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 :)

Surprise...

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, I didn't say the RED RAY version, I said the 4K version. Compress it with Quicktime's H.264 like you did with the 720p video (no wonder you think H.264 is lackluster). Obviously use a very high bitrate so it's practically lossless, then let us have a look.

Make it a lot more bitrate, because Quicktime's encoder really sucks. Even at 448MB, there were really bad scenes.

Nice low quality scaling on your logo and the credits, btw. No idea how you managed to do that.
 
00:18 - 00:20 Pupa Make-up commercial
 
Erik Ponti said:
No, I didn't say the RED RAY version, I said the 4K version. Compress it with Quicktime's H.264 like you did with the 720p video (no wonder you think H.264 is lackluster). Obviously use a very high bitrate so it's practically lossless, then let us have a look.
Click to expand...

Might as well just post some selected 4K frames as TIFFs at that point, since I'm pretty sure nobody can play back 4K H.264 right now either.

The thing is, viewing still frames is a little unfair to the RedRay codec; compression artifacts tend to be easier to pick out in still frames. If Red posts pre-compression and post-compression still frames, people are immediately going to take them into Photoshop, diff them, post 200% extractions showing every artifact, etc. Every flaw of the codec will be picked apart and discussed endlessly, but we won't have gotten the experience of actually watching playback of impressive-looking 4K RedRay footage as a counterpoint.

Now, don't get me wrong. I hope Red does it anyway, and I'll be here picking over compression artifacts like everyone else. But it's quite understandable if Red doesn't want to do this.
 
i feel so left out!!! the link opens up a new window with a screen where the video is supposed to be, BUT IT NEVER PLAYS!!!!! any other site i can go to down load it???
 
No, pass through on Audio section?

No, pass through on Audio section?

I just have to say...Wow. even in 720p looks great. I've yet make a mp4. version to play on PS3 on my Pioneer Elite 50 TV. But I did notice when using QT Pro, I didn't get the "pass through" on the audio bit like the video that was posted here. I can "P thorough" on video but not on audio - just gives me the option AAC. What's up with that?
 
Chris Kenny said:
Might as well just post some selected 4K frames as TIFFs at that point, since I'm pretty sure nobody can play back 4K H.264 right now either.
Click to expand...
Who said it has to be played back in real time? I want to compare it against x264.

The thing is, viewing still frames is a little unfair to the RedRay codec; compression artifacts tend to be easier to pick out in still frames. If Red posts pre-compression and post-compression still frames, people are immediately going to take them into Photoshop, diff them, post 200% extractions showing every artifact, etc. Every flaw of the codec will be picked apart and discussed endlessly, but we don't have gotten the experience of actually watching playback of impressive-looking 4K RedRay footage as a counterpoint.
Click to expand...
No, people like me are going to view them as still frames... without zooming, or enhancing the difference. I can encode a 1080p video (very very close to 2K) at 7Mbps, and it looks identical for all purposes, even if you view still frames. Yes, there are very minor differences, but it's practically the same.
David Newman of CineForm has frequently said that the difference between 2K and 4K is not as drastic as the resolution difference would lead you to believe, so perhaps x264 can achieve something similar at 4K.

Now, don't get me wrong. I hope Red does it anyway, and I'll be here picking over compression artifacts like everyone else. But it's quite understandable if Red doesn't want to do this.
Click to expand...
It's not understandable. You can't claim to be competitive and then avoid posting samples so that it's shown you aren't.
Looking nearly identical at 10Mbps is amazing; having artifacts which are not noticeable in motion is not.

Blu-ray looks identical to the master. If this does not, then it's subpar and doesn't match the claims they've made about this codec.
 
Erik Ponti said:
It's not understandable. You can't claim to be competitive and then avoid posting samples so that it's shown you aren't.
Looking nearly identical at 10Mbps is amazing; having artifacts which are not noticeable in motion is not.

Blu-ray looks identical to the master. If this does not, then it's subpar and doesn't match the claims they've made about this codec.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? We just showed 1st public demo of REDray. We are still developing it. How about we finish it before we let you pick it apart? We learned our lesson with REDCODE in the RED ONE.

BluRay identical to the master? Then you are pretty lax in your comparisons.

Try to remember what this is for. 10mb/sec replaces 800MB/sec for motion delivery. The result is off the chart great. But if you think this is what you should use for still work, you are nuts (sorry).

Jim
 
Erik Ponti said:
Blu-ray looks identical to the master.
Click to expand...

you know.. you probably had a couple of people riding along with you in your argument parade ; cheering you on; until that very last line...
 
O.o very good, I don't know what Erik Ponti is talking about... keep up the great work!
 
Erik Ponti is a Fictional Character from a Novel called "Evil" or "Ondskan" in Swedish...Thats a clue that narrows things down.

DogDay.
 
Blu-ray looks identical to the master.
Click to expand...

Sometimes it can be visually lossless, in real-time, but once you pause, all bets are off.

If you look at the Pirates Blu-ray (1st film), there is a lot of shadow detail that was filtered out by the PHL encoder. I know, because Disney sent me the source for testing.

You are left with what I would call chroma blocking. The Y channel is fixed at 16 while the Cb and Cr channels fluctuate by one (128, 127 or 128, 129) on a block by block basis. They look like little blocks of chocolate. This is because they preserved no AC coeff, just DC. The source has low amplitude grain, not Y 16. You should have Y filled with 16s, 17s and even 18s.
 
help? im dying to see the video... please???
 
Nick Wolf said:
Erik Ponti is a Fictional Character from a Novel called "Evil" or "Ondskan" in Swedish...Thats a clue that narrows things down.

DogDay.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but I'm not trolling. They can't, at first, tell me it's perfect and then retract that statement and tell me it's still under development and they don't want me looking at it with a magnifying glass yet.
Stacey Spears said:
Sometimes it can be visually lossless in real-time, but once you pause, all bets are off.

If you look at the Pirates Blu-ray (1st film), there is a lot of shadow detail that was filtered out by the PHL encoder. I know, because Disney sent me the source for testing.

You are left with what I would call chroma blocking. The Y channel is fixed at 16 while the Cb and Cr channels change on a block by block basis. i.e. they preserve no AC coeff, just DC and it is floating. The source has low amplitude grain, not Y 16. You should have 16s, 17s and even 18s in the Y channel.
Click to expand...
Very well. Professional encoders suck, then. All of them - you've confirmed my suspicions. I figured there would be no way to screw it up at Blu-ray's bitrates.
 
Jannard said:
What the hell are you talking about? We just showed 1st public demo of REDray. We are still developing it. How about we finish it before we let you pick it apart? We learned our lesson with REDCODE in the RED ONE.

BluRay identical to the master? Then you are pretty lax in your comparisons.

Try to remember what this is for. 10mb/sec replaces 800MB/sec for motion delivery. The result is off the chart great. But if you think this is what you should use for still work, you are nuts (sorry).

Jim
Click to expand...

Good! because the real shame would be letting kids like this to even remotely alter your internal plans.


what the hell is thinking?

simple "hmm, ill challenge RED's thinking publicly so they give up their secrets" or "its so he can boast about his knowledge in this forum, im guessing because he thinks it will impress you...

How's he doing so far?

Erik, u seem like a smart kid. why all the edge? You catch more bees with honey than vinegar... do u work for Sony? sure sounds like it to me
 
Erik Ponti said:
He said there were no artifacts. Clearly it is ready for production, then.
Click to expand...

I did not say that. Read the quote you took from me very very carefully. It was phrased as a question. Perhaps a rhetorical question, but still a question.

As Jim mentioned, that was the first public showing of a REDRAY encode. REDRAY is not finished yet.

Quite frankly, now that we have that demo out of the way, I want to get back to coding to put the finishing touches on the code, rather than get into endless forum discussions on it. The whole point of the demo was to show that we're not completely "off our rockers" and that 4k at absurdly low data rates does work.

Graeme
 
Supreme reel

Supreme reel

Thank you, thank you, thank you! I have never seen anything this supreme on my 720p projector ... play it again ... play it again ...

Jari Sundqvist
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top