Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Slow Motion with RED : Best practices

WRT slomo, does anyone know offhand, approximately how much lower compression is achieved on Epic Dragon by switching to minimags? Worth the outlay?
 
Tom Hamilton said:
WRT slomo, does anyone know offhand, approximately how much lower compression is achieved on Epic Dragon by switching to minimags? Worth the outlay?
Click to expand...
2 compression values Tom. For us it defiantly was worth the upgrade. We however could trade our 1.8" mags back to red which made it attractive. Also the fact that Jared made it clear that it was the end of the line for the 1.8s.
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't know what everyone is worried about. We've seen at least three examples of (approximately) 4K 15:1 120 fps footage that is very clean and usable. Sure, the Raven and Scarlet W aren't Weapons or Phantoms, but they do accomplish a lot at their price point. If you don't try to shoot a dense forest at night, you'll be fine.

Here is another thing I have been thinking about: effective data rate. What I mean is, Scarlet W puts out 140 MB/s. You will always be putting out approximately that amount of data if you set your Redcode as low as possible and your resolution as high as possible for each framerate you shoot. That means that if you over crank at 120fps, when you play it back at 24fps you will effectively get 140 MB / 5 secs, which equals 28 MB/s. Now if you push it to 300fps, you will spread that over 12.5 seconds at speed, which means you're getting 11.2 MB/sec of visual data at playback (140/12.5). To put that in perspective, your top-of-the-line DSLR's record 6.25 MB/s, and people are still making incredible stuff with those.

If my math is funky, though, please call me out.
 
Kenneth C Merrill said:
I honestly don't know what everyone is worried about. We've seen at least three examples of (approximately) 4K 15:1 120 fps footage that is very clean and usable. Sure, the Raven and Scarlet W aren't Weapons or Phantoms, but they do accomplish a lot at their price point. If you don't try to shoot a dense forest at night, you'll be fine.

Here is another thing I have been thinking about: effective data rate. What I mean is, Scarlet W puts out 140 MB/s. You will always be putting out approximately that amount of data if you set your Redcode as low as possible and your resolution as high as possible for each framerate you shoot. That means that if you over crank at 120fps, when you play it back at 24fps you will effectively get 140 MB / 5 secs, which equals 28 MB/s. Now if you push it to 300fps, you will spread that over 12.5 seconds at speed, which means you're getting 11.2 MB/sec of visual data at playback (140/12.5). To put that in perspective, your top-of-the-line DSLR's record 6.25 MB/s, and people are still making incredible stuff with those.

If my math is funky, though, please call me out.
Click to expand...

I have seen a couple that look not so bad at 120 also, but I think the OP and some others are looking for higher fps than 120 for their HFR required work. So far that 200fps footage just posted was the best 200 ive seen (still not great). I am guessing a lot of Neat video was used, the footage was lacking some serious detail. Not to my standards, but still usable for most peoples work i'd imagine.
 
You can get clean results.

Redcode (wavlet based RAW data) is not a horrible codec at all, it's actually pretty efficient and this goes back to the REDONE when that camera needed to record to 8GB to 16GB C-FAST media.

Films like CHE were recorded at 4K RC 36 (roughly 8:1) at 4K.

Now we are a few sensors down the line and all the R&D, etc better, more efficient extraction, etc.

If you hit the sensor with light (in film terms a FAT NEGATIVE, in digital terms ETTR) without clipping, you will get nice color reproduction and low noise images. The more you window the sensor, the higher your risk of grain.

The rules are pretty simple and everyones taste and tolerance varies.

David
 
just wanted to let you guys know, that I shot CF Weapon with best compression ratios on all different fps und resolutions.
Also shot the wanted ratios/fps/res for S-Weapon.
Wideangle with Sigma Art 24mm, shutter angle 180, lots of leaves and grass in the wind.

Does have anyone an advice where I should upload all this stuff?

Regards
 
Manfred Baulig said:
just wanted to let you guys know, that I shot CF Weapon with best compression ratios on all different fps und resolutions.
Also shot the wanted ratios/fps/res for S-Weapon.
Wideangle with Sigma Art 24mm, shutter angle 180, lots of leaves and grass in the wind.

Does have anyone an advice where I should upload all this stuff?

Regards
Click to expand...

YouTube 4K and R3D clips on any server that can hold it
 
Manfred Baulig said:
just wanted to let you guys know, that I shot CF Weapon with best compression ratios on all different fps und resolutions.
Also shot the wanted ratios/fps/res for S-Weapon.
Wideangle with Sigma Art 24mm, shutter angle 180, lots of leaves and grass in the wind.

Does have anyone an advice where I should upload all this stuff?

Regards
Click to expand...

Ya youtube or vimeo, plus rd3s on any server, dropbox, box etc. That would be great man.
 
Manfred Baulig said:
just wanted to let you guys know, that I shot CF Weapon with best compression ratios on all different fps und resolutions.
Also shot the wanted ratios/fps/res for S-Weapon.
Wideangle with Sigma Art 24mm, shutter angle 180, lots of leaves and grass in the wind.

Does have anyone an advice where I should upload all this stuff?

Regards
Click to expand...

Thank you for the efforts! Might be best for you to start a new Thread rather than cross thread this one
 
Will post it here first and when you guys say it's all right, I'll make a new thread.
 
info

Daniel Reed said:
Someone yell for me? heh j/k



Time to put on my serious face. :smiley:

To avoid any perceivable dancing compression noise,
think of the Raven & Scar-W as normal speed cameras w/ a little overcrank potential.
(remember the trusty wind-up bolex?)



48fps at 6:1 at 4.5K FF on Raven should look great - apparently Raven got a stealth upgrade to FF mode in 4.5K
60fps at 7:1 in 4.5K wide on Raven mode may be a reasonable limit for most scenes not shot in a white void.

Raven_FF.PNG




For Scar-W, in most 5K modes, it may prove wise to consider not pushing higher then 40fps for 6:1~7:1
If going for wide mode, 48fps may be a good limit advisement to maintain 7:1

ScarW.PNG




Comparing the two charts above, it appears Raven gets lower compression at every 4.5K FF speed notch the two cams share.
(unless a typo is afoot)
Click to expand...
 
info

Daniel Reed said:
Scar-W offers a larger FOV, bigger 5K FF image, specialty OLP filters options, and the use of PL glass natively.

If you plan to use AF canon lenses w/ fool control, don't mind the slight hit to FOV/image size(especially if 4.5K FF is true),
and don't want to mess w/ OLPFs (standard is a solid choice most of the time),
then Raven may be a good choice - an awesome RED gateway drug!

In terms of image quality, they both are RED dragons w/ the improvements of the DSMC2 system.
I.E. drastically reduced CMOS smear, a touch higher DR, and built in scaled down 2K ProRes

Either camera should produce very similar cinematic results if all else is equal.
If shooting the same set with both cameras, I suspect many would be hard pressed to see the difference.

However; I have used neither camera, so take my thoughts w/ grains of course salt.
I'm still in Epic Dragon DSMC1 land now and for the foreseeable near future.



Here's the compression chart for Epic-D (for the sake of an orange to apples comparison)

epicD_01.PNG


epicD_02.PNG


epicD_04.PNG


epicD_03.PNG
Click to expand...
 
links
John Shofner said:
Im pretty sure this will work... 2K FF, 241FPS, 8:1. But this is the folder where it can be accessed

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/46b501qre9nelrk/AAD2MuSC8WZn6DFmY31fR8exa?dl=0

This one may take another 20-30 but this is 5K WS @ 59.94 RC 9:1 with a LLO. Not sure if this is something you guys care to see. It wasnt setup as a test I just thought maybe someone would like to take a look.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wpv58ld83815xcq/AAAgo1xuaLs8Z7gJ7nkB3r7Ga?dl=0
Click to expand...
 
Info from daniel stilling


Daniel Stilling said:
It's really hard to discuss about something unseen. Honestly, compression plays a minor role in the quality of what you're putting out there. Many large features shoot the whole thing at 5:1, 6:1, so if you think 2:1 is an absolute necessity, that's not true... As many pointed out, you need to know a good deal of technical and artistic styles before even pointing a camera in the right direction for a good result.
You have to garner experience and knowledge before churning out stunning work. It's like expecting a person that has only driven Toyota Corolas, when sitting inside a formula one car for the first time, to da a lap at record times.
But also, like in so many things in life, filmmaking is the art of managing compromise: to get something you want, you need to give up something else most of the time. You want maximum frame rate on a shot, you know you'll have to give up compression and resolution. If the framerate is the most important, you have to learn to deal with the issues created and try to somehow mitigate the negative aspects.
But we really have come so far on what's possible with these cameras that we forget how much light we had to throw in when doing interior high speed with film. Talk about grain...
Click to expand...
 
Patrick Faith

PatrickFaith said:
There is way to much garbage in this thread to save it. What I'd like to see happen is opening a bunch of sticky threads like "NEWB: shooting high speed", then copy this basic info into those. Seems like this board fills up when this nonsense every week, also a lot of the great comments just get lost in the bogus titled threads. The "newb: shooting high speed" would be great if someone went over the basics:
1) high speed means there is less light to the sensor per frame (i swear people don't get this)
2) you can't compress random data, like noise, so explains best approach using the gio scope for high speed
3) high speed means smaller frame sizes, so goes over what frame sizes are good for 1080p and 4k.
4) a few examples of does and don'ts

Then I'd follow that with some copy pastes from this and other threads with reference pictures (maybe keep some of the first couple of posts open to do some copy/paste from the ASC crowd that have answered these questions a bunch of times).
Click to expand...
 
C. Phillips

C. Phillips said:
Zeb,

That would help tremendously. I hope someone shares something. Don't know about anybody else, but that influenced my purchase. I already have a Scarlet MX which is still great, but I would like my second cam to do some decent HFR clips. That jump was pretty steep for me, $10,000 to $30,000. I actually had the Magnesium and got allocated, but changed to Scarlet-W because I figured that should be good enough to do the HFR without spending the extra $20,000. I don't need 6K benefits at this time, and the ProRes 4:4:4:4 wasn't a must for me either. Outside of those things I just mentioned and the compression ratios, those are the only differences creating a $20,000 price bump and I couldn't justify it. But, as I have said, I did realize the compression would be that significant because overtime I shoot, it's always been at the highest ratio. I just buy many, many terabytes of hard drives.
Click to expand...
 
Links

C. Phillips said:
Hello all,

I didn't have time to upload an R3D, but I did take two clips, exported them from RED Cine X as ProRes 4:4:4:4 clips, then uploaded to Vimeo. Because I took two different frame rates (one at 200fps and the other at 253 fps) you will notice the two different resolution sizes. So I put them in a timeline that had the highest of the two which was the 3K clip, 3072 x 1296. The other clip which was 2K, 2048 x 1024 I just left in there as normal and did no scaling. Unfortunately, Vimeo I believe down scaled this to 2K. I have a plus account, so I have the 4K capabilities, so I was hoping it would leave it as a 3K clip. I don't know the rhyme or reason why it was downsized to 2K.

https://vimeo.com/163654610

In any case here are some specs which are also on the clip:

Scarlet-W
First half - 3072 x 1296
200 fps
Redcode 11:1

Second half - 2048 x 1024
253 fps
Redcode 8:1

Settings consistent for both clips:
ISO 800
Skin Tone OLPF used
RedGamma 4 Lut
-No ND filter, Motion Mount was used to keep exposure under control.
-No denoising, exported as ProRes 4:4:4:4 from RED Cine X (Premiere isn't taking the footage yet, but it should soon in the next update.)
-No color grading

Now here is a clip of something I did with the RED Epic X, with no denoising, 150 fps and up. Can't remember the compression specs, but I will find out later and share that in another update.
https://vimeo.com/163041718

If you notice, it holds up very well, and you can play it back in true 4K, so that is why I was wanting to see if anyone had any Weapon footage, 150 fps and up to compare. Sure these clips are shot very differently which can make a difference, but I wasn't expecting the Scarlet-W to look the way it did even with 11:1 compression.

Now here is the kicker, I posted this earlier and some of you watched it. But what you may be shocked at if you are honest with yourself, the opening shot is actually a 3K 3072 x 1284, 201fps SCALED UP image! If I didn't say anything, some of you wouldn't have known IF you're being honest. Still looks great! Redcode is 7:1. I forgot it was that was the resolution until I actually dug up the specs.

Now maybe I am being picky, but you guys and gals can give it your honest opinion and hopefully you can see why I was little bit disappointed. Actually, the RED Epic shot has less noise as well, but I think Jarred said something about the noise being a compromise with the Skin Tone OLPF for the increased dynamic range and color in the highlights. DON'T QUOTE ME THOUGH! I have to search for that to clarify. I tried to attach screen shots so you all could verify my settings in Red Cine X, but I had a problem attaching it to this post, but trust, I am giving you the right information.

Thank you everyone for you patience. Like I said in a earlier post, I am working heavily on a feature film right now in post, so if it takes me a little bit to respond, I apologize. You can send me a private message as well if you want to get at me more directly, because I haven't had time to go through the thread everyday.

God bless!

-C. Phillips
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top