The Big Mistake...

[David Mullen ASC]

I'll add one final point to this topic....

2011 will be the year in which there will be no excuse not to finish in 4K, unless you are on a micro budget.

4K+ acquisition, dynamic range, image quality, media storage, editing, processing power, camera size, 3D.... all things that should be readily accessible to film makers and tv companies by the end of next year.

I don't know about that, a typical D.I. facility will still charge "x" more money if they have to deal with 4X the data, or have to laser record to 35mm at 4K. Maybe that "x" amount is only $50,000 for a movie that cost millions to make, but you'd be surprised at how many productions would opt to not spend that little extra. To me, that's being penny-wise, pound-foolish, but that's the reality. Besides, other post people may want that bit of money, so it comes down to the producer telling you "do you want to finish in 4K or do you want another two days for sound mixing?" "Do you want the rights to that song you put in the end title or do you want to spend it on a 4K film-out?" "Do you want to redo those visual effect shots that you hate? I can find the money to get it redone... if you can live with finishing the project at 2K." That's the nature of conversations in various post suites around Hollywood. Every dollar near the finishing line is argued over and over and over, so there basically has to be nearly no extra costs with mastering in 4K.

 

[PatrickW]

In 5 years, what is going to be the difference in price between a footage library on HD vs 4k?

 

[Lee Fingersh]

a screen can be rolled down/up.
did you ever noticed the difference between a screened dvd and a blueray?
multiply this with 4 times the quality and you have your own cinema experience in your home if you wish.

Actually, I think a DVD shown in a high-end home theater beats about 99% of professional cinemas showing film. A blueray is enough resolution that more resolution than that doesn't really help unless we sit closer or have bigger screens. Some people will do that (enthusiasts), the masses will not, unless it's cheap (under $1,000 at Costco) and easy to install.

 

[Detlev Eller]

I have done tests on my own vision (which is pretty much 20/20), and at the appropriate viewing distances, a GOOD 1080p bluray looks tact sharp. So for me, at the correct viewing distance, I would probably need to sit closer to see a difference between 4k and 1080p/2k.

Craig, i think there is more to "experience" than just what we see and are able to analyze with our mind.

It is obvious, that our eyes "technically" perceive much more data than our mind is able to elaborate and put on the awareness screen ...

i imagine, the experience of a well crafted and designed 5k/4k experience is recognizable ... by gut feeling.

Few people will be able to rationalize the "why" ... but i am sure, the effect is inherently there.

 

[M Most]

i imagine, the experience of a well crafted and designed 5k/4k experience is recognizable ... by gut feeling.

Few people will be able to rationalize the "why" ... but i am sure, the effect is inherently there.

And are you basing that analysis on personal experience or simply because everyone else here seems to say it?

 

[David Quinn Carder]

If you say that everything not 4K is a big mistake, then why don't you say that everything shot 2D isn't futureproof? since probably 70% of future Displays and Television sets will have an option for it?

You say that film resolves at 4K, then why don't i see a difference between 1080p and 720p in most movies shot on film?
there is so much grain and motionblur and diffusion that resolution doesn't really matter THAT much.

is this the Megapixel-war all over again?

For one thing, 2D is not inherently inferior to 3D (my reasoning is beyond the scope of this thread so I won't get into it). But I don't think, anyway, that Jannard was saying it was/is a mistake for any individual to choose 1080p over film—hopefully he'll correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he was saying it was a mistake for the industry as a whole to imply 1080p was good enough, an implication which trickled down in the decision-making processes of many people who might have stuck with film if it was widely accepted that 1080p as a standard was not adequate. To some extent or another, most people "go with the flow" on at least some of their technical decisions, and the flow was headed in the wrong direction.

As for you not being able to see the difference between 1080p and 720p, I think that's your problem, or a problem with the set or configuration of the set you're watching material on, or just as likely, a problem with the material itself. Furthermore, the difference between 720p and 1080p is significantly smaller than the difference between 1080p and 4K. No offense, but it's a fact. I do agree that with most crap it doesn't matter, but who cares about "most crap"? In any given art, there's only a small percentage (or even a percentage of a percent) that is worth fussing over.

I quoted Boyle's reason... the small form factor of the camera.

I think that's a totally valid exception in some cases, especially documentary work, but you or someone else cited Sin City as an example of shooting digital having some sort of artistic merit, and I don't see how that would apply in cases like that. It might make the workflow easier, it might be cheaper, it might be a lot of things, but I fail to see how the end product would benefit from being shot with 1080p digital cameras instead of film. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying I fail to see your logic.

 

[richard peterson]

ultra resolution is already here... check out a 40x30 print from something like a hasselblad H4D-60... jaw dropping resolution that looks great from across the room or standing 3 feet out. When 320 ppi makes it to the home screen then even 4k will seem soft.

Red gets it and is on target with 645 epic; a medium format camera that shoots motion.... the future is a work in progress

http://www.hasselbladusa.com/downloads/images.aspx

 

[Detlev Eller]

And are you basing that analysis on personal experience or simply because everyone else here seems to say it?

... well, i guess i still have to find someone speaking about depth cues ... ;-)
as a reason to shot in 5k ...

to my knowledge, very few people have physical experience with a 5k/4k workflow ...

therefore it says: I imagine .... which is based on my years of image creation and analysis as well as studies of the process ... i used to "peek and poke" ASCII characters to create flying rocket animations in the 80ies ... just sayin' ...

i hope this helps to clarify ... whatever there was to clarify.

P.S: and by the way, while the first part of your question seems to be highly productive ... the latter part lacks that quality .... => didn`t we all agree on using real names ... ;-) ...

 

[Stuart English]

4K demand

4K demand

Actually, I think a DVD shown in a high-end home theater beats about 99% of professional cinemas showing film. A blueray is enough resolution that more resolution than that doesn't really help unless we sit closer or have bigger screens. Some people will do that (enthusiasts), the masses will not, unless it's cheap (under $1,000 at Costco) and easy to install.

The good news is the world is a very big place and the internet now allows all of those enthusiast's demand to be pooled and serviced.

Of course 4K will start out as a premium and niche service, for that matter so did color, and so did HD...

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

.=> didn`t we all agree on using real names ... ;-) ...

it is his real name,
mike most,
you can choose to only use your last name plus the 1st letter.
btw mike most is one of the most valuable members of this forum.

always good to discuss topics with him, also i am not always agreeing with him...but his experience rules.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

What it's going to take, among other things, is for a forward-thinking studio -- let's say, Warner Bros., who already have leanings in this direction -- to insist that a 4K master being part of the deliverables, and that it must pass QC, you can't pass off any old master just bumped up to 4K. Just like the BBC requirements, the studio would set a 4K standard (including acceptable levels of data compression) for all their in-house productions, with exceptions noted. Then a producer finishing a movie for that studio isn't going to take the 4K line item in the post budget and consider it open for debate, it's just going to be a given that it has to be done.

 

[Detlev Eller]

M,

Regarding the viewing experience, let me share something personal ....

I was watching "the tourist" yesterday ... i missed the first minutes ... so i changed theaters after 45 minutes and started from the beginning ....

This particular theater (10 multiplex) has some issues with focusing the movies. its slightly off many times ... not that anyone would walk out and ask to fix it - but ME!

Yesterday, the second theater was "dead spot on" ... while the first one was slightly off.
The second projection was breathing. Alive. had dimension. the first instead dull. rather flat. I see these things, because i study the experience. you may say i am obsessed with images.

 

[Robert Frank]

Don't get me wrong, I actually agree with Jim's general premise, that 35mm was the gold standard (and still is) and therefore 4K should be the new gold standard -- making 1080P and 2K the "defacto" standard, as has happened by default over the past decade -- was a step backwards, but at least with 35mm originated material, there is always the possibility of remastering at 4K.

So I agree, we should all be working towards seeing 4K instituted as a standard for digital cinema as soon as possible, and get beyond this past decade where we let standards drop to 2K for convenience's and cost's sake.

We don't have to compromise anymore if we don't want to, unless we have a creative reason to work with lower-resolution formats and processes.

David, this statement is, IMO, the bottom line.

And, from what I've always understood, it was the reason that Jim & Co. created the RED One and followed up with EPIC. To counter 1080p becoming the "new", yet lower quality, image capture standard.

Look at the world of audio recording. The creative choice to use tools that "color" and/or degrade the sound is totally understood, but the typical recording is the absolute best quality possible.

 

[Bryce O]

Craig, i think there is more to "experience" than just what we see and are able to analyze with our mind.

It is obvious, that our eyes "technically" perceive much more data than our mind is able to elaborate and put on the awareness screen ...

i imagine, the experience of a well crafted and designed 5k/4k experience is recognizable ... by gut feeling.

Few people will be able to rationalize the "why" ... but i am sure, the effect is inherently there.

I don't think there is any real logic to this.

I do think were hitting the threshold for entertainment resolution though. It's just like the audio industry. It's always better to capture and master at higher resolution, but 90% of people don't notice a difference higher than 44.1khz 16bit. Honestly, people really have a hard time with the difference between 720p and 1080p as it is... even on 50" screens.

The only advantage I see to a 4k display is an aliased free 2k image. Maybe some sports bars and ads will go 4k. But I dunno about the home. I've been tested at 20/10 vision and blu-ray looks fine to me at home theater sizes. I'd rather invest in sound. I don't see how 4k+ will help unless it's some boutique venu like a 100ft advertisement at 4 feet away or Imax. Though I would love an Apple 40" 4k 2:1 display for my workstation. :thumbsup:

 

[M Most]

What it's going to take, among other things, is for a forward-thinking studio -- let's say, Warner Bros., who already have leanings in this direction -- to insist that a 4K master being part of the deliverables, and that it must pass QC, you can't pass off any old master just bumped up to 4K.

They're also the only studio in town (at least the only one that I know of) that are actively moving in a similar direction for television. We (the company I work for) are delivering 4K archival masters for the Warner Bros. shows we're posting that are shot on Red, and we're also creating similar elements for a show we didn't post. The archives are in the form of 4K DPX files on LTO4 tapes, primarily because the studio feels that open formats are required for archival purposes. At the same time, a significant portion of the footage for these shows is being originated on cameras such as Canon and Iconix, so the "4K" designation is a bit misleading, but we are doing it and the studio feels it has value. Whether these archives ever get accessed and used, only time will tell.

 

[Thor Melsted]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8w3fhYy6w4

Nothing beats the Red Dwarf treatment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUFkb0d1kbU

 

[Detlev Eller]

it is his real name,
mike most,
you can choose to only use your last name plus the 1st letter.
btw mike most is one of the most valuable members of this forum.

always good to discuss topics with him, also i am not always agreeing with him...but his experience rules.

Cüneyt, thanks for letting me know!

I enjoy discussing topics with anyone, as long as we stay in "progress mode"

... i have fired a "super experienced" DOP first day directing. I think in images for all of my life and i enjoy adding some of my own thinking to the discussion on reduser ...

in conclusion, i think, i made some valuable points that most professionals never think about ... and think the slightly offensive subtext of "M" was not necessary ...

So Mike, i am looking forward to dive deep into discussions about the mysteries of image creation and experience ... if you are so inclined ... ... i am hungry to learn anything there is to the magic of creating worlds on screen ... and i assume, i´ve got some things to share.

Many minds are richer than one - no doubt.

What i don´t do, with all respect to the individual human being, is accept any so called status quo - progress is outside the frame of reference.

That is, if anything, what i have to contribute.

Personally, i think, this is the spirit of RED.

 

[Detlev Eller]

I don't think there is any real logic to this.

I do think were hitting the threshold for entertainment resolution though. It's just like the audio industry. It's always better to capture and master at higher resolution, but 90% of people don't notice a difference higher than 44.1khz 16bit. Honestly, people really have a hard time with the difference between 720p and 1080p as it is... even on 50" screens. ...

hmm.

Right. I think it is irrational as opposed to logical.

We cannot deny, we make decisions and judge experiences often by hunches instead of analyzing what happens to us. there are good books on the subject of experience and psychology.

So why should a different experience, a more intense experience of condensed information, not have an effect on the viewer?

That makes no logic to me.

Subtle as it may be, it may make all the difference.

Referring to the music analogy you have provided -
I remember a certain set of trance & dance tracks we played at certain events ... from CD. The crowd always went CRAZY - predictably crazy. At one point we changed the medium and converted the heavy cd collection to mp3 ... same tracks ... same crowd ...

I can only say, there was not the same drive in the "waves" ... and the crowd did not respond the same way ...

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

in conclusion, i think, i made some valuable points that most professionals never think about ... and think the slightly offensive subtext of "M" was not necessary ...

So Mike, i am looking forward to dive deep into discussions about the mysteries of image creation and experience ... if you are so inclined ... ... i am hungry to learn anything there is to the magic of creating worlds on screen ... and i assume, i´ve got some things to share.

Many minds are richer than one - no doubt.

definitly

 

[Robert Frank]

I remember a certain set of trance & dance tracks we played at certain events ... from CD. The crowd always went CRAZY - predictably crazy. At one point we changed the medium and converted the heavy cd collection to mp3 ... same tracks ... same crowd ...

I can only say, there was not the same drive in the "waves" ... and the crowd did not respond the same way ...

Exactly. I have experienced this very same phenomenon. It is everywhere in life. People react on a visceral level to sensory input. Sure, the masses have been "dumbed down" somewhat by profit driven marketing bullshit, and conditioned to accept lower quality, because marketing sells it to them, but given the chance to think, feel, experience for themselves, people can sense the difference, even if they can't articulate it.

All you have to do is use your eyes, your ears.

Would you rather see the world through 1080p eyes, and mp3 ears, or ??