Cameras & Codecs Chart

JMtheDP

JMtheDP

Veteran
Hi Guys,

I got bored this morning so I have created a small chart that shows some of the bit rates involved in the more common cameras and codecs presently in use.

This is still applicable to the F35 guys as much as F65/Alexa/etc... because most of the F35 boys record direct to ProRes it seems, and the F65's 1080P modes all mirror the options available to HDCAM SR tape users.

What is quite interesting is how close the F65's RAW and higher-spec 1080P modes are, as well as how high some of the "cheap" cameras factor.

438344_codecs2.jpg


Any corrections please let me know
 
Last edited:
Nice ! :)

Can I suggest you add Sony FS RAW recorded on the Odyssey 7Q ?

I don't know the data rates by heart but it should be on the top range since it's uncompressed RAW.

Oh yes, according to Convergent Design, FS 4K RAW @24fps fills up a 1TB SSD in 50 minutes.

Cheers.
 
Well uncompressed 4K 12-bit RAW is...

4096 * 2160 * 12 = 12MB/frame = Approx 288 MB/sec or approx 2300Mbps so it is the same as Canon raw (makes sense if both are uncompressed 12-bit 4K)
 
No problem. Variable codecs are tricky because there can be huge variances in actual file sizes. On my F35, the cineform codec would go anywhere from 1MB/frame up to 3MB/frame - usually being about 1.5-2.

If anyone is interested, the math to get "uncompressed" numbers is:

(Pixels W x Pixels H x bit depth) / 8, /1024, /1024 - that gives you the size in MB for one frame, for bayer pattern raw.

For RGB stuff you need Pixels W x Pixels H x bit depth x 3. This is why high quality HD and higher compression "raw" cross over.
 
With Red, no one uses 2:1 so why list it that way? I'd hate for some ignorant producer to see this and say "Look how good red is!" :Drogar-Evil(DBG):

Oh and raw is not "RAW!!", it's just Raw or raw, only. R and A and W do not stand for anything so it can not be capitalized, ever. Don't be a sheep!
 
Vince

I have listed Red's material at 2:1, 8:1 and 20:1 by way of comparison.

The main reason I capitalise "RAW" is because it helps distinguish between "raw footage" and "footage taken directly from the imaging sensor, typically of a bayer pattern, recorded without interpolation and either uncompressed or lightly compressed without having been de-bayered".

I find it particularly useful when one is conversing on a forum where I have to deal with S-Log and other types of material that can easily be referred to as raw material.

Also, if your producer is convinced to shoot Red based on a small chart I created, I would definitely work for them - they clearly have more money than sense if they can afford to shoot 6K @ 2:1 :)
 
I forgot to put in Uncompressed HD, that would fit in at 1432Mbps - so very far along the chart and larger than several "raw" formats
 
Where does that Red Weapon number come from? Looks like 1.5:1 compression which I don't think REDCODE supports...

6K 2:1 on Epic Dragon only goes up to 4:1 or 5:1 compression from what I understand, and weapon is said to support up to 50% faster data rates, so maybe 3:1 will be supported at 6k 2:1? In either case, that RED Weapon maximum bitrate will likely be at least 2x lower than listed in that chart. The fastest Mini-mags top out under 180MBps (1440Mbps) in an Epic, so at most a Weapon might support 270MBps (2160Mbps). Uncompressed 4k RAW would still be the highest datarate.
 
I simply looked at the RED website, it just said "Compression rates from 2:1 to 22:1", so I thought I would put up three - one max, one min and one in the middle. I am not a frequent RED user, the last I recall most people shoot around 8:1/6:1 depending on the project.

If you've got some hard numbers somewhere for the actual maximum WEAPON will record, I can put those in.
 
This is so cool! Huge thanks, it really gives an idea on file sizes of different cameras. (But I don't believe bit-rate is that highly linked to image quality as I've shot perfectly clean 50mbps on C300 with virtually no artefacts and shot 90mbps on 5D with lots of compression artefacts, I'd not use this list as an indicator of image quality)

Thank you so much for taking the time, interesting to know Mjpeg 4:2:2 on 1DC is a ProRes 422 twin, they both are great codecs to be honest but ProRes takes less power for reason even though they're both compressed closely, any thoughts on that?
 
MJPEG is a very old and very basic codec Ebrahim - ProRes should technically be more complex to decode but perhaps it is just better built for the task at hand? It is definitely more efficient, I believe it is based on MPEG-4 standard stuff (not sure which variant). I believe it is similar to AVID's DNxHD.

You are absolutely right that bitrate does not necessarily equal quality, however I find in the age of higher and higher quality file outputs, it is definitely worth knowing what you are up against when it comes to organising storage requirements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top