Windowed-4K for 2:35

"Hans, better than windowed-4k, it would be what occurs with the Canon ACV-235 or even with the ERG ventures monitors.. like Mathieu Kassovitz had been posting.. "

I am not very found of adaptors. They tend to steal light and degrade the picture. I would rather crop the material and use premium lenses than throw in an adaptor and "gain" pixels on the CMOS/CCD´s.
I would say the quality of the lenses is more important than the resolution of the sensor(s) (within reason of course).

But if the RED could oversample from 4K 16:9 to 2.35 (2.39-2.40) ratio...
I do not know if it is possible. But it is an interesting approach.

I am not worried about picture quality, we are talking about a 4K+ sensor with 66dB that you can throw the best optics in the world at i.e Cooke and ARRI Ultra Primes (or Panavision for you guys in the US)...that with the ability to shoot 4:4:4 or even better RGB...I think the picture will look great (to say the least)...
BUT I am worried about the amount of data to record. If oversampling does lower the data stream from the camera it´s a great idea. Otherwise croping at the sensor will do for me.

If the amount of data is no problem, one solution would be using anamorphic lenses on full 4K...
But then we have the problem with anamorphic lenses...
 
Last edited:
Technically speaking, oversampling or scaling down can only go so far in lowering the data to record. If you scale down, you're taking the information from the full sensor and concentrating it, so you can do this if you want, but you're making the data you record harder to compress, as there's more detail per pixel in there, although, at the same time, you're lowering noise a little, making compression easier. I just think capturing as much of the sensor as you can and recording it, is the way to go - from that point, you can do pretty much as you wish in post.

Graeme
 
right!

..do you see Hans? Graeme knows what he's talking about..

..and can we have both to both sides and to everybody needs, isn't it?
 
Last edited:
"..do you see Hans? Graeme knows what he's talking about.."

Of course he does. I have nothing but the highest respect for Mr Nattress knowledge. :)

But it is strange...when I read his posts I hear Douglas Rain´s voice, you know "HAL 9000"...must be that RED logotype.

If I starts up my RED camera and it goes:
"Let me put it this way, Mr. Nystroem. The RED One series is the most reliable camera ever made. No RED camera has ever made a mistake or distorted any pictures. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error."
...I will scream lika a girl!
 
Im all over the crop. Thats gonna be my method. I personally am not a big fan of scaling down because of the artifacts that can be generated, and if the camera can crop intelligently before compression it gives you more bandwidth for recording time and frame rates.
 
Besides, I think the great win/loss of this project is in the compression. We know what 2K or 4K 4:4:4 data looks like and how much power it takes to do something with it. So this is not about having the biggest image. We can't handled 4K uncompressed, let alone more than that. That's why the best way to work this data is to make compression more efficient. That's why intelligent cropping is a good idea, because it allows for that. A Higher than 2K res image with a data stream less than the 4K.

That's the bet. Will they provide a camera that output 2k or 4k data that we are able to handle? Codec is key. Actually if this was only a codec developing company, they could already call themselves revolutionary...
 
Hans Nystroem said:
But it is strange...when I read his posts I hear Douglas Rain´s voice, you know "HAL 9000"...must be that RED logotype.

If I starts up my RED camera and it goes:
"Let me put it this way, Mr. Nystroem. The RED One series is the most reliable camera ever made. No RED camera has ever made a mistake or distorted any pictures. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error."
...I will scream lika a girl!
Click to expand...
:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

Hans, don't you know Mr. Nattress?

i can assure you he is a nice english fellow, see his photo at creative cow forums..

he isn't a machine i can confirm but maybe his brain works as a reliable Mac, who knows?

i hope as the best PC as my money will buy, as well.. :) please Graeme, don't forget at PC side please and at the same time than the RED/Mac release, okay?
 
taubkin said:
That's why intelligent cropping is a good idea, ..
Click to expand...

i just invented that term when i typed it.. i like the fact its catching on :)

I agree totally Taubkin. Its gonna a be a flurry the month or so before camera ships to get the NLE system up to speed.. its gonna be fun, kinda like painting the room blue for the new baby.
 
intelligent cropping.. (good one JarRED)

..why not RED intelligent anamorphic as far as possible?..




edit
and what about intelligent 2.35?.. or we must say 2.39?.. or even 2.4?




_
 
Last edited:
taubkin said:
We know what 2K or 4K 4:4:4 data looks like and how much power it takes to do something with it. So this is not about having the biggest image. We can't handled 4K uncompressed, let alone more than that.
Click to expand...
Hmm, we can't?
2k 4:4:4 = 2048x1536x10bx3 = 11.8 Mbytes/frame
RED raw = 4520x2540x12b = 17.2 Mbytes/frame

The difference isn't so massive.
All we need is lower quality realtime raw conversion to NLE for viewing and high quality non-realtime for accurate cc'ing and exporting.

Btw. did you guys find a reason for that 2.35/2.39 mess?
If not, i can enlighten a bit of history: in 70's when 35mm anamorphic release prints became popular (before it was 70mm for widescreen and 35mm was usually pan&scanned), the original negative cuttings occassionally were seen onscreen. So they decided to lower the gate from 2.35 to 2.39 to hide this annoyance.
 
Ha ha Graeme you gotta be kidding.. as of two days ago I officially went from a nice Canadian Fellow to a nice American Fellow... well i dont know about the nice part :)
 
Congrats guys! I'm currently in the middle of roughly three deciduous forests' worth of paperwork for the Green Card thing...havent even got to the citizenship stage yet.
 
OK. What about intelligent cropping to slightly less than 2.35:1. Gives you less data than a full frame for longer record times and some room for reframing?
 
you mean like a sorta overscan/underscan option.. Its a good idea.

one of the things i think we can all see from this 6 page thread is that everyone has a different idea what the perfect aspect for them would be, so hopefully Red can take that into account and have it user adjustable.
 
ericyoung said:
OK. What about intelligent cropping to slightly less than 2.35:1. Gives you less data than a full frame for longer record times and some room for reframing?
Click to expand...
reframing can be interesting but to have less data than a full frame for longer record times instead more quality??

if you are speaking about quality is.. as available as possible though affordable..

but not so much!

why should it be necessary?

2.5" disk storage is bargain!

why bother!?..
 
filmmaker1977 said:
reframing can be interesting but to have less data than a full frame for longer record times instead more quality??

if you are speaking about quality is.. as available as possible though affordable..

but not so much!

why should it be necessary?

2.5" disk storage is bargain!

why bother!?..
Click to expand...

even with a 120gb hard drive.. there is people that time is important, such as sports shooters and event recording.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top