Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: RED What exactly is available  (Read 4203 times)

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
    • Tree Without a Bird
RED What exactly is available
« on: October 21, 2010, 01:45:03 pm »

I'm getting frustrated trying to use a DSLR, so I thought I would take a look at the RED offerings. I was eyeing up the Scarlet a year or more ago, I'm not sure if it exists yet. So what does RED make that you can buy?

Kevin.
Logged
Kevin.

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: RED What exactly is available
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2010, 02:49:13 pm »

Kevin, you are actually asking the most oscur, unpredictable, unknow phantomatic and mystic question about that Scarlet. Mystery?

It seems that the new Pana style based on the micro 4/3 is really doing a severe bombing to dslr's video club and a serious alternative and a lot cheaper than Red. Ok, no Raw video that I know.
In fact I've always thought that this micro 4/3 for stills was a dead end road, but for video it makes great sense and I suspect that the guys of Panasonic knew that from the very beginning.
Their real goal with the micro format was the video. Well I can't affirm it because I'm not inside the house but I smell it like a hunting dog.

This is a very interesting, and IMO the most passionate currently in photography equipment and way of doing because all that will change soon or later the all game rule.

I will be very very pleased if articles and debates could show-up on that because it's very important. In fact, much more potential impact in the industry and profession than the next Phase 500MP back.

Michael and Chris's views are interesting. Michael was one of the very first on earth to point the convergence and we first beleived that it will come from the traditional camera makers. But it seems that another powerfull path is opening from the video cameras. When those video tools will be capable of producing steels with enough resolution, the all game will change dramatically.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2010, 03:36:21 pm by fredjeang »
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
RED One still the only one available? uncompressed 4:2:2 from AG-AF100
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2010, 05:04:57 pm »

On the original question, a quick search reveals:
http://www.red.com/store
As far as I understand it, the original the RED One, in 24.4mm x 13.7mm (Super35mm) format with 4520 (h) x 2540 (v) Bayer CFA sensor, is the only RED camera model available to the general buying public. (Are some insiders are getting Epic's?) See also which models are marked as "available now" on the home page http://www.red.com

It seems that the new Pana style based on the micro 4/3 is really doing a severe bombing to dslr's video club and a serious alternative and a lot cheaper than Red. Ok, no Raw video that I know.
The AG-AF100 has HD-SDI output of uncompressed 4:2:2; is that RAW enough? Its internal recording formats are more limited, to AVCHD, perhaps by the bandwidth limitations its SDXC card system.
Logged

Christopher Sanderson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2693
    • photopxl.com
Re: RED One still the only one available? uncompressed 4:2:2 from AG-AF100
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2010, 05:43:12 pm »

The AG-AF100 has HD-SDI output of uncompressed 4:2:2; is that RAW enough?
Interesting question and one which is still unanswered, I believe, by the marketplace. For me the answer is no.

RED cameras are the only ones to offer a real attempt at the kind of non-destructive fine-tuning of video pictures which as still-photographers, we have become accustomed to in the RAW conversion of still captures.

While something of an over-statement when applied to 4:2:2 video, the video output's settings are essentially 'baked-in' the same way that JPEGs are fully baked. Any major adjustment after the fact is more or less destructive.

Although the bandwidth challenges are huge, what some of us video folk want is the recording of a RAW format which allows that same flexibility for final output that RAW stills allow: the ability in post-processing to non-destructively change the visual output of the video. RED in large measure allows this.

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: RED What exactly is available
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2010, 06:05:10 pm »

If I remember well, they extracted 5MP stills no? (talking about Red).

But then Chris, what does that Raw video really means in practise? Because the grade of fine tuning is already pretty high with the non linear softwares. It's not clear to me how much penalties (weight-cost-montage) to get this extra amount of flexibilidad.
I can't really figure a practical example that can be acheived with Raw video and only with raw video.

If we are stucked into a maximum definition for broadcasting, then in practise this lack of lost datas is really noticiable? And then, how to keep the datas in the convertions?

In short, I have the sensation that if we don't have a computer power equal to the all Nasa mission control, we will be stucked into the low resolution of the Red.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2010, 06:15:52 pm by fredjeang »
Logged

Christopher Sanderson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2693
    • photopxl.com
Re: RED What exactly is available
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2010, 06:14:43 pm »

My emphasis is on non-destructive

Complete freedom in post-processing: The ability to create 'looks' in post that are identical to the styles and looks available to us in Capture One or Lightroom.

Any compressed format (RED is actually compressed but non-destructively) can only allow a degree of change before artifacting or banding sets in.

The proposal is simple: Give video the flexibility of RAW stills.

bradleygibson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 828
    • http://GibsonPhotographic.com
Re: RED What exactly is available
« Reply #6 on: October 22, 2010, 02:27:37 am »

Any compressed format (RED is actually compressed but non-destructively)

My understanding is that REDcode is a visually lossless encoding (ie. it is still mathematically lossy).

So what does RED make that you can buy?

The RED One. (4K video, 12MP stills).

I believe that everything else is in closed alpha/beta.
Logged
-Brad
 [url=http://GibsonPhotographic.com

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: RED What exactly is available
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2010, 03:55:51 am »

To me raw is important - or rather the non destructive edit

if you go two cameras or shoot through changing light (even subtle) not only must the individual frames look good but there must be consistency across the cut

Im happy with DSLR (and thier flaws) at their price point, not sure that I am prepared to step up a level to the Panny considering it is costly but still 'not there'

I think that the Red is a fine tool but may get a cheaper version in the next 2-3 years

I base that prediction on my purchase of a 22mp H1 kit in late 2005 that is, lets face it, fairly redundant on the price quality curve compared to the DSLR of 2010

My H1 probably paid for itself in that time, if you have a business model that will pay for a red in three years , great

Otherwise id keep it cheap, the T2i is an amazing price/quality point

S

Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3369
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: RED One still the only one available? uncompressed 4:2:2 from AG-AF100
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2010, 05:03:27 am »

The AG-AF100 has HD-SDI output of uncompressed 4:2:2; is that RAW enough?
No, it isn't RAW at all. It isn't even a particularly good format at that compression.
No one playing with DSLR video seems to consider that there are already outstandingly good HDTV formats that have been in daily use in TV for years.
Sony's HDCAM SR format at 4:4:4 has been around in broadcasting, and even for electronic film production, and has a fine reputation for quality output.
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Re: RED What exactly is available
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2010, 05:22:50 am »

I know little of codecs but have some experience on sets (observing while doing stills)

Those using 'proper' sony cameras put a lot of effort to get colours right before they shoot

very expensive monitors
and a lot of faffing with WB and matching across the cameras (even the same model)

of course they are using well controlled lights too (kinos)

Stepping up to the Sony F35 that has baked in film curves, not only do they do all of that faff but loads of testing first

then the whole lot goes to a colourist afterwards

This is all fine and gets the result

but the the non baked approach that we know and love as stills photographers seems so much simpler and cost effective

I for one in stills also shoot for raw, knowing what I can warm and cool in an image, when I will be able to bring a sky or window back

shooting for raw in this manner saves big bucks (say on a hotel shoot) compared to gelling or using heaps of flash

Im not too up to speed on the NLE process with red, but it would seem that burning a sky or suchlike should be fairly elementary as should matching two cameras or correcting or 'improving' WB

S

Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

hjulenissen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2051
Re: RED What exactly is available
« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2010, 06:02:46 am »

1. The per-frame difference between raw and not-raw should be the same for video as still images (if the lossy coding is high-quality)

2. The price/bandwith increases a lot more for video than stills due to the higher pixel-rate.

Regarding 1: Most people on forums like this agrees that raw is the thing for stills. But that is given that it costs us nothing. Is it really that important that it is worth twice the price for the camera, all else equal? I think not. Many people make a living (or shoot fantastic images spare time) using only jpeg.

-h
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up