4K JVC Consumer Camera with 3D at CES 2011- Red Scarlet blushes...

HDkilledFILM. said:
It seems to me that 4K and "consumer" is a bit off. Who do you know who's an entry level consumer who has the power to edit 4K footage? Or that even wants too? It's a great prospect for us indie guys but even now I often choose not to shoot 4K because of the file size and cost of editing and keeping such large media, not to mention the cost of renting more than one RED. I'll wait to see how the footage looks and how functional the camera is as well as how reliable the codec is before I get all hyped up. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that someone is trying to answer RED but without a price point or any real world endorsments of this camera from industry pro's it's just another thing to watch for at this point.
Click to expand...

Early technology adapters are always both rewarded with the bleeding edge and penalized either financially or timewise, with non-standard mass-production technology. Just ask plasma buyers who forked over $5-10K for 720p sets, or anyone who bought 3D sets at near double the price just a year ago with very little content to playback...

That being said, 4K on the desktop is easily attainable today...
HOW?

AMD and Nvidia support multiple HD Monitors, so you setup a cheap 2x2 monitor setup and POP... 4k display ON THE CHEAP!

This camera could open up nice potential for 4K content creation for PC gamers / movies on the cheap...

I say bravo to JVC for trying to be first in the 4K consumer space, just bring in reasonable quality and price and your registers will ring in the New Year...
 
Last edited:
60p! I think (even though generally I dislike JVC, mostly for their poor support) they've got it right this time and they distinguished between acquisition specs and delivery specs. That's what is missing in AF100- 60p. Let me film at the frame rate I want and let me decide what frame rate I will deliver.
 
J Bellari said:
Early technology adapters are always both rewarded with the bleeding edge and penalized either financially or timewise, with non-standard mass-production technology. Just ask plasma buyers who forked over $5-10K for 720p sets, or anyone who bought 3D sets at near double the price just a year ago with very little content to playback...

That being said, 4K on the desktop is easily attainable today...
HOW?

AMD and Nvidia support multiple HD Monitors, so you setup a cheap 2x2 monitor setup and POP... 4k display ON THE CHEAP!

This camera could open up nice potential for 4K content creation for PC gamers / movies on the cheap...

I say bravo to JVC for trying to be first in the 4K consumer space, just bring in reasonable quality and price and your registers will ring in the New Year...
Click to expand...

Cheap for who? If the market is directed at people in low budget indie film production it makes sence, but that doesn't change the fact that the average consumer isn't going to buy two displays to view their home movies. And at this point a 4K projector isn't announced so that basicly eliminates the average consumer from needing a 4K camera. I'm not downing this release, heck I'm stoked that RED will have some one nipping at their heels (If this lives up to the standard that RED has set). I'm just saying there is not even a single piece of footage at this point to get hyped about. Until I see the specs on the codec or HOW THE FOOTAGE HANDLES REAL WORLD SHOOTING. I'll wait to get too excited. I just feel like far too often people look at a spec sheet and decide that a product will be good or not, I'm just not getting my hopes up until things become more real.
 
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this actually comes out. Look at our laptops, processors, iphones, televisions, ect. Do you really think all we are capable for video capture is 1080p? Red was never some alien technology that was years ahead of the competition. It was just Jannard saying, "hey, how about we just sell todays best available sensor/processor technology for what it's worth?". It just happened to be 4k RAW for $15,000. It was the other companies who were holding back. These corporations are still used to marketing in a world without the internet, were they can release sub-par technology and pass it off as a "new standard". This is a different world now. We have all the information we want. "Broadcast formats" and "industry standard" need to be abolished. They are holding back technology because the current executives and producers, who buy the majority of these cameras, still by into that ancient jargon and mindset... Leaving us, the consumer, with "the latest HD camera and color-space" that is technically less advanced than our Xbox's and iphones.

I dream of a world where cameras are not limited by "standards" and "codecs". Where you can shoot high-ressolution raw to any solid state storage and wirelessly monitor it on a ipad. And the only connection to the camera is USB 3.0, wifi, and bluetooth. These are not tall orders. This is possible today. Most people just can't see it because they're too worried about living up to the previous generations idea of "professional" instead of blazing their own trails and innovating for the future.
 
I'm willing to bet my left nut, RED comes out with an anouncement tomorrow. Any time a company delivers news that competes with Red, they put out some BS about a new feature for 1,000 extra. lol
 
Sorry but I'm not going anywhere near that nut.

For sure this JVC news might be worrisome for Red depending on the price and features.
 
Cbrianchester said:
It was the other companies who were holding back.
Click to expand...

I'm sick of hearing this.... these corporations are not stupid.... there has been ZERO need for 4K at consumer level... they are not holding back, they just know they would lose money.

I will say it again.... If JVC announce a 4K consumer camera (the statement does not actually say that) they will also announce a 4K consumer TV.
 
Cbrianchester said:
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this actually comes out. Look at our laptops, processors, iphones, televisions, ect. Do you really think all we are capable for video capture is 1080p? Red was never some alien technology that was years ahead of the competition. It was just Jannard saying, "hey, how about we just sell todays best available sensor/processor technology for what it's worth?". It just happened to be 4k RAW for $15,000. It was the other companies who were holding back. These corporations are still used to marketing in a world without the internet, were they can release sub-par technology and pass it off as a "new standard". This is a different world now. We have all the information we want. "Broadcast formats" and "industry standard" need to be abolished. They are holding back technology because the current executives and producers, who buy the majority of these cameras, still by into that ancient jargon and mindset... Leaving us, the consumer, with "the latest HD camera and color-space" that is technically less advanced than our Xbox's and iphones.

I dream of a world where cameras are not limited by "standards" and "codecs". Where you can shoot high-ressolution raw to any solid state storage and wirelessly monitor it on a ipad. And the only connection to the camera is USB 3.0, wifi, and bluetooth. These are not tall orders. This is possible today. Most people just can't see it because they're too worried about living up to the previous generations idea of "professional" instead of blazing their own trails and innovating for the future.
Click to expand...


Nice one!
 
robertrogoz said:
care to elaborate why?
Click to expand...

Because nobody could use it.

Hypothetical example: "I shot my son's birthday in 4k... but my dvd player can only do SD, my blu-ray 1080 and High-Def television 1080i. Oh snap...."




I think the common mistake is to assume they meant 4k consumer. I'd suspect prosumer. It would make me confused if consumers were shooting 4k, editing 4k in windows movie maker, and exporting to 1080. What's the point for everyday people to shoot in 4k when they can only play back in 1080? Do you expect them to pan and scan for close-ups and etc?
 
robertrogoz said:
care to elaborate why?
Click to expand...

Because consumers will not buy a 4K camera without having something to view it on.

Look at Panasonic's 3D consumer camera, it was only launched once Panasonic had a 3D TV out.

An argument could be made that a good prosumer 4K camera would be successful without a 4KTV, as most of us know the value of trying to future proof our shots... but at a consumer level, they don't care about things like that. It is all about the here and now... so no 4KTV, no 4K consumer camera.
 
stockfuel said:
Because consumers will not buy a 4K camera without having something to view it on.

Look at Panasonic's 3D consumer camera, it was only launched once Panasonic had a 3D TV out.

An argument could be made that a good prosumer 4K camera would be successful without a 4KTV, as most of us know the value of trying to future proof our shots... but at a consumer level, they don't care about things like that. It is all about the here and now... so no 4KTV, no 4K consumer camera.
Click to expand...

Hahaha, exactly.

Beyond future proofing, the higher resolution can simply be helpful for Vfx shots, color correction, and other professional post workflows, as you have more information to work with. Something only helpful for prosumer and professional users. I shoot with the RedOne all the time and 10/10 times we will finish out at 2k or 1080p. I've never had a completed film on the RedOneMX actually output to 4k as the deliverable. It's only been archived at 4k and put on a shelf. This is because most indie films are being projected at 2k, while all blu-rays, TV/commercial deliverables are 1080.

Thus I really thump my head against the wall to think Jimmy's soccer game will beat me to a 4k finish.
 
Last edited:
I agree with what you guys are saying but what about JVC's announcement of a 4K projector? They announced this back in 2008 (around the same time they announced this 4K camera). That basically falls in line with what you guys are saying doesn't it? The projector is something comsumers can view 4K content on.
 
I'll have to let you guys in the USA answer that one... the countries I have lived in or visited in Europe don't seem to purchase projectors. I rarely see them in a consumer store.

But yea, if they are finally launching a 4K projector... they will likely release a 4K consumer camera.

It is kind of a chicken and egg situation.... they wont release a 4KTV without a way of showcasing a 4k image... and they wont release a 4K camera without a way of displaying the footage in 4K.

If a network or IPtv goes 4K, all that will change, of course. (Jannard to launch RED TV?!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top