Slashdot Mirror
RED's New Digital Stills and Motion Camera Pushing the Limits
rallymatte writes to mention that camera maker RED has announced a new digital stills and motion camera system that includes one model that can shoot up to 28K at 25 fps. The new system will come in three tiers: Scarlet, Epic, and their top of line model which won't be out until possibly 2010. Still image capture will range anywhere from 4.9 megapixels to an insane 261 megapixels. In addition to some impressive 'traditional' hardware, RED also announced a 3D camera.
Here's the actual info & specs from Red themselves - be sure to scroll down to the bottom where they have the "Oh ... by the way - 3D" teaser.
Crazy stuff (makes my
Canon 40D look pokey) - we'll see if they deliver.
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
...what would be the printed size of a 261 megapixels image, using current printers?
The mind boggles
No sig for the moment.
Shoot up to 28K whats at 25fps? 28 kilobytes? 28 kilopixels? Units, please!
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Quick glance through the article did not mention anything about dynamic range. These pixel counts mean nothing if the range is still the same old three orders of magnitude. At least if they come up with an image sensor with better range, we could upgrade to that. So the idea of modularized camera system makes sense. But it is high time sensor makers quit the stupid megapixel race and concentrate on things like color correctness, dynamic range etc.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Lawyers or Marketing people hopefully.
Anything that can shoot 28k of them at any rate is good enough for me.
28 Kelvin.
The superconductors used in the camera only work when it's really, really cold outside.
If you buy one of the first 1000, though, they give you a free pair of gloves.
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Actually cinema film cameras go for $65,000 and up. Add film and film editing to get that analog film into digital ($100K), Red looks pretty cheap.
Red makes a big splash here in the tech world, but I'm curious to know how their cameras stack up against anything from Arri or Panavision; they're theoretically the "big dogs" when it comes to filming motion pictures. Do they see an upstart like Red as a threat? Do they have similar products? Yes, Googling is my friend and I could find out models, prices, etc., but what I'm really trying to get at is whether or not these companies are feeling in any way threatened by this announcement, and whether filmmakers see Red's cameras as a way of making blockbuster-quality movies cheaper, better quality, etc.
More precisely, why would anyone continue to shoot film in this day and age? Especially since programs like Avid and Final Cut are likely going to be the tools to edit the movie, regardless of origin. Seems a pure-digital workflow would be the way to go.
on slide 3 they show the dynamic range. Depending on the sensor it can be 12 to 16 bits, which means 11+ to 13+ stops (estimated).
Actually they've been shipping cameras for a while, these are just the next in the range. The Red One was considered vapour for a while by some people - they started taking pre-orders in April 2006 and actually shipped the first 25 units in August 2007. There is apparently still some wait time between ordering and receiving the camera, but they definitely exist.
They announced the Scarlet and the Epic in April this year, and announced today they they've somewhat revised the design of them.
http://rcjohnso.com/REDFACTS.html
If you shoot at the resolution you are tend to project at, you can't modify the frames in any non-trivial way other than colour/contrast adjustments. Anything else will in practice degrade the resolution. Shooting at a higher resolution gives you a lot of headroom that can be used to for example cut away areas that you don't want to use, and zoom in interesting areas. Similar to when music studios record and work with 192kHz audio signals to give some headroom for processing, then resample to whatever resolution the end user wants, 44.1 and 48kHz for example.
Other uses could be for reporters, journalists or nature photographers who can film at general areas of interest and then later cut out and scale up interesting areas.
c++;
Ok 261 megapixel, yeah, cool, but, since RED cameras use canon/nikon photo lenses how they suppose to obtain such a resolution? I mean, currently with new cameras (like 5dMkII) coming out we are allready speaking about lens limits (also for "top" lenses like L marked ones). So, how can they push this camera to that resolution without enlarging sensor size? For 261 megapixel you will need AT LEAST 6x6 sensor rather than normal 35mm. And 6x6 sensor requires really big lenses (like hasselblad) and probably won't keep up either. So, i think there is too much "megapixel" marketing here rather than "real" resolution.
Wired had posted a really detailed article on where Red is in its September issue. You can read it here - http://www.wired.com/entertainment/hollywood/magazine/16-09/ff_redcamera?currentPage=all
Peter Jackson loved the camera so much that he suggested Steven Soderbergh to use it for his new movie on Che Guevara...which he has made now. So definitely it is not vaporware.
Still, DSMC is a whole new ball game.
--
I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer.
What handheld device can write 19 gigabytes/sec.?
(25 x 261000000 x 3)
No sig today...
I have seen these rigs, and they're quite impressive. Soderberg shot "Che" with it, and though they've got some integration and workflow problems, it seems that they're on their way to demolishing the film industry as it is-- my GF is a DP and she and all her friends have been storming rental houses to get some time practicing with the gear so they can at least tell people they know how to use it. When everyone else is charging $70-$100K for something Red is selling for $15K, the writing is sorta on the wall. All RED has to do now is fill orders.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Turns out you can't read the charge without erasing it.
That's true for CCD and CMOS type detectors, but not true for CID detectors. CID detectors were designed for repeated reading without destroying the charge. In fact, the signal in any pixel can be read out repeatedly while accumulating photoelectrons without interrupting the exposure.
Alas, although silicon-based and employing the same photovoltaic principles as CCD or CMOS, CID requires more complicated chip construction and remains expensive. Indeed, it has been "tomorrow's technology" for a couple of decades already. However, they are used in some scientific and forensic imaging devices, where extremely high dynamic range must be recorded.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
"Angels and Demons", along with other current & soon movies, was shot using a Red camera.
They're in the process of fulfilling 4000 orders. Not promising to, actually building & shipping them.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
I could be misinformed about this, but from a little googling, it looks like the red will lenses that were intended for use on DSLR cameras.
$1000 bucks and you've bought yourself some nice glass. Keep in mind that nikon has been making lenses with the same mount for the last ~50 years. Some of them can be had for CHEAP on ebay.
NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
I've had my hands in two feature-length projects shot on the Red, and I can attest that not only is the camera real, but it can produce fantastic picture. :)
-b
myselfmusic
Indeed -- I also shot a small film project with the Red One. All things considered, it's a user-friendly package (as far as professional-level cameras are concerned) with superb performance and a virtually unbeatable price.
Ostensibly, as of last year, the only competitor to the Red One camera (package cost: around $50K) was an offering from Sony (cost: around $200K).
When Soderbergh said that this camera was going to "revolutionize independent film," he wasn't joking.