I think it's because 2k RGB takes up a lot more space than 2k RAW and they wanted to preserve conformity and keep it to a single 2k format rather than two.Originally Posted by ZaneIsNumber1
just my guess...
Thread: Specs changes...
Results 111 to 120 of 173
12-20-2006 12:31 AM
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
12-20-2006 12:54 AMIs it me? Or it doesn't make sense...
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
2k RGB could be scaled from the full resolution of the sensor: 11.5 megapixels.
2k RAW doesn't. It's just less than 2.4 megapixels... A small part of the sensor. If 2k RAW can't be scaled only cropped.
Then, is this Red a 24, 25 or 30fps 4k camera from a 9.4 megapixels sensor area?
Or a 2k camera from a 2.4 megapixels sensor area? (the same resolution than the Silicon Imaging / Cineform camera?)
Edit: Is it so necessary to save storage at 2k when the camera will also record 4k?
60fps from 11.5 megapixels isn't the same than 2.4 megapixels...
Still, how much would this 60fps 2k footage be in a daily basis? 5%, 10%? Less? Then, why not 2k RGB?
It doesn't make sense.
Last edited by Gordon Prince; 12-21-2006 at 12:35 AM.
12-20-2006 02:06 AM
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
12-20-2006 02:15 AM
Non native english doesn't make sense at all. Maybe RED does. I guess there are other reasons for the 2K RAW instead the 2K RGB on board. Less data. And hardware limitations.
12-20-2006 02:52 AM
We had previously been told that onboard recording of 2k RGB would be scaled from the 4k frame and onboard 1080p would be cropped from the scaled 2k. This would have reduced the field of view in 1080p mode.
Given scaled 2k is no more, will the 1080p be scaled from the 4k frame (and keep the same fied of view)?
Thanks!RED ONE #362
RED ZOOM #267
12-20-2006 04:03 AM
If you look at the table, 1080p RGB @ up to 60fps is available either scaled from the 4k frame (possibly with a small crop to give 2:1 scaling?) or cropped. Thus you can still get 35mm DoF at 1080p. If you record your 1080p RGB at 12 bit linear, which it appears you can, then you also maintain most of the benefits of RAW.
12-20-2006 05:03 AM
Given the fact the 1080p RGB is scaled from the 4K and the 2K RAW doesn't, my doubt:
[for slow motion purposes from the 60fps onboard]
1080p RGB better choice than 2K RAW?
I can imagine to shoot 4K...
...and for the slow motion sequences: 1080 RGB scaled from 4K (having the native res and the DOF 35mm as reference),
uprezing again such slow motion sequences (just those) for 4K online editing (coupled to the major 4K footage).
12-20-2006 07:23 AMQuote:
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
Originally Posted by Emanuel
The windowed alternative will give you the inconvenience of the magnification factor.
The magnification factor is really desirable for shooting sports, nature, and many other genres. If we were using the RED S35mm 18-85 zoom as the interview and creative b-roll camera, even with the magnification factor, FOV should be fine. On the sports coverage or nature camera, using the RED 300mm, the magnification factor would be quite welcome. If you needed to get even greater focal lengths, you could also use a 2x between the camera and the 300mm lens.
RED One cameras #8 and #700
RED 18-85mm, RED 300mm, various primes, various Nikon lenses, various B4 2/3" lenses, rental account waiting...
Also D & G and Emanuel, i sympathise with you on the scaling front particularly when wanting to use the cheaper still lenses. But you know what, Those in my situation who want the image quality of red but desire deeper DOF also have an expensive route to achieve our aims.
The red zoom 18mm-85mm will be great for my s35mm footage and will do a reasonable amount of usage in windowed 2k Raw. But the 18mm will be magnified to 36mm ( approx) in 2k windowed mode. So i am stuck between choosing the varsatility of the red zoom but with no wide angle useage on 2k windowed mode (unless you consider 36mm wide enough?) or splashing out on a second hand quality s16mm zoom for around $6,000 -$8,000 but miss out on the great image quality of the full sensor by being restricted to s16mm format and also low light performance poorer in s16mm than s35mm. My only other option is to go with a s16mm 11 or 12mm prime lens, but you are still paying over $1,000 second hand.
It would be great to have the red lens starting at 12mm but it would weigh a ton and cost a bomb
I think that was what Greg Lowry was meaning when he posted many months ago about the true cost of red and people not taking into account the lenses. To cover everything either of us want to do is unlikely to be cheap.
Steve (or others) on the red zoom, apart from close up work where the use of 36mm is limited to a shallower DOF do you feel 36mm is actually quite reasonable in FOV. A lot of my work that involves boats in water will see me about 15ft distance to subject. Ive looked about for a visual comparison but so far no joy.
ps it's ironic that the red 300mm prime might possibly be the more versatile of the two lenses for my use!
12-20-2006 08:28 AMOriginally Posted by mike the beginner
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- toronto, Canada
Good points Mike
For me, it's more about using smooth slo mo with 4K. Maybe in a narrative production we'd be possibly be using only 1-5% of the final film for slo mo footage - we're not planning on shooting Johm Woo epics here ;). Thus, it's not a huge deal on the long list of "needs" for the camera, and I completely understand where the RED team is coming from. I ceretainly hope they don't take anything I've posted except for constructive discussion. I've always been an advocate of the tool for the job and realize that to get any result you want there are going to have to be choices made, in each and every department - from choosing a Briese light to a practical.
What is obvious is that the RED team are focusing on what the camera does best - deliver a digital negative at an amazing price. As a businessman and artist; it's what I've been waiting for. As a long time renter; it should say a lot that this is the first camera that we'll be purchasing. Why ? Because it's on "our dime" now. And that belief shown in this camera hasn't changed.
This will be one of those instances where I'll have to rent either a) a deck or b) shoot film. It's not going to be totally cost prohibitive either way. Everyone is going to have to design the camera around their needs, and make the necessary adjustments. I'm cool with that. But, I'm going to be honest about wanting the slo mo capability. Who knows ? 1080p RGB may suit my needs fine.
I realize that Jim and team took a very different tack by allowing us all in on the development process, and I sincerely hope that they understand how exrtremely grateful I am they did so. They could have sat back and waited until the camera specs and workflow was completely finalized and said "take it or leave it". The fact is, they didn't. They allowed us users to advocate for features that we deem useful, needed, wanted, and just downright crazy
Ok, so I've made my advocacy for certain features clear. Thanks to the RED team for all your hard work. Look forward to Spikes reveal and her footage. Your renders prove how she's sprucing up gorgeous. I think we've got a classic on our hands here.
RED# vive la resolution
12-20-2006 08:36 AM
If the new specs hold, and we shoot 2k RAW, if we need a wider field of view, we may need to use wide converter lenses (Century, etc.) on the front of S35mm, 35mm, and S16mm lenses.
For your fishing shows shot in 2k RAW, with the on-boat camera having a RED 18-85mm zoom with a wide converter (full zoom through) for creative shots, interviews, and coverage of nearby boats, you should be fine. A wide S16mm zoom would also work. A wide 35mm still zoom, if you have a decent follow focus made for still lens use, may work. If you decide to shoot 1080p RGB, a wide 2/3" B4 HD ENG zoom may also work for that type of show. The RED 18-85mm should give you the best glass of those options - something to consider.
I've used good quality wide converter lenses on the front of my lenses for years now. It adds a little weight on the front of the rig, which you need to compensate for in the weight & balance of the rig, usually by counterbalancing with weight on the back (battery/drive), and sliding the camera back on the shoulder brace or sliding the quickmount plate backward in tripod configurations.
You need to understand that RED One, as a digital cinema camera and adaptable EFP camera, wasn't designed primarily for doing fishing shows, so even though you can adapt the camera to effectively shoot that genre, there are some natural limitations involved. Your shows have similar challenges to many of the shows I produce, and there are many multi-genre shooters who will go through a learning curve in how to best use RED One for each of the genres they shoot. You're learning a lot about RED One now, but the real learning will come when you use RED One on location. I think you'll do just fine in adapting RED One to your genre of productions, and then why not also spread you production genres to other styles and genres to maximize the earning potential of your RED One? Food for thought...