The Big Mistake...

[Terry VerHaar]

One thing that I thing is sort of interesting about this discussion is that no one has really defined what they mean by "near future." Or, at the very least, there doesn't seem to be much agreement on a definition. I have absolutely no idea what Jim means when he says "near future" but I think one's concept of near future is dependent on one's own unique perspective (and age?). And so it seems that many people think they disagree with each other when they are really agreeing about time frames while having different perspectives on how to refer to it. So, is the "near future," in reference to 4K, 2 years? 6 years? And are we talking theaters, television, internet/computer devices? When will iPad be 4K?

Reading between the lines, it seems that some people disagree that 4K will be here in the "near future" but argue that it will take five years. To me, that IS the near future. Personally, I understand what is it is like to overestimate the speed at which something will come - I was sure true broadband internet access would be ubiquitous in the U.S. by 2002. I was wrong by what, 6-8 years or more, depending on the details? I guess, for me, the bottom line is that 4K will come; maybe in three years or maybe it will take 6-8. And it won't happen all at once, it will ramp up. Either way, that seems pretty quick to me and it is not too soon to start getting ready!

FWIW, I still see 3D as a bit of a special purpose technology - and a bit of a fad - but there are plenty of companies jumping on that bandwagon because they smell money. With new lighter cameras like Epic and Scarlet which make 3D rigs more "useable," who knows...

One thing is for sure: when you are CREATING the future, as RED is, you are likely to be both a little more confident about it and a little more optimistic. As others have said on this forum before, it might not be all that smart to bet against Jim Jannard. This is a guy who stays up all night to make the future happen!hmy:

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

It only takes ONE network to change the game. It wil happen. Sooner than you think.

NFL Network certainly has the COIN and the VISION... ESPN already adopted Quantel Broadcast solution for HD and Quantel has been manipulating 4K for almost a decade. QUantel has had record years back to back in 09 and 10 due to the HD conversion... despite the economic downturn. RECORD CASH
with a ton going into research and development in 2011.

If anyone can help make 4K a reality in Broadcast TV< its Quantel- Ill forward the engineers this post.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

...
I'll get into my car one day and I won't drive it, it'll drive me to my destination whilst I read the paper.


...

Heck - I see people doing this already here in California. Yikes!!! :crying:

 

[Liam Hall]

Heck - I see people doing this already here in California. Yikes!!! :crying:

We have some here in London too, they're called taxi drivers...

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

We have some here in London too, they're called taxi drivers...

:biggrin5::biggrin5:

 

[Joe Walker]

I have said this before but I'll say it again, shooting features or serious television in 1080P is a big mistake. Since this view will certainly get thrown around the industry, let me explain why.

1. With the certain new standard of 4K delivery for movies AND tv, anything shot on 1080P will be left in the cold for a re-release. Several major companies have 4K displays and projectors nearing release to theaters and to the public. Sony has already converted many theaters to their 4K projectors. Epson has a killer home 4K projector in waiting. Panasonic, Samsung, Christie, Barco, Sharp, Meridian, and others are ready to get their fair share.

2. 1080P is not a quality replacement for film. It has 1/4 the actual measured resolution of film (some less than that). To make the "big screen" it needs sharpening. Often times lots of it. Sharpening is not good for the skin. Real resolution beats sharpening every time... by a lot.

It is my firm belief that hindsight will show the 1st two digital standards, SD and HD, will be considered "mistakes" in the not to distant future. Film will never be considered a mistake. It is the gold standard. It will hold up to 4K releases and you will see many classics re-released in 4K.

Don't count television out of 4K. The delivery mechanism is coming.

I started RED because I did not believe that 1080P was an adequate replacement for film. I love film. When its day is done, we need to honor it with at least as good an image... hopefully better. 1080P is not it.

(Steps down from soapbox)

Jim

In your opinion, where does this leave a film like Avatar, say 10 years down the road?

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

In your opinion, where does this leave a film like Avatar, say 10 years down the road?

since avatar is 90%+ cgi i guess the shots will be rendered in 4k again.
the 20-30 "real" shots...well till then they can reshoot it with the same actors and just make them look younger by cgi in 4k

 

[Tom Lowe]

In your opinion, where does this leave a film like Avatar, say 10 years down the road?

The same place Star Wars Episodes 2 and 3 are... locked at 1080p forever. The popularity of these films will make them endure, but it's not advisable to be shooting new films at 1080p.

Jim's vision for 4K has remained crystal clear and unwavering. In my mind, Jim is like a pitbull with a deathgrip on a car tire. Jim is the pitbull, and 4K display is the tire. No matter what forces try to shake him loose, he stays locked on 4K. Above all things, this is what I admire about Jim -- his clear vision, and but also his willingness to move mountains to make it happen.

 

[AnthonyFlores]

One thing that I thing is sort of interesting about this discussion is that no one has really defined what they mean by "near future." Or, at the very least, there doesn't seem to be much agreement on a definition. I have absolutely no idea what Jim means when he says "near future" but I think one's concept of near future is dependent on one's own unique perspective (and age?). And so it seems that many people think they disagree with each other when they are really agreeing about time frames while having different perspectives on how to refer to it. So, is the "near future," in reference to 4K, 2 years? 6 years? And are we talking theaters, television, internet/computer devices? When will iPad be 4K?

Reading between the lines, it seems that some people disagree that 4K will be here in the "near future" but argue that it will take five years. To me, that IS the near future. Personally, I understand what is it is like to overestimate the speed at which something will come - I was sure true broadband internet access would be ubiquitous in the U.S. by 2002. I was wrong by what, 6-8 years or more, depending on the details? I guess, for me, the bottom line is that 4K will come; maybe in three years or maybe it will take 6-8. And it won't happen all at once, it will ramp up. Either way, that seems pretty quick to me and it is not too soon to start getting ready!

FWIW, I still see 3D as a bit of a special purpose technology - and a bit of a fad - but there are plenty of companies jumping on that bandwagon because they smell money. With new lighter cameras like Epic and Scarlet which make 3D rigs more "useable," who knows...

One thing is for sure: when you are CREATING the future, as RED is, you are likely to be both a little more confident about it and a little more optimistic. As others have said on this forum before, it might not be all that smart to bet against Jim Jannard. This is a guy who stays up all night to make the future happen!hmy:

Good post Terry, I agree. "Near future" is not 1-2 years ... however it seems as though we will see some big 4k advances in the next 2 years as Jim mentioned (more TV's, projectors, monitors, etc) ... but more like a minimum of 4-5 years for something to become "standard." But that's okay -- do I want to shoot my stuff so that future-proofed for that very imminent time period? DEFINITELY.

Also, one thing that's been kinda surprising to me ... is the how slow it's taken for fiber-optic and 20+ mbps internet speed to become standard -- at least here in the US. I mean, the technology has been around for a while and in my opinion it's absolutely necessary for 4K to become convenient for streaming video content. I for one, am totally looking forward to that day.

Same with 4k streaming via itunes and 4k displays on my Macbook Pro and iPad ... I really hope Apple embraces it pronto. Jim and Steve need to talk ..... LOL.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Here is my story about HD. 7 years ago I signed up for HDTV. . Guy comes out to install it, puts ina new dish and receiver has me come in and flips to HDNet! "Wow! That looks amazing!" he exclaims. I squint and pick up the remote, flip through the dish menus and bring up the disay settings: 480p.

The best HD in the world is no good unless it's turned on. And the HD we get today is barely HD, its so compressed it turns out like 5D "1080p". The future is coming but considering a nice clean mildly compressed HD signal is still unavailable I question their commitment to quality. . Even if the do embrace it, Sony and best buy will still put dynamic contrast and sharpening to 11. The problem isn't the technology or the cost, it's the will and lack of discerning eyes on the part of the consumer.

 

[AnthonyFlores]

Jim do you think we will approach an upper limit of what's actually useful (or even discernible) in terms of resolution?

As others have joked, we're saying the future is 4k -- but what about 6k, 8k, and beyond? Given that 4k looks pretty darn good .... once this becomes "standard" do we see it remaining this way for a while?

I guess that's the beauty of the Epic and future Red models with the ability to shoot in these even higher formats and then finish in 4k. If the standard changes later the content will still be future-protected against those advances :hurray:

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

since avatar is 90%+ cgi i guess the shots will be rendered in 4k again.
the 20-30 "real" shots...well till then they can reshoot it with the same actors and just make them look younger by cgi in 4k

I doubt it. The amount of work that would go into rerendering and comping would probably be cost prohibitive, assuming it was even possible to find every asset.

 

[Frederick Giles]

Tell me about it Editing a DSLR shot feature right now.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

While we are talking future... anyone want to comment about a gradual move to higher frame rates as standard operating procedure? Shooting and displaying at 60fps? 120? :reddevil:

 

[Gunleik Groven]

While we are talking future... anyone want to comment about a gradual move to higher frame rates as standard operating procedure? Shooting and displaying at 60fps? 120? :reddevil:

That would at least compensate for the added sensitivty.

 

[James Brundige]

I've said it a few times.... the day 4K takes off in the home is the day sports get shown in 4K. Sports networks hold the key to consumer purchasing power, when it comes to upgrading their TVs... not tv, not films.

Until there is a 4K live broadcast camera and the sports networks feel there is enough "groundswell" to sell this format... it is not going to happen, in the mainstream. Moving the sports industry to 4K would cost billions, that's without even thinking about the consumers buying expensive TVs. We are in recession, you know?

As a potential Scarlet 3k buyer, these posts worry me.... but I personally think 2K/1080p is here for a long, long time and is not just "good enough" but is a great format.

Sorry if this sounds blunt.

I jumped on Red as soon as I heard about it because of the multiple format nightmare I experienced with the various flavors of HDTV.

Whatever format we release in, I want to down-Rez for conversion, not have to create lines and frames. For the same reason I shoot 30 fps. More resolution, spatially and temporally, is better.

That said, it will be interesting to see how 4K sorts out in broadcast and episodic TV.

 

[Michael Dalton]

Because it is as close as you are going to get to 4K for half of $10K.

Jim

I hope this means that Epic Light is going to come in at an even 10K, based on your above statement. I can remember if there is anything outside of the S35 that does 4k.

As soon as you release scarlet and epic light, I'll never look back at 1080p. I may wish some of my TV shows were shoot at 1080 and feel regret, but I'll look at my future projects with a glare of thanks in my eyes that you took it on yourself to make sure the HD mistake was not permanent.

Thanks!

Please on that scarlet/epic light announcement it could be the best christmas present for us soon to be red owners!

 

[David Stewart]

Not to be a kiss-butt, but I think Jim is right. Film is on it's way out for many reasons. If you have a product that will meet or beat film, create an easier workflow, create an easier route for compositing and effects, something that can be worked on by several engineers at the same time, somthing that won't deteriorate over time, can be backed up and archived easily then I think 4K is here to stay and older formats will slowly be retired. I disagree about 3D. It sucks most of the time. It gives me a headache, is distracting, and kind of a gimmick. But that's my opinion.

 

[David Lagos]

I am aware what the future holds for broadcast and film.

However, I use a DSLR setup to make music videos, commercial work, and corporate pieces. Given the fact that the Honduran is at least a good 10 years behind in every market, my choice has proven fruitful. We have SD down here but stations are slowly (and I'm talking about snails pace, here) making the transition to HD.

Having been lucky enough to recieve a college education in the US in Film and TV production has prepared me with enough knowledge to know what the future is (RED) and what I can use here in Honduras to turn a profit (DSLR) eventually leading up to having enough to invest in an Epic.

Having a film of mine shown on a large screen has always been my dream which is why I have held off making a feature until I can make it proper with the right tools. Resoluton counts and I demand too much of myself to allow myself to underachieve.

This thread goes to show that Jim looks out for his clients and offers advice to better prepare them for the world out there.

Jim, this is the reason many of us feel indebted to you. Not only because you have put the tools to create amazing films within the grasp of the most meager of dreamers (myself) but because you share your knowledge, experience, and input to help us out, no matter the circumstances. Red isn't just a revolutionary digital cinema camera company, it's a revolutionary organization of very creative and grounded individuals that should serve as an example to all other companies and the way they do business.

Thanks again to all the RED team, but most of all to Jim, who started it all.

 

[Andrew Huse]

For me, this says it all. The RED ONEs were a perfect match for film. EPIC is an entirely different story altogether... what we are hearing is VistaVision.

Jim

What does this mean? He's talking about the FF35s when he mentions Vista Vision, but what then? What is he hearing?