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 :)

REDRAY NOW SHIPPING...

Phil Holland said:
Will do. I'd also say stay tuned to what Jeff Kilgroe will have to say in the coming weeks and months as he's more of a computer whisperer than I am.

I've been eyeballing his GPU talk lately like a hawk.
Click to expand...

Oh, I have definitely been taking note of what Mr. Kilgroe has to say on the topic. I'm completely torn between the idea and headache of building, and trying to find the dollars for a turnkey solution such as Apple's offering (which is rife with shortcomings). At the end of it all, I think I know what needs to be done from a high level standpoint, but I just don't want to accept that I need to put a box together.

E
 
Just saw a 4k LG 84" screen for the first time. Was quite shocked by the difference in image quality. It did indeed feel like the first time I saw 1080 compared to DVD. Didn't quite expect the difference to be so big.

I noticed that almost all material they used were still images. Portraits from a medium format camera, time lapses, scrolling photos and some (very) mediocre, ungraded 4k videos. I could see some compression, but hard to know what material they are actually playing. I would not be surprised if they use higher bitrate than will be used later to maximize the demo impact.

An interesting experiment was to imagine that the view was instead from a window so I compared it to reality. The illusion doesn't quite hold here though, I think we would need 8k or higher to begin having images that compare to reality itself.
I must say that 84" still felt small compared to my 120" projector.
/Andreas
 
Sorry if this all sounds a bit confused, but, am I mistaken, or has RED just released the best finishing codec ever made available to the general public?

Is it, or is it not, the best 'off the shelf' combination of high image quality and small file size you can get?

And if that's the case, what's with the silence from all those who could benefit from that? I'm thinking mainly of companies and businesses other than RED who could be announcing their intention to incorporate the codec into their products and/or services. But speaking even more generally, outside of these forums, I haven't seen any mention of the .RED release anywhere.

Someone earlier in this thread said there would be a SDK that would allow third parties to develop uses for the codec. Is there any news from RED on that front, about its availability or whether they've had expressions of interest from people intending to use it?

We've all heard about Odemax, which sounds like a good solution for more accessible distribution of high-quality content. Is there some kind of exclusivity arrangement there with that, with RED intending that to be the only venue for widespread use of .RED content, or was Odemax just the first to get in on it?

Is there any chance for example of Youtube and Vimeo etc allowing direct uploading of .RED files for subsequent conversion to their streaming codec, so people could upload higher quality/longer length video's that would stand a better chance of surviving the Youtube/Vimeo 'crush'? Along similar lines, would it be possible for end-users to (mis)use the .RED codec as an intermediary, recompressing the .RED files to lossy .mp4's with third party software to get extremely small file sizes if they want to? I know the aim is 4K and higher all the way, but why not also aim at making the .RED codec as ubiquitous as H.264 by making it as available and useful for as broad a range of end-users as possible?

On a personal level I'm thrilled and relieved and think it's more than enough that RED have managed to complete the chain and allow the capturing of high quality RAW images that can then be readily edited and converted to .RED files for easier storage and final viewing . But is there, or will there be, more to this than that? I kind of feel like this should have been a bigger announcement or that there must be some other .RED related announcement/s yet to come.

Again, sorry for expressing this confusion, but the overall reaction to the release of the .RED deliverables I'm seeing/not seeing doesn't gel with the expectations I've developed during the wait. Maybe I've misunderstood and missed the point or scope of this development, and I understand some of the things I've been imagining may just not be possible, but I was under the impression the .RED codec was the breakthrough that would make 4K deliverables manageable, and make visually lossless 2K/1080p resolutions streamable. Which, I thought, would be a bit of a big deal, and of interest to more than those of us who have expressed our enthusiasm for it here.

and yes, i should probably b sleeping now not wndring ot loud sry thks :)
 
Les Hillis said:
Sorry if this all sounds a bit confused, but, am I mistaken, or has RED just released the best finishing codec ever made available to the general public?

Is it, or is it not, the best 'off the shelf' combination of high image quality and small file size you can get?

And if that's the case, what's with the silence from all those who could benefit from that? I'm thinking mainly of companies and businesses other than RED who could be announcing their intention to incorporate the codec into their products and/or services. But speaking even more generally, outside of these forums, I haven't seen any mention of the .RED release anywhere.

Someone earlier in this thread said there would be a SDK that would allow third parties to develop uses for the codec. Is there any news from RED on that front, about its availability or whether they've had expressions of interest from people intending to use it?

We've all heard about Odemax, which sounds like a good solution for more accessible distribution of high-quality content. Is there some kind of exclusivity arrangement there with that, with RED intending that to be the only venue for widespread use of .RED content, or was Odemax just the first to get in on it?

Is there any chance for example of Youtube and Vimeo etc allowing direct uploading of .RED files for subsequent conversion to their streaming codec, so people could upload higher quality/longer length video's that would stand a better chance of surviving the Youtube/Vimeo 'crush'? Along similar lines, would it be possible for end-users to (mis)use the .RED codec as an intermediary, recompressing the .RED files to lossy .mp4's with third party software to get extremely small file sizes if they want to? I know the aim is 4K and higher all the way, but why not also aim at making the .RED codec as ubiquitous as H.264 by making it as available and useful for as broad a range of end-users as possible?

On a personal level I'm thrilled and relieved and think it's more than enough that RED have managed to complete the chain and allow the capturing of high quality RAW images that can then be readily edited and converted to .RED files for easier storage and final viewing . But is there, or will there be, more to this than that? I kind of feel like this should have been a bigger announcement or that there must be some other .RED related announcement/s yet to come.

Again, sorry for expressing this confusion, but the overall reaction to the release of the .RED deliverables I'm seeing/not seeing doesn't gel with the expectations I've developed during the wait. Maybe I've misunderstood and missed the point or scope of this development, and I understand some of the things I've been imagining may just not be possible, but I was under the impression the .RED codec was the breakthrough that would make 4K deliverables manageable, and make visually lossless 2K/1080p resolutions streamable. Which, I thought, would be a bit of a big deal, and of interest to more than those of us who have expressed our enthusiasm for it here.

and yes, i should probably b sleeping now not wndring ot loud sry thks :)
Click to expand...

Yes, the .RED format is indeed an amazing achievement, but you must remember that it is a codec that required a dedicated HW to be played back in real time. This is what separates it from the likes of H.265 and this is also why it can be so efficient. This is in no way to diminish what this format has achieved, but you need to put it in a perspective...

:sifone: Peter
 
Les Hillis said:
Sorry if this all sounds a bit confused, but, am I mistaken, or has RED just released the best finishing codec ever made available to the general public?
Click to expand...

Sure seems that way from what I'm seeing. H.265 and everything else out there can go take a flying leap...
 
AndreasOberg said:
J

An interesting experiment was to imagine that the view was instead from a window so I compared it to reality. The illusion doesn't quite hold here though, I think we would need 8k or higher to begin having images that compare to reality itself.
/Andreas
Click to expand...

When movies start looking like reality I stop watching (and probably stop making) movies.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Sure seems that way from what I'm seeing. H.265 and everything else out there can go take a flying leap...
Click to expand...

I think one thing I've been pleasantly surprised about, while encoding to .RED is certainly a time consuming concept, it's much faster than what I was expecting and can be assisted further with some newer hardware.

Kinda wish I didn't destroy my main color system for the impending new color/edit suite coming in next month.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Sure seems that way from what I'm seeing. H.265 and everything else out there can go take a flying leap...
Click to expand...

I bit harsh Jeff... ;o)

I am sure H.265 (and the likes) will be much appreciated by the hundreds of millions of peeps out there who will NOT buy a dedicated RED HW (be it REDRAY or the RED projectors) to play back 4K/UHD footage. Unless we start seeing REDRAY players in the supermarkets shelves for around 2~300 USD and people buying them like there is no tomorrow - constant development and improvement of HW-independent codecs, such as the H.265, is a must. There is a reason why NHK is using H.265 in their 4K net-broacasting trials here in Japan as we speak...

:sifone: Peter
 
If that's really the case, then Red should be marketing this amazing codec in a broad way.
They could be making more money doing that than selling camera hardware possibly.

Jeff Kilgroe said:
Sure seems that way from what I'm seeing. H.265 and everything else out there can go take a flying leap...
Click to expand...
 
Peter Majtan said:
I bit harsh Jeff... ;o)

I am sure H.265 (and the likes) will be much appreciated by the hundreds of millions of peeps out there who will NOT buy a dedicated RED HW (be it REDRAY or the RED projectors) to play back 4K/UHD footage. Unless we start seeing REDRAY players in the supermarkets shelves for around 2~300 USD and people buying them like there is no tomorrow - constant development and improvement of HW-independent codecs, such as the H.265, is a must. There is a reason why NHK is using H.265 in their 4K net-broacasting trials here in Japan as we speak...

:sifone: Peter
Click to expand...


Hehe... True. I'm hoping RED can find a way to proliferate this tech. However, I totally understand if they just want to target the high end and professional users. Hardware independent codecs are a must, as you say. Which begs the question of whether or not the .RED codec will always remain tied to RED hardware for playback. This may have something to do with their DRM.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
... This may have something to do with their DRM.
Click to expand...

I think this will prove popular among encoders... just don't know how it's going to affect the decoders. If in fact it becomes targeted at the .RED movie theaters, I think the DRM will be a big pusher of the codec.

Not to mention that there are enough people out there who can afford the RED Projector (with player) who will want the option to view 4k movies at home, to make the platform very profitable, IMO. The best pathway to success, again IMO, will be through theatrical usage.
 
Les Dittert said:
Red should be marketing this amazing codec in a broad way.
They could be making more money doing that than selling camera hardware possibly.
Click to expand...

+1 million.

I think this is what will happen. And we are the infantry.
 
Okay, thanks. The way I see it, anything's possible, but until I hear or see otherwise, I'll just think of this development less like it's the release of the 'codec for the masses', and more like it's an in-house codec from RED that they've kindly made available to others.

In which case, the pre-release information about REDRAY and the players on RED's website pretty much sums up what this is about. Like the camera's, high-end tools for professional purposes, that are still accessible to others who might find value in them.

No worries. Was holding out for the player included with the projector, but will probably end up using a standalone player to drive an as yet unreleased monitor before that.
 
Yesterday I was at CO3 here in L.A. for a color session and they have REDRAY hooked up to a 4K display in the lobby. Looked really nice. So that's one place you can go check it out if you want....
 
Elsie N said:
Has anyone done a .RED encode for a higher timebase than 24? Most interested in learning how a 48 timebase encode affects encoding time and final result.
Click to expand...

John Marchant said:
Only 23.98 and 24 supported currently.

Running a 25p clip through the encode just results in skipped frames as far as I can tell, haven't tried higher.

Itching for 25p, but I'm restraining myself on the instant wishlist that having the Redray here has created in my head....
Click to expand...

I am assuming higher timebase recording will eventually be done but I would welcome confirmation by RED. This could have bearing on how one chooses to shoot upcoming projects... even if there is a bitrate penalty.
 
Just ran some quick analysis on my last .RED encode.

Started off with: 7729 16bit DPX 4K UHD frames frames (00:05:20 runtime)
Which comes out to: 238GB of disk space
Encoded to .RED Cinema 36: 1.33GB (with stereo audio track)
 
Phil Holland said:
Just ran some quick analysis on my last .RED encode.

Started off with: 7729 16bit DPX 4K UHD frames frames (00:05:20 runtime)
Which comes out to: 238GB of disk space
Encoded to .RED Cinema 36: 1.33GB (with stereo audio track)
Click to expand...

How long did it take your system to encode? Does the encoding process scale with more cores?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top