Shoot in 2K or 4K?

[AnthonyFaust]

Hello RED Users,

I have this little debate going with my cinematographer right now. I'm shooting a film on the RED Epic-M. We're talking about whether or not to shoot the film in 2K and master to 2K, with some shots being shot at 3K to allow for extra pixels to zoom in, OR shoot the film in 4K and master to 2K.

I'm of the opinion that we should shoot everything in 4K and then I'll master the film in 2K. Now, she says that is overkill because there is no reason to shoot everything in 4K if we're mastering to 2K anyway. I will have the hard drive space to house the footage if we shoot 4K so that's not an issue.

But what's your opinion on the subject? My logic is that 4K may seem overkill now, but in a few years, 4K will be what high definition (1080p) is now. In other words, I'm thinking about the future and if I need a 4K master of this film 5 or 10 years from now, I will be able to make that because I had planned ahead.

What does everyone think?

 

[Thomas Pohl]

For me no question - use 4k. Even if you master on 2k it looks better if you record on 4k. And the most important factor is the DOF: To create this 35mm look it's necessary to use 4k.

Cheers
Thomas.

 

[Andrew clemson]

If you have the HDD space, and on-set workflow in place to support the extra data, then shoot at least 4K, even 5K. Then transcode to 2K if thats your bag. 2K loses a lot of the aesthetic benefits of shooting on the large sensor and footage may not seem as sharp.

 

[Josh Snyder]

Does 4K scaled to 2K look better and sharper vs shooting 2K? At least it works that way with stills and 1080p -> 720p cameras Could there be some aliasing or other problems?

 

[Andrew clemson]

Shooting 4K and transcoding to 2K will look better hands down. Plus you have the 4K masters to go back to for reframing etc, arguably there is less noise in 4K than 2K aswell, IMHO.

 

[Uli Plank]

Downscaling is reducing noise too.

 

[Antony M]

If you want the 35mm depth of field, but want to save data, then use the FF1080 option in the Epic.

That feature is one of the main reasons for me to upgrade to the Epic.

But some people here insist on 4k.

Each to their own

 

[George Butterfield]

I have this little debate going with my cinematographer right now. I'm shooting a film on the RED Epic-M. We're talking about whether or not to shoot the film in 2K and master to 2K, with some shots being shot at 3K to allow for extra pixels to zoom in, OR shoot the film in 4K and master to 2K.

Why does your Cinematographer even care? What I'm getting at is, who is doing the editing? Who is downloading/looking after the "footage"? Maybe your Cinematographer can't handle the extra workload required for 4K. I think you have to go over the whole workflow and see where you and the Cinematographer may have misconceptions. Obviously 4K is more "future proof" and better foe everyone's reel. Talk to the Editor, get their input. Who is the editor? What tools does the Editor have? How many SSD's does the Cinematographer have? What is the REAL issue?

 

[George Butterfield]

What is the REAL issue?

If the REAL issue is lack of resources, SSD's etc, i.e workflow "bottlenecks" slowing Production, I would turn that negative into a prime advantage. I'd explain to cast and crew that the workflow is slowing everything down so guess what? We will be doing Old Time Movie Making!
We will actually rehearse and nail each scene during the backup/download downtimes, we will shoot less coverage and require better performances from the Actors! Rehearse each scene five times before shooting ... then do two takes (one for safety). I bet your Production will actually be better, your Actors will have more fun and be more creative, they will come up with nuances no-one considered.

 

[JanneJansson]

Do a test, then you know. ...but I would shoot 4k.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Only shoot <4k if you need to do high speed shots you cannot otherwise obtain at >=4k. For Epic, shoot a 5k mode and downsample for all output resolutions.

Graeme

 

[Mark Phelan]

Only shoot <4k if you need to do high speed shots you cannot otherwise obtain at >=4k. For Epic, shoot a 5k mode and downsample for all output resolutions.

Graeme

Listen to the man, he knows that of which he speaks.

 

[Yaque Silva-Doyle]

shoot in SD

 

[Max Fischer]

Anthony,

If you have the drive space, computer speed, and workflow efficiency, definitely shoot 4K. It's also nice to be able to zoom in in post when you need that closeup that you couldn't get!

Good luck, Max

 

[Matt Makena]

As everyone else has already stated, I would definitely shoot in 4k or 5k if you have the space. I want as many options and as high of quality video as possible in post.

 

[Damien Molineaux]

Hello RED Users,

I have this little debate going with my cinematographer right now. I'm shooting a film on the RED Epic-M. We're talking about whether or not to shoot the film in 2K and master to 2K, with some shots being shot at 3K to allow for extra pixels to zoom in, OR shoot the film in 4K and master to 2K.

I'm of the opinion that we should shoot everything in 4K and then I'll master the film in 2K. Now, she says that is overkill because there is no reason to shoot everything in 4K if we're mastering to 2K anyway. I will have the hard drive space to house the footage if we shoot 4K so that's not an issue.

But what's your opinion on the subject? My logic is that 4K may seem overkill now, but in a few years, 4K will be what high definition (1080p) is now. In other words, I'm thinking about the future and if I need a 4K master of this film 5 or 10 years from now, I will be able to make that because I had planned ahead.

What does everyone think?

Hi Anthony,

I think by understanding the way a Red Epic-M, or One for that matter, works ; will make this question somewhat not required...

1. When you shoot with a Red camera (Epic or One) when shooting 2K, you are in fact using a cropped portion of your sensor. This joins what people have been saying, you're not using the whole sensor therefore you do not have the FOV (field of view, which many inacurately refer to as Depth of FIeld) of a 35mm sensor/35mm film. 2K corresponds pretty much to 16mm film. That is a choice, do you want more depth of field?

2. Red cameras use Bayer sensors, which means the sensor is composed of a pattern of pixels responding to either Red, Green OR Blue light. Imagine a checker board, the white squares are sensitive to Green (that is half the pixels) and half the black squares are sensitive to Red while the other half are sensitive to Blue. From this information, a complex and brillant calculation is made, called "Debayer", to create a RGB image. However, while all the pixels respond to light, you don't have the sensor's full resolution in color. In an ideal situation, you have approximately 80% of the sensor's resolution. This means a 4K sensor gives you a 3.2K RGB image. So if you only shoot 2K, you in fact only have a 1.6K image, not even 1920 (1.9K). Which joins Graeme's reccomendation to shoot the highest resolution the camera is capable of. (Graeme is the main progamming head behind Red Raw, ie. .r3d, I would listen...).

On a side note, someone reccomended shooting 1080P on the Epic, that is meant to come, but not available yet...

Finally, personally, when finishing to HD, I like to shoot 4KHD. It is slightly smaller and lighter than full 4K, and even more so than 5K. But mainly, the debayering is faster because it is a multiple of HD (1920x1080). FYI, 4KHD uses a very slightly cropped portion of the sensor, precisely 3840x2160 pixels, yet very close to the full 4K (4096x2304 px).

Cheers,
Damien

 

[Erich Ocean]

This discussion should not even be happening: shoot the film in 5K and master to 2K.

And contemplate finding a new DP, who actually knows WTF they are talking about.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

To digress: Damien, as right as you are about the 80%, that's mostly down to the optical low pass filtering to avoid moire and alias artifacts in the final image, rather than the demosaic per-se. Cameras that use lower rez arrays tend to relax the optical filtering requirements so as to get sharper images at the expense of aliasing. Now aliasing on a good 3 chipper will look better than that on similar resolution Bayer, so they can get away with it to an extent.... But the better solution is the very high resolution Bayer we use that has very high resolution and negligible aliasing (much lower than practically any other camera I've measured).

Graeme

 

[paulherrin]

If you're shooting Epic, and have no other reasons (production or post workflow/processing/etc) I would certainly shoot 5k, no matter what your output. If you really don't care what it looks like, then I'm not sure why you're shooting with the Epic. If you're gonna use it, use it.

Down-sampled imagery will look crisper, and you can always soften it if you want. The full sensor will be used, you can crop it yourself in post if desired. It will last the test of time if it's ever worth re-releasing. You will have more options for reframing and pan&scan/digital dollies. You will have room and resolution for stabilization/camera shake and interpolated effects (slo-mo, motion blur, etc). Editors and VFX will love you.

Only downsides are your available framerates (go down when necessary) and your filesizes being larger. The side effects of larger files means you need to switch media more often, may need more media available, will have longer transfer times, will use more storage all the way through post-production, and will need more post-production power and processing time. Use that information (along with some testing perhaps) to make an informed decision about what combo of resolution, framerates, and compression ratios make sense for your production.

 

[Damien Molineaux]

To digress: Damien, as right as you are about the 80%, that's mostly down to the optical low pass filtering to avoid moire and alias artifacts in the final image, rather than the demosaic per-se. Cameras that use lower rez arrays tend to relax the optical filtering requirements so as to get sharper images at the expense of aliasing. Now aliasing on a good 3 chipper will look better than that on similar resolution Bayer, so they can get away with it to an extent.... But the better solution is the very high resolution Bayer we use that has very high resolution and negligible aliasing (much lower than practically any other camera I've measured).

Graeme

Thanks Graeme,

I bow low in front of thee, in awe of your knowledge and generosity in sharing it. One has to love Reduser, where else would we get this kind of information, the lore of geeks !

Cheers,
Damien