RED 4K 3D laser projector = $10K - Page 9

It remains the polarizations with DaLite HP 2.4?

Nope, the high power doesn't retain any polarization.

Too bad , i will not buy another screen...

Hi,

Not very enthusiastic this Italian journalist :

http://www.avmagazine.it/articoli/vi...-4k_index.html

http://translate.google.com/translat...-4k_index.html

Sorry for Google translation, but ...

It is not facts.
You are just repeating Sony "hyperbole".

The "8K" specs of the F65 is just Sony marketing hype, or rather call it "creative counting".

"Smart move" from Sony, as people all over now is indiscriminately repeating the marketing hype.

General resolution for 8K is 8192x4320=35MP (DCI cinema specs but not yet standardized) or 7680x4320=33MP (8K TV/Broadcast format).

How does Sony reach their "8K" number.

They have a CMOS sensor with 20 million photosites. The rows of photosites on the sensor is turned 45 degrees. The aspect ratio of the sensor is 1.88:1.
The sensor has double set of green photosites compared to normal CMOS sensors, But this is only in the horizontal rows.

So; The horizontal rows has 4000 Green photosites + 2000 Red + 2000 Blue = 8000! ~ aka "8K".
The sensor does not have the equal double set of green vertical.

Normal pixel counting of any sensor to tell the pixel resolution would not count the double set of green photosites as more than single photosite as they do not contribute much, if any, to the resolution and resolving power of the sensor. Particularly when the double set of photosites of one color is not repeated both horizontal and vertical.
The double Green set of photosites in the Sony sensor does only contribute to a better reproduction of Green color. That's why Sony has made the sensor that way.

This camera uses a 17.6 million photosites crop of the sensor to record image output (this is normal), If we incorporate all the green photosites in the measure.

If we count the double green as one photosite, the resolution measure will be much lower and will be on par with the Red MX sensor in the Epic-X camera.
Based on the numbers above, people can themselves calculate the conventional resolution of the Sony F65 camera.

The Sony F65 sensor is subsampled in camera to 4K output even in RAW (it can not record the sensors full resolution like the Red cameras.
The Red Epic does not subsample the 5K sensor resolution in camera. That is done in post.
This is one of the main differences between Red cameras and cameras like F65 and Alexa, neither which can record RAW in camera but needs an expensive ($30000?) external recorder to record RAW. Also one of the reasons why those cameras are so much larger and heavier than the Red cameras.

It is true that no camera have the resolve power of their sensor resolution measured on a Zone chart. That is why they record at a higher resolution than the intended output resolution. That is also why 2K cameras or 2K film scans does not resolve full HD.
There is no difference between cameras based on this, only difference is how they subsample from higher sensor resolution to intended output resolution.

The F65 surely records good quality images, but is not exactly an impressive piece of innovative engineering like the Red cameras.

It is surprising that Sony uses this kind "marketing hyperbole" (even thought that is typical Sony) when presenting professional equipment, but it is more worrying that professional "camera gearheads" keep repeating the "8K" hype from Sony rather than calling them out on it.

Wow. Interesting report on the new Redray projector demo. Especially these quotes (from the translation):

"Beyond the ghosting, the thing that struck me immediately is the native contrast ratio, very, very low. The black level is just too high. Also higher than a lower-priced DLP projector. "


"All in all there's the projector. It exists and works, but still need significant improvements, not just for the stereo separation that will be resolved with better management of the polarization of the laser beams. The biggest trouble I think about the native contrast ratio that is simply timeless. "

I wonder how a SilverStar P would work? I think you can use this screen for 2D as well.

Drexler
If you were to project 2D as will be most common I assume you send the same signal left and right so that things look right in 2D on any screen. To your eyes photons are photons.

The italian review
Lumen reasonable if the estimate is correct.
3D performance is hard to tell since the reviewer took of the 3D-glasses.
Color ok is good.
Most important the reviewer didn´t complain about speckle
The sad part was the remarks about native contrast. If we are lucky the higher blacklever was from ambient iight or good light output

Thanks for interesting report links. At last someone that has a clue about projector reporting. "Camera gearheds" ususally display a shocking lack of knowledge about projector technology.

As to the 3D "quality"; it seems like the 3D was not enough "in your face" to really impress him, based on many other attenders that was "self confessed" "3D haters" in fact reported that this was the first time they actually liked 3D.

About the too low contrast; many rather (inculding Engadget) reported how impressed they where with the detail resolve in the shadows. Could be the movie was graded rather light in the shadows.
Laser projection should not have problems with good Black, as this is one of the advantages of lasers (rapid on/off).

Seems the projector maybe was a little underpowered for the throw distance. When the projector is spec'd to up to 15' screen and is here used on a 24' screen on a throw distance much larger than a normal HT cinema, it might lack some power.
This was a 3D showing, and showing 2K 3D for each eye. It is possible when they get it up to 4K for each eye on Wednesday that it has some more light power, depending on the type of 3D system they use.

Strange that his companion that sat closer to the screen was not able to see if this was Lcos, DLP or some other tech.

I guess Red keeps their technical specs "close to their chests" to be a step ahead of other manufacturers until they release this projector.

Too bad about the need for silver screen, not good for 2D, which will be the material one use the projector for most.
But impressive he couldn't see Speckle even though it was on a silver screen.

That his companion could see pixels just show 4K is not enough.

I'm not repeating hyperbole. I stated everywhere that it is only specd at 8k. By their logic, that is true. Red does not mention anywhere that their 5k cameras are not really so after debayering. I don't understand why you went on about it after I stated several times you will not resolve 8k resolution, and nobody in the industry has said such things. Everyone knows it is a true 4k camera primarily.

My point is and was it is the only true 4k source. Therefore. There is scant use for a projector right now from red, a company that can't even hit 4k in their cameras. I doubt this will be released anytime soon or at all, since there are already options for people who work with very high resolution, and those people are generally not consumers.

coolscan
Why do you say that a silver screen is necessary even for 2D. What is it that I am not getting? Is there no light trap inside the projector (assuming microdisplays) that soups up the "black pixels"?

good report nice pictures thanks for the link.

that all sounds for me like they use a lcos chipset inside.

i hear in the past reports from people saw a lcos based laser pr. and they also
complain about the bad cr.

also the bad ghosting tell me there is a lcos inside.

No, it is not true in any conventional way of calculating sensor resolution, as I wrote. If that was so the Foveon sensor would be 3 times their actual resolution, which has been debated a lot and is not accepted as such.

The "8K" is a marketing hype by Sony, and they know it.
8K as in for example the new broadcast standard that NHK is working on, their 8K camera they are going to use in the London Olympics or the Sharp 85" 8K TV is approximately 33Megapixel.
When then Sony uses this term to marketing their camera, it is false and dishonest marketing.
You may believe it as much as you like, but just don't repeat it as a statement without expecting corrections, particularly when you use the "hyperbole measurements" to criticise another company.

What will Sony do the day they or someone else make a true 8K camera?

W.Mayer
Fast switching lcos implementations that I have read about have low native contrast.
Theory says that slower switching lcos such as d-ila and sxrd should benefit in native contrast from lasers instead of lamps.

Whether the friend did or didn´t see pixels might be lost in google translate.

Why not??
This projector deserve his Silver Screen!

I haven't space for a second screen...

Nowhere did I say it will resolve 8k resolution. I don't believe it will, I know it won't. it is a fact they state it is an 8k sensor, and by their math it is. They don't advertise it as 8k really though, they advertise is at 4k by the way of an 8k sensor. On the other hand, other companies are not so honest. Where can I find Red saying that the epic 5k is 3.8k, or even 4k? Of course you can pull 5k out of an epic, and you will be able to pull 8k out of an f65. It means nothing at the resolution, I keep saying that, I don't know where I'm being hyperbolic. at those resolutions the images will be unwatchable, but the spec is there, the file will be there for demosaicing. Sony never bragged about it being 8k when their reps visited, and none of the rental houses who make money of it advertise is as '8k'. the same can't be said for other camera companies. Sony and rental companies just use the 8k as a way to describe the ability to de-alias, blow up, and pull out extensive information and color that would surpass merely a '4k' camera. I don't own, never will shoot, and don't sell sony cameras. After seeing it paired with leicas on the lot, and being on set for After Earth, forgive me if I found the resolution of the F65 amazing, and I am excited about true 4k. As it stands, it will be the first movie suitable for 4k projection. But nowhere am I claiming it will resolve 8k. I noted it is needed in this case, and the only case at the moment, to derive real 4k for projection.

How would the LCOS contribute to ghosting if they are displaying L/R simultaneously, and does anyone have any idea how they are displaying two images at once? (not being a jerk with the LCOS question, just confused)

I don't say it is necessary for 2D in any other way than that is rather cumbersome and expensive for home theatre (and cinemas) to need a silver screen for 3D and a white normal screen for 2D.
As in; silver screens are not good for showing 2D in good quality.

Which in fact if one think of it; Silver screens probably degrade the quality for 3D too, and it is a pity that one have to use silver screens for 3D.

Silver screens for 3D is rather a badly resolved technical problem.
It started out as a solution to too low light in 3D projection (mostly for RealD?) and was meant to swap screens between 3D and 2D showings. This ended rather fast as cinemas got lazy and 2D movies are nearly always shown on Silver screens.
Now it has become a requirement for passive 3D (other than RealD systems). X-Pand 3D and other shutterglass technologies don't need silver screens.

So it has become a badly technical resolved 3D solution.

Negative reactions to 2D projection on silver screens has come from several film workers communities in Europe, and the French till now has gone furthers; France bids adieu to silver screens

Actually he only says that both couldn't see any pixel!

They are very well prepared and professional video editors, also tested and calbrated so many projector and displays trough the years, since CRT's...
Emidio is the founder of Italian AVforum many years ago and recently performed several demonstrations and shootout of Sony VW1000 Vs JVC all around italy, also with some native 4K material shoot by them
He recently setup a calibration test BR for 3D, so if he says that there was some 3D issue on RED (probably due to early beta machine), i would belive him!

As you can imagine i know him...

Bye

Eh, this is what comes out of the google translate; "I could not perceive the pixels. Ermanno even that was almost three meters in front of me, was able to perceive them."

Is this not correct translated from the Italian original?


Fully respect his knowledge, not critical to what he reports at all.

Yes, I was talking about 3D. In 2D you wont have any problems with a normal screen.

Not correct.

"Ermanno wasn't able to perceive any pixel."

Yeah i know it wasn't a criticism, it was to say that report was made by people experienced in the projection matter...

There is an error on translation, they couldn't perceive any pixel even from 5 meters of distance...it was in the "positive things" section!

Oh please, you are both back-paddling and inserting new false information.
It is false use of common terminology by Sony to hype their product.

This is what you started with...

You claim Red use false marketing when it is fact Sony that use the false marketing.


There are many ways to marketing. To state that Sony has not used their 8K marketing claim fully to create the perception that it is a 8K camera is not true, both by your posts and by just googling like here.
Sony themselves in their material refer repeatedly their "8K CMOS sensor", it is slyly worded so as to be able "back it up with some numbers" but give the imression that it is a 8K camera in conventional understanding, marketing 101
doesn't mean it is honest.


You won't, they never have made such a claim. The nearest is approximately 4.5K measured on a zone plate. Until the F65 has been in a shoot-out with zone plate measures we will not really know the true resolve power of the camera.


You can't pull 8K out of the F65. Not in any conventional understanding of 8K as 33MP, and not on the principle the camera functions where the whole point is to combine the double set of green pixels.


If you don't think that kind of marketing is hyperbolic and dishonest, I don't know what to say.

Again you come with false claims that I only can assume you have gotten from Sony reps. or other people that repeat those false claims.

That the F65 is the first camera that has "true 4K" and only camera that produce files that derive "real 4k for projection." is patently false. And it makes it much worse that you use it to criticise RED.

As you compare Red and Sony cameras, Read this, best explanation of the process in the F65 that I have seen. It is of course from the guy at Red that is in charge of "the pixels" in the Red cameras. But if you find someone from Sony to counter this I will be happy to read it.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...l=1#post894692

Some more info from Red Fire Chief Jarred Land;

How do you "shoot" 24 foot lamberts? Foot lamberts are what you get off the screen and are a function of ANSI brightness, screen size and gain.

Could you guys please take he camera discussion to a more appropriate place? This thread is about PROJECTORS.

Excellent question.

"And remember.. since we are shooting 24 foot lamberts you don't need it to be high gain. A higher gain screen improves the effects of polarization but also gets into all sorts of other issues like hotspots etc."

What does it mean?
Then my HP will work fine in 3D?