Whats the use of 4k in a budget camera?

[Stephen Wheeler]

Ok I have a two part response to this.

1. "Future Proofing"
So you have two things going on with future proofing in my mind. You have the display formatte/resolution. In the future not everyone will have 4k projectors in their living rooms, but there is a good chance they will have 4 or 2k flat screens. Data rates will only improve paving the way for larger resolution streaming videos on the internet.

This is not the "Future Proofing" i'm worried about. What worries me in the digital age is archiving. Film is still the best tool for archiving a motion image. Disney dose color separations for it's archiving. that is three monochromatic strips of film with each strip used to record the red, green, or blue color information of one of there films. This is how they are able to re-release their films with out any image degeneration do to ageing and release it in any formatte. The best way to "future proof" your film in the digital world for the purpose of archiving it is to shoot 5/4k and print it to film. If you think film is dead then you don't understand that a strip of 35mm film has a longer life span then a Hard drive and is more future proof then any digital codec.

2. 4k raw with the Red
First with most 1080 cameras you are baking in your look. so if I am fussing with the colors or pushing my iso for a look, i'm stuck with it. Red raw records at your native settings then makes the changes in color and iso after. this gives you a lot more flexability down the line. In terms of the 4k down resed to 1080 there is a visible difference. also color grading from a 1080 prores file is very limiting when compared to working with a 4k raw file.

 

[Michael Cioni]

One thing people are forgetting is 1080p CCD sensors didn't all capture 1080p (as Graeme reminds us). But consider this:
The best of the 1080p CCDs were significantly over sampling in order to produce the best 1080p they could. One of my favorite 2/3" cameras was the Viper. This camera was sampling somewhere in the neighborhood of 9MP and then downsampling that to (what many considered) a camera that was way ahead of the curve. Even though the end result was 1080p, it started a whole lot bigger in order to make 1080p look as good as Viper was able to produce.

The same type of thing is happening in SCARLET. This is how i summarize the argument of this thread:
1. SCARLET is too close to EPIC rendering it unnecessary for top-end pros
2. SCARLET is too close to EPIC rendering it unnecessary for low-end indies

These can't both be right, can they? In my opinion, both of these statements are totally incorrect and I can prove it with dozens of examples from the past - even before SCARLET - and can prove it with people's plans for the near future. Here are a couple examples that are very important to consider:


1. Anyone making the argument that you do not need a 4K SCARLET because we do not have 4K cinemas is positively wrong. Graeme and Deanan were just at my shop a week ago and I showed them parts of a small MX movie we're working on called "Shanghai Calling" (shanghaicalling.com). Shanghai Calling is a perfect example where a talented DP like Armando Salas took every advantage of 4K sourcing which allowed us to produce one of the best 2K downsamples we've ever had. RED, EPIC and SCARLET are not all about 4K exhibition (yet). Just like film isn't all about 4K exhibition (ever). But the incorrect argument that some people are making is that exhibition resolution should dictate acquisition resolution.
THIS IS WRONG.

Oversampling at the source always provides the best exhibition fidelity, regardless of the venue or format. This is why toothpaste commercials shot 35mm in the for standard definition 480i spots. A 4 perf, low ASA film neg is some 50x higher resolution than SDTV. But that never stopped film from being used on nearly everything. -Independent, studio, spot, show, feature even documentaries all took advantage of film's oversampling edge - whether they knew it or not. SCARLET will benefit it's users in 1080p just as film or Viper did. And we owe it to the trained eye of the consumer to deliver high fidelity. Cutting every corner will only add distance to your work from where you (likely) prefer it to be.

2. I had a conversation with DP John Schwartzman the other day and discussed the SCARLET. John probably wouldn't mind me sharing this.
Some people are suggesting that no one in their right mind would want a SCARLET in the professional world over an EPIC. While I can see where that logic may come from, let me clarify that my discussions with rental houses and professionals like John disagree. The SCARLET will become a staple-camera for many motion pictures, regardless of the size. SCARLET's codec, primary framerate options, size, recording media and overall functionality meet the burden of today's digital cinema capture and exhibition environment. But there is an additionally excellent benefit to what SCARLET is going to offer: John and I both agree that the notion of more and more filmmakers sharing the same technology and therefore mastering it are ideal for EPIC and SCARLET users alike. John says that he'll be moving towards SCARLET's as the primary camera and keeping an EPIC around when necessary, but not the other way around as some people speculate.


SUMMARY
More and more people are going to realize SCARLET's capabilities are not designed for a single market, rather every market. I believe this will be true and I believe this will really become more apparent as time goes on and SCARLET begins to demonstrate what it's capable of. Remember, comparing cameras based on price does not always work. You need to compare based on specs and features above price. If you take a piece of paper and write down the specs of SCARLET and the specs of other camera's you'll see it stands alone. But don't get hung-up on the 4K. Consider SCARLET's ability to photograph in 4K as delivering you the opportunity to improve an oversampled source file, not a high resolution exhibition file. SCARLET, at any resolution, would require a debayer process and transcoding of some degree. Due to this fact, 4K is not a penalty, nor is it an added expense. The quality of the sensor, codec and formfactor are what's important to every filmmaker. Those of the community that claim they "don't need 4K" need to clearly define that: 4K for capture is not the same as 4K for exhibition. Don't let the benefit of one appear as a disadvantage to both.

m

 

[Dave Blackham]

I have to say it.


WHAT - THE - FUCK is this thread turning into.

Are all Scarlet threads this manic? WOW!

I think I'll go back to my EPIC now and try to work with a digital tool while carrying the aesthetic of film in my heart.

David

Where will the madness end in this thread........Wasnt it this chaotic when Red One launched.

 

[David Battistella]

@cioni.


Can you agree that with Scarlet there needs to be a RR 2 at a competitive price point to put post in the hands of the masses too.

At half the price of a scarlet an RR in the 900-1200 range would cement REDs market penetration.

Thoughts?

 

[David Battistella]

Where will the madness end in this thread........Wasnt it this chaotic when Red One launched.

It's true. So many noob discussions are resurfacing from that time. Fun.

 

[Ruben and Sheri O.]

Agree to disagree RED and 4k is not the GOD of all cinema and there is no perfect cam, and what good is a 4k image on a 1999 crt monitor or a tube sd tv which allot of ppl still have in there home desktop and living rooms , it all looks the same in the end to allot of normal ppl, so all this shit only matters to us uggggg! We r just going in circles soo dizzy lol we lov DR but it only matter to ppl like us because we are suck perfectionist borderline ocd techs , we have seen ppl argue that they don't see the differnce between bluray and dvd and I remember same ppl arguing vhs and DVD look the same lol and ppl saying VHS was better than Beta but Beta max was far superior than VHS ever was=) this will never end one day we will just get so high rez we will just be in the movie lol

 

[Terry VerHaar]

One thing people are forgetting is 1080p CCD sensors didn't all capture 1080p (as Graeme reminds us). But consider this:
The best of the 1080p CCDs were significantly over sampling in order to produce the best 1080p they could. One of my favorite 2/3" cameras was the Viper. This camera was sampling somewhere in the neighborhood of 9MP and then downsampling that to (what many considered) a camera that was way ahead of the curve. Even though the end result was 1080p, it started a whole lot bigger in order to make 1080p look as good as Viper was able to produce.

The same type of thing is happening in SCARLET. This is how i summarize the argument of this thread:
1. SCARLET is too close to EPIC rendering it unnecessary for top-end pros
2. SCARLET too close to EPIC rendering it unnecessary for low-end indies

These can't both be right, can they? In my opinion, both of these statements are totally incorrect and I can prove it with dozens of examples from the past - even before SCARLET - and can prove it with people's plans for the near future. Here are a couple examples that are very important to consider:


1. Anyone making the argument that you do not need a 4K SCARLET because we do not have 4K cinemas is positively wrong. Graeme and Deanan were just at my shop a week ago and I showed them parts of a small MX movie we're working on called "Shanghai Calling" (shanghaicalling.com). Shanghai Calling is a perfect example where a talented DP like Armando Salas took every advantage of 4K sourcing which allowed us to produce one of the best 2K downsamples we've ever had. RED, EPIC and SCARLET are not all about 4K exhibition (yet). Just like film isn't all about 4K exhibition (ever). But the incorrect argument that some people are making is that exhibition resolution should dictate acquisition resolution.
THIS IS WRONG.

Oversampling at the source always provides the best exhibition fidelity, regardless of the venue or format. This is why toothpaste commercials shot 35mm in the for standard definition 480i spots. A 4 perf, low ASA film neg is some 50x higher resolution than SDTV. But that never stopped film from being used on nearly everything. -Independent, studio, spot, show, feature even documentaries all took advantage of film's oversampling edge - whether they knew it or not. SCARLET will benefit it's users in 1080p just as film or Viper did. And we owe it to the trained eye of the consumer to deliver high fidelity. Cutting every corner will only add distance to your work from where you (likely) prefer it to be.

2. I had a conversation with DP John Schwartzman the other day and discussed the SCARLET. John probably wouldn't mind me sharing this.
Some people are suggesting that no one in their right mind would want a SCARLET in the professional world over an EPIC. While I can see where that logic may come from, let me clarify that my discussions with rental houses and professionals like John disagree. The SCARLET will become a staple-camera for many motion pictures, regardless of the size. SCARLET's codec, primary framerate options, size, recording media and overall functionality meet the burden of today's digital cinema capture and exhibition environment. But there is an additionally excellent benefit to what SCARLET is going to offer: John and I both agree that the notion of more and more filmmakers sharing the same technology and therefore mastering it are ideal for EPIC and SCARLET users alike. John says that he'll be moving towards SCARLET's as the primary camera and keeping an EPIC around when necessary, but not the other way around as some people speculate.


SUMMARY
More and more people are going to realize SCARLET's capabilities are not designed for a single market, rather every market. I believe this will be true and I believe this will really become more apparent as time goes on and SCARLET begins to demonstrate what it's capable of. Remember, comparing cameras based on price does not always work. You need to compare based on specs and features above price. If you take a piece of paper and write down the specs of SCARLET and the specs of other camera's you'll see it stands alone. But don't get hung-up on the 4K. Consider SCARLET's ability to photograph in 4K as delivering you the opportunity to improve an oversampled source file, not a high resolution exhibition file. SCARLET, at any resolution, would require a debayer process and transcoding of some degree. Due to this fact, 4K is not a penalty, nor an added expense. The quality of the sensor, codec and formfactor are what's important to every filmmaker. Those of the community that don't need 4K need to compartmentalize that: 4K for capture is not the same as 4K for exhibition. Don't let the benefit of one appear as a disadvantage to both.

m

This is why Michael is "the man!" :thumbup:

 

[BrandonChristensen]

Compare this season of Fringe to all previous seasons. You will notice a complete lack of detail this season compared to all previous and this is on a 720p broacast. I wish they would go back to 35mm or go EPIC.

What are they shooting on now?

I was saying to my wife a week or so ago how much cheaper it looks. I know they slashed their budget, but the end of last season still looked really nice!

 

[Michael Cioni]

@ David
Perhaps. But a typical 8-core CPU can make 720p files at a 1/4 debayer which:
- can be rendered in real time
- work for offline fantastically
- take up under 50GBs per hour

So the "cheap" RED ROCKET is just the CPU - which I render red files at home all the time this way. Then, with the basic conform tools of RCXP, you can rebuild a list and re-render selects in a conformed configuration at 1/2 res high. I help indies do this all the time and even when they do the conform, the "heavy" render is no more than a single overnight render. Other than that, with the right workflow, real-time without a rocket at 720p DNX36 or PR PXY is a great alternative.

m

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

,Must be nice to not have to worry about money so much so that you treat your camera like a regular old camcorder at times we want what u have!!

RED ONE owners have been treating their cameras this way since the early days...what I said about using my camera both for casual or serious purposes is neither unusual or unique. It is the hallmark of the camera's flexibility, not something about me, particularly. It has nothing to do with not worrying about money - it is inherent to the camera's purpose and price point. It is one of the distinguishing features of being able to own a digital cinema camera over renting a film camera, or processing film. SCARLET will only unleash more of these possibilities, for greater numbers of people.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Agree to disagree RED and 4k is not the GOD of all cinema and there is no perfect cam, and what good is a 4k image on a 1999 crt monitor or a tube sd tv which allot of ppl still have in there home desktop and living rooms , it all looks the same in the end to allot of normal ppl, so all this shit only matters to us uggggg! We r just going in circles soo dizzy lol we lov DR but it only matter to ppl like us because we are suck perfectionist borderline ocd techs =)

Did you not read my post above? You love film, but obviously by your argument it's no good when you watch it on VHS, or on a old CRT or SD monitor. 4K bring more benefits than just resolution and yes, they're visible on even old monitors, and even on heavily compressed web videos. Just like we can tell when watching a VHS on our SD CRT monitors if a movie was shot on film or video, we can see the benefits of 4k in that environment too because the benefits of 4k go beyond just the resolution improvement.

Graeme

 

[David Battistella]

True.

The half Rez high tosses about 75% of the info off the bat.

It's in everybodys intrest to use fully scaled images from 4k (as Graeme points out in this thread). I think your ideas are great as offline solutions but why not just use all the files from a pix 240 if that's the case?

I'd like to see a second gen RR card and with the introduction of alchemy, a 33% frame size increase, film looks. The acceleration becomes a much more substantial issue.

As great as RCX P is, I think for the (less expert) side of this community a low cost offering would help the whole program.

David

 

[Michael Cioni]

True.

As great as RCX P is, I think for the (less expert) side of this community a low cost offering would help the whole program.

You just gave me a great idea! This sounds like an administrative problem, maybe not a technical one! I think I have a new class to teach at REDucation!
"Professional Conforming & Prep using RCXPro."

 

[David Battistella]

Agree to disagree RED and 4k is not the GOD of all cinema and there is no perfect cam, and what good is a 4k image on a 1999 crt monitor or a tube sd tv which allot of ppl still have in there home desktop and living rooms , it all looks the same in the end to allot of normal ppl, so all this shit only matters to us uggggg! We r just going in circles soo dizzy lol we lov DR but it only matter to ppl like us because we are suck perfectionist borderline ocd techs , we have seen ppl argue that they don't see the differnce between bluray and dvd and I remember same ppl arguing vhs and DVD look the same lol and ppl saying VHS was better than Beta but Beta max was far superior than VHS ever was=) this will never end one day we will just get so high rez we will just be in the movie lol

I am officially convinced that someone is having us on.

 

[David Battistella]

You just gave me a great idea! This sounds like an administrative problem, maybe not a technical one! I think I have a new class to teach at REDucation!
"Professional Conforming & Prep using RCXPro."

Want a hand with the syllabus for that Micheal?

Good plan.

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

As great as RCX P is, I think for the (less expert) side of this community a low cost offering would help the whole program.

agreed - the biggest hurdle for a SCARLET owner is going to be the ROCKET - and Michael, as usual, has superb arguments in favor of the SCARLET becoming an all-purpose workhorse - but really, a ROCKET is a fairly essential piece of kit and, on a percentage basis, is a lopsided expense for most SCARLET owners...those renders don't come easy without it.

 

[David Battistella]

course title

Squeezing the most out of your RED cam with a Mabook Pro or iMac.
The Indy guide to shooting and posting RED.


I think I'll write my next creative cow article.

David

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

You just gave me a great idea! This sounds like an administrative problem, maybe not a technical one! I think I have a new class to teach at REDucation!
"Professional Conforming & Prep using RCXPro."

you don't need Reducation - if you taught that -- and that alone -- in one of your Lightiron suites, you would flood the joint. I'd take it, instead of peppering Katie with questions....

 

[Ruben and Sheri O.]

We think we all are insane!! how much more resolution cant the human eye really pic up every one is pushing for extemez in rez so much so you want it to look life like, and then so many ppl with 120hrtz tv say the 120 makes it look to clear and looks weird so where is this rez thing gonna end once again how much can the human eye really process..LOL LOL LOL LOL

I am officially convinced that someone is having us on.

 

[David Battistella]

agreed - the biggest hurdle for a SCARLET owner is going to be the ROCKET - and Michael, as usual, has superb arguments in favor of the SCARLET becoming an all-purpose workhorse - but really, a ROCKET is a fairly essential piece of kit and, on a percentage basis, is a lopsided expense for most SCARLET owners...those renders don't come easy without it.

It's the quality thing again.

If Scarlet owners shoot 4k then a fully scaled debayer of RED footage from a rocket render looks best.

When you start throwing out most of the data to facilitate an "easier render" then maybe stuff won't look as good as it can.

Hmm

Michael. Coukd you post a test of the same clip with the same settings rendered three different ways.

1. RR render
2. RCX pro full
3. RCX half high

That would pretty much show if a full scale render matters.

David