Resolution of Prometheus/

roxics

roxics

Veteran
Being that it was shot on two Red Epics at 5K each, what is the actual end resolution of the 3D file? Is it the same as a 2D 5K file or a little bigger?

I would assume that if you're shooting with two cameras you'd have twice (or nearly twice) the resolution. But maybe I'm wrong here.
 
roxics said:
Being that it was shot on two Red Epics at 5K each, what is the actual end resolution of the 3D file? Is it the same as a 2D 5K file or a little bigger?

I would assume that if you're shooting with two cameras you'd have twice (or nearly twice) the resolution. But maybe I'm wrong here.
Click to expand...
A 2048 × 858 pixel ratio image is a 2048 × 858 pixel ratio image. The resolution doesn't change just because you're shooting with two cameras at once.
 
Jawa Ex Machina said:
A 2048 × 858 pixel ratio image is a 2048 × 858 pixel ratio image. The resolution doesn't change just because you're shooting with two cameras at once.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I guess this makes sense. But technically speaking you still have twice the infomation right? Because you have two chips recording 5K, each slightly shifted. So even if most of the pixels overlap you still have two for each. Kind of similar to recording with a 3 CCD system where you have one red, one blue and one green pixel going into each final pixel. I mean at worst you would probably get slightly better resolution for a 5K 2D file. Because you're downsampling from twice the resolution versus shooting a 2D film on a single 5K Epic.

I could be completely wrong in my thinking here. But the point being, you're still recording twice as much data of the same scene. So technically that's twice the resolution.

I understand the cost/time issues with only going 2K, but it still concerns me that they would spend that much money to make that film and not try to future proof it for 4k screens/media. I mean why not do it now rather than have to go back and do it later on? Jaws and ET were rescanned and redone at 4K. Wizard of Oz and Baraka at 8K. So why not at $120-150 million dollar Ridley Scott film at at least 4K?
 
Roxic:

I see where you are going with this.

You might be right that 2 cameras, spaced six inches apart, will record from different angles, and gather data the other camera can't see. For instance, camera left might see something behind a vase that camera right can't see.

Sort of like how some satellites use stereo radar to map the surface of the earth.

Or how a tennis player with two eyes will beat a one eyed player.... he has more data to work from when he calculates the trajectory of the ball.

But it won't give you twice the resolution because, as you said, a lot of the data overlaps, but it should give you a little more than if it was a 2D image shot with one camera.

Put it this way:

If you were watching a 2D movie in 2K format, your brain will say it's a 2k movie, even though each eye gets 2k of information, because the left and right eye gets the same exact duplicate information.

If you were watching a 3D movie in 2k format your brain will say it's a 2K movie plus extra information that the brain interprets as 3D, because the left and right eye gets slightly different information.

Man.... I've got a headache from thinking this through.
 
I agree with the previous comments.
Additionally, doubling the resolution of an image requires 4X the same information per pixel, not 2X that you would get with 2 cameras.
 
Last edited:
Gord.T said:
I agree with the previous comments.
Additionally, doubling the resolution of an image requires 4X the same information per pixel, not 2X that you would get with 2 cameras.
Click to expand...
I tried to make a post about this by displaying two versions of the same image, but for some weird reason the board would only let me link one image in the post.
Here are links instead:
Bart Simpson 75x75 pixels:
http://farm1.staticflickr.com/1/1016855_8712acf0d2_s.jpg
Bart Simpson 150x150 pixels:
http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/3117/bartnirvanalz6.jpg

The second one is twice the resolution, and four times the size, same as 2k vs 4k resolution.
Simple as that.
 

Attachments

  • 1016855_8712acf0d2_s.jpg
    1016855_8712acf0d2_s.jpg
    3.6 KB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top