RED's performance value at 1080i/p

[Kevin Rogers]

Since I'd predominantly use RED to shoot lower end formats such as 720p, 1080i and 1080p, how will it's performance compare to cameras such as the HVX200 and XDCAM 350???
In particular what are your thoughts in terms of performance for dollar or value??

Notes -
Obviously what glass you use will determine quality of image but let's imagine the glass is a consistent factor.
I know we are onl guessing what sort of image RED will deliver from the specs presented but we've seen what the other two cameras are doing.
I know it's a airy fairy type of question but I would be intertested in people's thoughts.

I'm still trying to work out whether to 1. just slap down the cash and grab a HVX200, or 2. keep saving a few more months for XDCAM HD, or 3. keep saving six more months for RED - won't have any need for 2K or 4K so wondering if RED is overkill for my needs and my bank account - I like the idea of having the best 1080 image you can get though :)

PS - "my name is Kevin and I've become a camera forum addict":badputer:

[Gibby]

Kevin,

Assuming that RED delivers their camera at the currently proposed specs. Here are my thoughts on your questions.

HVX200: I have a high opinion of the HVX. I was one of the first DP's to review the HVX for a national magazine, and I gave it a high rating. There are workarounds in the workflow, and mass storage issues that need to be addressed. The HVX is one of the cameras I've used to shoot hi-def stock footage, with excellent results. A lot of people are very happy with their HVX's, and many shooters are busy as we speak using the HVX for a broad range of projects from indies, to HDTV, to commercials, to corporate, etc.

In a perfect world, if your budget allows, a 2-camera quiver, consisting of an HVX and a RED would be a great choice. If you can only afford one camera system, you need to ask yourself what your primary intended use will be. If you do mostly smaller-budget projects where you don't need deep depth of field, resolutions above 1080, interchangeable lenses, and your clients aren't looking for high-end production equipment, perhaps the HVX would satisfy your needs. If you bought an HVX and found you needed higher than 1080 resolution for a project, you could always rent a RED camera system for that unique project. Outlay for a full-featured HVX ENG-style field production system will be around $11k USD. For a cine-style setup expect additional outlay for a matte box, follow focus, external monitor, etc.

The Sony XDCAM F350 has a suggested retail value of $25k USD. If you search hard, you can find used ENG-style HD lenses for around $8k USD, so, with tax and other necessary field accessories, your field package for an F350 will be a minimum of around $37k.

The basic price for a RED camera is currently a suggested $17.5k USD. The least expensive lens setup would be to buy a used S16 lens, currently ranging between $1.5k USD and on up, so with a battery, and RED Drive, you'd look at around $23k to get you up and running. A used 2/3" B4 mount ENG-style lens would be around $8k USD and up, so if you went that route, you'd be looking at an outlay of around $28k USD. If you shoot a lot of cine-style productions, going the S16 lens route would also enable you to shoot 2k windowed and 4:4:4 with the RED.

If you intend to bid for, or freelance for, or produce and projects in an image format higher than 1080 (2k, 4k, 2540p), RED is the only camera of the three that can supply that. If you think you’ll ever need a 4:4:4 colorspace, 35mm depth of field from the sensor, RAW files, or a frame rate higher than 60fps, RED is the only one of the three that will supply those. If you do a mixture of ENG-style (sports, reality, news, etc.) and cine-style (features, indies, commercials, stock footage) production, and you will need a combination of interchangeable lenses, 35mm/16mm/2/3” HD multiple capability accessory use, and an adjustable small-to-large form factor, RED would be the choice.

So, estimated minimum camera system outlays to get you out shooting are: HVX = $11k, RED = $23k to $28k, F350 = $37k.

You’ll have to make the decision based on your project list, and professional goals. Remember, you can easily rent equipment on a per-project basis, and include the cost in your bid to the client, studio, or network. If I was on a limited budget, I’d buy enough equipment to get me shooting, bid a lot of projects, rent the accessories for each project until I had the capital to buy what I’d use regularly, and work up into larger and larger projects. With media convergence, I’d also get a camera system that not only satisfies the genres I currently work in, but would give me the ability to branch out into production in the genres I want to expand into.

In summary, analyze the cost of the camera system, what you currently do, your future expansion, and the earning potential of the camera system (enabled by it’s versatility), and go for it. If you do it right, you should be able to pay for your in-house equipment very quickly.

I regularly use multiple film, HD, and SD cameras, depending on what the project calls for. I use cameras from all manufacturers. I rent almost everything I use, because I’m a convergence DP who tackles a broad range of projects and genres. What camera systems do I own? Because I constantly rent what I need, I’ve pared the in-house quiver down to cameras that are affordable and will get the most day-in and day-out use: a Sony Z1, an HVX200, and my higher-end camera will be a RED One.

Hope this insight helps you!

Gibby
RED camera #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com

[Graeme_Nattress]

For starters, you'll get true 1080p from the RED, which neither of the others will do as the HVX is upsampled, and the XDCAM HD is really an interlaced camera. Because you've got such a big sensor, the HD picture should be utterly superb, and the compression scheme is much more modern too. I think it will win in image quality terms.

Graeme

[Gibby]

Thanks Graeme! I definately agree with what you said about comparative 1080p image quality. In covering many bases in my post I forgot to mention that. I guess I was emphasizing the economics of the decision and overlooked mentioning the tech behind the comparative images. Image quality will be a big sales point to potential clients and networks, so in essence image quality is an economic factor in how much revenue a camera system can generate, along with multiple image format choices, lense options, etc.

Gibby
RED camera #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com

[Jarred Land]

Everyone is right here.. the HVX is a hellofa camera, and in the 5k price range its hard to beat. But Graeme is right.. you get real true 1080 resolution with the RED camera (and above).. Personally to me the HVX is a killer 720p camera and is the mode i shoot at 99.9% of the time. Depth of Field is gonna be a big selling point for the Red though beyond resolution, and all the adapters out there you can pay $10k + for to get that depth of field kinda puts the two cameras on an even price point.

Both cameras can live together very well. Red uses HVX's right now... you can buy an HVX and use it today. Since both cameras use a tapeless workflow, its nice to get all the kinks out of that workflow with a HVX so when the RED comes you dont hit that learning curve.

[MikeCurtis]

Graeme and Gibby are extremely knowledgeable guys, and I'm not arguing with what they say, but here's my take on it:

1.) For starters, as Steve points out, the "out the door" cost of the cameras is quite different, roughly 2X price difference as properly equipped to go out and do real shooting. So you have to ask yourself - would I rather have one RED or two HVX setups?

2.) While technically quite true that the RED shoots higher end formats (2K, 2540p, etc.), I don't think that is going to be used very often on a percentage of projects basis - I think it will be used as 1080p/i or 720p 95%+ of the time, simply because of the relatively low demand for 2K and higher work out there in the overall range of jobs. Now, some might buy a RED and focus on 2K+ work, and that's great, but my guesstimate based on folks I talk to is that HD work will be the bulk of what it's used for, among other reasons because that is what is reasonably easy to post with, assuming the "FireWire it over" workflow works as advertised with a QuickTime or AVI codec.

3.) I think the frame rate issue is a more substantial factor than the "above HD resolution" issue - HVX is uniquely flexible at its price point to allow, what is it, 4-60 fps? That's great. The F350 does not - you've got a functionally resolution limited 24p, 25p, 30p, and then full res 1080i50 and 1080i60. RED will offer up to 60fps progressive, and even 120 fps progressive using windowed 2K.

4.) But I think that, by FAR, the dynamic range, contrast, and image sharpness that the RED specs imply will be the deciding quality factor for most. Sampling down, rather than up, to 1080p/i will give a sharper image, not to mention the compression artifacts should be fewer and less noticeable with the wavelet based stuff RED is talking about so far. The 1/3", 960x540 dual pixel shifted 3 CCD setup on the HVX is not bad, but the MUCH larger sensor, with larger individual pixels, and higher resolution of the Mysterium SHOULD provide a superior image, based on the specs we've been given so far. But IBC (if footage shown there) will be the ultimate proof.

5.) And the glass - you can't change the glass on the HVX, period, so it is NOT an "all things being equal" scenario. Depth of field, choice of lenses, etc. The HVX and RED aren't really in the same category, and that's OK - the HVX is a fraction of the price, and a good bang/buck.

The F350 is really the appropriate comparator for RED, or Panasonic's upcoming DVCPRO HD new camera that will cost $20-$30K.

My $0.02.

-mike

[Greg Lowry]

Excellent comments all.

One comment. Steve said: "... If you do mostly smaller-budget projects where you don't need deep depth of field, resolutions above 1080 ...".

I think you meant shallow depth of field. I bring this up because Stuart English recently made a similar remark. I assume you both simply "misspoke".

[Jarred Land]

1.) For starters, as Steve points out, the "out the door" cost of the cameras is quite different, roughly 2X price difference as properly equipped to go out and do real shooting. So you have to ask yourself - would I rather have one RED or two HVX setups?
Good point Mike.. i was trying to compare price points by comparing the HVX with a P+S mini35 or a Movietube, in that rate they are both comparably in price. But of course, out of the box, the HVX takes stunning images at a $6000 price point (without cards)



2.) While technically quite true that the RED shoots higher end formats (2K, 2540p, etc.), I don't think that is going to be used very often on a percentage of projects basis - I think it will be used as 1080p/i or 720p 95%+ of the time, simply because of the relatively low demand for 2K and higher work out there in the overall range of jobs. Now, some might buy a RED and focus on 2K+ work, and that's great, but my guesstimate based on folks I talk to is that HD work will be the bulk of what it's used for, among other reasons because that is what is reasonably easy to post with, assuming the "FireWire it over" workflow works as advertised with a QuickTime or AVI codec.

yes.. most of us will use 1080p modes 95% of the time. But i have a feeling if the image is good enough, there are a few cameras out there in big studios that will be shooting 2k-4k 95% of the time.. and that small fraction of cameras is probally going to also do 95% of the convincing of the capability of RED.



3.) I think the frame rate issue is a more substantial factor than the "above HD resolution" issue - HVX is uniquely flexible at its price point to allow, what is it, 4-60 fps? That's great. The F350 does not - you've got a functionally resolution limited 24p, 25p, 30p, and then full res 1080i50 and 1080i60. RED will offer up to 60fps progressive, and even 120 fps progressive using windowed 2K.
The HVX officially supports 12-60fps. With a small hack it can go from 2fps-60. This feature is what kills the competition though in my eyes.. the resolution, as you said, is not a selling factor.


4.) But I think that, by FAR, the dynamic range, contrast, and image sharpness that the RED specs imply will be the deciding quality factor for most. Sampling down, rather than up, to 1080p/i will give a sharper image, not to mention the compression artifacts should be fewer and less noticeable with the wavelet based stuff RED is talking about so far. The 1/3", 960x540 dual pixel shifted 3 CCD setup on the HVX is not bad, but the MUCH larger sensor, with larger individual pixels, and higher resolution of the Mysterium SHOULD provide a superior image, based on the specs we've been given so far. But IBC (if footage shown there) will be the ultimate proof.
Im glad you mentioned dynamic range.. as its something that people looking at digital kinda have just crossed off the list. I dont know if RIGHT NOW people are really buying into RED for the dynamic range alone, its kinda like a nice bonus. But, if it does hit the advertised latitude, hell even if it hits 11 stops, its gonna make a big, big wave. And DP's around the world will start sending Jim Flowers.


5.) And the glass - you can't change the glass on the HVX, period, so it is NOT an "all things being equal" scenario. Depth of field, choice of lenses, etc. The HVX and RED aren't really in the same category, and that's OK - the HVX is a fraction of the price, and a good bang/buck.

yes.. thats what i was getting at with the mini35 options. Its changing glass but kinda not really.


The F350 is really the appropriate comparator for RED, or Panasonic's upcoming DVCPRO HD new camera that will cost $20-$30K.

My $0.02.
the HDX900 is very cool camera, i had alot of time to play with it already. Deep down i wish it had P2 slots. But it definately is top of the market right now, and it will be interesting to step back and look at the field when everything is on the streets.

[Jarred Land]

Excellent comments all.

One comment. Steve said: "... If you do mostly smaller-budget projects where you don't need deep depth of field, resolutions above 1080 ...".

I think you meant shallow depth of field. I bring this up because Stuart English recently made a similar remark. I assume you both simply misspoke.

I think your right.. deep is what people are trying to get away from.

[Greg Lowry]

Exactly. Selective focus, particuarly for closeups, with a lovely bokeh.

[Gibby]

Thanks Greg, you're right, I meant to put shallow DOF, but in spelling it all out, "deep" somehow got typed. Good catch!

Whether we shoot ENG-style, cine-style, or both, the golden ring is a camera system that will enable shallow DOF when we need it.

Gibby
RED camera #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com

[mike the beginner]

I have looked at the pros and cons of purchasing a camera as a newcomer. More than a few on this forum have said they expect to keep a camera for three years and then upgrade. How much would you get for a camera with a limited shelf life often superseded by the latest cameras offering more for your money than previous cameras. How much added extras specific to the camera are re-usable on a new camera. If the lens gets damaged and it is a fixed lens what then? P2 as an example is hugely expensive for anyone thinking of filming for long periods during the day. If as suggested in various posts the price of p2 will go down substantially in the next couple of years, what is it then worth should you decide to sell? Some guys have already spent $5,000 on these cards.

It seems to me that most people rarely get the maximum capabilities out of their camera. How long would it take most experienced videographers to get pretty used to working with a newly purchased camera? Judging by the many posts i have read it is months rather than weeks (for me it would probably be a year!).

What do videographers really think of 3 ccd cameras in the prosumer range in terms of low light capability. XLHI said to be similar to XL2 and hvx 200 has been spoken about in numerous threads. Also if i have read correctly at 1080p you are looking at requiring over 2 million pixels to get the maximum quality without some form technology to get the required picture.

Red is expected to be usable for a decade!!! If you decided to sell Red after three years how much might you get for it (or lose on it) compared to the above cameras.

If you keep it for ten years just think of the times spent utilising the camera once you do get the hang of it instead of learning all over again with a new camera every three years. If Red does succeed and the camera is all it might be it will be well sought after. Those with experience with Red could possibly find themselves in demand for hire with camera?

Red as Steve said, opens up so many possibilities for you guys that if i were a pro i would be saving like mad to get one (doing so and i am a beginner!!):)

Michael

[Jarred Land]

bingo michael.. remember, even the SENSOR on RED is upgradable.. so theoretically it can last just as long as the good old Russion K 35mms....

[Gibby]

Mike the Beginner,

I think you display one of the best traits a beginner can - an eagerness to learn from veterans. Every veteran on this thread, or anywhere else in the TV, video, or film world, was a beginner at some point. Nobody is born knowing anything - we start absorbing knowledge at birth. If you want to keep your knowledge base in a dynamic warp drive for your entire career follow this one simple principle:

"The more you learn, the more you should realize you don't know" - a Chinese sage

In other words, keep an open mind, be an "info sponge", and pick the brain of everyone in this industry that has more knowledge than you!

Though you want to always keep learning, eventually you'll arrive at this plateau:

"Be respectful to your superiors - if you have any" - Mark Twain

The danger then is to think you have all the answers, and at that point your learning slows or stops.

Comb through every tech board and forum you can find, but balance that with constant shooting. I've been shooting motion footage and still photos footage for a long time. I shoot almost every day, and when I go out to shoot I learn something new every single time.

The three elements to success in this industry are: talent, experience, and technology. You’re born with talent. You pay dues on location shooting to get experience (but you can fast-track that by picking experienced brains). You must constantly comb tech forums to learn about technology.

This is a dynamic profession, never static...

Gibby
RED camera #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com

[nalu]

We are very luck to have these forums with the likes of Gibby, Jarred Land and Mike Curtis - PS Mike I'm daily visiting your site as well as this one and DVinfo.

These thoughts only confim my dream of a RED purchase - we'll be able to get super excited if the footage this fall delivers on the specs - in fact I'll pop a bottle of bubbly if it delivers on expectations!

Dynamic range is a huge plus for this camera and I'm surprised it doesn't get discussed more often. From my relatively unexperienced take (compared to the rest of you guns) this is as important as higher resolutions. I do a lot of outdoor shooting (often in harsh light) and a large dynamic range is going to be beautiful!

also the point that RED's value should be long term as opposed to the other rigs is a strong point that I keep reminding myself.

The variety of work you do Gibby is something that I aspire to. Thanks for al your post, your logic thinking and openness in sharing your experience.

Now. anyone know where there is a S16 lens forum like this?????
I'll be looking to deck out my RED with a used S16 zoom and a couple of other chepaer lense to get me started - but I've never dealt with these lenses and I need to learn more!

I'm thirsty :beer: :cheesy:

[Emanuel]

yes.. most of us will use 1080p modes 95% of the time. But i have a feeling if the image is good enough, there are a few cameras out there in big studios that will be shooting 2k-4k 95% of the time.. and that small fraction of cameras is probally going to also do 95% of the convincing of the capability of RED.Not just in the big studios...specially 2k scaled, for instance, to 2.39:1 purposes. And yes, for some, it will be 95% of the time.

[evinsky]

You can also consider starting out your Red package with still primes. I know my Nikkors can make incredible blow ups on my 12mp d2X, 20"x30" easily. The Red one is 11mp so as long as you can handle some less than ideal focusing gears then you can start shooting with just a $50 50mm prime.

[Gibby]

Hey Braddah Nalu,

Are you from Hawaii? With a handle like Nalu (Hawaiian for "ocean"), I'm guessing you are, or you hang out by the ocean a lot. Same here...

I've worked all over the world, especially across Polynesia. For about 15 years I worked in Hawaii for large portions of each winter, directing and shooting tons of programs. For example, I was field producer, director, and primary cameraman (all 3 simultaneously) for the ESPN series "Hawaiian Sports Adventure" (20 half hour programs), where we just went from island to island profiling all the cool things to do in the air, in the water, and on land. My wife is a longtime Production Coordinator, so we traveled and worked together on those projects - just mobile crews of three, me, production coordinator, and talent. I was shooting Beta SP, plus mounting POV lipstick cameras on everything and everyone. Hawaii Visitors Bureau was a major supporter of the series, and Team Unlimited, then Event Marketing, produced the series. My work on those projects was contracted to my company through a company named DynoComm, which was owned by my brother Alan, like me, an Emmy-winning producer/director/DP.

I'm developing some projects that may take us back to Hawaii - this time to shoot with RED cameras! I'll be receiving one of the first production models of RED (#8), and I'd love to test it out in Hawaii. If you're based in Hawaii, when we come there you can hook up with us, check out the camera, and I'll give you some stick time on it.

Thanks for the kind words! When I first started in this business, and many times since, more experienced individuals stepped up to help fast-track my learning curve, including two of my own brothers who are award-winning professionals in the TV/film industry. I mentor a lot of young people, online and on location, because to me it is completing the circle and giving back to the system, in honor of those who helped me when I started. It's good Karma, or whatever you want to call it...

To keep this post on-thread, 1080p, with 2/3" HD ENG-style lenses for action, S35 or S16 lenses for creative montages, will be what we shoot for our Hawaiian programs. Stock footage is also a big part of my business, so I'll probably shoot the stock in 2k Windowed, which licensees can easily down-res to 1080p if they desire. One advantage of shooting RED in 2k Windowed with S35 or 35 lenses, especially for long focal length sports and nature footage, is that the focal length is doubled, assuming that we can effectively store the massive amounts of data in a mobile configuration shooting 4:4:4 or 120 fps RAW. I may also shoot some 4k and 2540p stock footage in Hawaii, but I feel 2k Windowed and 1080p would be the sweet spot for most mobile travel and tourism stock footage.

Let's take specific plans about connecting in Hawaii offline. You can find my email address on my Cut4.tv web site.

Like you, I also read DV Info and HD for Indies daily - good sites!

RED - eeets da kine braddah!!

Gibby
RED camera #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com

[Gibby]

I think your right.. deep is what people are trying to get away from.

No doubt - for certain shots. But for wide establishing shots, wide scenery stock footage, and many other similar shots, deep DOF is exactly what we need to achieve. So, a camera/lens combination that enables setup of shallow DOF, deep DOF, and everywhere in between is the ticket - and RED should be capable of that, depending on the lens, lens format, and image format combination in use.

Gibby
RED camera #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com

[D_and_G]

For me, I'm more concerned with blowup to film, and having the use of cine lens and accessories.

Frankly, i've been underwhelmed by 1/3" blow ups, and if you are going to use this level of gear, at this price point, RED seems best...(if they deliver)

And if I need 1080, for music vids, or straight to DVD, then it's there. I've been waiting for a camera not to be the obstacle in the production process, or a question mark for distributors. Hopefully that day has come.

I also think I'll purchase an acceptable used lens, and rent the rest for specific applications. If RED produces a decent zoom, in the middle, at a cool price then even better.

Having a good dynamic range, sensitivity, colours, and reduction of video artifacts on the big screen makes a huge difference (for film blowup).


No doubt - for certain shots. But for wide establishing shots, wide scenery stock footage, and many other similar shots, deep DOF is exactly what we need to achieve. So, a camera/lens combination that enables setup of shallow DOF, deep DOF, and everywhere in between is the ticket - and RED should be capable of that, depending on the lens, lens format, and image format combination in use.

Gibby
RED camera #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com

Exactly Gibby. I would love to use this camera to give panoramic shots real justice. Ever since I saw John Ford's films in colour, I've wanted to do something similar...also, the poetry of Malick's nature shots are another inspiration.

I also think we'd be surprised at how many people will use 2K, aiming for theatrical release. We forget that the potential of this camera will allso hit foreign markets too. Hopefully, some of the labs in Toronto, are keeping a close eye on RED's development. It could be an extremely popular alternative option for entrpereneurial filmmakers, or those with mixed financing, and foreign markets.:beer::beer::beer:




Cheers.








RED#wish I was higher

[mike the beginner]

Thank Gibby for taking the time to help me with some really great pointers and advice. :)

Your point with regard a deep depth of field with 35mm gave me a sigh of relief. I thought my learning process had went astray for a minute.

Back to Red though. When you look at the sheer number of ideas that forum members have all come up with, it is both frightening and exciting. Red has already come up with great ideas and a fabulous thought process that leaves nothing out and er.....nothing in. That is fine given the probable certainty that others will be looking at this list!!

You could torture yourself or drool over some of the suggestions and see what ideas must be incorporated into the camera body itself and what could be attached to the camera cage. How many suggestions will end up on Red? Could there be overkill on this or is it a case the more the merrier or is it just more items to go wrong or faulty?

Will they include the cheap ideas first, as it does not alter the cost. Is it possible to go too far and cheapen red (too many items= tacky cheap?)

Some suggestions look to have tremendous potential but must surely add to the cost. how much would they add?

Then i put my rational cap on and think!..... What Red is trying to do is already breathtaking and a really tough challange. Despite having what looks like a great team with quality credentials, this is a formidable task that i am positive the founder is already aware of. I am sure they will succeed but it does not stop me wondering....will all those ideas suggested, hold back the development and by how much? I know so little yet, even i can see some ideas are brilliant if they can be incorporated.

What would really be useful at reasonable cost. Does anyone have definite "must haves" on keeping the value for money high and cost base low whilst keeping in sympathy with what Red is all about, innovation and modularity. Just wondered.

Michael

[Proteus]

I think it's a *big* problem to incorporate new ideas in an existing project, so I'm not optimistic at all about this.

The cost for most excellent (and feasible) ideas will be mostly in time, (research & development) than in electronic components, so I don't think the camera cost will be affected much, but most companies consider time as their most valuable asset and release semi-finished products to the market... or release mediocre implementations. I hope RED it's not like most companies...

Of course there is the cost of R&D too (man hours, equipment, components etc) but I don't think the RED company will increase the price just because they decided to do more R&D...

Also some ideas might not be possible to incorporate just because it's too late now, while some others might be already being thought by the RED team, so I think that finally only one or two simple ideas *might* get incorporated to RED...

But there is one good thing about the idea-contest: Some ideas might find their way in other products (assuming that some other companies are watching) and might help build a better product in some point in time! Just the thought of it, made this contest worthwhile for me... ...except from viewing it as a mind game!

BTW isn't the contest over?

[Jarred Land]

Also some ideas might not be possible to incorporate just because it's too late now, while some others might be already being thought by the RED team, so I think that finally only one or two simple ideas *might* get incorporated to RED...


BTW isn't the contest over?

Red isnt a normal company.. i have been fortunate enough to take a peek inside some of the development and have seen how these guys work.. things change everyday with the RED team.

And yes the contest is over as of midnight.. winner will be announced tomorrow.

[acrochordon]

1080p, I don't think anybody else has that. RED is the best. I think 1080i will be obsolete soon except for the fact that so many people have bought 1080i screens. Too bad screen manufacturers didn't bypass 1080i. I guess that is what is call planned obsolescence. :( I like REDs tag line, making obsolescence obsolete. :) I don't want to spend $30,000 and then find out the next day that my camera is obsolete.

[Gibby]

I'm glad RED included 1080i in the image resolutions though, because ESPN, ABC, HDNet, and others broadcast HDTV in 1080i, and there is potential to weave RED cameras into their workflow. As Graeme Nattress will attest, transcoding 1080p to 1080i works well, but 1080i transferred to 1080p deosn't work well. If you're doing a delayed 1080i HDTV broadcast with RED cameras, I'd shoot and edit it in 1080p, then transfer to 1080i for the master. Still, I think it makes sense to have 1080i included in the image format resolutions of the RED camera.

[Graeme_Nattress]

1080i is a bit of an evil format. It's not really much more measured rez than 720p, but takes a lot more pixels to achieve it, hence it's innefficient. 1080p60 converts to 1080i60 very well, but then again, so does 720p60.... I don't think the reverse can be said for 1080i60 to 1080p60, although 1080i60 to 720p60 can look ok as long as you don't look too hard.

Graeme

[Jarred Land]

yes the much more logical method would just to extract 1080i from a 1080p singnal. Im not much of a fan of converting any interlaced format into a progressive format. In fact. I hate Interlaced with a passion.

Film isnt interlaced, and its relatively easy to convert to "i" so i think Red should just stick with progressive in camera.. and leave the interlacing to post or via a small selectable massage out the HD-SDI to make studios happy. Doing anything (effects etc) is way easier with a progressive frame so everyone in the process would be happy until deliverable.

[Kevin Rogers]

all good posts everyone

Would be interested on people's thoughts on the different cameras available and what needs they satisfy. I'm tempted by the HVX200 with it's smaller initial investment but maybe RED is a better longer term investment??
Also will RED just blow the HVX200 outta the water in trems of image quality at 1080i/p???
I'm more used to operating a camera like the Panasonic - never dealt with film cameras before - that's why it's a difficult dilemma!

[donatello]

perhaps the recent "test ..comparisons" on the 4 hand size HD camera's, VariCam and cinealta should be a tell sign ..now that's 1/3 " and 2/3 " sensors .. now add a panavision genesis , dalsa or arri D20 in the mix ..
i predict the all the 1/3 " camera's will be last ...

the sony 350 & HVX 200 compared to the genesis super 35m sensor should give you a ball park idea of the difference ?

i just don't see the deciding to buy between a HVX 200 or a RED in same mix??? 2 different price ranges ...

[Proteus]

Also will RED just blow the HVX200 outta the water in trems of image quality at 1080i/p???

I'm sure it will !!!
I bet that if you display 1080p images from both cameras (RED downresed) in a native 1080p monitor you'll see that simply there's no comparison!

I think that RED will give us the opportunity to produce stunning images such as those we've seen sometimes on quality HD broadcasts! That quality that HDV failed to provide... especially to those of us spoiled with high definition...

[acrochordon]

There are so many HD formats. I was naive. A few years ago, I walked into Circuit City and saw a Pioneer HD LCD screen. I thought that all HD TVs would be the same. I thought all HD camcorders would be the same. There are so many different formats: DVCPRO25, DVCPRO50, and DVCPRO100. I just want a camera that works and looks good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVCPRO

I went to Circuit City today, I looked at the most expensive Sony they had there. It was over $7,000. But the video playing on it still had flaws due to compression artifacts. That is a real bummer. The reality of HD is not the perfection that was hyped. (I went to Circuit City to get a 13" tube set with built in DVD. It was only $140.)

I guess it all comes down to the compression codecs. That is where the disappointment will come from.

[Proteus]

Many factors have their share in the final quality that arrives to your eyeballs. All subtract from reality and compression is just one link of the chain -neither the only one nor the most important. A very fine image can be ruined at the last stage by your monitor for example …or your dirty glasses! :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
Because of the common nature of all compression formats, most codecs will work much more efficiently if the input image is of very high quality.

HD broadcasts usually suffer from motion artefacts, not because of the MPEG2 format but because they usually don't provide enough bandwidth for *that* format (that's why I said "sometimes"). With AVC (h.264), things might get better since it requires much lower data rates....except if they get greedy again and prefer to double their channels....

So, it all comes down to what WE the viewers demand... Do we want ...quality or ...quantity?
If you ask the broadcasters, I bet most of them prefer to give you quantity. That's because quality has not been appreciated from the majority of the viewers yet (for many reasons)....and so currently quality will cost *them* while quantity will cost *you*…

Fortunately there is Blu Ray and HD DVD where we can use even MPEG2 with great results…I think that when the majority of the viewers will own a native HD display, and they will be able to see everything in HD, then HD will be skyrocketed into the stratosphere….

[Kevin Rogers]

i just don't see the deciding to buy between a HVX 200 or a RED in same mix??? 2 different price ranges ...

Yes and no.
HVX200 outta box is certainly a lot cheaper but what is you want to start adding 16 or 35mil lenses??? It gets a lot closer then.

So is the price difference worth the extra quality??? (not that we can compare them yet).
Suppose it depends on the work you do and a whole other bunch of things.

I probably don't need the quality for most of my work but it would be nice of course!!

I'm trying to guess how significant the difference will be. As I need to make a judgement call whether the extra doh will be worth spending - considering I'm delivering on DVD or standard def most of the time.

[acrochordon]

I went to BestBuy today. I saw the new Blu-ray players and 1080p screens. They looked great. I think I would buy a RED One. Skip the DVX. I think I will film and plan to make projects that go straight to Blu-ray. I will not bother with 1080i. But the Blu-ray player is $999 .Ouch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC

It would be great if the RED website, once RED is for sale, had a comparison of RED against all the other cameras that come close in quality, not that any do. It would also be great if RED had a few pages on their web site that explained all the technical jargon about HDTV and 4K, and why RED uses the best technology and an explanation of the technology.

What does eveybody else think? It would help people to decide what camera to buy. Of course it will make everyone who can afford it, decide to get a RED One.

[donatello]

i don't think we'll see any long explanations on how , what red does until it is near/after release ... it is still evolving ...

if you have not been to the SI camera ( look under other camera's - Silicon Imaging ) site you might take a look at their camera comparision to other camera's - it's basic and yet effective ..no long answers - just a chart ...

[Proteus]

I can't find the comparison chart. It would be a lot easier for anybody interested if you posted the link.

[acoreasc]

for what is being promised on the sheets and Jarred's word so far on the subject the price seems absolutely small for shooting quality promised. The thing I am most looking forward to seeing is how the latitude of the imagery is compared to other cameras. That will be the defining element for me. I think we all know that at these specs that the resolution will be there.

[Jarred Land]

yes.. with latitude and resolution the advantages of film disappear.