Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement
[1] 2 Next »

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Crossover Camera

Will a new low-price, high-def video camera make traditional still cameras obsolete?

By John Borland
smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon
Scarlet: Expected in early 2009, Red Digital’s super-high definition “pocket professional” video camera may appeal to still photographers as well as videographers. This display version is outfitted with a range of accessories.
Credit: JR Rost

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.)
[1] 2 Next »

Tags

digital cameras digital photography HD video video cameras

Comments

  • Absurd Title
    middlebass on 04/22/2008 at 6:22 AM
    Posts:
    3
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
    Still cameras aren't going to be obsolete. Just because most still cameras now offer some video capability and most video cameras offer some still image capability doesn't change that. And even if a few exotics support both formats reasonably well, most serious photographers and videographers will always favor cameras optimized for their interests. The author should be ashamed.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Re: Absurd Title
      ArtInvent on 04/22/2008 at 2:12 PM
      Posts:
      18
      Avg Rating:
      3/5
      Agreed. This is probably a very significant camera in a purely video sense. But still photography is indeed very different from videography. Also, the price of the camera will be groundbreaking, but in order to make use of the titanic data stream one of these cameras will generate, users will have to have an order of magnitude more powerful computer and storage systems.

      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.
      Rate this comment: 12345
    • Re: Absurd Title
      wbdeville on 04/22/2008 at 4:22 PM
      Posts:
      10
      Avg Rating:
      5/5
      I don't think the title was absurd, nor that the author didn't reflect some of the differences between video and still photography.

      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.
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • Technology marches on. Get with the program.
    nakrown on 04/22/2008 at 4:24 PM
    Posts:
    1
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
    Sure this thing will generate a ton of data which most people won't be able to use well right now, but don't miss the point. This camera is merely a sign of things to come. Petabyte sized hard drives WILL become standard issue, accessible video/photo software and processors WILL evolve to work with the output of these cameras and eventually, HD video WILL replace a great deal of our photography. This is the film vs. digital argument all over again. "Progress" always wins. We've gone from playing Pong to editing fullscreen video in just a couple decades. If you think this isn't the future you're just deluding yourself. Or maybe you're just more comfortable with the way things are now.
    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.
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • THE TRUTH
    Film Director on 04/23/2008 at 3:05 AM
    Posts:
    3
    Avg Rating:
    1/5
    There has been more misinformation around the Red cameras than around cars in Honest Jim's Used Car Lot.

    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.


    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Re: THE TRUTH
      sculptor on 04/30/2008 at 11:04 PM
      Posts:
      8
      Avg Rating:
      3/5
      I can't think of a single pro grade zoom lenses that has an F-stop of less than 2.8 so I suspect your are confusing short prime lenses with zoom lenses.
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • READ THE COMMENTS HERE
    Film Director on 04/23/2008 at 3:19 AM
    Posts:
    3
    Avg Rating:
    1/5
    http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/st
    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.
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Convergence of Video and Still Photography
    Film Director on 04/23/2008 at 3:27 AM
    Posts:
    3
    Avg Rating:
    1/5
    This is the reason Sony is so serious about the Alpha DSLR line. They initially announced that they are shooting for a No. 2 spot in DSLR sales. Now Canon and Nikon have 80% share and Sony 10%. Last year they had 6%.

    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.
    Rate this comment: 12345
Add New Thread

Related Articles
Advertisement

Current Issue

Technology Review November/December 2008
Sun + Water = Fuel
An MIT chemist has opened the way to making hydrogen fuel from water using sunlight.
•  Subscribe
Save 41%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News

Magazine Services

•  Gift Subscription
•  Digital Subscription
•  Reprints, Back Issues, Customer Service

Career Resources

Visit the Job Board and Resource Center to move your career to the next level.

MIT Technology Insider

Stories and breaking news from inside MIT about the latest research, innovations, and startups--in a convenient monthly e-newsletter. Subscribe today

Follow us on Twitter

Twitter

Get Technology Review updates via the web, cellphone, or Instant Messager – Follow techreview on Twitter!
Advertisement

More Technology News from Forbes

Wire Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement
TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology