Why implementing 4k Prores will prove Jim's point.

[Marcus Friedlander]

Hello RED TEAM and REDUSER's,

Pretty much everyone on this forum agrees that REDRAW is a better capture format then PRORES. So why don't we, once and for all, objectively prove it?

The REDRAW VS PRORES debate has never had a chance at a real apples to apples argument. Since no previous RED camera could record internal PRORES, and no other company has a camera that can dual record PRORES and REDRAW, there have always been too many independent variables to be able to test
properly. It essence, it was still a RED vs ARRI argument. However, with THE WEAPON, we can finally get rid of most, if not all, of the variables that would skew the results.

If you could implement high resolution PRORES 4444 XQ, even if it was just a test model (though REDUSER's everywhere would love a release version). Then, let Phil Holland, Geoff Boyle, and all other reliable testers, have the camera for a week. I'm sure we would know the answer to this question once and for all. The best part is, the test could not be easier to pull off. The testers would shoot 4k, 6k and 8k REDRAW clips, and then without changing anything but one setting, shoot 4k, 6k, and 8k PRORES 4444 XQ clips. Then, its back to pixel peeping and number crunching to objectively prove superiority.

The RED ONE proved, that, given the option between 2k and 4k out of the same camera, 4k is a far superior capture resolution than 2k. This helped jumpstart the 4k revolution and its the reason that every major player except ARRI released a true 4K or 4k+ camera this NAB. THE WEAPON gives us that same opportunity, but with capture codecs instead of captured resolution. We finally have a chance at an apples to apples comparison of REDRAW and PRORES!!!! Please RED make it happen!!!

 

[Phil Holland]

This isn't really a question for me, but I've already recorded the 4K UHD 422 output from the REDCAST Module (previously the 4K Broadcast Module) from Dragon 6K HD.

Also, RED and Jim are right about REDCODE RAW in a variety of ways. And it mainly comes down to keeping the compressed raw information in tact without encoding into a less functional codec.

Anyways, the point is often missed in regards to having access to REDCODE RAW. ProRes will bake in your ISO, Color Space, Gamma Curve, etc..... And you don't have access to the "rest" of the possible information found in REDCODE RAW. I was just on a job where we decided to go with DRAGONcolor2 from DRAGONcolor for our interiors. I wouldn't have anything close to that freedom with ProRes.

You can shoot pretty low compression ratios on the MINI-MAGs and that produces stellar and "thick" images.

The fun thing is that there will be REDCODE improvements on Weapon and it will be a bit more powerful than ever. We just don't know all the details just yet.

The quality of REDCODE RAW and ProRes on Weapon will be top notch and I'm not really worried about anything other than allowing both the simultaneous .R3D/.MOV workflow and giving users the ability to choose between recording 2K and 4K ProRes or REDCODE RAW as I feel this propels Weapon into being the most functional production camera on the market.

I'm from the world of features and while I think ProRes is wonderful for a variety of applications it won't be my primary capture format. However, if I was reporting on a godzilla attack near the Santa Monica Pier and needed to upload an "air ready" ProRes file you'd see me use that feature on in a heartbeat.

 

[Nick Morrison]

This is really a RAW vs NON-RAW debate. Which is really apples and oranges.

 

[Marc Wielage]

I have used both R3D raw files and ProRes files -- sometimes within the same project -- and it doesn't matter to me if the end result is HD. That's provided the ProRes files were made correctly in the appropriate color temperature, RedColor, and RedLogFilm settings.

I have definitely had times when I had to have my assistant or the assistant editor re-debayer and re-render ProRes files because I felt I didn't have quite enough range to get there, or the DP had selected an ISO that was losing highlight detail. Sometimes, decoding (say) 800 ISO footage at 500 yielded a better result.

All things being equal, I'd rather have the R3D files, but for HD delivery, I don't think it matters anymore. I haven't yet done a 4K delivery of a ProRes project, but I have done plenty of DPX projects in 4K and those always held up fine -- with the same proviso. Given more time and much more computer horsepower, absolutely -- go from the raw. Unfortunately, a lot of short schedule/low budget projects I see these days don't have the time or money to do that.

From the indie colorist perspective, I'd say it maybe adds a day to the schedule for conform (vs. working with a flattened ProRes file), and if I can negotiate a little more time and a slightly bigger budget, it's no problem. It's not a huge difference in most cases, but it can with scenes that have major lighting issues or shots that require lots of repositioning.

Note that most (but not all) Alexa projects on TV are shooting ProRes and they look terrific on the air. And Arriraw works fine for features, as witnessed by the many Marvel films shooting Alexa. I think there are several ways to get across the finish line, and each production has to judge the time & money issues for themselves.

 

[David Battistella]

Just for the simple reason Marc mentioned of having to re-render the odd shot makes RAW a slightly superior acquisition format.

But.

You can't shove it down peoples throats. They get it or they don't. They understand it, or they think it is slow and cumbersome. They can plug it in to their workflow, or they can't or don't want to. They like the word prores, the prefer an ARRI proves image over a Dragon prores image.

This conversation is not about what is superior, clearly RAW without baked in WB and ISO is superior, it simple offers more choices and flexibility.

The conversation is more about how people will move in the direction they want to given the choices before them.

The move to Prores has happened in many feature and TV series productions, now we will see if it is proves or the cameras?

It seems you can get proves out of anything, so it's not totally tied to the recording format.

 

[Demetri Zuev]

This isn't really a question for me, but I've already recorded the 4K UHD 422 output from the REDCAST Module (previously the 4K Broadcast Module) from Dragon 6K HD.

What recorder did you use and how was the Prores quality overall?

 

[Craig Lees]

I've already recorded the 4K UHD 422 output from the REDCAST Module (previously the 4K Broadcast Module) from Dragon 6K HD.What recorder did you use and how was the Prores quality overall?

+1

Also Phil, do you know if it is full debayer supersampled 4K from the 6K? I imagine it looks pretty amazing if it does.

Thanks again for your wisdom.


cheers,

Craig Lees
ED UK
3dstories.co.uk

 

[Shane Betts]

One of the most compelling reasons to have native Prores is that, when someone asks for something, saying, "no I can't do that but this is better" always raises suspicions. To be able to offer either/or and then telling them the RAW is better, more people will believe you.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

ProRes is best for a fast workflow, RAW is best for highest quality... the end :tongue_smilie:

 

[Tarquin Cardona]

What I am trying to figure out is if I am using high powered mac pro to turn Red Raw into nice looking pro Rez 1080 or whatever ... With rendering time getting faster all the time but rendering nonetheless... How can a little camera give me the same result in real time? Arri Mini has 4k UHD. But they are pulling from smaller sensor data. So I just trying to understand when we speak of getting pro Rez on a Weapon. will it look anything like what I am doing xcoding out of Redcine or what?

 

[David Battistella]

Last week my pal was on a same day turnaround production. Shot 6K raw, edited in premiere, graded on speed grade and delivered a 2K and 4K master.

Where was the bottleneck with raw? There wasn't one.

Everything is doable with horsepower, brains and money.

Battistella

 

[Christoffer Glans]

What I am trying to figure out is if I am using high powered mac pro to turn Red Raw into nice looking pro Rez 1080 or whatever ... With rendering time getting faster all the time but rendering nonetheless... How can a little camera give me the same result in real time? Arri Mini has 4k UHD. But they are pulling from smaller sensor data. So I just trying to understand when we speak of getting pro Rez on a Weapon. will it look anything like what I am doing xcoding out of Redcine or what?

In the same way as it captures and code RAW data into R3D format in real time. Can your Mac Pro code R3D from a RAW sensor stream in real time? Or even higher at 120 fps 6K? Don't think so. Remember that the Red cameras are essentially a $20,000 computer. If you bought a computer for the same amount of money, I guarantee you it will code that fast.

 

[Tarquin Cardona]

Ok. Well given how good red raw looks xcoded to pro rez out of RC...then this is going to be some very nice real time pro rez. If they can swing a pro Rez only stream in at least 4K UHD that looks so clean then not only will we users be happy, but I think they will be truly bringing it to the skeptics and competition.

 

[David Battistella]

Tarquin.

I think there is more than prores.

People are not going to abandon ARRI just because RED records prores. It might turn some productions. But I doubt anyone is going to switch to 2K prores if ARRI starts offering up sampled 4K UHD prores.

There is much more to it than that.

 

[Tarquin Cardona]

Last week my pal was on a same day turnaround production. Shot 6K raw, edited in premiere, graded on speed grade and delivered a 2K and 4K master.

Where was the bottleneck with raw? There wasn't one.

Everything is doable with horsepower, brains and money.

Battistella

I agree. Plus one thing we are leaving out is that a lot of the cams coming out are leaning on raw to get the DR. SLog, CLog, etc..so the workflow is identical. I do wonder if the PR thing is more important for us just to check a capability box. But those of us who work with raw and LUT ... Seems like that's the new normal.

 

[Tarquin Cardona]

Tarquin.

I think there is more than prores.

People are not going to abandon ARRI just because RED records prores. It might turn some productions. But I doubt anyone is going to switch to 2K prores if ARRI starts offering up sampled 4K UHD prores.

There is much more to it than that.

Yes David. I agree. I think Red must implement 4k UHD stream just to hold parity. esp now that A Mini is competing in form factor. I say this more for the Red business model than for my tastes. You know, I just like to feel my camera company is healthy and growing

 

[Dunkan Wolf]

It would be awesome if you could detach the encoder part of the brain and swap it out with whatever codec / processing module you need. R3D module, ProRes module, DNxHD, H265, DPX etc etc

 

[Darren Streibig]

Last week my pal was on a same day turnaround production. Shot 6K raw, edited in premiere, graded on speed grade and delivered a 2K and 4K master.

Where was the bottleneck with raw? There wasn't one.

Everything is doable with horsepower, brains and money.

Battistella

I agree! So far with my R3D files, I had over estimated the requirements to edit the format. I upgraded certain things that might have had a marginal effect on output times, but in general the overall editing process has been a blast. I would say that the hardware you can get, for the money, just about any serious studio or film maker should have access to a machine that can easily handle the r3d format. Smooth playback in full resolution? Probably not, but if you need to do it, you probably can afford a system that can do it.

And considering all the RED software is free for download, its hard to understand why someone would prefer recording straight to prores and losing out on all the extra data/flexibility of the file?

 

[Björn Benckert]

There are benefits from working with raw. But also there are huge benefits from downsampling and debayering before compression, especially if there is a lot of downsampling and a lot of compression that has to be done.

Red one aimed to shot 4k for 4k, then it was pretty much a 1:1 and compressing in raw was simply the best option. MX and epic got a bit of extra for more downsampling, some say they have enough and some allways want more. With dragon and 6k you have a 3:2 downsample ratio to go to 4k which is, I think, right at the tipping point where it actually start to make more sense to downsample and then compress. for 8k/weapon that logic makes even more sense. The downsampling 2:1 takes away 3/4 of the noise, the image left is far more easy to compress than the full 8k and the result at 4k for the same bit rate will be much more clear. But you are not in raw if you do that and you closed some doors and made some decisions in camera. Also if you need the full resolution for stills, reframing or actually finalizing in 8k, 6k or above proress then downsampling in camera is not a good option.... So what to do?

Well, what RED are about to release is the obvious solution, something that can do both at the same time. 12bit proress and compressed super resolution r3d raw.

I'm pretty sure that when we have both we can not say one is better than the other, they are both having different sorts of qualities, and I'm not talking about simplified workflows and over comming slow computers etc, but more different picture qualities that will shine in it's own way. Where one is less sensitive to noise but bakes in colors (even if that is 12bit redlogfilm if wanted) and the other is higher resolution and bit depth but more sensitive to noise and compression issues.

 

[Jose Alejandro Acosta]

Last week my pal was on a same day turnaround production. Shot 6K raw, edited in premiere, graded on speed grade and delivered a 2K and 4K master.

Where was the bottleneck with raw? There wasn't one.

Everything is doable with horsepower, brains and money.

Battistella

Indeed! I don't understand how Prores provides a "faster workflow" unless someone's running 3-year-old FCP 7. With Adobe we've edited scores of projects with R3Ds on a MacBook Pro with USB3 drives. Not a problem.