Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

Anyway. This is only an example of a product, of why it would be nice to get 8k BM. Not to promote celebrate or unnecessarily nock a competing product.

Incidentally, it should be noted that other small companies are doing 8k CVM50000 machine cameras without big budgets, which are most of what this camera would be.

Wayne

you don't really contribute anything that I find reasonable and rational to conversations.

I'm adding you to my ignore list and I'm sorry to do so.

I know you've been around a while, and you operate under several aliases (Mr Morelinni On Reduser)

You continue to make claims that defy logic and practical usefulness and rationality. I'm all for theoretical discussions but Wayne you're just not actually worth arguing with. I used to want to engage for those other readers who may be influenced by your posts. Now you're just annoying, So I take myself out of the conversation.

JB

Uli. Did you really expect them to manufacture in Spain and survive?
A lot of stuff gets done out of Asia.

That's not the point. If BM sends me anything, or Sony, most of it is also manufactured in Asia. But as a reviewer, I can't handle that cost if they send it even unannounced, straight out of China, which makes DHL take care of the paperwork and charge me extra for it. It would have cost me more than I get per page. They could have at least informed me that they'll send from China, so I could have turned down that review.

From any solid manufacturer I get reviewers samples without additional cost for me and I simply return them. I just found a massive lack of professionalism. Plus, that announcement of a straight Raw recording from Red, which never showed up as a product, makes me very sceptic about announcements from them. Maybe they are just testing the waters, but I'd have done a better 3D rendering then

You continue to make claims that defy login and practical usefulness and rationality.

JB

Wayne gonna Wayne

Uli. Did you really expect them to manufacture in Spain and survive?
A lot of stuff gets done out of Asia.

That's not the point. If BM sends me anything, or Sony, most of it is also manufactured in Asia. But as a reviewer, I can't handle that cost if they send it even unannounced, straight out of China, which makes DHL take care of the paperwork and charge me extra for it. It would have cost me more than I get per page. They could have at least informed me that they'll send from China, so I could have turned down that review.

From any solid manufacturer I get reviewers samples without additional cost for me and I simply return them. I just found a massive lack of professionalism. Plus, that announcement of a straight Raw recording from Red, which never showed up as a product, makes me very sceptic about announcements from them. Maybe they are just testing the waters, but I'd have done a better 3D rendering then

I get you Uli. Have a look at my reply. By saying I would have done it differently, I'm implying it wasn't the best


Do you mean this:

http://www.cinemartin.com/teodored/

You continue to make claims that defy login and practical usefulness and rationality.

JB

Wayne gonna Wayne

You two should learn how to type. I'm "gonna" "login" "Wayne" (I'm going to gi away).

Lol, don't worry about it, I make lots of typos to.

You continue to make claims that defy login and practical usefulness and rationality.

JB

Wayne gonna Wayne

You two should learn how to type. I'm "gonna" "login" "Wayne" (I'm going to gi away).

Lol, don't worry about it, I make lots of typos to.

Wayne,
It’s a play on an existing phrase about someone else who excels at what he does.

Cheers,

Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera, I do not realy see any at this time.

I have seen demonstration on big 8k screen and it was closest to reality I have seen, it was on purpose made like that. But is it cinematic and how many such sreens there is?

As I see BMD is aiming to be the lower cost good quality products. As long as there is true demand just for few 8k cameras, I do not really see the point.

I much rather would see the efforts put on better quality pixels, global shutter etc.

+1.
I would never waste 10K$ or whatever it's going to cost only because it has 8K sensor.
Wait few months and you may get next Samsung phone with 8k recording- if K is what you after
Absolutely don't see a single point why people are so paranoid about 8K or a need for one, specially like this which will be compromise in every aspect.

Professionally speaking I guess if you're that small % that produces for high end, specialzied events then no, no practical interest whatsoever.

But as far as producing for the masses - broadcast, cable and web we've got all the resolution we need for a long time to come.

Every week we do something for a client that reinforces this. A recent digital campaign for a RE company where our research showed the majority of viewers would be seeing it on portable devices where 720p would look sharp. TV spots going out where anything for Fox is still 720p etc.

Improving DR and color science is what makes sense. Chasing more and more pixels dosn't have much meaning for the vast majority of us though. We've reached a bit of a plateau w/ great 4k, IMHO.

We just got to stage where we can produce good HD.
Most 4K is still far from optimal, so chasing poor 8K is a nonsense.
As you said, high-end/special production may benefit from 8K, but that's about it.

Give me 5K$ Alexa quality camera with 3K sensor and I will be more happy than with some crap 8K.

Wayne,
It’s a play on an existing phrase about someone else who excels at what he does.

Cheers,

Sorry Steve, I didn't see his original offensive post before I posted that. It's completely hypocritical to accuse somebody of what you do which is the opposite what they do. There needs to be gaol for that, internet and forums with stompers stalking people. It's completely ironic, I've been trying to explain things clearly (and have) so other people (and themselves) "don't get led astray". Also, I am the one that should be blocking them, as it's not worth talking to them. But if I don't, the truth suffers the American election style alternative facts and people are misled, like many that post in support. Look I'm in one nation, and I'm sick of this sort of .... (I'm one of the sensible ones). People against logic and sense and I debate the opposite. But like Donald Trump these people are not wrong, but at least their clients can see how they treat right people. And at last I can have the last word, because I'm 100% right, again, but somebody else seems to 'love' to have the last word. Talk about burning the bridge. You don't burn the bridge when you're wrong. It makes you look very petty and bad. Stuff, there are companies accriss industry's I don't deal with or ask for beta testing products because the people in charge lie and are immoral. Not BM, I don't know Grant, but they have done a good job advancing the industry forwards (which is morally a good deed) on affordable hardware when Red was ratcheting up prices and Silicon Image (or was that imaging. One defined HDMI the other the si2k) just never got there. So the industry can't go too far up with BM there. Great. The truth is, there is a lot more to be done for People. But after his last offence, that 8k thing looks more attractive, rather than putting up with being hounded. Sense and sensibility in this forum getting blotted.

Anyway, you are all wrong.

Let me explain. if you had been following the discussion, you would realise that 8k raw produces better 4k and 2k. So a big advantage there. The 8k Nokia camera phone produced much better fhd by doing exactly that, plus better digital zoom.

If it is native 15.5 stops, instead of hdr, that is better than old Arri anyway. Colour science has a lot to do with the amount you can pickup and processing. So, 8k is already reaching out far beyond what people used to work with. This thing might be a monster as far as we know yet.

Native ISO of 800 is tolerable/workable.

For a carry around camera you can use it as a 50mp still (you provide the skill instead of a lot of auto/other functions, but as it's programmable, those other functions are probably coming. (Sorry, I'm getting the 8k, and the 8k example camera mixed up. But if the claims for it are true, it already shows how 8k doesn't need to be poor).

As a carry around camera you can use it to film and also snap off stills. You can do behind the scenes footage and promotional snaps. But as John rightly (actual) pointed out last year, there are issues with pulling stills from footage rather than the seperate snaps I am talking about above. But there are two technical techniques that can do both. One, shoot at a highest shutter speed suitable (in auto shutter) to give the best still extraction, and use software to restore motion blur, producing the desired shutter angle. You could try to get rid of motion blur in an still extraction in the same way instead (using surrounding frames to calculate out motion blur). Good features that could be added to Resolve. Then when you want to do both runaround and stills, you can rely on post software. Actually, calculating out blur in the still is probably better, but not completely reliable.

Another thing I have become aware of, is having the camera record a 8k still during 4k shooting, and using something like Resolve to extract the frame, downscale it, and calculate missing interpolated 4k frames in its place. If a camera maxes out at 8k 30th a second, then during 4kp60 shooting you might loose a frame when you press a 8k still button. So, in this way, you can restore the image in a way that the audience might not notice. They also do post focus from single cameras too. So, another little side use for an 8k, to deliver poster sized pro material (in photography 8k definitely is not the highest you ever want).

So, in reality there are benefits to 8k, but without proper codecs, that camera is expensive to operate. You definitely want 3:1+ codecs. This is where BM can jump in and save the day. But using FPGA is an issue. It needs a lower powered processing system, like the NVIDIA one the zcam e2 uses, that runs at over 1700mb/s and does 4kp120=8kp30. I haven't asked which solution version they used, but if it is the latest one, it could compress raw 8kp30 and like p60. They had been designing arificial intelligence vision credit card sized boards to run six 4k cameras on drones a few years back. They are one of the lowest power general purpose processing chips out. It could be a few watts or more (if they can use the gpu everything else can clock and power down, as well as the unused gpu processing units, and power and clock down dynamically depending on the workload at the core at the time. Pretty advanced stuff). This sort of stuff is dynamically far beyond what Red is using. Red, spent big on their ASIC chips, but NVIDIA spent much more again on their general purpose computing chips, and it shows. I would not be surprised if the NVIDIA beats the weapon ASIC in processing power consumption in real loads. Being a mass market chip, the NVIDIA might well be cheaper.


So, that is the simple explanation.

Anyway, you are all wrong.

Let me explain. if you had been following the discussion, you would realise that 8k raw produces better 4k and 2k. So a big advantage there. The 8k Nokia camera phone produced much better fhd by doing exactly that, plus better digital zoom.

Not really- 1.5x oversampled good sensor with optimal color science will easily be better than 8K average sensor, so you don't need 8K to deliver 4K and definitely not for 2K.
Arri 2.8K one is about all what you need in case of 2K. Make it even better and it will blow "some" 8K by miles for 2K delivery. For 4K good around 6K sensor should be enough. This is exactly the reason why so many people use Arri now. Also look at mentioned here few times article about resolution, how it's perceived and how misleading Ks- some 4K sensors are not as good as Arri 2.8K one.
It's not like we won't ever need/want 8K camera, but technology is not there yet. As you said- there are cool things which an be done with 8K image, but it has to be good one to start with. You can produce some 8K sensor, but we need decent sensor not just any. This reminds me story with lack of Dolby 4K monitor. There isn't one because Dolby can't source good enough panel for it - simple as this.

8K camera for sure needs compressed RAW. Again- technology is not there to record uncompressed RAW at eg. 60p at realistic price. Problem is that Cinemartin can't deliver it as they they have no resources to produce such a custom chip. Will BM be even interested to add support for such a camera in Resolve? How are you going to work with this footage? Convert RAW with cinemartin app to ProRes etc.? They say that this will be possible in camera- how good debayering it will use and how practical is this (to relay on camera for such a task)? Will there be actual SDK, so companies can add support to their apps?
As I said- if anything this camera will be full of compromises- operational, quality and also never mentioned support and servicing.

Would you buy this camera tomorrow for 10K Euro over other choices?

I bought a 4k monitor some weeks ago, before I had Apple cinema display that is outdated many ways. I will return the 4k display and keep the old display for time being. It is lower resolution, and has much worse colors than the 4k display, but still it is much better as it does not irrigate my eyes.

There is something on the 4k monitor that just irritates my eyes. I am not sure what it is, I am not complaining the resolution, and do not think that is the problem.

It has few very clear problems, it is a very bright monitor, but does not go very dim. the Apple monitor goes much dimmer, and that is useful especially night time. Also, on the Apple monitor I can adjust the brightens from the keyboard. On the 4 k monitor not so and it has totally terrible menu structure.

So is this somehow relevant to this discussion, maybe not. It is just, I have not even found a good 4k monitor yet and people are exited about 8k...

Wayne,
It’s a play on an existing phrase about someone else who excels at what he does.

Cheers,

Sorry Steve, I didn't see his original offensive post before I posted that. It's completely hypocritical to accuse somebody of what you do which is the opposite what they do...

Wayne,
I've read enough of your posts that I thought you might be able to take a little light-hearted humor. Steph Curry is one of the world's best basketball players. He does things no one else does. So they just say "Steph gonna Steph".

You post like no one else on this forum. Hence, "Wayne gonna Wayne". Just a little levity. WGW. I don't think it's any worse than how you started another post in this thread: "Anyway, you're all wrong...".

Just a couple observations. I don't think your posts are out of line on this forum, not that you care what I think.

But your posts aren't that clear (to me at least) and you don't include enough biographical information for anyone to authenticate your expertise. The posters on this forum who are genuinely helpful to others clearly have verifiable real-world experience, either in content creation or the technology itself.

That said, there's nothing wrong with speculating on the direction the technology will go and I see that at least a few folks want to dialog with you on this topic. Others can ignore, block, whatever. It's all good.

Again, Cheers!
Steve

As others have pointed out here, 4K is the plateau that most viewers will benefit from in enjoying a cinematic experience. I almost wish this thread had been titled “Why BMD Will Build a 6K Camera.” And the simple answer would be “to build a better 4K image.” I think that’s the only argument I personally find compelling. And I don’t fret about not having that as I love the 4.6K for the most part.

I just read the B&H Photo Explora article on the evolution of the Nikon F film cameras. Kind of nice to see an article about the Nikon F on my shelf. As a high school student I appreciated the game changer the original Nikon F represented for stills photography. My early model was completely manual. As were all other cameras I had used from the early 60s. It was perfect to be in complete control of every aspect and rarely was an image unusable because of that. And any bad shots were bad because I made a mistake or tried to push the film too far.

Every Nikon film camera after the model F ‘improved’ the camera. None made a better image necessarily, but added convenience. As I mentioned years ago, I shot so much in so many different conditions with forgiving film, I rarely needed to use my exposure meter which I also still use today. I even did work for others for a only few dollars because I loved everything about taking, developing, and printing photos in black and white primarily from the 60s to the 90s but also colour by the early 80s. But I guess that made me a professional in a sense since it was done for others and involved compensation.

I just know the URSA Mini 4.6K PL Camera will be the motion equivalent of that Nikon F. Someday decades ahead someone, likely an enthusiast, will be writing about this all manual camera sitting on their shelf that made the most beautiful moving images.

Sean, do you believe Arri? How long did they hold performance instead of make a better senseor?

Cypress Semiconductor was not able to make a better sensor for Arri, so they basically had to put 2 of their ALEV III sensors together, to makle the A3X for the Alexa 65

Wayne,
I've read enough of your posts that I thought you might be able to take a little light-hearted humor. Steph Curry is one of the world's best basketball players. He does things no one else does. So they just say "Steph gonna Steph".

You post like no one else on this forum. Hence, "Wayne gonna Wayne". Just a little levity. WGW. I don't think it's any worse than how you started another post in this thread: "Anyway, you're all wrong...".

Just a couple observations. I don't think your posts are out of line on this forum, not that you care what I think.

But your posts aren't that clear (to me at least) and you don't include enough biographical information for anyone to authenticate your expertise. The posters on this forum who are genuinely helpful to others clearly have verifiable real-world experience, either in content creation or the technology itself.

That said, there's nothing wrong with speculating on the direction the technology will go and I see that at least a few folks want to dialog with you on this topic. Others can ignore, block, whatever. It's all good.

Again, Cheers!
Steve

Apart from, what is he on about, I did post back humor. Bit uncertain about the way you meant it. Unfortunately people are stuck on power games ranking rather than facts ranking. Unfortunately, those who want a genuine conversation are far between. We get several here (out of thousands) that contribute very little and are illogical a lot, but constantly on. No credit in the figuring out department given, or retained much. Thinking of getting the psychological personality profiling and profile where they fit, where they are coming from. But this sort of thing goes on in a lot of places I think. It's no wonder there were so many bans in cinema forums in the past. I've met good camera men, and I've come across not spectacular ones simmering with attitudes. A freind of mine died, and I didn't even go to talk to the table full of video production guys he knew. They were sitting there simmering with a sort of negative vibe. Pretty unusual, I picked up on it straight away. I think it is the local region, didn't pick up this stuff where I was before. I must be a director. It is what it is, and they will find out one day. The future often proves me right. Good grief, if you logically and comprehensively figure things out before you say then, there is not much chance you will turn out wrong. One of the number one rules are in debating, it can be very difficult to prove something completely wrong in everyway, and you only need to prove it right once. Another big thing in debating, is that things can be right in some way even if not seemingly in others, and 'seemingly' used wrongly, doesn't cut it, as what you think is wrong, in some way could be right.(complex I know, but worth thinking about). So it is worth contemplating if what somebody says could be right in some way that you may not see. That's reality. Unfortunately, just launching attacks on things puts you on a logical back foot (something's skeptics don't even realise is happening). I think everytime you find a full on skeptic, you are probably dealing with less than first rate. But in the pseudo skeptic's world view, they are first rate. Their "knowledge" defines truth. I am not first rate, but I'm a sight better rate than a lot of skeptics like that. It's ironic, I once was working on a theory of unified physics that skeptics would love.

Anyway, of course I care about what genuine people think. I even also care about what the non-genuine ones think, as you can see. My often, very logical and clear posts are credentials, but may require clear headed logic to realise that.

I'm busy with more important things at the moment and have to make space and devote time to sit down and seriously formulate a good reply (more diplomatic) out of the three or so notes of replies I did. Just had a plumber here, so I popped by. But thanks for the input Steve.

I think Blackmagic either sticks with their current 4.6K sensor model and scales it to build a larger 6Kish camera or sticks with their current resolution and builds a V2 camera that can do 120fps 4K and 240fps in 1080p without window. I think that's the next logical upgrade for me.

I have to agree with Savannah Miller ... Black Magic should do both a V2 of 4.6 with 120fps in 4K without window and a 6.9 K (or whatever 6.something that works) as 6k is the sweet spot for production.

Sean, do you believe Arri? How long did they hold performance instead of make a better senseor?

Cypress Semiconductor was not able to make a better sensor for Arri, so they basically had to put 2 of their ALEV III sensors together, to makle the A3X for the Alexa 65

Lol. I was wondering what happened to their sensor tech. I thought it might have been absorbed by another company like Aptina or cmosis. The had smalsensor's technology, but am uncertain if they had fillfactory as well. Maybe they just used the best bits towards the Article, and let the consumer ones linger, but am uncertain, that's going back like 12 years. Smalsensor is the one that did the sensor in the cheap hdr stills I had, which did ungraded raw like hdr stills. It had a data rate that should have supported 720p. Just beautiful to look at magnified. Their hdr technique was to adjust the gain per pixel. Fillfactory, had hdr (I can't remember exactly which form, but maybe auto reset) and a way to get 100% fillfactor. The images were nice graded. I always thought that the technology of both companies integrated would make a great sensor. Now I'm finding out Arri might be it. Lol.

I'm stoked.

But seriously, you can do a lot better sensor than that, and such exists now. They had a lead, and could have kept it. Even this Fran sensor could be one that's clearly better. Science and physics doesn't just line up at brand names, they have to work at it like most. Now we have dragon come helium come monstro and the 4.6k and Sony would be as good. Years ago I advocated BM should get a Arri performance like website (thanks guys) and it shows, as a minimum not a maximum. The golden point where what you film gets like what you see is the claimed performance of the helium (but that depends on your gain settings etc, so some way to go yet). So, I've been expecting the next step up (because 16.5 stops, like my old cheap stills) looks gorgeous.

Anyway, you are all wrong.

Let me explain. if you had been following the discussion, you would realise that 8k raw produces better 4k and 2k. So a big advantage there. The 8k Nokia camera phone produced much better fhd by doing exactly that, plus better digital zoom.

Not really- 1.5x oversampled good sensor with optimal color science will easily be better than 8K average sensor, so you don't need 8K to deliver 4K and definitely not for 2K.
Arri 2.8K one is about all what you need in case of 2K. Make it even better and it will blow "some" 8K by miles for 2K delivery. For 4K good around 6K sensor should be enough. This is exactly the reason why so many people use Arri now. Also look at mentioned here few times article about resolution, how it's perceived and how misleading Ks- some 4K sensors are not as good as Arri 2.8K one.
It's not like we won't ever need/want 8K camera, but technology is not there yet. As you said- there are cool things which an be done with 8K image, but it has to be good one to start with. You can produce some 8K sensor, but we need decent sensor not just any. This reminds me story with lack of Dolby 4K monitor. There isn't one because Dolby can't source good enough panel for it - simple as this.

8K camera for sure needs compressed RAW. Again- technology is not there to record uncompressed RAW at eg. 60p at realistic price. Problem is that Cinemartin can't deliver it as they they have no resources to produce such a custom chip. Will BM be even interested to add support for such a camera in Resolve? How are you going to work with this footage? Convert RAW with cinemartin app to ProRes etc.? They say that this will be possible in camera- how good debayering it will use and how practical is this (to relay on camera for such a task)? Will there be actual SDK, so companies can add support to their apps?
As I said- if anything this camera will be full of compromises- operational, quality and also never mentioned support and servicing.

Would you buy this camera tomorrow for 10K Euro over other choices?

Let me ask you a question Andrew. If an 8k pixel had better performance than a 4.6k pixel, wouldn't it do 4k better than the 4.6k or a 6k? Which seems to be what cinemartin has done, and the sort of thing Canon did.

BM is a bigger company, they could do it better. When a lower cost pro 8k comes out, it is likely you 4.6k and 6k cameras will become cheaper too. Would that be a good thing? So yes BM, bring it on,?

People are operating out of fear. Fear that 8k means an expensive camera, fear that 8k means poor pixels, fear that 8k means delays on getting the next camera. But even cinemartine is doing a higher performance cheap 8k. People should have realised that when Nokia put a 8k stills in their camera phone with good performance and 2k video (by shooting with 8k pixels and binning and windowing for zoom) that the debate was over, it had been lost. That was a long time back. (Anybody know who did the Nokia sensor, I want to look up their stuff)? Now, many years latter, a bigger better full sized 8k should be possible, and it appears that cinemartin is offering something with better pixels than you are used to. So yes it could be cheaper than we think, have nice picture compared to some companies, and here September.

Now, NVIDIA has low power chips that could compress 8k raw p60 maybe. So, there are no objections that should not be immediately overcomable.

Let me ask you a question Andrew. If an 8k pixel had better performance than a 4.6k pixel, wouldn't it do 4k better than the 4.6k or a 6k? Which seems to be what cinemartin has done, and the sort of thing Canon did.

Yes, but show me this sensor. Show me this amazing 8K sensor publicly available (not crazy expensive) which is at leats as good as RED 8K or one in Alexa65.

As far as I know hype about this Nokia camera quickly got quiet and no one really used such a sensor again for years (new Huawei P20 Pro seems to have 40MP one).

Lets wait and see some footage from this camera then we can talk if 8K resolution covers other imperfections of the sensor.
Would you buy this camera tomorrow for 10KEuro if you had money and were in position to buy new one? Simple question.

Nobody said as good as the Red. Wait to see. Arri is not sacrament, tech moves on with time. This sensor maybe as good as it claims, we'll see. But don't expect BM to do anything less.

The problem is, like Arii, nokia seemed to have an exclusive, and I don't even know where it came from. So, as far as I know, nobody got to use it. The thing was, that it was before the Nokia which was the time for such debates. But like Arri, the Nokia technology didn't seem to move on, but sensor technology did. Have some faith about physics.

Honestly, you guys are treating this like it's 15 years ago, and it's crazy expensive, not just another Full frame sensor with a beefy fpga for special recording (apparently, unlike the ambarella 8k full camera chipset, this one has sophisticated read out requirements related to the global shutter). I have seen pictures of canon sensors at least 24 cm wide. A rolling shutter 8k might require less of a fpga (buy higher operation speed) than a shuttle recorder. It is usually the compression which chews up the power and the heat. A handful of steps to move a pixel, would not be much compared to many times more operational steps to compress a pixel.

BTW, available to a business is not the same as publically available. There could be 100 different sensors out there behind closed doors as far as we know. Time to chill and wait. But don't think BM can't give a good camera with this sort of resolution (actually an 5.3k s35 version and an 8k FF version with same pixels, which are only a little smaller than the 4.6).

Exactly- for doing cutting edge tech you need to be respected and biggish company with enough resources, founds, trust and respect. What Cinemartin does is more like a development kit and fun project for guy who likes doing it and has money to spend. BM is definitely in different position and sooner or later they will make 8K camera. They won't make one only because you are so desperate to see1 for sure though It's serious business decision in their case and I think now they know that going to much ahead is not necessarily good. There are still many years ahead to make money on 4K cameras (a lot can be still done here), not point jumping to 8K and destroying your own market.
You still did not answer my simple question which is the best summary for the whole debate

Atm. Cinemartin's 8K camera is this:



same as Canon's 24cm sensor - a picture.

By the way that Foxconn story is surely the new RED 8K phone ? I don’t think we’re talking about a “real” camera.

JB

No, real camera.

I seriously doubt that. It's most likely a consumer camera intended for holographic imaging, not a cinema camera.

One of the big uses of 8k is better 4k. Canon was doing this with their tullhd cinema cameras. They used Ultra HD sensor to debayer to better color at full HD. If you listen to Red, 8k is not really 8k, you need 10k+ to make better 8k. So, expect them to come out with 10-12k once 8k is more a shooting thing.

There are a lot of misconceptions in there. One of the biggest advantages that the higher resolutions offer is in keying for compositing and VFX. 16-bit linear data gives colorists a lot of flexibility with it as well.

The rest is mythical. People have been printing 8K (approximately) cameras for printing for years, and they haven't had to shoot at higher res and downscale to get great image quality. Most likely most of the people who need to down res from 8K to 4K to get good 4K footage are shooting wide open and missing focus.

AJA Cion, Axiom and three Blackmagic 4K cameras used a GS sensor that was supposed to have a number of special HDR DR extention modes.

Not to mention how long it took AJA to get the Cion's color science dialed in (three years after launch -- and it was a five year development project)... and Apertus is still at it. BMD "cheated" by incorporating a collection of experts on color science by buying DaVinci. I seriously think that a lot of people underestimate how big an advantage that was for BMD; it probably cut BMD's development time for its first camera by years, and there's no way that BMD would have nailed the color science so well with its first camera attempt otherwise.

Definitely a wise investment, acquiring DaVinci.

And Wayne, if they'd sold thousands of monitors. I've worked on many continents on many shows with many crews. I like to stay current with gear and I've never heard of them.

I've heard of Cinemartin, but not been able to find anyone who has seen a Cinemartin product in real life.

The Sony MF sensors as far as I know have integration times that are too slow for motion that's good enough for what we want (Fuji / Phase One / X1D etc) unless that's changed in the last few months. They list video capabilities, but in reality...

JB

Yeah, they CAN record video, but they don't come anywhere near to recording the full sensor's data.

And if Sony did have a version of one of those sensors that could record video at reasonable frame rates, it would be in Venice, but Venice is 6K, and a VERY sweet camera. Gorgeous image.

And only (hah!) $50K!

I'd say the next big step in sensor technology will be with organic sensors like Panasonic has came up with and a later paradigm shift could be curved sensors which might drastically reduce lens design complexity and weight.

Or any other new sensor technology.

The rest is mythical. People have been printing 8K (approximately) cameras for printing for years, and they haven't had to shoot at higher res and downscale to get great image quality. Most likely most of the people who need to down res from 8K to 4K to get good 4K footage are shooting wide open and missing focus.

I think the point is that 4K Bayer sensor can't deliver 4K final resolution. It has to be oversampled sensor with probably about 1.5x(?) final resolution, so something like 6K for final 4K.

The best algorithms deliver about 80% of measured resolution. That is, if you design the OLPF for avoiding luma moiré, but not completely excluding chroma moiré. Even Arri or Red do it that way.

But of course we'd like some more for oversampling for stabilising, re-framing etc. so I'd consider 6K a sweet spot between sensitivity, data rates and price at the current state of technology. But until that get's cheaper, I'm very happy with a UM46P.

By the way that Foxconn story is surely the new RED 8K phone ? I don’t think we’re talking about a “real” camera.

JB

No, real camera.

I seriously doubt that. It's most likely a consumer camera intended for holographic imaging, not a cinema camera.

One of the big uses of 8k is better 4k. Canon was doing this with their tullhd cinema cameras. They used Ultra HD sensor to debayer to better color at full HD. If you listen to Red, 8k is not really 8k, you need 10k+ to make better 8k. So, expect them to come out with 10-12k once 8k is more a shooting thing.

There are a lot of misconceptions in there. One of the biggest advantages that the higher resolutions offer is in keying for compositing and VFX. 16-bit linear data gives colorists a lot of flexibility with it as well.

The rest is mythical. People have been printing 8K (approximately) cameras for printing for years, and they haven't had to shoot at higher res and downscale to get great image quality. Most likely most of the people who need to down res from 8K to 4K to get good 4K footage are shooting wide open and missing focus.

A lot of misconceptions, but you have not give even 1 example. Why shoot 8k for better 4k, then why do they shoot 4.6k or 6k for better 4K. It's an old trick that people in the know, know. Canon used 4k to shoot 2k. Nokia used 8k to shoot 2k best in class. No misconceptions at all. It doesn't stack up, what you said. That is the mythical. Why pollute the thread?

RED is making a few cameras. They are making consumer level cameras for their new 4V platform, and they have a 4V camera incorporated into the new RED phone.

There is later going to be possibly a 6K or 8K add-on "cinema module" which is likely what Foxconn is making. I don't think the RED phone will do well because it's too large, expensive, and not the most practical thing. Unless the 4V format really takes off, I don't see it doing too well.

So, no, it doesn't take years. There are even cheap cameras with a relatively balanced image, and those with deliverably distorted image levels to make it less sellable to higher models. It's sort if like saying that a colorist has to spend years to balance a frame. You know the characteristics as the manufacturer, and you pass along the profile to be compensated for.

The Venice example is actually one good objection, but Sony has shown off a prototype hispeed in 2015 I think. My guess, if it was a Sony, it's likely not from the cinema line, it could be industrial) but there are many companies to choose from). It's only 12 bits, which doesn't sound very high end, with pixel size on par with 4k m4/3rds cameras like the pocket, or the latest 1 inch 4k+ Sony's with similar dynamic range (which might have 14 bit mode). So, most objections fall away.

It's all a mythical misconception to say that 8k FF has to be worse than the 4.3rds and less cameras out there with same or less pixel size, which have perfectly sufficient capability. That's real logic. Not believing misconstrued hype about what manufactures do which is really designed to give you less for the money, to get you to spend more. I've just had an image in my mind of a skit of Japanese camera execs on a wall down a warf fishing for people's wallets as they walk by. Its no stranger skit than believing them.

Savannah. They are not listening so much anymore. I worry for them, that it is going be like the redray.

Atm. Cinemartin's 8K camera is this:



same as Canon's 24cm sensor - a picture.

My apologies, I was wrong, it was a 20cm sensor (unless I saw a second bigger one):

http://www.canon.com/technology/future/cmos.html


And here's cinemartin's present camera head:



There is speculation that is another camera that it is based upon.

Exactly- for doing cutting edge tech you need to be respected and biggish company with enough resources, founds, trust and respect.

Nonsense, that is myth. All you need to do is be a customer of somebody that does cutting edge technology and put it together. There are companies bigger than Red making sensors which can be bought, along with the camera design, and put in a camera. This does not equate with reality. Red did it this way, because they had the money. Even they got their sensor design done by somebody else, and now likely they have sensor design in house, but from the way Red and Sony sensor performance track each other. I imagine ON semiconductor is involved. As Aptina (was bought by On) and Sony had a cross licensing deal.

You are missing the marketing and practical cues which are the real reasons to make a 8k camera. Likely also 8k camcorders this or next year. Why are you seemingly so absolutely desperate not to see one, that's the question.

You obviously don't know the real business issue of selling so many 4k cameras the amount of people left that want one drops off, your asked stall, the competition goes to the next step beyond 8k into auto stereo content, you go bankrupt still on 4k delivery cameras. Even if 4k became and resmined most of the market, most people would have their's already, plumetting sales to hundreds, maybe a few thousand a year. Starts to make more business sense now doesn't it. There is maybe another 10-30 years of practical camera improvement left, no use getting stuck here. Practical realistic stuff out there to consider.

Which simple question?

10k euro, I thought that was another irrelevant bait question. I don't think it will be more than $5kUS on the high end. Within a year these sorts of things are likely to be $1k-2kUS for the head (and face it, it is mostly a head with direct to storage recurring). You are still up for maybe many thousands for the rest of the system to compress it fast enough to keep up with recording. At $5k-10kAU I would especially want a full camera with compression and monitoring, but then Red is expected to move 8k in this range next year's or so, so under $5kUS full camera is then what to aim for. But Sony etc (let's hope JVC) would move 8k video cameras into under $5k market next year (even Sooner, JVC tends to be first, but this maybe upto $10kAU. (Note I have used a mixture of US and Australian dollar figures). The big companies will move camcorders into the $1k-$2k market likely in 2019 or 2020. 8k displays are out there and that's enough justification to work on 8k footage. But for the time being, 4k is enough reason to buy 8k, due to quality and 8k stills. The guy could make money selling it into the stills market for discerning professionals (a cliche, where they do most of the setting up without auto functions). You shoot for what people will watch tomorrow, 4k+ honking great big displays and glasses.

Anyway, when is that 8k 70 inch sharp coming to Australia. I want to check one out. I have been told there is a surprisingly noticeable difference in 8k compared to 4k even at 70 inches.

There is one thing I can see demandig 8k and beyond cameras, it is the very wide angle video form 180 degrees to full 360 video. There is big names now developing headsets for such material.

It is also, I think such cameras will have use also on traditional film industry. It gives the possibility to freely select the framing at editing phase for very spesial shots.

This is with 100 euro less than 4k 360 camera and not much time used on the editing, but you get the idea. Just needing a better camera for it.

See expesially the end of the video, starting 0:32.

With better camera it could be zoomed more into and the fisheye corrected.

The problem with the CINEMARTIN camera is I have doubts if they can get it under $10K which is overpriced. Even Kinefinity cameras these days are overpriced given their feature-set compared to similar Blackmagic models. Look at the new Terra 4K which is rumored to be the same sensor tech as in GH5s/Pocket4k/Z-cam E2. It seemed like a bargain at $4000 (body only) until the pocket 4K was announced and now it looks way overpriced. Likewise, the new Mavo 6K has likely the same sensor tech as the DJI x7 camera, except it costs 4x more money at almost $10K in a usable shooting configuration. I don't think small-time camera manufacturers can keep up with Blackmagic's aggressive pricing anymore.

Exactly- for doing cutting edge tech you need to be respected and biggish company with enough resources, founds, trust and respect.

Nonsense, that is myth. All you need to do is be a customer of somebody that does cutting edge technology and put it together. There are companies bigger than Red making sensors which can be bought, along with the camera design, and put in a camera. This does not equate with reality. Red did it this way, because they had the money. Even they got their sensor design done by somebody else, and now likely they have sensor design in house, but from the way Red and Sony sensor performance track each other. I imagine ON semiconductor is involved. As Aptina (was bought by On) and Sony had a cross licensing deal.

You are missing the marketing and practical cues which are the real reasons to make a 8k camera. Likely also 8k camcorders this or next year. Why are you seemingly so absolutely desperate not to see one, that's the question.

You obviously don't know the real business issue of selling so many 4k cameras the amount of people left that want one drops off, your asked stall, the competition goes to the next step beyond 8k into auto stereo content, you go bankrupt still on 4k delivery cameras. Even if 4k became and resmined most of the market, most people would have their's already, plumetting sales to hundreds, maybe a few thousand a year. Starts to make more business sense now doesn't it. There is maybe another 10-30 years of practical camera improvement left, no use getting stuck here. Practical realistic stuff out there to consider.

Which simple question?

10k euro, I thought that was another irrelevant bait question. I don't think it will be more than $5kUS on the high end. Within a year these sorts of things are likely to be $1k-2kUS for the head (and face it, it is mostly a head with direct to storage recurring). You are still up for maybe many thousands for the rest of the system to compress it fast enough to keep up with recording. At $5k-10kAU I would especially want a full camera with compression and monitoring, but then Red is expected to move 8k in this range next year's or so, so under $5kUS full camera is then what to aim for. But Sony etc (let's hope JVC) would move 8k video cameras into under $5k market next year (even Sooner, JVC tends to be first, but this maybe upto $10kAU. (Note I have used a mixture of US and Australian dollar figures). The big companies will move camcorders into the $1k-$2k market likely in 2019 or 2020. 8k displays are out there and that's enough justification to work on 8k footage. But for the time being, 4k is enough reason to buy 8k, due to quality and 8k stills. The guy could make money selling it into the stills market for discerning professionals (a cliche, where they do most of the setting up without auto functions). You shoot for what people will watch tomorrow, 4k+ honking great big displays and glasses.

Sorry, but this is lot of talking about "what may happen" without any support from facts (mostly wishful thinking) and slightly outside of reality.
I think tomorrow is going to rain and in next 5 years we will have 16K camera. I can keep going.
Waste of time...

I think the point is that 4K Bayer sensor can't deliver 4K final resolution. It has to be oversampled sensor with probably about 1.5x(?) final resolution, so something like 6K for final 4K.

Once again, it's a myth. The 4K version of Blade Runner 2049 was shot in LESS than 4K for example. The 4K version of Skyfall was up-rezzed from 4K and Roger Deakins actually thought that it was TOO sharp.

It dosn't HAVE to be subsampled from 6K to make great 4K if it's well enough lit and shot.

Of course, if you miss focus a lot, then you'll HAVE to subsample to get sharpness back...

It will never be as sharp as CGI due to use of Bayern pattern- this is the point and not a myth, but pure math. It's also not only about sharpness but image being more "organic" when it's oversampled (or then it can be even blurred).
If it's aesthetically sharp enough or not it's another story.

It will never be as sharp as CGI due to use of Bayern pattern- this is the point and not a myth, but pure math.
If it's aesthetically sharp enough or not it's another story.

Agreed... but if it's sharp enough to print, then it's sharp enough.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

The problem with the CINEMARTIN camera is I have doubts if they can get it under $10K which is overpriced. Even Kinefinity cameras these days are overpriced given their feature-set compared to similar Blackmagic models. Look at the new Terra 4K which is rumored to be the same sensor tech as in GH5s/Pocket4k/Z-cam E2. It seemed like a bargain at $4000 (body only) until the pocket 4K was announced and now it looks way overpriced. Likewise, the new Mavo 6K has likely the same sensor tech as the DJI x7 camera, except it costs 4x more money at almost $10K in a usable shooting configuration. I don't think small-time camera manufacturers can keep up with Blackmagic's aggressive pricing anymore.

Yes each camera has overheads per camera. Four pocket 4k's = 8kp60, but a 8k camera only has one overhead, plus this lacks the cost of the compression engine etc. An exotic sensor might cost more, but companies compete against each other in price. A compression engine in dogs is a hefty FPGA, a bit more cost again, but they are not doing that. So below $5k is preferable, but not having the volume of BM sales, it could cost a lot more as the fixed costs are spread across less units. But using a reference design paid for by the sensor manufacturer fur customers to use, and slotted in a networked manufacturing pine in Asia, it could still be cheap. So, on BM like sales sub $2k might get possible, but to pay themselves on lower sakes,bit might need to be a lot more. It's a gamble, if you can guarantee sales you can charge less, but otherwise. However, they could sell a few thousands of these to the movie lots in Asia straight off, particularly if there was a compression engine module coming at a well estimated price. Then once that comes, thousands of sales in China and Japan TV industry, but they could use as a live studio camera already with a suitable convertor. So, there are avenues. I base this possibility on two things, nationalistic loyality fur a product manufactured in a populous up and coming country wanting to be seen as world leaders, and the Japanese are wanting to be out front with 8k anyway. These are only avenues of possibility, it doesn't mean they will turn out, it just means it's an avenue to try. But you are looking at maybe less than 10k sakes over 2 years once they start selling, and if competitors don't get out there. So, it's far from retain the volume or the price. I prefer 1k-$2k, but they should charge up to $5k fit volume. As a specialist camera, like VFX, the market price is much higher. There is a little trick there that could get the market, I'm not mentioning.

Sorry, but this is lot of talking about "what may happen" without any support from facts (mostly wishful thinking) and slightly outside of reality.
I think tomorrow is going to rain and in next 5 years we will have 16K camera. I can keep going.
Waste of time...

Just spent my time rereading to verify. No, it is about what 'can' realistically happen, that's how real business decisions are made. It is based on real information and historical patterns and company statements. You are yourself out of reality, and wasted time. You don't have to spend thousands of dollars to buy a market report to tell you the same thing if you have a clue. Some of the more fundamental or obscure stuff you have to dig into a report for. You don't even seem aware of the common historical release patterns (reality).

Stop being so full you can't come up to the next level of understanding. You are better off listening and learning rather than trying to challenge everything somebody with nearly 40 years of reading and dealing with technology sectors. If you are not going contribute anything realistically positive, don't bother. I can count on my fingers those out of thousands that archived nothing but know everything, that negatively come along and post bomb everything. Those thousands obviously have some sense. You yourself, have contributed very little which is realistic.

Construing out negative conjecture is not answering correctly. A mere vapour image of reality.

It will never be as sharp as CGI due to use of Bayern pattern- this is the point and not a myth, but pure math.
If it's aesthetically sharp enough or not it's another story.

Agreed... but if it's sharp enough to print, then it's sharp enough.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

You know, I was once in a discussion with an academy award winning engineer and an leading person to do with Bayer, with too much technical acclaim by others. The engineer had figured out a way to derive more resolution, and I was onto what he was talking about because I had come up with a more complete method decades ago. But we were both like, blinking, at each other, astounded, because the other guy just didn't get it, not did his company by the looks of it. He felt disrespected and left. I've long argued that 4k line of pixels presents 4k of points which is resolution. With the right technique you can get squared pixel borders of the original scene, as they are aligned. So, Rakesh, you are right in various ways. You can also upscale from my technique. I think there would be modern upscalers out there that do it too.

People quote other's incomplete marketed works as complete too much, with no real experience in freshly designing something even as incomplete as their example themselves, let alone look into the dark and create something brand new.

So, Wayne. Care to link to the whitepaper of your technique?
What was the amount of resolution increase your method could yield?
And how costly in terms of processor calculations is it?

People quote other's incomplete marketed works as complete too much, with no real experience in freshly designing something even as incomplete as their example themselves, let alone look into the dark and create something brand new.

Look what you said few posts above: "we need 8K to get perfect 4K"- it was your key argument for 8K sensor.
Now you are saying that with newly designed sensor we need just 4K to get perfect 4K And there is even paper for this technology (we also have Cinemartin picture). Well, there are 1000s of papers which stay papers forever as they there is always something there- complexity, costs, processing power etc which holds them to become real products. Blue laser technology was known for 50 years, but only where Polish scientists made technology affordable it became a real deal. If idea on paper is "good", easy to implement and gives real advantages then it's picked up quickly and spreads everywhere, like Bayern pattern.
Any upscaling is just interpolation, so "not real". It always have its limits and when it's good then costs a lot of processing power.
Most important- it's not resolution which makes great image, but for you it's all about 8K sensor. It's use of those shortcuts like Bayern, interpolation, sharpening etc what makes digital image only an approximation of real world and for many less "nice" than analog film (same with audio). The more "cheating" you use the more "digital" image you get. We want opposite- more "organic" sensors to get better representation of reality. It's almost like we want 8K sensor and then blur those pixels edges to get more organic look while keeping enough resolution (not sharpen this edges to get more fake/harsh "details"). World is not pixel perfect, this is last thing you want in real image.

So, Wayne. Care to link to the whitepaper of your technique?
What was the amount of resolution increase your method could yield?
And how costly in terms of processor calculations is it?

Lol! As any good engineer might say, it's priority (meaning nick off, you are not getting it for free Robert, and you should know better than to ask). . I know a guy doing top end technology that won't even reveal his company name or patents, he's so paranoid after being in the real industry for years.