technical reason apple couldnt put Thunderbolt only ports on the back not MDP or HDMI, as all they should have to do is put in an option to just look for thre DP signal.

I don't think it is likely as thunderbolt ports need the Thunderbolt internals (which as discussed involve both a TB and a DP controller) whereas the others only need their own. A pair of TB ports to allow it to daisy and a raft of HDMIs in seem more likely, but this is more a cost thing.

 

[Sergio Perez]

Red Team, how are we in terms of 25p support? What happens when we use a 25P file to encode to .red for Redray? Right on the edge of pressing purchase. Any timetable for 25P support?

Thanks, am planning to use this for a display of Red footage and show its potential over here for multi screens.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

All IP

All IP

Per the discussion of what Apple may or may not do with the living room targeted display they may or may not be developing. What I was postulating is that Apple could make a display with only Thunderbolt as a physical input (probably 2 of them). I wouldn't be surprised to see a HDMI port, but it may be limited to 1080/HDMI 1.4 with a fixed upscaler. The display itself would be essentially a blown up iMac with, among other things, 802.11ac wireless connection to your router as the primary "source" of content with TCP/IP over TB as a hard wire option. More traditional sources would have to come via an outboard TB savvy device like a MacPro or next gen MBP/Air, etc.

IMO Apple is taking the approach that everything you might want to see on their "alleged" display will come via IP. Satellite or cable services beyond 1080 could perhaps function as "apps" or would need set top boxes with TB or DP ports (this is assuming a DP to TB crossover cable would be a sub $50 item). At the risk of sounding heretical, the less legacy connectivity the better from Apple's POV - easier DRM and less support effort. They want to be the portal for all your content. Period. Why wouldn't they create barriers for other sources? Not trying to start a conspiracy theory threadjack but I believe the phrase is "business is war". Just sayin'

Cheers - #19

 

[Sergio Perez]

Did a "Leap of faith" again and ordered the Redray. Ordered it because now its the time of showcasing our own content in the best way possible, to take advantage of the recent 4K screens, and to believe in Red and ODEMAX. Would love to see a Red "Best practices" mastering for Redray Video on the education part of the site. Hope to get this soon. If you want to push boundaries, you need to show to those that can't see them where those boundaries are and can be pushed to- if it comes out of one's own pocket, so be it. It will be worth it.

 

[Frazier Nivens]

.RED Plug In Purchase in Advance?

.RED Plug In Purchase in Advance?

I ordered the RED Ray Player the day it went live in the RED Store and have filled out all the paperwork, license agreements and given that to my rep. I'm hoping that the player will arrive soon, it was ordered within 20 min. of it going live in the store.

I am exhibiting at the upcoming DEMA, (Diviing Equipment and Manufacturing Association trade show, have my own booth and was hoping to show the footage on my 4k TV.

So until it arrives, would it be possible for me to buy the .RED encoder from the store in advance of it's arrival, begin encoding my footage prior to the dive show? I know the encoder comes with the unit, happy to buy another license of the encoder in advance, and then even if my RED RAY player doesn't arrive maybe I can find one for rental for the 4 day trade show. Maybe Clark at Mammoth can help me and promote both of us.

But having the .RED codec in advance would help in the meantime to begin working on the footage now rather than waiting till the last min and not being ready for the show. I'd be happy to pay for the RED RAY now in full and wait for the shipment later if this is a issue.

Hoping someone at RED can help answer if this is possible or not. If not then at least I'll know how to prepare.

Thanks for your help with this in advance. Best,

 

[mark haflich]

Why don't you call the jack of all sales and customer service guys at Red and ask the question. Red refers to these guys as Bomb Squad members because they supposedly can defuse any problem.

 

[Frazier Nivens]

Why don't you call the jack of all sales and customer service guys at Red and ask the question. Red refers to these guys as Bomb Squad members because they supposedly can defuse any problem.

Not a problem, my bomb squad rep is looking into it to see if it's possible. Hope so, would be nice to have the codec ahead of time if possible.

Just posted this before I spoke with my rep.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

UHD/4K content pipeline

UHD/4K content pipeline

Finally managed to borrow a RedRay and hook it up to the Sony VPL VW600ES 4K projector. Nice image up on a 110" Stewart Firehawk, viewing from about 10' away I was able to easily see details that no 1080 source could provide (including playback from DPX image sequences). The usability and IQ of the RedRay player is impressive. My only quibble is that the only audio output is via HDMI. While I appreciate that there is a dedicated HDMI port just for the audio signal, that doesn't help if the audio system at hand lacks HDMI inputs. Guess I'll have to cart my ($4,000 new) AJA i/oHD around just to extract audio...

The preceding notes are only to mark a baseline as I see little evidence that the RedRay in its current state is a product with a future. The more interesting question is will RED continue to develop UHD/4K player hardware? Many of us have speculated that a smaller and lower cost version of the RedRay is in development, hopefully for 2014 release. The bigger question might be whether any distribution scheme that relies on a proprietary stand alone hardware decoder can ever reach critical mass.

IMO there is a market for UHD/4K at decent quality - the home theater (HT) crowd. If you could get the player under $500 with a $100/mo fee for content access via IP I'd expect serious penetration into the HT world - IF, and only IF - there's plenty of attractive content available. As mentioned in this thread, there are lots of RedUsers with lots of UHD or greater resolution imagery filling hard drives the world over - but how much of it has been finished/mastered at >1080/2K? How much of it is more than just eye candy?

In order to get serious uptake of UHD/4K in the marketplace certain things must exist, starting with a decent sized library of attractive content well mastered in UHD/4K. Oops. Building up that library is something that I would like to be part of as a business strategy, and I'm guessing I'm not the only RedUser who has considered that. This brings us to the chicken/egg problem of how much can you invest in creating content for which there is not yet a proven market. Beyond that, like buying storage before you need it, its tough to make a case for authoring UHD/4K assets with todays tech when it just gets faster and cheaper with each passing quarter. Not to mention the lack of solid standards for UHD/4K deliverables formatting.

RedRay is an impressive proof of concept device and I applaud RED (particularly Stuart English) for getting it out there. There needs to be some reference point for what decent quality UHD/4K looks like. I think that's particularly important when the near term is likely to be dominated by content labeled as UHD/4K - but so brutally compressed that most viewers will wonder what all the fuss is about. Goose/golden egg scenario?

Cheers - #19

 

[Corey_O]

Blair, Have you tried 2k on the Redray yet?