1st video posted...

filmmaker1977 said:
but i'd like to know how this can be easy fixed.. if so.. well, i believe so.. but i'd hear a technical explanation as well.. not just believers like myself..
Click to expand...

When you get a little spot like that, it is just one pixel out of all the millions on the chip that isn't reading the light in the right way, or not able to store it to the file in the right way.

It happens in every chip, in every camera in manufacturing the chip.

The solution is simple, before shipping the camera, you build in a correction that takes the faulty pixel value and adjusts it to have the same value as the pixels around it. In a ten megapixel image, you will never know it was there.
 
These are sensor tests, not camera tests. The sensor doesn't have dead pixel or black level correction, the camera does. The camera isn't ready yet as it's still in development. I'd not be concerned at all about any defects you see in the images and movies. Dead pixels will vanish, aliassing will go, and all will be well in the world. What you're seeing is a sneak peak into the stages of development not normally witnessed.

Graeme
 
ProLost said:
Guys, one thing to remember is that this camera shoots raw, uncorrected images. You want (slightly) flashed blacks and muted highlights.
Click to expand...

Your right, if Jim J. had provided a RAW sample to play with, or a greater than 8bit depth image for us to manipulate... but we're looking at a plain 'ol QT.

The very act of making a QT involves some level of processing, and since it's just 8bits/channel end product, why not hit the levels BEFORE to better show us the great dynamic range? After all, the clip is 85% black, I might not have even cared if it was the clip of the two fems with the cigar. :)

By this logic, if we're shown an outdoor clip, and the chip is 3200K balanced, should they just leave it overly blue and let us CC it back? Of course not. We're not talking about major whole cloth manipulation to artistic effect, just some simple things to put the camera in its best light since such a world spotlight is on it...

Regards,
 
Graeme_Nattress said:
These are sensor tests, not camera tests. The sensor doesn't have dead pixel or black level correction, the camera does.
Click to expand...

Thanks Graeme, I did and do understand completely. But will the thousands of folks who see the clips? All I'm asking is for the visual equivalent of zipping your fly before stepping out in front of an audience... :)

My previous post explains my rationale to hit the clips with a bit of housekeeping correction if they're going to be shown to us in a limited 8bit/channel container...

Thanks again for giving us this little peak into the development...
 
leaving the blacks as they did gives me great confidence in that they know what they are doing and have a chip with a huge range,

had they set the blacks to black, it would have been impossible to increase the contrast and saturation to max and see that there still is no noise
 
The blacks in the pre-web compression movie were better black balanced, so it could be the web codec - not sure. Either way, the raw sensor images straight out of REDCINE are stunning and hanve fantastic range, and we'll be showing more as time permits, given that all at RED are running around like mad things actually making the real camera happen. The prototype is mostly for us to do R&D on the image processing and pixel fixing in camera.

Graeme
 
Graeme_Nattress said:
These are sensor tests, not camera tests. The sensor doesn't have dead pixel or black level correction, the camera does. The camera isn't ready yet as it's still in development. I'd not be concerned at all about any defects you see in the images and movies. Dead pixels will vanish, aliassing will go, and all will be well in the world. What you're seeing is a sneak peak into the stages of development not normally witnessed.

Graeme
Click to expand...
thx for the clear-up.. useful also because there are who doesn't post but thinks.. with your explanation, all is clear enough.. as i said this is a prototype footage and red is a special cool new way of communication between customer <-> manufacturer.. our bet too <-> our reason for our prior investment --to--the--> reservations even before the footage posted.. especially after the footage posted.

now we're waiting for the faces and skies (EXT.)
 
Jim Arthurs said:
Your right, if Jim J. had provided a RAW sample to play with, or a greater than 8bit depth image for us to manipulate... but we're looking at a plain 'ol QT.

The very act of making a QT involves some level of processing, and since it's just 8bits/channel end product, why not hit the levels BEFORE to better show us the great dynamic range? After all, the clip is 85% black, I might not have even cared if it was the clip of the two fems with the cigar. :)
Click to expand...
I hear you Jim but for my part I'm happy to see the image with only a minimum of processing. Like you, I am very much looking forward to some high bit-depth, uncompressed stills to play with!

Graeme_Nattress said:
The blacks in the pre-web compression movie were better black balanced, so it could be the web codec...
Click to expand...
Making an H.264 using QT pro usually results in a gamma lift, which sucks beyond all comprehension. Compressor seems to do a better job.

-Stu
 
Man, I cant BELIEVE I missed this.

Congrats to red team, reservation holders, and all propsective red users. :)
 
You can see the dust on the F&**&&n Glasses.You can see the dust on the F&**&&n Glasses

.....You can see the dust on the F&**&&n Glasses
 
Graeme_Nattress said:
These are sensor tests, not camera tests. The sensor doesn't have dead pixel or black level correction, the camera does. The camera isn't ready yet as it's still in development. I'd not be concerned at all about any defects you see in the images and movies. Dead pixels will vanish, aliassing will go, and all will be well in the world. What you're seeing is a sneak peak into the stages of development not normally witnessed.

Graeme
Click to expand...
I've been missing out on a good deal of the development talk (although I'm interested). Are you working on whitepapers as you go?
 
Stephen, things are in flux. Maybe your request for whitepapers (redpapers?) would be better suited a few months down the line.

Of course, by then I think the people who are really interested in the project will be pretty competent with what's going on and that sort of thing won't matter much. I think they've done a pretty darn good job explaining things along the way...
 
Ragged edge with (very) small team. If we took time to write papers on what we're doing you'd get first footage next year and a camera the year after that. We thought you'd appreciate the camera sooner :-)
 
Graeme_Nattress said:
Ragged edge with (very) small team. If we took time to write papers on what we're doing you'd get first footage next year and a camera the year after that. We thought you'd appreciate the camera sooner :-)
Click to expand...
Take good notes Graeme! I'm interested on how you're scanning the chip and how you can scan it so often and not worry about heat degredation.
 
stephenlnoe said:
Take good notes Graeme! I'm interested on how you're scanning the chip and how you can scan it so often and not worry about heat degredation.
Click to expand...
Oh, well why didn't you ask that in the first place?

They've already addressed that question... the answer is "magic." :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top