PDA

View Full Version : A Look at Post Production with The Red Camera!


Gentle Fury
03-12-2008, 12:32 PM
This is cool! Our friends at FXGuideTV.com have posted a video detailing the post methods with the Red Camera. This camera is turning out the be a phenomenon in the film world and is only going to get bigger. Apparently in the new film Jumper, the Red cam was used in tandem with a 35mm and you can't tell which is which......very cool!

http://media.fxguide.com/fxguidetv/fxguidetv-ep022.mov

biliousfrog
03-13-2008, 03:53 PM
I watched it and have absolutely no idea what he was talking about. :D

It seems like he was saying that the Red camera works in the same way as a digital camera which takes RAW images, the files contain exposure, white balance etc. which can then be adjusted afterwards. I'm surprised that professional digital film cameras don't do that anyway actually but I guess there's a lot to process for each frame.

I was most surprised that he was talking about capturing to CF cards! I thought that even consumer digi-cams had 20gb HD's?

aglick
03-13-2008, 04:24 PM
I was most surprised that he was talking about capturing to CF cards! I thought that even consumer digi-cams had 20gb HD's?


They do offer RED DRIVE which is two laptop hard drives in RAID0 that plug into the back of the camera.

aglick
03-13-2008, 04:47 PM
It seems like he was saying that the Red camera works in the same way as a digital camera which takes RAW images, the files contain exposure, white balance etc. which can then be adjusted afterwards. I'm surprised that professional digital film cameras don't do that anyway actually but I guess there's a lot to process for each frame.


The RED ONE camera is designed to be used exactly like a traditional ARRI or Panavision 35mm film camera. Same lenses, same controls (aperature, ASA/ISO/, etc), etc.

The camera generates RAW files simmilar to the other 2K/4K digital cinema camera (and Digital SLR still cameras). The RAW files also use a mild "wavelet compression" to get the data rate down to about 30MB/s. This lets them use CF cards in the camera and to be played back immediately (@ 1K resolution) from a laptop on-set.

These files must be transcoded into DPX/Quicktime/AVI in order to be used in most existing post-production pipelines.

We have been working very closely with Assimilate (Scratch) - and currently have the only system in the world (a BOXXX prototype) that can play back the 4K .r3d (RAW) files at 1/2 resolution (2K) @ 24fps. We are showing realtime lay-off to Sony SR 4:4:4 decks @ 1080P.

This is a feat that cannot currently be done reliably even on the fastest MAC Pros or HP workstations.

The footage looks phenominal - And DPX frames generated by the camera hold up pretty nicely in for VFX-heavy compositing. Perhaps not quite as good as 35mm film scans, but it ain't too shabby!

tleisher
03-13-2008, 05:50 PM
I haven't watched the video yet (Watching now) but has any feature film been shot on this camera? I would imagine you would have to convert it from the digital format to 35mm film for theatres and if so.. do you lose quality in doing that? Is it worth it to spend $50,000 to blow it up for the quality difference.. or is the red camera primarliy for commercials, straight to dvd stuff, etc?

aglick
03-13-2008, 05:56 PM
I haven't watched the video yet (Watching now) but has any feature film been shot on this camera? I would imagine you would have to convert it from the digital format to 35mm film for theatres and if so.. do you lose quality in doing that? Is it worth it to spend $50,000 to blow it up for the quality difference.. or is the red camera primarliy for commercials, straight to dvd stuff, etc?


The camera is being sold as an alternative to 35mm film cameras so projects will include cinematic feature film, independant film, high-end commercial spots, etc.

beaker
03-13-2008, 06:43 PM
We have been working very closely with Assimilate (Scratch) - and currently have the only system in the world (a BOXXX prototype) that can play back the 4K .r3d (RAW) files at 1/2 resolution (2K) @ 24fps. We are showing realtime lay-off to Sony SR 4:4:4 decks @ 1080P.FCP cam also play back the 2k quicktime reference which the Red makes on the fly. After NAB there should be a bunch of other companies supporting r3d files since Assimilate's exclusive on the file format expires.

http://www.red.com/support/release_history/8

tleisher
03-13-2008, 06:44 PM
The camera is being sold as an alternative to 35mm film cameras so projects will include cinematic feature film, independant film, high-end commercial spots, etc.

Is the quality on screen noticably different than shooting on regular 35mm?

beaker
03-13-2008, 06:45 PM
I haven't watched the video yet (Watching now) but has any feature film been shot on this camera? I would imagine you would have to convert it from the digital format to 35mm film for theatres and if so.. do you lose quality in doing that? Is it worth it to spend $50,000 to blow it up for the quality difference.. or is the red camera primarliy for commercials, straight to dvd stuff, etc?There are currently many films in production with it. The camera has only been out for 9 months. They have shipped around 800-1000 cameras so far.

beaker
03-13-2008, 06:50 PM
If you live in LA you can check out the Red this Saturday at the LA Red Users Group meeting.

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=59&t=606682

aglick
03-13-2008, 07:06 PM
FCP cam also play back the 2k quicktime reference which the Red makes on the fly. After NAB there should be a bunch of other companies supporting r3d files since Assimilate's exclusive on the file format expires.

http://www.red.com/support/release_history/8

Hi Deke,

The QT "proxy" wrappers from the camera that FCP can play back are much lower quality than the actual .r3d files that can be played back @ 2K in Scratch.

Also, working with this "proxy" RED footage in FCP is VERY limited. i.e. - must use 8-bit color space, no color grading in "color", no dissolves, etc.

It's getting better, but in order to really do anything in editorial or post, the footage must be transcoded first...


Adam

aglick
03-13-2008, 07:07 PM
sorry duplicate post

aglick
03-13-2008, 07:08 PM
FCP cam also play back the 2k quicktime reference which the Red makes on the fly. After NAB there should be a bunch of other companies supporting r3d files since Assimilate's exclusive on the file format expires.

http://www.red.com/support/release_history/8


Also, you can't play the RED footage out to a deck from FCP...

You can in Scratch.

CGTrader
03-14-2008, 07:05 AM
There are currently many films in production with it. The camera has only been out for 9 months. They have shipped around 800-1000 cameras so far.

What are possibilities purchasing it? I heard you have to line up long before getting it..
Web site says they are now serving between 1001-1250 serials. I wonder what is the whole queue?

beaker
03-14-2008, 06:05 PM
What are possibilities purchasing it? I heard you have to line up long before getting it..
Web site says they are now serving between 1001-1250 serials. I wonder what is the whole queue?Last I knew there were 2500 in the que, maybe more. You probably have to wait around 9-12 months to get one if you were to go on the list. The thing is there are a 1000 around the world, so there are many opportunities to rent them. It is considerably cheaper then a Genesis or Viper but your still going to spend around 40k to get a fully working Red(17k is just the body) which is still a good chunk of change.

Ivan D Young
03-16-2008, 03:21 AM
Wow, all I can say is wow. I have been following this Camera for quite awhile now. The technology is not mature yet, but very soon and I am absolutely dumbfounded how more people are not interested in this camera and the over all concept of it's work flow. We as an industry will most likely move away from standard types of production to this capture on harddrive and dump it to post effects quickly.


Any who great Red News and look forward to all things Red at NAB!

AstralPancakes
03-16-2008, 10:45 PM
Is the quality on screen noticably different than shooting on regular 35mm?

From what I've heard the dynamic range is ever so slightly worse compared to shooting on 35mm and scanning, so I suppose there's a chance you might notice if you watched a shot obsessively that you somehow knew was shot with the Red. :) The upside is that with the Red you avoid dust buildup and the like during the process of getting your image onto the computer, which is a benefit for things like chrome keying in particular. That, and after the initial investment running costs are close to zero, compared to lab and scanning when using film.

Gentle Fury
03-17-2008, 01:09 PM
From what I've heard the dynamic range is ever so slightly worse compared to shooting on 35mm and scanning, so I suppose there's a chance you might notice if you watched a shot obsessively that you somehow knew was shot with the Red. :) The upside is that with the Red you avoid dust buildup and the like during the process of getting your image onto the computer, which is a benefit for things like chrome keying in particular. That, and after the initial investment running costs are close to zero, compared to lab and scanning when using film.

How about the fact that you have full res dailies.....ON THE DAY! That is invaluable! You can actually have a daily screening tent set up onsite! We shot with the cinealta this weekend and were able to watch some amazing quality footage immediately after shooting....and I was editing the next day. Digital is the way to go. I have worked with 35mm and yeah the quality is great...but the negatives HIGHLY outweigh the positives. Not only do you have ot wait for transfers you also have to develop film...meaning two things....one...excessive use of toxic chemicals that are AWEFUL for the environment (in my opinion the best reason to go digital) and of course you have your dailies on the fly, so if something is out of focus or you just really dont like the print you thought was great...you can do re-shoots on the day. That is also a phenominal advantage. For the very very very very small drop in quality...that the consumer will NEVER notice...it is not worth sticking with film.

oh, and about the QT Proxies that come with the r3D files.......they are really for offline edits....unless you are specifically shooting with a dvd or Blu-Ray release intent only.....course even if you are going to blu-ray, 4k converted to 1080p will always look better than proxy 2k converted. The .r3d files, while compressed (more a data compression so basically lossless) are the raw ccd data! You can't get better than that....that essentially is a digital negative! And while yes you can just push out DPX conversions I think it will become more common to see r3d acceptance...and in the near future completely uncompressed r3d data.

I also can't wait to see the pocket red!

aglick
03-17-2008, 02:44 PM
How about the fact that you have full res dailies.....ON THE DAY!

Actually, the best you can probably do on-set is playing back .r3d files @ 1/4 res -or about 1K. This would be with a laptop.

BOXX will be releasing an ovclocked 8-core system @ NAB which will reliably decode and play out the .r3d files @ 1/2 res (full 1080 HD & 2K) via HD-SDI to a calibrated display but right now, nobody is able to buy or build a machine to do this.

Not only do you have ot wait for transfers you also have to develop film...

Right, but remember, you will need to wait for .r3d footage to be transcoded into DPX, TIFF, AVI, or QT before you can really do any real work in the edtoial or VFX pipelines. This process can take up to 30X realtime - so certainly many people are having to wait overnight (or longer) for RED footage to be ready to work with in their traditional pipelines.


From what I've heard the dynamic range is ever so slightly worse compared to shooting on 35mm and scanning, so I suppose there's a chance you might notice if you watched a shot obsessively that you somehow knew was shot with the Red. :)

35mm film is very hard to beat in terms of low-light contrast. Sony's $100K F35 HD camera comes closer than most digital cameras. However, with enought light, many colorists, compositors and FX artists are getting quite good results with RED.

beaker
03-17-2008, 09:46 PM
Hi Deke,

The QT "proxy" wrappers from the camera that FCP can play back are much lower quality than the actual .r3d files that can be played back @ 2K in Scratch.At the meeting this weekend the concensus was that the 2k proxies in FCP were the exact same quality as the ones in scratch. Scratch has the ability adjust the debayer parameters without having to go back into Red Alert like you have to do with FCP. Also of course you can lay the raw files to tape without transcoding.

aglick
03-17-2008, 11:00 PM
At the meeting this weekend the concensus was that the 2k proxies in FCP were the exact same quality as the ones in scratch. Scratch has the ability adjust the debayer parameters without having to go back into Red Alert like you have to do with FCP. Also of course you can lay the raw files to tape without transcoding.


The impression I've gotten from folks after my travels and research related to RED is that
most who are actually working with the footage on a daily basis believe that the QT proxy "wrapper" generates playback that is noticeably inferior in quality to that of the native .r3d files.

Active discussions on the official forums seem to back that up without dispute.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/

I believe that Graeme Nattress, one of the lead engineers @ RED refered to the QT wrapper method as using a "bunk-ass debayer" algorithm or something to that effect. I can't find the actual quote right now. The idea was that it was "fast", but image quality suffered...

HDhead
03-18-2008, 12:27 AM
You also have to render the proxies to get the full resolution playback (if I remember right). If you don't render the resolution of the material drops significantly every time you press play. FCP is making "proxy of a proxy" on the fly if this makes sense.

This can be easily observed if you zoom into the any portion of the image that contains sharp detail.

Apengkawayi
03-18-2008, 01:57 AM
Thank you~`

Imhotep397
03-18-2008, 07:10 AM
I haven't watched the video yet (Watching now) but has any feature film been shot on this camera? I would imagine you would have to convert it from the digital format to 35mm film for theatres and if so.. do you lose quality in doing that? Is it worth it to spend $50,000 to blow it up for the quality difference.. or is the red camera primarliy for commercials, straight to dvd stuff, etc?

I think you should check out the Red One website and look at the short film Peter Jackson shot with it.

CGTalk Moderation
03-18-2008, 07:10 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.