Why 4K?

[Tom Lowe]

Yes, I've been thinking along those lines -- rent the main cameras but own an EPIC for shooting after hours, or during prep or post, on weekends, B-roll stuff, timelapse, etc. That way you have the freedom to pick up a camera and grab stuff, but you don't have to personally buy a fully-outfitted two-camera package for a feature.

Interesting. So you're thinking of taking the plunge with Epic X, David?

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I'll cross that bridge when I get to it...

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Yes, I've been thinking along those lines -- rent the main cameras but own an EPIC for shooting after hours, or during prep or post, on weekends, B-roll stuff, timelapse, etc. That way you have the freedom to pick up a camera and grab stuff, but you don't have to personally buy a fully-outfitted two-camera package for a feature.

This sounds like my view on purchasing. Financially it probably makes sense to never buy and always rent, but it's impossible to be spontaneous and all too easy to make excuses when you have to drive somewhere to rent. Although for me that really makes the argument for Scarlet vs Epic as the ownership camera. I don't know how often my B-Roll or weekend stuff will need the high framerates and features of an Epic. Scarlet to me is the camera you buy. Epic the rental.

 

[Todd M.]

But isn't 5k the new 4k?

Shouldn't this thread be called why 5k? Since we are moments away from setting that as a new standard.




David

It seems as though RED is shifting towards "4k" referencing the delivery format. 5k debayers to 4k for delivery. Perfect for the new "RED 4K" content delivery system.

 

[Joseph Ward]

Am I the only one who thinks that Jim might be secretly building his own 4K Red displays?

He does have a history of getting fed up when others are not building something he needs, and then building it himself. That's what Red One was. Displays might seem out of Red's core competencies, but then again, was anyone expecting them to try to get into the digital cinema distribution/projection business with RedRAY?

I am have the same belief also, Tom. Red has not officially said they wont do 4k Projectors, but have said since other manufactures are supposedly doing 4k displays they wont. There is not really many manufactures with affordable 4k displays yet so maybe Red will have to step in?

Red Please step in!:thumbup1:

 

[Jay Drose]

It was a great pleasure knowing that while I was shooting my latest short film, we'd be actually projecting in 4k...on wide screen...in 150+ theater. It also largely changed the conversation between my DP and I when we broke our shots down; there was a lot of centering, clear, non-sensational, up-front shooting. In pre-production, we knew that for the price, there wasn't going to be anything better for our money. Of course, there was always the idiosyncratic aesthetic that is the RED.

 

[Henri H]

The S35 Epic is 5K, the future FF35 Epic will be 6K, after that, I think the next size up (645?) will be 9K. But the larger-than-FF35 Epic won't be out for a while. Keep in mind that a digital efx-heavy movie will be quite expensive to produce entirely at resolutions higher than 6K.

So, will 6K or 9K REDs be available one year from now?

 

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

I think 1080p is perfectly enough resolution for a home theater, but the relentless advance of technology will inevitably bring affordable 4K displays too.

I can easily imagine a huge 4K OLED super-thin display on my wall. It will certainly be a nice addition.

But I like a projected image better for some reason.

It gives me something. :hat:

 

[Graeme Nattress]

I happen to think that the home viewing environment is a more critical viewing environment than the cinema - you sit in the same well placed seat, close to the screen and can see every imperfection, and pause the movie, or re-wind to review a section. TO me, that means you may actually need higher quality in the home than in the cinema.

Graeme

 

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Affordable 4K projectors for the home will take a bit longer, I presume?

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Who knows - it's often chicken and egg - home use drops the cost, but expense keeps it out of the home.

Graeme

 

[Chris Kenny]

A properly configured home theater setup probably is a more demanding viewing environment than an average movie theater... but most people sit way too far from the screen at home.

 

[David Battistella]

It seems as though RED is shifting towards "4k" referencing the delivery format. 5k debayers to 4k for delivery. Perfect for the new "RED 4K" content delivery system.

Yeah. I know. I was being cheeky.

David

 

[Todd M.]

Yeah. I know. I was being cheeky.

David

Sorry... seemed like an odd comment coming from you.

 

[Jim Retar]

Regarding 4k at home.... I see sport as being the major industry to either push it or stick with 1080i (that is how it seems in Europe at least).

I think sports will stay at 1080i for many years to come, as they have invested massively in the facilities to broadcast.

4k (in the home) will remain elitist for a quite while yet, in my opinion.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

One thing I've learned over the last 10 years or so, is that things can move very fast indeed. When things get connected to computers, they move faster than you'd expect. Look at the speed of movement in video before we connected our camcorders to computers with Firewire compared to the progress made after that connection to computers occurred.

Graeme

 

[Steven Caesare]

One thing I've learned over the last 10 years or so, is that things can move very fast indeed. When things get connected to computers, they move faster than you'd expect. Look at the speed of movement in video before we connected our camcorders to computers with Firewire compared to the progress made after that connection to computers occurred.

Graeme

Indeed. And the line between TV and computer monitor has blurred such that many displays have become resolution/framerate agnostic to a large degree.

Gone ar ethe days where most displays will _ONLY_ dispaly an exactly-conforming ATSC signal.

As such, sources that include ATSC, satellite, cable, BluRay disc, Red4K disc(!), online streaming, game/media platforms, computers, etc... can expand the boundries fo the resolution they deliver with much greater ease and speed than a decade ago.

-sc

 

[Rob Ruffo]

This sounds like my view on purchasing. Financially it probably makes sense to never buy and always rent, but it's impossible to be spontaneous and all too easy to make excuses when you have to drive somewhere to rent. Although for me that really makes the argument for Scarlet vs Epic as the ownership camera. I don't know how often my B-Roll or weekend stuff will need the high framerates and features of an Epic. Scarlet to me is the camera you buy. Epic the rental.

How does that make sense? It doesn't take that many days and then you've paid what it would have cost to buy it, but you have to give the gear back to the rental house.

Our cameras, our dolly, we've paid them off many times over now in saved rentals. A 10 K par, yes, that we will continue to rent, but every day stuff is cheaper to buy.

I also am not so excited about a 2/3 cam. To me Red is the winner for self-owning, especially since I'm pretty sure the price will drop a bit after Epic is released and some people have missed their trade-in deadlines.

 

[Rob Ruffo]

If I sound short with Rob, it's just because the guy joined Dec 2009 and in that time, he's already repeated himself several times about how movies are getting better than ever, TV is better than ever, the past isn't that good, 70's cinematography was crap, etc. I read it the first time and I read it the tenth time, and I've had my fill, I don't have to read it anymore if that's what Rob wants to be known for on this site, the guy who doesn't like old movies and TV shows.

I'm very sensitive to this issue because I'm more or less self-taught, having spent many hours in libraries and watching movies and then making movies. I learned from the past work of others, I'm standing on the shoulders of giants so to speak, so to not respect the past -- and not defend it -- would be an act of arrogance and hypocrisy on my part.

Current methods, styles, and the status quo don't need defending because that's the majority of work, that's how everyone already does everything. But the past can be forgotten, hard-won gains and knowledge can be lost, and a lot of time can be wasted relearning things.

It's a topic I have a bee in my bonnet about lately, for personal reasons, I'll admit that. I guess I didn't realize I posted so much on that topic. I didn't mean to annoy you.

What I do feel needs defending is positivity toward where we are going, not just in films, but as a human race. There were no good old days, the good days are now. This can be proven in many ways, including that never before has there been so little violence in general (the news is lurid, but actually your chance of dying via violence on planet earth has never been lower than right now) so much tolerance, etc.

As someone between gen-X and Y, I think I am not alone in feeling that the work of the generation before me, boomers, was touted just one too many times as being so far superior to the work of my own - film, music everything. Enough already.

That said, I too have carefully studied many films from history, and have loved some very much. I too spend a ton of time at the library and elsewhere learning as much as I can about film, litterature and a number of other topics. I never meant to say that all older films were bad, or that none were brilliant, only that we overestimate the AVERAGE quality of what was made back then or is made now abroad, because we only remember and import the best work.

I do think that in many ways films have moved forward, not backward, and that the best film ever made still lies in the future as we continue to deepen our understanding of how audiences react and relate to moving images. Some people out there today, including some on this forum, inluding you, have every right to be very proud of thw work they do. Some of it is the best that has ever been done. It's my right to have that opinion and express it, I think.

I also think that current work does need defending. I know someone who pirates films on the Internet. When I confronted him with it, he said "When they start making great films again like they used to I'll pay for them."

 

[Rob Ruffo]

Do you really want all limited liability feature productions buying two or three EPIC's for their one-off productions -- that is going to last a month or two or three -- and then putting them back into the market as used equipment? At some point, the market would be completely flooded with used EPIC's.

Most features are not made by companies making several movies over several years, they are put together temporarily to make a single movie. It's the reason why they rent everything from xerox machines to office space to phones, all the way down the line to lighting equipment, vehicles, cameras, etc. It has very little to do with whether it is cheaper to buy or rent. A lot of it is due to the convenience of closing up shop within a week or two of the production's end and returning all of this stuff as soon as possible. If everything was bought, it could take months to sell all of it off again.

I work in TV, so it's different, but I see your point about this.