4k idea

[myfriendimage]

I was just thinking, if they made a codec you could capture 4k like HD is to HDV, you might be able to compress a 4k Image down to DVCPRO file size. Like HD is compressed to roughly DV file size with MPG2 Compression it might be easy to make a codec similar for 4k editing, just a though, not on camera but a capture codec.

[Policar]

Unfortunately, that wouldn't work. If you used an interframe codec with a 4k image, the processing power required to edit in real time would be out of this world.

[toke lahti]

Yep, you'd have to wait for something like 2008 until you can edit highly compressed 4k with your home computer. Most of us will not even have a 2k camera by then...

[glassblowerscat]

I guess that depends on what you mean by "home computer." The rumored FCP Extreme is supposed to handle 4k ...

[Jack_Felis]

I don't know why you couldn't do 4K, you'd just need a multiple dual core processor machine. Only problem is that Windows Vista is a little ways off and Windows Server 2003 isn't good for NLE's. If Apple could release a 4-way dual core Mac, a true quad processor machine, then you'd be in good shape but your wallet would be...well...dead! =)

[Policar]

That's not really what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that editing 4k MIGHT be possible with a fast RAID array and a top of the line computer. With an intraframe codec, of course.

With an interframe codec, however, you would need a ridiculous amount more speed for perhaps 4 times the efficiency. So you might not need the RAID array, but it wouldn't matter; no computer could edit that footage, or even come close.

So what I'm saying is that HDV is harder to edit than DVCPRO HD, so a interframe solution for 4k would be much worse, not better, than an intraframe one, despite larger file sizes.

[Jack_Felis]

Yeah, in that case, you'd be right. A lot of the time it isn't the speed of the computer that counts, but it's the quality of the coding for the codec.