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 :)

This might amuse Graeme...

Well for people doing 4K filmouts, by all means, finish at 4K on Red One. Might as well. You will gain some resolution there for sure. Everyone should probably save their archival footage at 4k anyway, just to be safe.

Probably few of us here know for sure that we're doing 4K filmouts on any of our projects.
 
There was independent verification of 3.25k on CML btw Barry.

Of course, a measure of resolution means nothing without a measure of aliasing.....

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
There was independent verification of 3.25k on CML btw Barry.
Click to expand...
Agreed, and I'm not saying it's any less than that. All I'm saying is that even in the worst-case scenario by the most pessimistic review I've seen or heard of, it's still dramatically more than the Genesis can do.
 
Well said Barry. The (often) comparison has been distorted as a common case of trolling, normally coming out of the usual suspects.
 
That's right Barry. I'm just adding that it's not just me who says that :-)

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
That's right Barry. I'm just adding that it's not just me who says that :-)

Graeme
Click to expand...

Right, I should have clarified that. Yes, the 3.2k observation has been verified by independent testing. And the lens will also make all the difference when evaluating sharpness, of course, so testing methodology should be spelled out whenever a claim is made.
 
Lenses make ALL the difference, which probably accounts for most of the differences we're seeing....

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Lenses make ALL the difference, which probably accounts for most of the differences we're seeing....

Graeme
Click to expand...

we have tested, technically:


arri master primes
arri ultra primes
zeiss SS
zeiss HS

and none of these lenses, in all the sveral counterchecked-set, let me make that clear, including the master primes:

were able to match reds resolution.
 
Laguun, are you saying our resolution is lens limited? When I tested OLPFs with a Cooke 65mm S4, I could provoke luma aliasing out at 4k, with a weak OLPF in place, which would mean that that lens was at least letting some 4k detail through....

Graeme
 
Damn I'm learning a lot. Thanks all of you. And Graeme when I read your posts, I usually keep a tab open and google the acronyms you mention to understand what you are talking about.


Very educational...thank you all....who do I pay for this education?
 
Just buy a RED camera :-)
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Laguun, are you saying our resolution is lens limited? When I tested OLPFs with a Cooke 65mm S4, I could provoke luma aliasing out at 4k, with a weak OLPF in place, which would mean that that lens was at least letting some 4k detail through....

Graeme
Click to expand...

no, the opposite.
your ****** :) cameras show all flaws of our german, french and british lenses - and i had never seen (clearly) the faults even an arri masterprime or an angenieux zoom has until we tested them in front of the red one...
 
I met this guy at 2007 Sundance and found him to be incredibly biased. With deep respect for Panavision coming into my conversation, I left shaking my head going... OK. They have buried their heads in the sand.

M

Graeme Nattress said:
For me, it's just the "let's look at the issues with Bayer" without looking similarly at the issues of a prism, or the issues of a RGB stripe pattern. It's just feels a little biassed to me :-)

The whole concept of over-sampling is to push any artifacts of filters out of the visible / audible band. But that's exactly why we have a 4k sensor and get 3.2k out of it - because if we tried to get 4k out of it, we'd be in the same bad situation that any 1080p camera maker is, trying to get a full 1080 out of 1080, which inevitably leads to aliasing.

With a bayer pattern, you've GOT to be more conservative on your OLPF because we've got to minimize chroma aliasing, so we sacrifice a little luma detail too. This is a good thing, and means we don't get a 100% output. We're getting about 78% out, which means we get minimal chroma aliasing, and if you do see any, we have the tools to practically eliminate it. I've never seen any on a real world image anyway, only a test chart.

That means we can present all sub 3.2k detail without any significant aliasing artifacts and a very strong performance at the lower MTF that relate to picture sharpness perception, without the need for aggressive edge sharpening.

Some people think of a bayer demosaic as an upscaling algorithm. I often think of it as a form of compression. It's also a reconstruction filter. Notice how the subject of reconstruction filters is entirely missing from the presentation.... But that's the other half of sampling theory, and should not be ignored. I don't ignore it.....

Imaging and sensors is a complex subject. But it's also highly nuanced, and needs a good understanding of many different aspects before the picture falls into place. When I sat down at NAB and watched the demo reel, I see that we're in a pretty good place :-)

Graeme
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top