Jump to content


Mike Miller

Member Since 13 Dec 2007
Offline Last Active Dec 14 2007 11:23 AM
-----

Topics I've Started

Dead Pixels on RED CMOS

14 December 2007 - 11:10 AM

How does Red deal with this issue? Are they mapped out and corrected automatically? How many dead pixels the cameras in use have?

Red Marketing Campaign

14 December 2007 - 11:06 AM

Does anyone remember such a marketing campaign in the digital cinema, TV, or pro-video field? Sony employees are not even allowed to participate in forum discussions. I call that class.

What is the target exhibition for this camera? 4K or 2K?

14 December 2007 - 10:53 AM

The new digital cinema standards call for 2K and 4K digital projection. True 2K and 4K projectors and theater screens are now a reality and it is obvious that future high end productions will be 4K. How does this camera with actual resolution of 3K fits in? Will it be used primarily for 2K projection? Is 3K acquisition needed in a digital 2K post production, where there is no resolution loss and 2K will mean the same resolution as 3K when acquisition is concerned? 2K camera with the same size sensor would have an advantage because of bigger pixels. Would not it be then advantageous for the camera to have 2K output, gathered from the whole 35 mm sensor, rather than 4K?

Red is a 3K Resolution Camera. How Is The Noise?

14 December 2007 - 09:03 AM

Can we then agree that this camera has 3K resolution and Jim will quit calling it 4K and Phil less than 3K until true tests are carried out.

Could Jim pay Phil's ticket to come witness a resolution test or could he arrange for such a test to be carried in England with Phil's presence? I trust Phil. Jim is too much of a salesman.

It is obvious this is a 3. not a 4K camera as Jim is promoting it everywhere. This misrepresentation is what pushes Phil's and everyone else's button.


As Jim himself admits to 3, rather than 4K, lets agree to that and examine the noise. I read somewhere that it is quite noisy, although Jim's Red released in another forum frame grabs that indicate low noise even at around some 10K ASA rating. What is the reality?

Bayer Filter'd 1 sensor vs. 3-Sensor Camera

13 December 2007 - 06:58 AM

http://www.high-tech.../Camera_t_1.htm

This analysis claims 65% of the full horizontal resolution and 80% of the full vertical resolution when using Bayer filter

Kodak, which invented the Bayer filter has similar claims.


Other sites and test claim 1/2 resolution for Bayer filter:

http://www.scss.com....olution/#camres

http://lagemaat.blog...ensors-you.html


How does Red do it? How are they able to achieve full 4K resolution from a 4K single CMOS sensor with Bayer filter when neither Sony, nor Panasonic are able to do it? I do understand that Red is using some innovative algorithm that is superior to Kodak, Sony, Panasonic and everyone else. Could someone shed some light on it? Is Red using licenced technology? Is it their invention? Is it patented? Could someone direct me to their patent number?

I have hard time believing that Red can achieve 4K from a 4K sensor, but everything i possible. The Red concept is quite innovating.

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

The Slider

Willys Widgets

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

CineTape

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera