-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Redray 4K Player With Odemax - The Next Big Thing?


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 of 11 OFFLINE   Dave Upton

Dave Upton

    Owner

  • 827 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2012
  • Real Name:Dave Upton
  • LocationHouston, TX

Posted February 01 2013 - 12:50 AM

Source: http://www.gizmag.co...k-redray/25267/









Quote:
Serial disruptor RED is at it again. While the announcement of a REDRAY player capable of outputting 4K (4096 x 2160 pixels) moving images had been expected for some time, the accompanying infrastructure that’s being put in place comes as a major shock. RED, in partnership with new venture Odemax, is setting up an alternative to the highly regulated and protected film distribution networks of the big studios – and anybody can join. If they can pull it off it could be nothing less than a revolution...

Seems like this has a chance - provided some content producers get on board and the price drops due to adoption. I'd love to see some of our studios like Twilight Time offering limited 4K releases using this technology. What does everyone think?



#2 of 11 OFFLINE   Richard V

Richard V

    Screenwriter

  • 1,541 posts
  • Join Date: May 14 2009
  • Real Name:Richard

Posted February 01 2013 - 01:28 AM

I would pass. I frankly don't see a difference in quality on 4K scans, at least not on displays up to 55", which is what I have. The only difference I see in 4K is in 3D applications, which IMO, look more "3D-ish".
See you at the pah-ty, Richter.

#3 of 11 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Moderator

  • 16,623 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted February 01 2013 - 01:34 AM

I'm a huge fan of what Jannard and crew are doing, but as a consumer I think people need to remember Red's tagline:

"Everything in life changes... including our camera specs and delivery dates..." We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone with a bad attitude.

The official forums are illuminating in this regard: http://www.reduser.n....php?40-RED-RAY Specifically: http://www.reduser.n...Red-Ray-and-HFR And: http://www.reduser.n...?80988-NAB-2013

Assuming that the Mayan calendar doesn't hold water... you need to book your reservations for NAB 2013. Trust me... if anything I have ever said rings true, you need to be there. Jim

Tho that was from last JUNE.

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#4 of 11 OFFLINE   Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 834 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted February 01 2013 - 02:22 AM

I frankly don't see a difference in quality on 4K scans, at least not on displays up to 55", which is what I have.

This isn't about 4K scans; it offers 4K final content.

#5 of 11 OFFLINE   Richard V

Richard V

    Screenwriter

  • 1,541 posts
  • Join Date: May 14 2009
  • Real Name:Richard

Posted February 01 2013 - 02:39 AM

This isn't about 4K scans; it offers 4K final content.

Ok, please excuse my ignorance, but what is the difference? Not trying to be difficult, really don't understand.
See you at the pah-ty, Richter.

#6 of 11 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Moderator

  • 16,623 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted February 01 2013 - 02:48 AM

One is native 4k and the other is downconverted to 1080p for your disk media, throwing away 3 of every 4 pixels.

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#7 of 11 OFFLINE   kingofthejungle

kingofthejungle

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 135 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 06 2012

Posted February 01 2013 - 02:48 AM

Honestly, a good Blu-Ray at 1080p on my home projector crosses the 'good enough' threshold. It gets rid of the major deficiencies of SD DVDs, and can present a fairly film-like image. I might eventually consider a projector that upscaled 1080 input to 4k, but I'm done re-buying stuff.

#8 of 11 OFFLINE   Richard V

Richard V

    Screenwriter

  • 1,541 posts
  • Join Date: May 14 2009
  • Real Name:Richard

Posted February 01 2013 - 02:59 AM

One is native 4k and the other is downconverted to 1080p for your disk media, throwing away 3 of every 4 pixels.

Ok, then, if I'm understanding this correctly, you'd have to get a new Ultra HD TV in order to see the full native 4K, right? Or am I wrong again?
See you at the pah-ty, Richter.

#9 of 11 OFFLINE   schan1269

schan1269

    HTF Expert

  • 13,881 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 2012
  • Real Name:Sam
  • LocationChicago-ish/NW Indiana

Posted February 01 2013 - 03:18 AM

I'm still waiting for XV Color and Deep Color...

#10 of 11 OFFLINE   Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 834 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted February 01 2013 - 03:41 AM

Ok, then, if I'm understanding this correctly, you'd have to get a new Ultra HD TV in order to see the full native 4K, right? Or am I wrong again?

That's correct.

#11 of 11 OFFLINE   Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter

  • 1,738 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted February 01 2013 - 03:43 AM

One is native 4k and the other is downconverted to 1080p for your disk media, throwing away 3 of every 4 pixels.

4K to 2K (or 1080P) doesn't just "throw away 3 of every 4 pixels". If that's all that was involved with downconversions, you'd end up with nasty artifacts in the final 1080P image. Vincent




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users