|
Tuesday, April 22, 2008 Crossover CameraWill a new low-price, high-def video camera make traditional still cameras obsolete? By John Borland
A culture war is brewing in the world of digital photography, with a handful of enthusiasts arguing that high-definition video tools are making traditional still cameras all but obsolete. In a field where traditionalists are still debating the merits of film versus digital imagery, this contention naturally produces sparks. But growing numbers of photographers are already experimenting with HD camcorders to produce professional photos, with results now even being published on the front pages of newspapers. Last week's announcement of a new super-high definition "pocket professional" video camera from startup Red Digital Cinema Camera is feeding the debate. With picture resolution considerably greater than today's handheld HD camcorders and a base price expected to be under $3,000, the "Scarlet" may help accelerate the defection from traditional cameras. "This is something we're already salivating over," says Richard Koci Hernandez, a photographer for the San Jose Mercury News and a trailblazer in newsroom use of HD video. "The technology is getting to the point where we're going to be able to put one of these in everybody's hand." As technology convergences go, the union of still and video imagery has the feel of the inevitable. A moving picture, whether on digital video or film, is after all just a series of still images. Yet this relationship masks longstanding technological and practical differences between still and moving-image cameras. Still cameras have been optimized for high-quality single images, with large image sensors (or large-format film) that capture substantial amounts of light and incredible detail. Digital video, on the other hand, has had to balance image resolution against the huge amount of data collected. Indeed, the "full high-definition" video standard used by current HD televisions offers resolution of 1,920 by 1,080 pixels, or about 2.1 megapixels--a resolution exceeded by all but the most primitive digital cameras today. Most handheld HD camcorders offer a similar video resolution, although some can also take higher-resolution still photos. For instance, users of Sony's latest high-end consumer camcorder, the HDR-SR12, can take 10-megapixel still shots--though, as with other HD camcorders, frame grabs taken from video recordings are much lower in resolution. News photographers have bridged this technological gulf more easily than other professionals. Newspaper images are relatively low resolution, compared to professional prints or magazine photos. Moreover, photographers increasingly provide video for newspaper websites and so often have a camcorder at hand. Naturally, some began experimenting with frame grabs, or still shots from their HD video cameras, as a time-saving substitute for taking ordinary photographs. Dallas Morning News photographer David Leeson is given credit for sparking this trend, but a number of other photographers and papers have followed suit in the last year. This trend lies beneath photographers' intense interest in Red Digital's Scarlet. Announced at last week's National Association of Broadcasters trade show, the handheld camera, which will be available in early 2009, will be primarily a video tool, but its design is undeniably photographer-friendly. Red Digital, started by the founder of Oakley sunglasses, Jim Jannard, with an eye to creating a digital product line that could rival the performance of film-based movie cameras, is already proving a powerful rival to established companies. Its first model, the $17,500 digital cinema-quality Red One, began shipping only last September. Although fewer than 2,000 have shipped, buzz has been impressive. Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson produced a 10-minute short using a Red One prototype, calling the image quality "excellent" in OnFilm magazine. The camera was used, although not exclusively, in filming the recent thriller Jumper, and cinematographers and rental studios around the world are increasingly advertising their experience with the camera. With a planned video resolution of about 3,000 horizontal pixels, compared to the HDTV standard of 1,920 pixels, Scarlet will offer higher picture quality than any digital video camera under $10,000 and will better that of many far more expensive models. Keeping the mixed-use market in mind, its design includes a still function. (The precise details, including Scarlet's still-photo resolution, remain unreleased. Red has consistently told users to expect changes in announced specifications.) |
Audio »
Share »
Digg this
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Reddit
Add to Facebook
Slashdot It!
Stumble It!
Add to Newsvine
Add to Connotea
Add to CiteUlike
Add to Furl
Googlize this
Add to Rojo
Add to MyWeb
Favorite
Print
E-mail
Pushing Pixels
07/16/2008
Comments
middlebass on 04/22/2008 at 6:22 AM
2
ArtInvent on 04/22/2008 at 2:12 PM
12
It's already hard enough for prosumers to edit ordinary 1920 HD on todays hardware. 5 megapixels 30 to 60 times per second in uncompressed format? A rough guesstimate says this will fill a terabyte hard drive in maybe 15 minutes. The unwieldiness of the data rate will mean that still cameras will remain far more attractive to almost anyone besides pro sports photographers and news people whose organizations can afford the infrastructure to make use of the mountain of data.
wbdeville on 04/22/2008 at 4:22 PM
8
Recently, David Pogue of the New York Times posted a movie demonstrating a point & shoot camera capable of taking video at 60 frames per second. He took a short burst of video during a gymnastic performance. Result: a still photo almost impossible to take with a still camera.
One doesn't have to fill up a terabyte of drive space to use high-resolution that way. Yes, sports action photographers will use video to pick good still action shots.
So, I suspect, will a growing number of people make use of high-res video to get that great still of a toddler, or of a group of people without having at least one of them with eyes closed.
Think a terabyte of storage space is a lot? Yes, it's more than any laptop has now. But the technology is rapidly advancing. Future portable computers/digital devices may well have hundreds of terabytes of storage space in the not very distant future.
Shudder at the thought of looking at thousands or millions of frames to pick just the right still photo? Why not let AI software suggest some good frames for you?
Don't fight philosophical differences between motion and still photography. It's the image that counts. It still takes judgement to pick that great image, even with lots of technological assistance. So take advantage of the technology. It's coming.
nakrown on 04/22/2008 at 4:24 PM
1
May I refer you to the following:
They all laughed at Christopher Columbus when he said the world was round.
They all laughed when Edison recorded sound.
They all laughed at Wilbur and his brother when they said that man could fly.
They told Marconi wireless was a phony, it's the same old cry.
(And so on and so forth.)
'Nuff said.
Film Director on 04/23/2008 at 3:05 AM
3
Check Adam Wilt's tests. He shows that $6.000 Sony EX1 1080p camcorder has about equal resolution as Red 4K camera, or about 2K. This Sony 1/2" camera has about the same noise figures as the much larger CMOS Red camera.
There is a forum, RedUser.com, where posts are repeatedly deleted and modified by the moderators.
More about how honest the whole campaign around Red is can be found on Cinematography.com. Go there to High Definition, then to Red. There you will also find a thread referring to the Adam Wilt's test.
Actually here is the link, just paste the 4 lines together:
http://
provideocoalition
.com/index.php/awilt/story/three_three_let
ter_cameras_ex1_f23_red/
As to Scarlet, if 4K Red produces 2K resolution, expect 1.5 K from Scarlet.
Scarlet is a video camera. The Red CMOS is inherently noisy. The lens is only F2.8, whereas major makers of cameras use lenses that are at least 2x as fast and less noisy sensors.
Sony makes a CMOS, used in a $1.000 Casio camera that combines high definition video and still photography performance. No other sensor is able to do that. Certainly not the outsourced Red CMOS.
Red code has about 10:1 compression and it is about the most compressed format in real terms, even MiniDV is only 5:1 compressed.
Red cameras have been plagued with so many problems that they became the biggest joke among the pros.
sculptor on 04/30/2008 at 11:04 PM
8
Film Director on 04/23/2008 at 3:19 AM
3
ory/three_three_letter_cameras_ex1_f23_red/
YOU NEED TO PASTE THE TWO LINES ABOVE TOGETHER.
The comments are under the article.
Here real pros talk abou the 4K Red cameras that produce 2K resolution.
Also $17 K red camera costs 5x as much, when properly configured and real lenses, not the Red ones are added.
Film Director on 04/23/2008 at 3:27 AM
3
Pentax, Olympus, Leics, Panasonic, and Samsung have a combined market share of 10% right now.
The new Casio camera is an example of this technology and Sony sensor leadership.
Sony has teamed with Nikon to unseat Canon in #1 DSLR sales position. The alliance works behind the scenes.
When large and fast enough sensors are made, which will allow the cameras to without mechanical shutters, Sony will be positioned to take the No. 2 spot, or at least this is what they are hoping for.
I don't work for Sony, just work a lot with Sony HDCAM pro cameras. In the broadcast and digital cinema world, Sony sells more cameras than all the other makes combined and these cameras are more light sensitive, more reliable, produce better pictures, etc. That is why the pros like Sony.