RED's performance value at 1080i/p

Thank Gibby for taking the time to help me with some really great pointers and advice. :)

Your point with regard a deep depth of field with 35mm gave me a sigh of relief. I thought my learning process had went astray for a minute.

Back to Red though. When you look at the sheer number of ideas that forum members have all come up with, it is both frightening and exciting. Red has already come up with great ideas and a fabulous thought process that leaves nothing out and er.....nothing in. That is fine given the probable certainty that others will be looking at this list!!

You could torture yourself or drool over some of the suggestions and see what ideas must be incorporated into the camera body itself and what could be attached to the camera cage. How many suggestions will end up on Red? Could there be overkill on this or is it a case the more the merrier or is it just more items to go wrong or faulty?

Will they include the cheap ideas first, as it does not alter the cost. Is it possible to go too far and cheapen red (too many items= tacky cheap?)

Some suggestions look to have tremendous potential but must surely add to the cost. how much would they add?

Then i put my rational cap on and think!..... What Red is trying to do is already breathtaking and a really tough challange. Despite having what looks like a great team with quality credentials, this is a formidable task that i am positive the founder is already aware of. I am sure they will succeed but it does not stop me wondering....will all those ideas suggested, hold back the development and by how much? I know so little yet, even i can see some ideas are brilliant if they can be incorporated.

What would really be useful at reasonable cost. Does anyone have definite "must haves" on keeping the value for money high and cost base low whilst keeping in sympathy with what Red is all about, innovation and modularity. Just wondered.

Michael
 
I think it's a *big* problem to incorporate new ideas in an existing project, so I'm not optimistic at all about this.

The cost for most excellent (and feasible) ideas will be mostly in time, (research & development) than in electronic components, so I don't think the camera cost will be affected much, but most companies consider time as their most valuable asset and release semi-finished products to the market... or release mediocre implementations. I hope RED it's not like most companies...

Of course there is the cost of R&D too (man hours, equipment, components etc) but I don't think the RED company will increase the price just because they decided to do more R&D...

Also some ideas might not be possible to incorporate just because it's too late now, while some others might be already being thought by the RED team, so I think that finally only one or two simple ideas *might* get incorporated to RED...

But there is one good thing about the idea-contest: Some ideas might find their way in other products (assuming that some other companies are watching) and might help build a better product in some point in time! Just the thought of it, made this contest worthwhile for me... ...except from viewing it as a mind game!

BTW isn't the contest over?
 
Proteus said:
Also some ideas might not be possible to incorporate just because it's too late now, while some others might be already being thought by the RED team, so I think that finally only one or two simple ideas *might* get incorporated to RED...


BTW isn't the contest over?
Click to expand...

Red isnt a normal company.. i have been fortunate enough to take a peek inside some of the development and have seen how these guys work.. things change everyday with the RED team.

And yes the contest is over as of midnight.. winner will be announced tomorrow.
 
1080p, I don't think anybody else has that. RED is the best. I think 1080i will be obsolete soon except for the fact that so many people have bought 1080i screens. Too bad screen manufacturers didn't bypass 1080i. I guess that is what is call planned obsolescence. :( I like REDs tag line, making obsolescence obsolete. :) I don't want to spend $30,000 and then find out the next day that my camera is obsolete.
 
I'm glad RED included 1080i in the image resolutions though, because ESPN, ABC, HDNet, and others broadcast HDTV in 1080i, and there is potential to weave RED cameras into their workflow. As Graeme Nattress will attest, transcoding 1080p to 1080i works well, but 1080i transferred to 1080p deosn't work well. If you're doing a delayed 1080i HDTV broadcast with RED cameras, I'd shoot and edit it in 1080p, then transfer to 1080i for the master. Still, I think it makes sense to have 1080i included in the image format resolutions of the RED camera.
 
1080i is a bit of an evil format. It's not really much more measured rez than 720p, but takes a lot more pixels to achieve it, hence it's innefficient. 1080p60 converts to 1080i60 very well, but then again, so does 720p60.... I don't think the reverse can be said for 1080i60 to 1080p60, although 1080i60 to 720p60 can look ok as long as you don't look too hard.

Graeme
 
yes the much more logical method would just to extract 1080i from a 1080p singnal. Im not much of a fan of converting any interlaced format into a progressive format. In fact. I hate Interlaced with a passion.

Film isnt interlaced, and its relatively easy to convert to "i" so i think Red should just stick with progressive in camera.. and leave the interlacing to post or via a small selectable massage out the HD-SDI to make studios happy. Doing anything (effects etc) is way easier with a progressive frame so everyone in the process would be happy until deliverable.
 
more on other cameras at 1080?

more on other cameras at 1080?

all good posts everyone

Would be interested on people's thoughts on the different cameras available and what needs they satisfy. I'm tempted by the HVX200 with it's smaller initial investment but maybe RED is a better longer term investment??
Also will RED just blow the HVX200 outta the water in trems of image quality at 1080i/p???
I'm more used to operating a camera like the Panasonic - never dealt with film cameras before - that's why it's a difficult dilemma!
 
perhaps the recent "test ..comparisons" on the 4 hand size HD camera's, VariCam and cinealta should be a tell sign ..now that's 1/3 " and 2/3 " sensors .. now add a panavision genesis , dalsa or arri D20 in the mix ..
i predict the all the 1/3 " camera's will be last ...

the sony 350 & HVX 200 compared to the genesis super 35m sensor should give you a ball park idea of the difference ?

i just don't see the deciding to buy between a HVX 200 or a RED in same mix??? 2 different price ranges ...
 
Kevin Rogers said:
Also will RED just blow the HVX200 outta the water in trems of image quality at 1080i/p???
Click to expand...

I'm sure it will !!!
I bet that if you display 1080p images from both cameras (RED downresed) in a native 1080p monitor you'll see that simply there's no comparison!

I think that RED will give us the opportunity to produce stunning images such as those we've seen sometimes on quality HD broadcasts! That quality that HDV failed to provide... especially to those of us spoiled with high definition...
 
circuit city

circuit city

There are so many HD formats. I was naive. A few years ago, I walked into Circuit City and saw a Pioneer HD LCD screen. I thought that all HD TVs would be the same. I thought all HD camcorders would be the same. There are so many different formats: DVCPRO25, DVCPRO50, and DVCPRO100. I just want a camera that works and looks good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVCPRO

I went to Circuit City today, I looked at the most expensive Sony they had there. It was over $7,000. But the video playing on it still had flaws due to compression artifacts. That is a real bummer. The reality of HD is not the perfection that was hyped. (I went to Circuit City to get a 13" tube set with built in DVD. It was only $140.)

I guess it all comes down to the compression codecs. That is where the disappointment will come from.
 
Many factors have their share in the final quality that arrives to your eyeballs. All subtract from reality and compression is just one link of the chain -neither the only one nor the most important. A very fine image can be ruined at the last stage by your monitor for example …or your dirty glasses! :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
Because of the common nature of all compression formats, most codecs will work much more efficiently if the input image is of very high quality.

HD broadcasts usually suffer from motion artefacts, not because of the MPEG2 format but because they usually don't provide enough bandwidth for *that* format (that's why I said "sometimes"). With AVC (h.264), things might get better since it requires much lower data rates....except if they get greedy again and prefer to double their channels....

So, it all comes down to what WE the viewers demand... Do we want ...quality or ...quantity?
If you ask the broadcasters, I bet most of them prefer to give you quantity. That's because quality has not been appreciated from the majority of the viewers yet (for many reasons)....and so currently quality will cost *them* while quantity will cost *you*…

Fortunately there is Blu Ray and HD DVD where we can use even MPEG2 with great results…I think that when the majority of the viewers will own a native HD display, and they will be able to see everything in HD, then HD will be skyrocketed into the stratosphere….
 
donatello said:
i just don't see the deciding to buy between a HVX 200 or a RED in same mix??? 2 different price ranges ...
Click to expand...

Yes and no.
HVX200 outta box is certainly a lot cheaper but what is you want to start adding 16 or 35mil lenses??? It gets a lot closer then.

So is the price difference worth the extra quality??? (not that we can compare them yet).
Suppose it depends on the work you do and a whole other bunch of things.

I probably don't need the quality for most of my work but it would be nice of course!!

I'm trying to guess how significant the difference will be. As I need to make a judgement call whether the extra doh will be worth spending - considering I'm delivering on DVD or standard def most of the time.
 
BestBuy

BestBuy

I went to BestBuy today. I saw the new Blu-ray players and 1080p screens. They looked great. I think I would buy a RED One. Skip the DVX. I think I will film and plan to make projects that go straight to Blu-ray. I will not bother with 1080i. But the Blu-ray player is $999 .Ouch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC

It would be great if the RED website, once RED is for sale, had a comparison of RED against all the other cameras that come close in quality, not that any do. It would also be great if RED had a few pages on their web site that explained all the technical jargon about HDTV and 4K, and why RED uses the best technology and an explanation of the technology.

What does eveybody else think? It would help people to decide what camera to buy. Of course it will make everyone who can afford it, decide to get a RED One.
 
i don't think we'll see any long explanations on how , what red does until it is near/after release ... it is still evolving ...

if you have not been to the SI camera ( look under other camera's - Silicon Imaging ) site you might take a look at their camera comparision to other camera's - it's basic and yet effective ..no long answers - just a chart ...
 
I can't find the comparison chart. It would be a lot easier for anybody interested if you posted the link.
 
for what is being promised on the sheets and Jarred's word so far on the subject the price seems absolutely small for shooting quality promised. The thing I am most looking forward to seeing is how the latitude of the imagery is compared to other cameras. That will be the defining element for me. I think we all know that at these specs that the resolution will be there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top