How will the SI-1920HDVR compete against RED

[Don Donatello]

"If you read our FAQ, you will see that you can get the same DOF on a 2/3" sensor to a f4-5.6 split 35mm sensor if you use Zeiss primes at f1.2 (wide-open, which is T1.3"

then this would be TRUE of any 2/3 " CCD camera and it would hold true for 16mm vs. 35mm and to even stretch it further you could find the same DoF between a 1/3" camera shooting at a certain field of view at F 1.3 and match it to same field of view for 35mm lens shooting at F128 .. i really don't think you're going to find many cinematographers buying that DoF line..
.. cinealta, viper, varicam all can claim the same 35mm comparison DoF for
their camera's but they don't ????

i happen to like S16mm and have no problem with the DoF ... and i like
the DoF on the clips i've seen shot with the SI camera ..
the SI camera has been producing excellent images = no if's, and's, or butt's.
IMO loose the 2/3 vs 35mm DoF thing as a selling point ..

[Tom Wills]

Hey, I'm no expert here, but Jason, some of your points aren't entirely correct. First of all, the RED can record 4k to the RED-RAID, which is mounted on one of the RED cages. So there you go, onboard 4k. Also, it appears that RED will probably be working right out-of-the-box with Final Cut Pro, just like the SI camera.

And also, though this is less of a tech point than the ones above, but having a completely RAW workflow really makes me an ideal candidate to not buy this camera. If I can't take the footage right out of the camera, put it into Final Cut, and 20 minutes later have a rough cut of a few shots to show a client, without compressing, adjusting color spaces, and all that jazz, I can't work with it. So, for me, the RAW is actually a disadvantage. Maybe it's not for some of you filmmakers out there, but for me, doing Documentary/ENG work, I want a high quality D-Cinema camera, but I don't want to have to wait for "dailies". So, in my mind, that's not as big of an advantage as you're touting it to be. RAW isn't for everybody.

I mean, you've got a great camera for filmmakers who want a slightly lower priced system than RED, and who could love the workflow of RAW, but it's not a perfect camera for everybody. RED isn't pefect either, but it's more in line with what many other people want. I personally think that camera co-existing is perfectly good, and I think this will be a situation in which that will be perfect.

(And I'm waiting for the first shoot using REDs and SI cameras at the same time.)

[Jason Rodriguez]

Originally Posted by Tom Wills

If I can't take the footage right out of the camera, put it into Final Cut, and 20 minutes later have a rough cut of a few shots to show a client, without compressing, adjusting color spaces, and all that jazz, I can't work with it. So, for me, the RAW is actually a disadvantage.

I'm sorry you were not able to see our demos at NAB . . . but we were doing exactly what you need with the RAW footage without all the data-manipulation baggage you mention.

Shooting, editing, color-correction, rough-cutting, the RAW data is completely transparent to the end user with the Cineform RAW codec . . . it behaves just like any other AVI file. It even plays back in Windows Media player straight from the camera (that's how we were playing back dailies on the NAB show floor)

So if you want, you can shoot, edit, and distribute (play out over HD-SDI, burn to a DVD, or whatever you want to-do) just like you have with any other file format like a P2 file or something you've ingest off tape. BUT if you want, with the power of RAW you can then also go back and do all the messing around in post that you want.

Depending on how you want to manage, edit, and manipulate the footage, Cineform RAW gives you a choice. If you want to ignore the RAW features and just treat the footage as "normal" like any other file from any other camera (or like any AVI or QT file for that fact), all the capabilities to-do that are right there right now. If you want to be a tweaker and completely re-do the footage as something else, you can do that as well. Depending on your clients, the time constraints, etc. the choice is yours.

[Tom Wills]

I stand corrected Jason. Thank you for replying like that. I, truthfully, have had no experience with RAW outside of some photos I've worked with for my boss, and incorporating them into video productions. This does cut some of my problems with the SI camera, and to me makes it a much more viable option for those in the ENG/documentary film business. It looks like more and more the difference is not so much of a workflow one, but as a question of lenses, and also body style. The RED seems to me more suited for Steadicam or Handheld, whereas the SI seems much better on sticks or a dolly, or in a studio setup.

Just based upon your response though, I really must say you sound like a good person, and I look forward to working with your camera. (I probably will end up using it sometime or another.)

[Jason Rodriguez]

Originally Posted by Tom Wills

First of all, the RED can record 4k to the RED-RAID, which is mounted on one of the RED cages.

Just curious . . . not to knock RED, but what kind of portable, battery powered, redudant RAID (so level 3 or higher) do you know of can record 1.1 Gigabyte per second (4K@60p)? Even 24P is still 400MB/s.

That's not what I would call a "portable" on-camera storage unit.

Also a 3.5" HDD takes up 35W to spin up, and 8-10W for operation. They also can't take more than 60G's of operating shock. For 1GB/s at RAID 3 or 5, you'll need around 8-10 drives . . . not really an option since that's going to be the size of half an Xserve RAID.

There are some more robust 2.5" HDD's that could do the job, but you're still talking about a RAID unit that's quite hefty, needing around 10-12 drives to work at those data-rates reliably from start-to-finish (that's just for 400MB/s, not 1 Gigabyte per second). The box will be quite a bit smaller than the 3.5" drives, but again, this would only be for around 400MB/s from start-to-finish . . . so you're not going to get any fancy frame-rates. But I *could* see that as a possibilitiy for 24P work.

Flash drives could most likely bare the load with less drives, but that will come at a significant price or data size penalty.

Full 4K uncompressed recording from the RED camera, unless something changes, will not be a cheap proposition. Either it will take an external RAID, or it will take something like a Codex box, neither of which are very cheap.

[Tom Wills]

True. I think that for now, until prices come down, the RED will work beautifully as a 2k camera, right alongside the SI camera, and just when prices come down enough, or for people with enough money right out of the bat, it can also step up and do 4k. Maybe the RED RAID will be more of a rental item than something to buy with the camera. Who knows at this point.

Luckily though, both cameras are viable solutions. I am leaning twords the RED, because it's smaller, and I can fly it on my Steadicam, but the SI is a very viable option for more of the standard film shoots. We'll have to see how the RED does though. Maybe the RED will lean more twords professionals versus the SI leaning twords medium budget indies. That certainly might be a good situation. Indies get a great camera for their needs, Pros get a very similar camera, with a few more features for them.

[Ari Presler]

Originally Posted by Tom Wills

I am leaning twords the RED, because it's smaller, and I can fly it on my Steadicam.

At the moment, the only smaller thing you could fly on your Steadicam is vapor. We are already flying and I can assure you you will be able fly just fine, either with Silicon MINI or DVR.

You can shoot this year and join us at the academy. Or wait around while others innovate and make break-thru productions. Your choice.

Just shoot IT!

Shoot with Silicon :-)


PS. The Silicon DVR will be smaller and lighter weight than the prototype unit.

[Don Donatello]

"what kind of portable, battery powered, redudant RAID (so level 3 or higher) do you know of can record 1.1 Gigabyte per second (4K@60p)? Even 24P is still 400MB/s."

you are thinking OLD "normal box " normal codec's = OLD way of doing things etc.

you gotta THINK outside "normal" (old) way of doing things .... just like the SI camera doesn't do "normal/old way " when it processes/records ..
if SI had released some basic info on camera several months ago stating they would record RAW Bayer files to hard drive - most would be thinking RAID drives or dual SDI etc but SI found a way to do it over USB using a lap top drive .... so if SI could think outside the "normal box " why can't others think outside the box??

[Jason Rodriguez]

Hi Don,

You're right, we don't know exactly what RED is going to do (as Gramme mentioned). Unfortunetly a lot of what is out there is speculation because there are no hard facts concerning what their camera will be or not.

Of course we're doing some light compression (4:1 or 5:1, depends since it's a VBR codec) to get the RAW onto a single USB 2.0 drive. If Red chooses the uncompressed route for RAW, then they will have some difficulties with the RAID route (and hence where the current data-rate numbers come from).

They could of course do some very mild compression and get the data rates down . . . lossless compression might yield them a 2:1 ratio.

And of course they could follow our lead and do wavelet compression on the RAW bayer itself . . . will be interesting to see what they decide on doing. But that this point in time I can only go off what they've mentioned publicly, which is uncompressed RAW.

[Dave Ferdinand]

Originally Posted by Jason Rodriguez

Shooting, editing, color-correction, rough-cutting, the RAW data is completely transparent to the end user with the Cineform RAW codec

That is something good to know...

[Yasser Kassana]

Very fascinating discussion. I, as an impartial person would just like to say, this conversation seems to be about resolution. That's fine, but it shouldn't be, it's making the pixels count.

1. RED seems like an amazing camera, I won't say too much because all the information isn't here, however correct me if i'm wrong, but REDs goal is to to be future proof, right 4k, forget it, even for big studios it's not ergonomical. But for the near future, we'll be seeing HDD and newer technologies that will be able to handle that data rate and space.
2. Silicon, now okay, so it';s not 4k. Who cares? Who remembers seeing Sin City and Star Wars both high qaulity digital format movies? They looked great didn't they, on the big screen and on HD. At the end of the day we're making movies for the public, they're not as technical savvy as us, they see a good image and will watch the movie.

I for one, am going for the SIlicon right now, because I think that's all you need. Resolution is important, but it's about making the pixels count not counting your pixels.

[Graeme Nattress]

Originally Posted by Jason Rodriguez

You're right, we don't know exactly what RED is going to do (as Graeme mentioned).

Thanks! You're right, but reading you speculate is absolutely fascinating!

Graeme

[Jerry Waters]

I'm not technical and can't argue the fine points but I watched the countdown clock on the Red site before NAB -- "X days, X hurs until...." I could hardly wait. What was the big show at Red going to be?

Then, on Wednesday before I left for NAB, I read about Silicon Imaging and CioneForm doing a 2k camera with RAW footage and it is being shown IN OPERATION at NAB. That impressed me. I use HD Connect with my Z1 and A1U every day. CineForm is a godsend for HDV and the idea of RAW video took my breath away. Still, I thought, Red's prototype must be something great considering the countdown clock. And what did I see at NAB? A tent and a sign saying "Under Development." I wasn't too impressed. I can remember the Tucker automobile.

After coming back I read about the movie being shot with the Silicon Imaging camera and the reports are good. Assuming we see a camera from Red eventually, and I certainly hope we do, I would have to say they dropped the ball this year in my book. You can't shoot a movie with a sign and a tent.

[Tim Holtermann]

Jerry, you said that very well.

I'm minutes away from Oakley and I've always admired their approach to design and manufacturing but I too feel they over hyped and under delivered.

However, you have to admit....their marketing strategy is working. Look how many people (even in this thread) are swearing by the Red (ready to give up their child for it) and saying it will be better than anything. Yet they have never even seen a single image from the camera, 1% of a working prototype or any true specifications of how it will all work. Just a tent, a sign and a very simple (non detailed) mold of the body in a glass case.

I'm very excited that companies like SI and Red are finally figuring out what we need in a camera. Look at what SI has done, look at those images, imagine if they had Sony, JVC or Panasonic money behind them?

[Kevin Shaw]

Ditto what Tim said. SI is a real camera which will be shipping soon and offer an established workflow for generating true 1080p output from an affordable camera with a decent-sized sensor. Red is vaporware with many unanswered questions about workflow and cost. If I had money to spare for the SI camera I'd buy it in a heartbeat with no second thought about what Red might offer someday, if it ever ships. Unless you're planning a major theatrical release there's not much point in shooting higher resolution than 1080p anyway.