The times we love...

[Steven Caesare]

It would seem that many of the reaactions here are precisely some of the reasons why Jim is less inclined to talk openly with us.

<sigh>

-sc

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Graeme - You are the man! I love the way you can pixel fuc anyone out there but you don't, you see the bigger picture in the real world!

Cheers Mate!
Rich

Math doesn't lie. Mathematicians can lie, but they'll get found out. When your product is what it is and does what it does there's no need for anything more. We can go back to DVXUser with my conservative predictions on RED One measured resolution (which turned out to be conservative) and how we've always been brutally honest on this. Why would anyone want to be otherwise?

With F65, I look forwards to getting it on the test bench to see how my resolution and aliasing predictions turn out for it's 4k and especially it's "8K" claim.

Graeme

 

[Eric Lange]

Math doesn't lie. ..

With F65, I look forwards to getting it on the test bench to see how my resolution and aliasing predictions turn out for it's 4k and especially it's "8K" claim.

Graeme

Amen! (or “So say we all…!”).

Definitely one to put on the calendar! That will be a bizzare and awsome day...

 

[Jared Caldwell]

I read Jim's posts and went about my business. I come back, and I have to say I'm surprised at the reaction. Is there seriously no topic/image that can't/won't be taken out of context on RedUser? I'm not discrediting the different views held on war in this thread. War is a serious thing and is worthy of debate...I just can't believe it has been applied to Jim's words.

Seriously?

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Math doesn't lie. Mathematicians can lie, but they'll get found out. When your product is what it is and does what it does there's no need for anything more. We can go back to DVXUser with my conservative predictions on RED One measured resolution (which turned out to be conservative) and how we've always been brutally honest on this. Why would anyone want to be otherwise?

With F65, I look forwards to getting it on the test bench to see how my resolution and aliasing predictions turn out for it's 4k and especially it's "8K" claim.

Graeme

Graeme,

I don't want to steer the pot but would be nice if you could explain us the following Sony claim on 4K:

"As a leader in image sensor technology, Sony was able to develop an original image sensor of substantially higher pixel density.
Compared to the 8.8 million photosites of the typical 4K sensor, the F65 sensor has 20 million photosites.
Where the 4K sensor has half as many green photosites as there are 4K output pixels, the F65 sensor has a one-to-one ratio:
one green photosite for each pixel of the 4K output image. This new “Zig-Zag” sampling structure results in best-in-class image sharpness,
including full 4K resolution on the all-important Green channel. In this way, when an F65 RAW image is demosaicked to 4K,
there’s absolutely no guesswork required in the Green channel, and twice as much precision for the Blue and Red."

Page 5 from Sony F65 Camera PDF>>>

 

[Sabyasachi Patra]

I knew an all out war is brewing... Sony has opened its cards. Another sleeping giant is going to wake up soon...

It is good marketing move by RED to lock up their customers by announcing price rise in 2012. RED has already got the mind share by virtue of EPICs being used for many hollywood productions. It had got seriously derailed (read delayed) due to the supply chain issues. And when there is an unholy war, RED should expect issues with supply chain due to influences/cartelisation from the existing giants.

Sony has priced the F65 at 65K. It knew the demand of a product giving comparable (don't flame me) benefits being sold at similar prices levels (read 58k). RED should be worried, not because they don't believe on their own abilities, but because rarely have the original innovators become market leaders ( photocopier was not invented by Xerox)...

There are tons of people who are excitedly waiting to use their long white telephoto lenses. Today except RED there are not other options, in the high resolution arena. Tomorrow there will be other options. However, RED has done a good job in explaining their philosophy of modular system and upgradability and customer friendliness. Flooding the market with EPIC X and Scarlets (is it on?) within a month or two would be a good strategy. RED has to also engage its user base and fan base as well as reach out to other geographies where the competition is going to be fought. India and China are two economies that are doing well in these times. It would be apt to tap these two markets well. The japanese giants have a much better presence in these places.

There would be a stiff no holds barred competition (if not war) in the marketplace and boardrooms. Price would be also be another factor. I won't be surprised when at some point of time, RED has to think of offshoring its production. At the moment, the folks here seem to be taking pride in the fact that the factory of RED is in US. For some it might be an emotive issue. However, I am sure that there would be increasing pressure to be cost competitive.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

 

[Elsie N]

I knew an all out war is brewing... Sony has opened its cards. Another sleeping giant is going to wake up soon...

It is good marketing move by RED to lock up their customers by announcing price rise in 2012. RED has already got the mind share by virtue of EPICs being used for many hollywood productions. It had got seriously derailed (read delayed) due to the supply chain issues. And when there is an unholy war, RED should expect issues with supply chain due to influences/cartelisation from the existing giants.

Sony has priced the F65 at 65K. It knew the demand of a product giving comparable (don't flame me) benefits being sold at similar prices levels (read 58k). RED should be worried, not because they don't believe on their own abilities, but because rarely have the original innovators become market leaders ( photocopier was not invented by Xerox)...

There are tons of people who are excitedly waiting to use their long white telephoto lenses. Today except RED there are not other options, in the high resolution arena. Tomorrow there will be other options. However, RED has done a good job in explaining their philosophy of modular system and upgradability and customer friendliness. Flooding the market with EPIC X and Scarlets (is it on?) within a month or two would be a good strategy. RED has to also engage its user base and fan base as well as reach out to other geographies where the competition is going to be fought. India and China are two economies that are doing well in these times. It would be apt to tap these two markets well. The japanese giants have a much better presence in these places.

There would be a stiff no holds barred competition (if not war) in the marketplace and boardrooms. Price would be also be another factor. I won't be surprised when at some point of time, RED has to think of offshoring its production. At the moment, the folks here seem to be taking pride in the fact that the factory of RED is in US. For some it might be an emotive issue. However, I am sure that there would be increasing pressure to be cost competitive.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

Interesting observations from a world perspective. I would only add to them that RED is assembling more than a camera company, they appear to be inventing an entire system of imagery that, while allowing 3rd parties to complement, doesn't require third parties to operate. I foresee RED as the Little Giant of the image industry in the coming years. And the main reasons I believe they will succeed in capturing that high ranking is because they are small enough to move quickly and they seem more concerned about being cutting edge than about bottom line.

To use an old movie analogy from the movie "Patton", they are constantly moving forward and engaging the enemy (read: competition).

edit: Oh, and they have talented people.

 

[Rich Schaefer]

With F65, I look forwards to getting it on the test bench to see how my resolution and aliasing predictions turn out for it's 4k and especially it's "8K" claim.

Graeme

I look forward to that too, and from the sounds of it, Jim is also very excited.

Rich

 

[Joe Carney]

Today I had the pleasure to shoot a commercial with William Shatner right behind Red Studios (at Ben Kitay) on my Epic M. He was more interested in the Epic than the commercial. When he saw the camera and the footage all he could say was "Holy S#*!, how can that little camera do that?". All I could think to say was, "Star trek" . I am excited to see what is still to come.

the original Star Trek was shot at Desilu Studios, now known as Red.

 

[Jay Patton]

It never ceases to amaze me that with every new issue of American Cinematographer magazine, there is never any discussion of Epic. All the productions they cover are film, Alexa, and sometimes Red One. No discussion of revolution that is happening right under their noses, and already well underway. Do they think if they don't talk about it, it will go away? Epic is the game changer and will continue to be the itunes of an industry that is still trying to stock the shelves with CD's.


M#525

 

[Kyle Mallory]

Graeme,

I don't want to seer the pot but would be nice if you could explain us the following Sony claim on 4K:

"Where the 4K sensor has half as many green photosites as there are 4K output pixels, the F65 sensor has a one-to-one ratio:
one green photosite for each pixel of the 4K output image. This new “Zig-Zag” sampling structure results in best-in-class image sharpness,
including full 4K resolution on the all-important Green channel. In this way, when an F65 RAW image is demosaicked to 4K,
there’s absolutely no guesswork required in the Green channel, and twice as much precision for the Blue and Red."

My gut interpretation, without seeing any specs, footage, etc. would be they are using a larger block of photosites to calculate a final pixe, and figuring that into their final "resolution". Most Bayer sensors, including the RED count the sensor res without the Bayer pattern (of actual photosites). In fact, when RED records 4096x2048 (2:1), or 8.3 MP (8.8 for 16:9), it is actually recording 4096x1024, or 4.15 MP of green, and 2048x1024, or 2 MP of red and blue. It's why the measured resolution is approx 3k, instead of 4. You are starting with 1/2 the green pixels, and massaging in the other 1/2 of red and blue to make the final image. It's close, it gets the job done, but it's not perfect.

It appears Sony is using an oversized sensor. Keeping the 2:1 aspect ratio, a 6194x3072 sensor res, 19MP, would produce 6194x1536, or 9.4 MP of green, and 3072x1536, or 4.7MP of red/blue.

Because of the over-sampling (eventually scaling *down* to 4k), even though there are 1/2 the red and blue pixels, the demosaic algorythm may actually have twice as many red & blue photosites to evaluate *per green pixel*. In truth, this is a bit of marketing FUD on Sony's part. All but the most fundamental demosaic algorithms use 2 or more each of the surrounding red/blue (and sometimes even green) photosites to calculate a given pixel's RGB value.

 

[vita brevis]

My gut interpretation, without seeing any specs, footage, etc. would be they are using a larger block of photosites to calculate a final pixe, and figuring that into their final "resolution". Most Bayer sensors, including the RED count the sensor res without the Bayer pattern (of actual photosites). In fact, when RED records 4096x2048 (2:1), or 8.3 MP (8.8 for 16:9), it is actually recording 4096x1024, or 4.15 MP of green, and 2048x1024, or 2 MP of red and blue. It's why the measured resolution is approx 3k, instead of 4. You are starting with 1/2 the green pixels, and massaging in the other 1/2 of red and blue to make the final image. It's close, it gets the job done, but it's not perfect.

It appears Sony is using an oversized sensor. Keeping the 2:1 aspect ratio, a 6194x3072 sensor res, 19MP, would produce 6194x1536, or 9.4 MP of green, and 3072x1536, or 4.7MP of red/blue.

Because of the over-sampling (eventually scaling *down* to 4k), even though there are 1/2 the red and blue pixels, the demosaic algorythm may actually have twice as many red & blue photosites to evaluate *per green pixel*. In truth, this is a bit of marketing FUD on Sony's part. All but the most fundamental demosaic algorithms use 2 or more each of the surrounding red/blue (and sometimes even green) photosites to calculate a given pixel's RGB value.

Whoa Kyle!

 

[M Most]

the original Star Trek was shot at Desilu Studios, now known as Red.

That is not correct. The original Star Trek was shot at Paramount, as were all of the features and all of the other Star Trek series.

 

[Jay A. Kelley]

Mike,

Did you know back in the day Gene Roddenberry had an office a Desilu and that's where he wrote Star Trek the Motion Picture.

Jay

 

[Jun-Dai]

Shouldn't 8K be roughly 4 times the pixels of 4K? If the "typical 4K sensor" has 8.8 million pixels, then an 8K sensor should have 35.2 million sensors, yes? If there are 8,000 pixels across, that would mean a maximum of 2,500 vertical pixels, which might technically be an 8K image, but wouldn't really be 8K in any normal sense of the term, since an image that wide would not be practical unless you're re-shooting Napoleon?

My gut interpretation, without seeing any specs, footage, etc. would be they are using a larger block of photosites to calculate a final pixe, and figuring that into their final "resolution". Most Bayer sensors, including the RED count the sensor res without the Bayer pattern (of actual photosites). In fact, when RED records 4096x2048 (2:1), or 8.3 MP (8.8 for 16:9), it is actually recording 4096x1024, or 4.15 MP of green, and 2048x1024, or 2 MP of red and blue. It's why the measured resolution is approx 3k, instead of 4. You are starting with 1/2 the green pixels, and massaging in the other 1/2 of red and blue to make the final image. It's close, it gets the job done, but it's not perfect.

Unless I'm mistaken, shouldn't the measured resolution have nothing to do with the bayering? 4K of single-color-channel pixels should have the same measured resolution as 4K of full-color-spectrum-pixels, shouldn't it? I thought the bayering was just about color fidelity, which people seem to think is good enough (i.e., produces no noticeable difference).

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Kyle, if you go read up on the F65 sensor, it's a bayer pattern of ~20mp rotated 45 degrees. They're extracting a 4k green channel via the simple process of just putting every green pixel on the sensor out to the final image, a method facilitated via the rot45. Think of it as a 4k array of greens with holes, and in the holes there's alternating red and blue pixels.

So you can see for 4k output there's no oversampling or undersampling - there's 4k of greens for 4k of output. This is just like on their 1080p cameras where they have 1080p sensors for 1080p output. Now, sampling theory tells us for 4k (or 1080p) of samples you can have less than 4k (or 1080p) of resolution, or you can have aliasing. The more MTF at 4k you want, the more aliasing you get.

Now the best way to avoid the aliasing is to aim for a higher resolution (say 5k to get 4k, or 2.8k to get 1080p) and properly optically filter to make sure you don't get excessive aliasing.

Of course, there's a contradiction when it comes to 8k. Either Sony's 4k of greens for 4k is necessary as they say, or else there's a better way as we suggest. If Sony are right then their 8k is doubly wrong. If we are right their 8k is wrong. Either way, their 8k is wrong.

Jun-Dai, yes indeed you need ~37mp on the F65 for 8k, but they only have ~20mp. Ex Sony now Panavision John Galt had lots of fun with his term "marketing pixels" - it will be interesting to see how he applies that term to the F65.

Ideally you need to properly optically filter and would never-ever-get the same resolution measured out of the sensor as the count of pixels on the sensor, be it bayer or otherwise. To aim for such a thing violates sampling theory and produces aliases.

Graeme

 

[Cid J Salcido Uyarra]

I only want to shoot with RED products, a brand I can trust because with any other company I'm wasting my precious time.

Thank YOU RED! Filmmakers will no longer have limitations in telling their stories. FULL SPEED AHEAD!! WE ARE RIGHT THERE WITH YOU!

 

[T. Singh]

Graeme, while we are on the topic of optical filtering, any thoughts on 3 layer birefringent OLPFs? http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=5651784 claims to reduce aliasing by a factor of 5 while increasing sharpness with such a design.

Is a 3 layer OLPF too expensive to be practical?

-Tripurari

 

[Marc Wielage]

That is not correct. The original Star Trek was shot at Paramount, as were all of the features and all of the other Star Trek series.

Very close. The original 1966-1969 Star Trek was shot on the Desliu lot at Gower & Melrose, adjoining Paramount. In 1967, Lucille Ball sold Desilu to Gulf & Western (who already owned Paramount), and then they knocked down the wall separating Paramount and Desilu, making it one big lot. Desi Arnaz did buy quite a few studio lots as part of Desilu, and he did own lots on Cahuenga (like Ren-Mar, previously Desilu Cahuenga, which is where most of the original I Love Lucy shows were filmed) and Las Palmas, as well as Culver City. I think at one point around 1959, Desilu had more studio space than any independent company in Hollywood.

It never ceases to amaze me that with every new issue of American Cinematographer magazine, there is never any discussion of Epic. All the productions they cover are film, Alexa, and sometimes Red One.

I've talked to the staff and writers at the ASC before, and my impression is that they have no bias for or against any camera. Individual DPs do, but they write about a broad spectrum of different cameras used on different shows. Didn't they just do a big article on Pirates? And I know they did a big piece on Social Network last year, all very complimentary. As far as I know, there is no bias there, for or against anybody.

I did read a recent report that Sony did a big demo of the F65 for ASC members in the last week. My personal take is that there is no political agenda, when it comes to equipment -- it's all about availability, dollars and cents, and familiarity with the equipment. I know of at least five major recent productions that tested every camera on the market and chose only on the basis of what looked best, not the brand. In one case, they went Epic; in another, they went Sony; in two others, they went to film. The last one went to Alexa. The rental packages for everything were about the same; if anything, the film cameras are cheap these days. Lenses, lighting, and post are what cost the most; the camera is not that great an expense in the big picture.

I do agree with Jim that these are interesting times, and just like Mac OS vs. Windows, it's good to see a two-horse race.

 

[Eric Lange]

Very close. The original 1966-1969 Star Trek was shot on the Desliu lot at Gower & Melrose, adjoining Paramount. In 1967, Lucille Ball sold Desilu to Gulf & Western (who already owned Paramount), and then they knocked down the wall separating Paramount and Desilu, making it one big lot. Desi Arnaz did buy quite a few studio lots as part of Desilu, and he did own lots on Cahuenga (like Ren-Mar, previously Desilu Cahuenga, which is where most of the original I Love Lucy shows were filmed) and Las Palmas, as well as Culver City. I think at one point around 1959, Desilu had more studio space than any independent company in Hollywood.


I've talked to the staff and writers at the ASC before, and my impression is that they have no bias for or against any camera. Individual DPs do, but they write about a broad spectrum of different cameras used on different shows. Didn't they just do a big article on Pirates? And I know they did a big piece on Social Network last year, all very complimentary. As far as I know, there is no bias there, for or against anybody.

I did read a recent report that Sony did a big demo of the F65 for ASC members in the last week. My personal take is that there is no political agenda, when it comes to equipment -- it's all about availability, dollars and cents, and familiarity with the equipment. I know of at least five major recent productions that tested every camera on the market and chose only on the basis of what looked best, not the brand. In one case, they went Epic; in another, they went Sony; in two others, they went to film. The last one went to Alexa. The rental packages for everything were about the same; if anything, the film cameras are cheap these days. Lenses, lighting, and post are what cost the most; the camera is not that great an expense in the big picture.

I do agree with Jim that these are interesting times, and just like Mac OS vs. Windows, it's good to see a two-horse race.

Marc, That’s an awesome post, VERY interesting history, balanced perspective on the current situation.

Very useful observation…

“I know of at least five major recent productions that tested every camera on the market and chose only on the basis of what looked best, not the brand. In one case, they went Epic; in another, they went Sony; in two others, they went to film. The last one went to Alexa.”

That is probably going to be the ratio of usage (at least for “film” productions in the future), 20% RED (Epic), 20% Sony, Still at least 50% film, and Alexa and miscellaneous systems????

I think you hit the nail on the head when you say,

“Also The rental packages for everything were about the same; if anything, the film cameras are cheap these days. Lenses, lighting, and post are what cost the most; the camera is not that great an expense in the big picture.”

It’s interesting to me that RED has managed to create a culture of camera ownership by the individual (that’s amazing) thousands and thousands of cameras (genius).

Sabyasachi Patra (wrote)

“Sony has priced the F65 at 65K. It knew the demand of a product giving comparable (don't flame me) benefits being sold at similar prices levels (read 58k).”

Even though the SONY F65 has a price tag of $65k (really, you think that Mo would be $180K++???), I don’t see that individuals would go out and purchase the camera…

It does seem to indicate the influence of RED on forcing SONY to significantly drop their traditional price structure.

Elsie N writes

“Interesting observations from a world perspective. I would only add to them that RED is assembling more than a camera company, they appear to be inventing an entire system of imagery that, while allowing 3rd parties to complement, doesn't require third parties to operate.”

It seems that the F65 is definately NOT the camera for the “Individual” then.

Sabyasachi Patra (also wrote)

"RED should be worried, not because they don't believe on their own abilities, but because rarely have the original innovators become market leaders ( photocopier was not invented by Xerox)...”

(I’m sure Wayne has a lot to say about that one…) A lot of tech business analysts and Layers and even patent layers (after a patent has been granted) shove that one in my face also… I don’t know what to make of that because, what are we supposed to do? Are we not supposed to innovate, or invent new and useful methods and systems??? Are we supposed to license our technologies to someone else so that they can be the first to fail, and then we move in second… and therefore (statistically we would be more likely to be successful)??? A good explanation of this Phenomenon as to WHY would be good…


So especially with the price structure it’s like SONY turned up in your back yard with an unloaded folded open shot gun in the crook of its arm, with a “shit-eating grin” and said “howdy neighbor”.

I think to be honest that success or failure of seemingly hardware based companies will ultimately boil down to SOFTWARE and software development and various practical and efficient coding schemes. To my eye it seems that (in broader areas) that SONY’s Achilles heel is SOFTWARE development.

As Mike “Fireman” Ross said

“Do NOT make the mistake of regarding Sony as a monolithic corporate entity; it is not. It's like IBM, or worse; a collection of separate fiefdoms flying in loose formation, jealously protecting their individual profit centers and sometimes at outright war with one another.
But quite a few good brains there. I'd love to asset-strip Sony; perhaps Jim will.”

As Mike says a “collection of separate fiefdoms flying in loose formation”; and for some reason it seems that software development always seems to be the “poor” or “poorer” cousin at SONY.

Historically camera companies in general that have failed to invest sufficiently in software development have ultimately “paid” the price and go out of business or are acquired.
Graeme I hope they are paying you REAL well… (maybe it’s time for a raise…?)

Cheers,

Eric