Just watched the whole thing. Awesome talk.
5k for 4k makes a lot of sense. It's one of those things video guys wouldn't necessarily understand about film workflows. But apparently Red has some smarts.
Using non-linear editors on compressed video, and using the edit decision list on full res is an idea that's been around for a while.
My TB estimates were off because of visual effects. Perhaps they carry around additional data with effects, rather than just rendered results, making it easier to make changes.
His comment about 4k killing broadcast TV is interesting. I assume he's talking about bypassing traditional distribution chains, which are technologically rigid. Given enough power in the client computer, that computer doesn't give a crap about resolution, aspect ratio, compression format, etc. It can just deal. Digital cable TV, however, is still primarily MPEG-2. Yes, they use that compression standard from twenty years ago.
So on the one hand, the switch to 4k can be an element which accelerates the ongoing revolution in television delivery.
Riffing on his "transition vs. transformation" discussion, most digital TV in the US is really "digitized TV". Everything stayed the same in terms of the value chain and the topology of the technology. What happened was an almost 1 for 1 transition of devices from analog to digital. Analog tapes went to digital tapes (then discs). Analog modulation went to digital modulation (plus compression). Analog set tops went to digital set tops. Analog video connections to analog TV sets went to HDMI and digital flat screens.
But there are new delivery models which bypass the legacy value chains and infrastructure. E.g., netflix could get to 4k way faster than a traditional cable service could. (However, the cable companies are putting together their own "alternative delivery" services. So they won't be caught entirely flat footed.)
On the other hand, will 4k really make a huge impact? The TV manufacturers are drooling over this. But many consumers would probably be wowed by HD that didn't suck. Will they really demand true 4k in the house? How many people are happy with upsampled DVDs and won't spend the extra bucks for Blu-ray? Broadband internet in the US is another issue. Most people buy broadband from a company that wants to sell them video services (which are more lucrative). Will the data divisions of the cable co's and telcos facilitate the death of their video divisions?
As you can tell, I have more questions than answers on 4k in the house.
Thanks Mark!
|
5k for 4k makes a lot of sense. It's one of those things video guys wouldn't necessarily understand about film workflows. But apparently Red has some smarts.
Using non-linear editors on compressed video, and using the edit decision list on full res is an idea that's been around for a while.
My TB estimates were off because of visual effects. Perhaps they carry around additional data with effects, rather than just rendered results, making it easier to make changes.
His comment about 4k killing broadcast TV is interesting. I assume he's talking about bypassing traditional distribution chains, which are technologically rigid. Given enough power in the client computer, that computer doesn't give a crap about resolution, aspect ratio, compression format, etc. It can just deal. Digital cable TV, however, is still primarily MPEG-2. Yes, they use that compression standard from twenty years ago.
So on the one hand, the switch to 4k can be an element which accelerates the ongoing revolution in television delivery.
Riffing on his "transition vs. transformation" discussion, most digital TV in the US is really "digitized TV". Everything stayed the same in terms of the value chain and the topology of the technology. What happened was an almost 1 for 1 transition of devices from analog to digital. Analog tapes went to digital tapes (then discs). Analog modulation went to digital modulation (plus compression). Analog set tops went to digital set tops. Analog video connections to analog TV sets went to HDMI and digital flat screens.
But there are new delivery models which bypass the legacy value chains and infrastructure. E.g., netflix could get to 4k way faster than a traditional cable service could. (However, the cable companies are putting together their own "alternative delivery" services. So they won't be caught entirely flat footed.)
On the other hand, will 4k really make a huge impact? The TV manufacturers are drooling over this. But many consumers would probably be wowed by HD that didn't suck. Will they really demand true 4k in the house? How many people are happy with upsampled DVDs and won't spend the extra bucks for Blu-ray? Broadband internet in the US is another issue. Most people buy broadband from a company that wants to sell them video services (which are more lucrative). Will the data divisions of the cable co's and telcos facilitate the death of their video divisions?
As you can tell, I have more questions than answers on 4k in the house.
- mark 9-02-2012 7:52 am
Thanks Mark!
- jim 9-02-2012 12:42 pm [add a comment]