4k live... ( 4k Still from Red One is up )

[Jannard]

It is an 8-bit jpeg... but it is up.

Jim

[Jarred Land]

http://red.com/gallery-still.htm

thanks Jim!

[Poi Boy]

Jim,,, do you ever sleep ? It looks just as I anticipated, awesome ! I wish I could fast forward to 2007 !
Aloha
-A

[Jarred Land]

Jim,,, do you ever sleep ? It looks just as I anticipated, awesome ! I wish I could fast forward to 2007 !
Aloha
-A

Thats the secret in making a camera that should take an engineering span of 3 years and compress it to 1 year.. Work triple 8 hour days :)

[Poi Boy]

When you download a single frame and it is 5.5 megs it really drives home the magnitude of what is coming with red; 4K at multiple frame rates, Incredible !
Aloha
-A

[Craig Ryan]

Awesome!

And it STILL says "Still-DOWSIZE for Web" lmao

[Rob Lohman]

It is, the sensor spits out 4900 x 2580. This picture is 4096 x 2304. So from 4.9K to 4K (the only higher setting the camera supports is 4.5K which is 4520 x 2540)

[Jannard]

correct...

[Craig Ryan]

Exactly; I just like pointing it out..I mean ever think you'd think of a 4k image as down-sized? Unbelievable stuff.

[Emanuel]

Congrats!

Here is in all its splendor! Good one to post the same pic but now as 4K. It's possible to figure the differences between both sizes. And what red is offering that others don't.

[CVB]

Nice.

[evenblink]

Unreal...but it's real..it's really real!

[filmmaker1977]

yeah yeah but i'd like to see some other stuff around the corner..

EXT please?

[Poi Boy]

Jim, tough crowd here; it is never enough.
-A

[Darkline]

Wow that looks awesome.

One request for the shooting you do this week. Would it be possible in addition to shooting with cine lenses, to shoot some material with DSLR lenses? Canon or Nikon?

That way it would give a good indication of what a lot of us here could expect from our RED images.

Thanks, it's all looking good. Im very interested to see what an image like this would look like AFTER Redcode compression too (at 2K). As I think that's what we're all going to be working with.

But Im sure you're totally fed up of requests, you all know what you're doing :-)

[filmmaker1977]

Jim, tough crowd here; it is never enough.
-A

:thumbsup: there are 4 reservations here..

edit
we can be 4 people but all of us we are there..

[Ranger]

Whoa!

I have a 30in Cinema Display and it's still not big enough.

[Steve Shovlar]

Very impressive. Thought she was blowing smoke till I looked at her lips and saw it was bubble gum. That's a very narrow depth of field there.

[omen]

Me happy.
Me very happy.

Thanx Santa.

[Mr. Blonde]

Damn Jim, I already think about RED way too often.

This kinda stuff just keeps my excitement level on the up.

The car shot........speechless man, just beautiful, milky smooth dark to light transitions.

Now I just need a bit of a peek at the lens quality and I'll be in cinematography heaven.

[acehole111]

Speechless. Absoloutely Stupified.

[taubkin]

That is friggin' unbeliveable! You got my money...

[Haakon]

Very impressive. Thought she was blowing smoke till I looked at her lips and saw it was bubble gum. That's a very narrow depth of field there.
And that's at f4! Imagine what f2.8 or a closer zoom range would yield.

I honestly think that that anyone who hasn't worked a decent amount of time with pulling focus before is going to be in for quite a shock when they realize just how much skill it takes to retain crisp focus in a 35mm setting. This ain't your mama's 1/3" chip camera!

The nice thing is that since this camera has such wonderful low light capability, you won't have to shoot WFO the entire time (which is often the case with my HVX+M2 workflow).

I can't say enough nice things about the RED imagery - it truly is the quality of a 12MP DSLR at 60fps and beyond. Anyone who's still bashing at this point is either a troll or simply insane.

[Haakon]

Whoa!

I have a 30in Cinema Display and it's still not big enough.
You would need four of them to see the entire image at one time. Crazy.

Jim, wanna build a monitor after this? :)

[AuditoryVisuals]

I can't wait to see 2540p in TIFF format. But this... It's just, amazing. It looks a lot better than all of this Dalsa stuff (http://dalsa.com/dc/dcc/news/4k4real.asp).

[AuditoryVisuals]

Jim, wanna build a monitor after this? :)

Yeah, Jim. Build a WHUXGA or at least WHXGA monitor.

[Brook Willard]

I don't need to say how incredible this is.

[Brook Willard]

I can't wait to see 2540p in TIFF format. But this... It's just, amazing. It looks a lot better than all of this Dalsa stuff (http://dalsa.com/dc/dcc/news/4k4real.asp).
Geez, that Dalsa stuff is remarkably noisy...

[insanityfw]

Good God. That image is AMAZING!!! Now, i'm trying to figure out how to degrade the image some so that I don't blow all my money on makeup and setdec. :) All my movies will have to be out in the open desert with 19 year-old girls with perfect skin. OK, that doesn't sound too bad.

Thanks Jim et al.

[Fugitive]

Its so detailed, you can see the...you can see the...oh...(passes out)

[acoreasc]

I think everyone should start budgeting follow focus systems into their Red package plans...Haakon hit the proverbial nail on the proverbial head

[Isaac_Brody]

Wow...thanks for the new wallpaper. :beer:

[John Allardice]

hmm...I'm getting a......

The requested URL /images/gallery/still_1-downsize-for-web.jpg was not found on this server.

[Justin_Kirch]

Awesome image. Reservation here I come!

[insanityfw]

I think everyone should start budgeting follow focus systems into their Red package plans...Haakon hit the proverbial nail on the proverbial head


Just like the old-film days, but with video...crazy stuff. It will be so nice to have the need for a good focus puller.

It will also be nice to NOT be able to cut any corners or rush things without paying the price. I think some people are hoping that this will make digital filmmaking easier and in some ways it will, but I think RED is raising the bar on so many levels that you will have to know what you're doing more than ever.

Ultimately, it will be a camera that will only reward those that handle it properly. Just like most exotic sportscars....anybody can drive one, but only the experienced or those that pay attention can drive one well without ending up in the ditch.

Long live the REDvolution!!!!

[TimurCivan]

Mr Jannard,

that looks very nice and i imagine that this is an early prototype, but there are red and blue "dead pixels" in the blacks. look in the upper left side of the black background. i imagine this is just cause the chip is proably in its infacny, or because of jpeg comprression. Its not really a big deal, its the kind of thing you notice when you examine a still. when its moving im sure it spectacular.

But interms of resolution and clarity its excellent. Amazing work Sir.

[Jannard]

We did a remedial dead pixel correction (not precision) as stated on the website. It didn't get them all. This week lots of things get addressed, including DPC. You are also looking at an 8-bit jpeg, which does NOT look as good as the 16-bit tiff.

Jim

[Deadzone]

I downloaded the 2K image and the 4K image and compared the two in photoshop. When zoomed in, I don't see a terrible difference between the two. That said, I think the 2K image looks amazing as is and will probably be the resolution I shoot at when I get the camera. Is there any reason a low-budget guy like myself would have to go 4K?

[filmmaker1977]

Is there any reason a low-budget guy like myself would have to go 4K?future.. is it enough?..

[boothba]

Weird - I just noticed that Red.com briefly posted the two shot of the girls smoking as a 4K file, but now it's gone (back to the bubble girl). I didn't manage to downlaod in time. Was that a tease?

BTW - I've been playing with these images in Inferno - just incredible. The low noise allows you to pull excellent keys and perform crazy color corrects without the images falling apart. In my experience the resolution is superior to 35mm film. People say film requires 6K to do it justice, but that is crap. Most film (even high light, low ASA, prime lens) becomes noticeably grainy at HD and 2K (even NTSC). The grain issue, resolution issue and dynamic range issue are all cousins, and Red is kicking major ass! The only question now is how much you'll have to degrade the Red image (add grain, film weave, etc.) to make it look identical to 35mm film. Based on these early tests, they should WELCOME a shootout.

[penfever]

Well, I'll chime in with my 2c congrats as well -
I'm really looking forward to being challenged by this new medium. It's going to be really hard to get away with ANYTHING shooting on RED.
The really exciting thing will be when REDfest 1 comes along (and you know it will...) Fifteen movies in the desert with nineteen year olds? Yeah, I guess I could live with that. Hell, I'm in Cali, I DO live with that.
Oh, what's the point - a picture's worth a thousand of these and my keyboard would give out.

[baquajim]

Is there any reason a low-budget guy like myself would have to go 4K?

Film-outs and green screen are a couple I can think of. But if you don't need these, 2k or even 1080p will be more than enough.

I know just because of the relatively reasonable data rate, I am going to go ahead with 4k even for projects that are destined for dvd release.

[boothba]

Film-outs and green screen are a couple I can think of. .

IMHO, dynamic range and low compression are more important than resolution for green screen work (given that most compositors soften their keys a bit anyway). But I think Jim and Graeme are all over that one. If Redcode delivers the stated compression specs WITHOUT breaking the image up into blocky chunks with artifacts (like jpeg for example) then we're laughing. I have wondered if there would/could be specific Redcode options for optimizing green screen / blue screen shooting - perhaps allocating more data for green/blue channel??? Not sure.

[glenn chan]

I think to optimize Redcode for greenscreen, you would devote equal quality/bandwidth to the red, green, and blue channels.

Intuitively, it makes more sense to allocate more to the green channel... however, I don't think the math works out that way. i.e. think of a grayscale... it has green values from 0-255.
What you are really keying off of is the relationship between R:G:B... this ratio contains the hue and saturation. Actual greenscreen would have high G:R and G:B ratios... this is what you're keying off of essentially. *There are different algorithms, but I believe they all key off the r:g:b ratio.

2- Wavelet-compressed RAW encoding should offer significant advantages of DCT / Y'CbCr encoding.
DCT versus wavelet: Wavelet encoding tends to remove noise (and image details). DCT tends to introduce noise (i.e. mosquito noise on high-contrast edges)... which gives you those boiling keys.
Wavelet encoding might give you ringing on edges, which may not key well. But this depends on the functions you use... it might be good to choose a function that won't produce ringing on edges. *Ok, I haven't tested this.

RAW versus Y'CbCr: With RAW encoding, you have lower quantization noise in the dark portions of an image (and usually dark areas are very hard to key, although noise is a big factor). Y'CbCr has lots of rounding error and is wasteful since most of the color space represents illegal colors the camera can't produce. RAW = no color space waste.

With Y'CbCr encoding, typically encoders optimize greater bandwidth for luma instead of chroma (this is correct for non-greenscreen use)... whereas for greenscreen use, you want equal bandwidth for luma and chroma (an ideal keyer would key off both luma and chroma; any of the "3-D" keyers work off luma+chroma).

But basically, RAW recording and wavelet compression should offer significant advantages for keying.

3- This is somewhat speculative, but I would think that the best way to optimize for greenscreen would be in carefully choosing the functions for all the resampling/sampling-related functions. Ringing on edges would be bad.

Some resampling functions do introduce ringing (phase shift errors) intentionally. This is because they measure aliasing a certain way... and the only function that reduces anti-aliasing will have phase shift errors. This has to do with the uncertainty principle- in a (sampled) signal, you can't be certain of both frequency + position (phase).
In practice, it might be better to live with some aliasing and have no ringing.

Perhaps a visual explanation would make more sense:
Look at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-aliasing
In the checkerboard pictures, the (c) image shows a sinc filter. The sinc filter has 'perfect' anti-aliasing properties, but if you look closely there is ringing / phase shift errors on the checkboard (zoom in). The top edge is also erroneous.

*That example may not be the best, since there are other effects the images didn't account for (i.e. gamma correction / the image getting darker in the middle of c).

In Red, you have sampling-related functions in:
A- The sensor. The sensor has to implement optical low pass filtering. i.e. blurry glass. If there is too much blurinnes, you want to conteract it (un-blur it digitally). Optical low pass filtering is necessary to reduce aliasing of various sorts.
B- Going from ~5K --> 4K. (I don't think this will be applicable.)
C- In wavelet compression.

[boothba]

Thanks Glen. I'm going to have to sober up, and then re-read your post. So much to learn....
P.S. - just noticed your another Toronto guy. Go Leafs!

[filmmaker1977]

Weird - I just noticed that Red.com briefly posted the two shot of the girls smoking as a 4K file, but now it's gone (back to the bubble girl). I didn't manage to downlaod in time. Was that a tease?yeah yeah c'mon jim, post these and other goodies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Emanuel]

Is there any reason a low-budget guy like myself would have to go 4K?&
People say film requires 6K to do it justice, but that is crap.I think both of you have more information here:

LINK (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?p=538118#post538118)

[filmmaker1977]

Emanuel, my respect.. you're the best cross-examiner allover internet..

[boothba]

&I think both of you have more information here:

LINK (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?p=538118#post538118)

I agree more with Jim's 3.2K guesstimation. The 6K mantra comes from Kodak reps and the like, but I've worked on too much IMAX stuff to believe that.

[Emanuel]

Emanuel, my respect.. you're the best cross-examiner allover internet..:dankk2:

[Emanuel]

I agree more with Jim's 3.2K guesstimation. This guesstimation isn't coming from Jim. I think it was people from Panavision that gave this info to him, I believe. But you can ask to Jim.

[Gopher_Greene]

Boy is make up ever going to hate you Jim!!! They're actually going to have to work, I Love It!!!!

[boothba]

This guessestimation isn't coming from Jim. I think it was people from Panavision that gave this info to him, I believe. But you can ask to Jim.

I thought it was coming from the (refreshingly honest) folks at the studio (Warner Bros?) following his first 4K presentation. I should have qualified that statement.

[glenn chan]

P.S. - just noticed your another Toronto guy. Go Leafs!

How do you know I'm not a Canadians fan? ;)

[TimurCivan]

We did a remedial dead pixel correction (not precision) as stated on the website. It didn't get them all. This week lots of things get addressed, including DPC. You are also looking at an 8-bit jpeg, which does NOT look as good as the 16-bit tiff.

Jim


Thats pretty much what i figured. I cant believe how sensitive to these thigns ive become. I used to not care.

[Haakon]

The only question now is how much you'll have to degrade the Red image (add grain, film weave, etc.) to make it look identical to 35mm film. Based on these early tests, they should WELCOME a shootout.
Film is wonderful, but I don't believe it's the "be all and end all." Digital has already handedly exceeded the use of traditional film in the still world; there is no question in my mind that it will ultimately do the same in the realm of motion picture. Just takes a bit longer as technology plays catch-up.

In any case, you won't see me "degrading" my RED footage. As much as people want to say that grain "adds character" to a shot, in most cases, it's just because grain is an inherent part of celluloid film and it's what we've always seen on the screen. In 50 years when a whole new generation of kids who are used to seeing nothing but beautiful, clean images begin to make movies, they're going to look back on films of today and wonder why everything we shot looks so "dirty."

[Emanuel]

I thought it was coming from the (refreshingly honest) folks at the studio (Warner Bros?) following his first 4K presentation. I should have qualified that statement.I stand corrected you're probably right.

[Jim Arthurs]

In any case, you won't see me "degrading" my RED footage. As much as people want to say that grain "adds character" to a shot, in most cases, it's just because grain is an inherent part of celluloid film and it's what we've always seen on the screen.

I'm with you... I can't think of a better imaging future than what's coming with that butter smooth "24fps DSLR" look the RED team promises. I want clean, clean, clean, for technical AND esthetic reasons. However, there will be some "educational adjustment" for the viewers, as this story shows...

... Years and years ago, I was the first guy in my region to use a Spirit DataCine for 35mm to tape transfer. Everyone else was using the regional Ranks with their noisy blue channels and nasty gate weave. I'd finally convinced a local production company to piggy-back some "B" roll 35mm from one of their jobs onto my transfer just so they could check out the sweet Spirit lovin'.

They get the footage back, and thread it up and start to watch... I'm with them, and it was CLEAN and SOLID and the 90fps tennis stuff was absolutely gorgeous! Or so I thought...

... A couple weeks pass and I see their finished job. They had went back and "Ranked" it. It was now nasty and grainy and bouncy. What the... ??? Come to find out they had shown the Spirit footage to the client, who HATED it. Said it looked too much like VIDEO, heck, in fact, thought that it was video.

Regards,

[TimurCivan]

People forget how clean modern 35mm film is. The technology is so good on 35. This clean red footage really does look great.


And BTW Mr. JAnnard, i apologize for bringing up the dead pixel thing, i missed the note on the page on your site. i got so excited i just clicked the image without reading, lol. Sorry to restate it.

[imgentertainment@mac]

Wow it is funny I'm on my 17" Imac at home and all I can see is a lust the chin some lips and thats it 4K is really really big. I think I'm going to hafe to order two 30" to work with this. I think it is a good reasone to get them. I have always wanted one just need a reason.

[Brandon Rice]

The detail is breathtaking!

[Craig Ryan]

quick! Someone get Briceman some oxygen!

[scienceguy_ae]

We did a remedial dead pixel correction (not precision) as stated on the website. It didn't get them all. This week lots of things get addressed, including DPC. You are also looking at an 8-bit jpeg, which does NOT look as good as the 16-bit tiff.

Jim

Absolutely unbelievable images for this early in development. Just for kicks, I pushed the levels much farther than normal and was blown away by the results. And this is 8bit... I can't get RAW images off my Canon 20D DSLR to behave like this! The resemblance to film is just eerie...

http://www.kainosmedia.com/red/still_2-downsize-for-web_b.jpg

:shocked:

[zakforrest]

Absolutely unbelievable images for this early in development. Just for kicks, I pushed the levels much farther than normal and was blown away by the results. And this is 8bit... I can't get RAW images off my Canon 20D DSLR to behave like this! The resemblance to film is just eerie...

http://www.kainosmedia.com/red/still_2-downsize-for-web_b.jpg

:shocked:


i might be wrong but the image of the car you chose to push the levels on is pretty COLORLESS from the start.

try applying your same tricks to the 4k image of the invisible blowjob. i started crushing the blacks in photoshop a bit and some of her hair started turning dark RED, haha, in a bad way. i am not worried though, im sure its because its a jpeg, or something else. i know that when i get my TWIN RED CAMERAS i wont have to worry about SUCH TRIFLES (the image, or any kind of color correction/adjustment i dream up). i'm sure it will be fine.

-
i stand corrected but i knew this anyways, its a perfect exposure you cant really do much to it. i guess we have to wait for some FLAT images. but still, the car image adjustment is kind of strange, the "orange" cord in the background looks super light and strangely desaturated, the rest of the image is pretty much black and white.. whatever, i just wanted to post is all... =]

[Brook Willard]

The IBJ4K shot doesn't leave much range to play with. Elements are either exposed perfectly or dead black. I'm sure we'll see a 12+bit image in the next few weeks to play with.

[scienceguy_ae]

i might be wrong but the image of the car you chose to push the levels on is pretty COLORLESS from the start.

try applying your same tricks to the 4k image of the invisible blowjob. i started crushing the blacks in photoshop a bit and some of her hair started turning dark RED, haha, in a bad way. i am not worried though, im sure its because its a jpeg, or something else. i know that when i get my TWIN RED CAMERAS i wont have to worry about SUCH TRIFLES (the image, or any kind of color correction/adjustment i dream up). i'm sure it will be fine.

-
i stand corrected but i knew this anyways, its a perfect exposure you cant really do much to it. i guess we have to wait for some FLAT images. but still, the car image adjustment is kind of strange, the "orange" cord in the background looks super light and strangely desaturated, the rest of the image is pretty much black and white.. whatever, i just wanted to post is all... =]

Point taken. The adjustment was mainly focused on looking at the noise levels in the blackest areas of the image however, which are extremely low IMO. The dynamic range is just incredible.

scienceguy_ae

[stephen natanson]

wow
now make them move
and we will all be eating from your hands
and if you choose to sell the camera in a breadbox
i'll take it anyway

[wesball]

Really exciting.

After playing with the image, I'm amazed by how clean it was. I had to do a lot to destroy the image. Even using the sharpen filter, it looks amazing. Since there isn't any noise, sharpen does what you'd expect.

So when can we see some outdoor footage? The stage stuff is great, but this camera is important to me becuase I can just take it out and shoot without a bunch of lights and equipment.

[zakforrest]

Point taken. The adjustment was mainly focused on looking at the noise levels in the blackest areas of the image however, which are extremely low IMO. The dynamic range is just incredible.

scienceguy_ae


yeah seriously. its the best

[Zig_Zigman]

Beautiful. Truly. And now since we can consider this the maximum resolution for the forseeable future, we can now begin to identify what HD is and what the grail might look like for those who have been upgrading cameras as the years go by.

It's not 35mm, it has a look entirely of itself. You can see a bit of dvx100 in here, just sharper and cleaner. I'm not even sure if it isn't too sharp or too clean, meaning you probably get by with probably 1/2 the resolution and still please any audience.

My personal preference is probably still for film, but that might be just because that's what I've been looking at for many years.

Mass production of such a superior image-capturing device will be a fabulous achievement.