While a camera is panning / tilting the resolution drops significantly due to the amount of blur in the image.
I've always wanted to see a resolution graph the demos the relationship between image resolution, camera movement, and shutter-speed.
RED 8K Super 35 sensor teaser
- Thread starter Giriki
- Start date
While a camera is panning / tilting the resolution drops significantly due to the amount of blur in the image.
I've always wanted to see a resolution graph the demos the relationship between image resolution, camera movement, and shutter-speed.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
In a word, no.Speaking of color sampling and bayer patterns:
Can we have a three chip CMOS camera with a prism so that there is a 4K chip for red, a separate 4k chip for green, and again, another one for blue? I know this was done in the early cmos days, but it would be fantastic with today's larger and better sensors! Also, can we have interchangeable chip units with different ISO ratings? Like film. A 3-chip unit at 100ISO, another at 800ISO, and again another one at 5000ISO? And a set of daylight balanced and another set of chips that is tungsten balanced?
Throw a mechanical shutter on it and price it at 100,000.
While we're at it, make it so that you can buy custom internal filter wheels so you can have one ND filter wheel, a pro-mist filter wheel and another polarizer filter wheel? Oh, and liquid cooling so no fans and weather sealed.
Make some internal motored lenses as the new open standard so that they can be controlled by the camera, and I'd say you have a dream camera...except it would probably be pretty big, huh? Or maybe not?
in the meantime, let me practice my operating and lighting skills.
A 3-chip prism block design in for a Super-35 sized sensor would be quite large. So large that not only would the cameras be quite bulky, but pretty much all the lenses out there today would not work because they wouldn't fit -- the flange depth would be too close. And that's without the mechanical shutter or rotating filter wheels you request.
So, no. Not gonna happen.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
Because it makes it seem like the company is run by a bunch of 12 year old skate punks, not serious businessmen.
And having met Jarred and Jim numerous times, I know that to NOT be the case.
High1ander
Well-known member
Depends on the reason for shooting. I don't like HFR with fast shutter, it looks like crap to me. But if someone wants to capture scientific images I guess it is all good... To me complaining about shutter blur is about as valid as complaining about DoF from lenses, i.e. there are plenty of high speed cameras with variable shutter that can "remove that problem" but most people tend to "like that problem". Just like there are so fast sensors now that you can shoot f11-16 to get infinite focus, etc...
But "people" still prefer 180 degree shutter, 24 fps, and f4... And I do know it is most probably a "cultural" thing to like those settings cause we are used to it, and faster fps is associated with daytime soap-operas and news...
abreu-canedo
Well-known member
Oh, well, that's too bad. Thanks for enlightening me, though.
And sports. I saw the Sounders-West Ham 720 60p highlights last night and the sense of realism was much higher than with a 1080 24p.
Grug
Veteran
A 180 degree shutter at 24fps equals a 1/48 second shutter speed. Try panning a camera around at 1/48 and see how many critically sharp images you get.
It won't be a lot.
The motion blur we get from a 180 shutter helps smooth out and obscure the appearance of strobing that we'd otherwise see shooting at just 24fps. But that same motion blur also makes the majority of frames we shoot (unless we're locked off on a tripod), blurred to the point of 'K'lessness.
So it's worth questioning the value added by greater spatial resolution, compared to the higher costs in time, processing and storage that it requires. Downsampling is great, greater colour fidelity is great, but there are tradeoffs to all of these things. So the cost/benefit ratio is something to consider.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
Now that I shoot 4K, I've tried a couple of times to get stills out of my footage. It wasn't easy: I don't do lots of camera motion usually, and, even so, most of my frames are useless as a still because of motion blur. But the video still looks sharper than it did when I was shooting, and the extra resolution is super useful for VFX stuff (tracking, rotoscoping, etc, become easier, faster and more accurate).
G
Guest
Guest
Texture. Tonality. Who gives a **** about sharpness? Real detail is smooth and beautiful. Only people who still hate resolution, are the people who've only seen over sharpened HD.
So the physical dimensions of the new RED 8K Helium sensor have been revealed... ( which appears to have a 1.9 aspect ratio )
RED Sensor Sizes
RED Introduces 'Helium,' a New 8K 35mm Sensor for the Weapon and Epic-W
RED Sensor Sizes
RED Introduces 'Helium,' a New 8K 35mm Sensor for the Weapon and Epic-W
deltoidjohn
Veteran
So that's roughly 33-34 megapixels, If I am not mistaken? That's a hell of a lot of resolution!
I don't think I've ever looked at a (properly focused) 21mp photo at an appropriate viewing distance and thought it could do with some more resolution. I can't imagine I'd ever feel that way about moving images, either. But, I guess the photo resolution race has finally targeted the video world as well.
I don't think I've ever looked at a (properly focused) 21mp photo at an appropriate viewing distance and thought it could do with some more resolution. I can't imagine I'd ever feel that way about moving images, either. But, I guess the photo resolution race has finally targeted the video world as well.
26.4 MPX will give you a 4:4:4 4K.
Interesting that most Super35 lenses will cover this new RED Helium 8K format.
( I had always wondered what lenses could be used with the larger RED Weapon 8K format, because most standard cine lenses won't work )
Quoted again for truth.
Grug
Veteran
Sorry, I don't follow James. What do texture (which is defined by the subjects in front of your lens) and tonality (which is defined by the bit-depth of your images) have to do with the spatial resolution of a sensor, and the motion blurring characteristics that a 180 degree shutter has on that spatial resolution when recorded at 24fps?
I don't think you'll find that anyone here is 'hating' on spatial resolution (all-things-being-equal, more is always better as far as I'm concerned, it gives you greater control and flexibility in post). However it's just one aspect of the image, and there are so many others that we need to consider (in the interests of the entire production and post-production workflow), and given the finite limits of circle-of-confusion, and the display mediums and viewing distances that exist to showcase the images that we make, increasing the spatial resolution that we work in has to be considered in context of the entire overarching workflow.
Is anyone else a little baffled by this Helium sensor being called '8k S35mm'? It's almost identical in size to the current 6k Dragon sensor - which is significantly wider than S35mm and vignettes on a LARGE percentage of glass designed for S35mm coverage.
I can see a lot of value in Red providing a S35mm sensor for the vast majority of legacy gear and glass that's been designed around the format. But why confuse people by calling it something it's not, which is '8k' at 'S35mm', by the maths it's around 6.8k at S35mm coverage (which is a TONNE of resolution), so I don't understand the misnomer.
People are already confused enough by the rapidly escalating range of formats available now in digital.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
* 3.65 um pixel pitch
* With respect to full frame, 1.20x crop horizontally, 1.28x crop diagonally
* With respect to this sensor, S35 4-perf would be a 1.20x crop horizontally, 1.09x diagonally
* This "1.09x diagonally" means you're likely to get a >7.5K image with S35 glass (Grug used the 1.20x horizontal crop for his 6.8K number, but I think S35 glass should work with the taller S35 4-perf format, and then the diagonal crop is the relevant one)
* This is all meaningless: 8K is overkill
* With respect to full frame, 1.20x crop horizontally, 1.28x crop diagonally
* With respect to this sensor, S35 4-perf would be a 1.20x crop horizontally, 1.09x diagonally
* This "1.09x diagonally" means you're likely to get a >7.5K image with S35 glass (Grug used the 1.20x horizontal crop for his 6.8K number, but I think S35 glass should work with the taller S35 4-perf format, and then the diagonal crop is the relevant one)
* This is all meaningless: 8K is overkill
Ebrahim Saadawi
Carbonite Member
Cropped to the standard most used aspect ratio 16:9/10 + the fact that all s35 glass has a slight area around their projected image, this sensor will take any PL super 35mm will work perfectly I believe.