Nikon buys Red?

[Davide DB]

16 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

intoPIX and Fraunhofer IIS are the two major contributors to the JPEG XS patent pool - https://www.jpegxspool.com/ and https://www.jpegxspool.com/s/JPEG-XS-Patent-Pool-Licensed-Patents-01-Oct-2023.pdf  and https://www.tinynews.be/jpeg-xs-intopix-belgique/

 

From the article:

Quote

intoPIX's rise really began 5 years ago, when the company created its first proprietary compression algorithm called TICO, which was adopted by the world's leading companies. In 2016, the JPEG association, which is part of ISO, decided to launch a call for a new codec. The technology proposed by intoPIX was selected, and since then intoPIX has led the standardization process. For this effort, intoPIX last month received the NBN award (from the Belgian Bureau for Standardization) in the SME category.

 

Then I saw the patents registered.
But does the fact that it is under the auspices of the JPEG consortium mean that the implementation is free without cost?
 

[ac6000cw]

3 hours ago, Davide DB said:

But does the fact that it is under the auspices of the JPEG consortium mean that the implementation is free without cost?

I doubt it - for example, AFAIK including MPEG/AVC/HEVC in a product requires license fees to be paid to the patent holders (normally via a patent pool licensing organization). As end users we don't usually see those fees directly, because they are paid by the companies selling the products i.e. the fees are included in the purchase price.

[D Verco]

On 3/20/2024 at 11:59 AM, Andrew Reid said:

Mark my words TicoRAW is a dead dodo

Nikon is all about R3D from now on and it will be on all their cameras in place of N-RAW which is going away.

Probably. But does anyone have a comparison between R3D and N-raw? the fact that N-raw files aren't split up and is 10-15 years newer is already an advantage 

[kye]

4 hours ago, D Verco said:

Probably. But does anyone have a comparison between R3D and N-raw? the fact that N-raw files aren't split up and is 10-15 years newer is already an advantage 

In Andrews tests, the N-RAW wasn't better than the h265.

Soooo, are you asking if R3D files are better than h265?  While I haven't done a direct comparison, I'd have to say yes...  yes, I think they might just be better!!

[Eric Calabros]

3 hours ago, kye said:

the N-RAW wasn't better than the h265

For comparing two different codecs, you have to use the same or similar sensors.

[ac6000cw]

1 hour ago, Eric Calabros said:

For comparing two different codecs, you have to use the same or similar sensors.

I agree - Sony will be doing image processing before the H.265 encoding (e.g. noise suppression, de-Bayering, sharpening etc.), whereas you might expect less of that happening with N-RAW - isn't it meant to be raw sensor data, warts and all?

H.265 is a sophisticated codec, so I'm not that surprised 4:2:2 10-bit 8k video at 500Mbps from the A1 looks really good, especially on a static image like Andrew used in the N-RAW vs H.265 vs CDNG comparison article.

[ghostwind]

6 hours ago, kye said:

In Andrews tests, the N-RAW wasn't better than the h265.

Dunno what tests those were, but I've shot in all formats on my Z9s, and N-RAW is definitely better than H265. More latitude, less/no NR, less/no sharpening, etc. Not to mention, of course, the freedom to change WB and exposure in Resolve in post.

[TomTheDP]

2 hours ago, ghostwind said:

Dunno what tests those were, but I've shot in all formats on my Z9s, and N-RAW is definitely better than H265. More latitude, less/no NR, less/no sharpening, etc. Not to mention, of course, the freedom to change WB and exposure in Resolve in post.

 

2 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

I agree - Sony will be doing image processing before the H.265 encoding (e.g. noise suppression, de-Bayering, sharpening etc.), whereas you might expect less of that happening with N-RAW - isn't it meant to be raw sensor data, warts and all?

H.265 is a sophisticated codec, so I'm not that surprised 4:2:2 10-bit 8k video at 500Mbps from the A1 looks really good, especially on a static image like Andrew used in the N-RAW vs H.265 vs CDNG comparison article.

https://www.eoshd.com/news/is-n-raw-real-raw-nikon-z9-under-the-spotlight-at-eoshd/

Generelly when greatly underexposed RAW looks better than H265. You usually get weird compression artifacts and blotchy looking texture with more compressed codecs. 

Noise Reduction can reduce noise but nice texture is usually a sign of a better sensor with more dynamic range. 

That said there are other reasons to shooting RAW like color information which would be the main draw for me. The Z8/Z9 also have Prores which looks quite nice. 

 

[Danyyyel]

9 hours ago, kye said:

In Andrews tests, the N-RAW wasn't better than the h265.

Soooo, are you asking if R3D files are better than h265?  While I haven't done a direct comparison, I'd have to say yes...  yes, I think they might just be better!!

The big difference is that when Nikon Nraw came out, their was no real good workflow. Their is actually a big DR difference between Nikon h265 and Nraw, because Nikon has been very conservative in the Nlog  which is quite contrasty. CINED today has a nice set of DR test of the different cameras. And as Nikon featured very low in the Synthetic DR test with Xyla chart and Imatest. It shines in the truer real life latitude test. In their the Z9 is the better than every Sony camera by at least half if not 1 stop better DR. +4 stop above and - 5 stop lower.  Even better than the Venice 2!!! Which is at least 1 stop lower. I think Sony perhaps focused on speed of the sensor, 3 ms. Because their are other Sony cameras that look better. 

The VV Red Raptor was half to a stop better and this test really show how the Alexa's are better, with at least 1,5 stop higher for the traditional Alexa and at least 3!!! for the Alexa 35. 

[Danyyyel]

3 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

I agree - Sony will be doing image processing before the H.265 encoding (e.g. noise suppression, de-Bayering, sharpening etc.), whereas you might expect less of that happening with N-RAW - isn't it meant to be raw sensor data, warts and all?

H.265 is a sophisticated codec, so I'm not that surprised 4:2:2 10-bit 8k video at 500Mbps from the A1 looks really good, especially on a static image like Andrew used in the N-RAW vs H.265 vs CDNG comparison article.

Nikon a bit naively, have a very conservative (Contrasty) Nlog which make it look very bad compared to others on DR test. On CineD on its Nraw test, it scored very low in the Sythetic DR imatest results.  But It shines in the truer real life latitude test. In their the Z9 is better than every Sony camera by at least half if not 1 stop better DR. +4 stop above and - 5 stop lower. In fact their are big surprise in this test, from Canon baked in NR RAW, that makes it look good, but once you have real life latitude it falls apart... except for their C70 with the DGO sensor. The biggest surprise for me is the Venice 2, at least a stop bellow the Z9!!!

[kye]

13 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

For comparing two different codecs, you have to use the same or similar sensors.

Sort-of yes, but also sort-of no.

For a start, the Z9 and A1 are both top-of-the-line cameras, so if one can't beat the other given a 4X bitrate advantage, then either the sensor is absolutely rubbish, the processing is absolutely rubbish, or the codec isn't up to much.

BUT, none of that matters, because unless you want to have a purely academic and theoretical discussion, you can't get a Sony sensor with N-RAW, so the variables aren't independent.

BUT, none of that matters either, because soon you won't be able to get N-RAW on any camera.

BUT, none of that matters either, because let's face it...   any time you spend worrying about this is time you aren't spending time on what actually matters to make a good and enjoyable film.

[ghostwind]

23 minutes ago, kye said:

BUT, none of that matters either, because soon you won't be able to get N-RAW on any camera.

So you think Nikon will just remove it from the Z cameras that have it and replace it?

[Eric Calabros]

Just now, kye said:

For a start, the Z9 and A1 are both top-of-the-line cameras

And yet Z9 is the noisier one:

[kye]

6 minutes ago, ghostwind said:

So you think Nikon will just remove it from the Z cameras that have it and replace it?

I suggest you read the thread before posting - this is the second post from you that I've seen where you have come in half way through the conversation making comments that look a bit silly.....

https://www.eoshd.com/news/adobe-cancel-nikon-n-raw-support-is-redcode-raw-coming-to-a-mirrorless-camera-near-you/

4 minutes ago, Eric Calabros said:

And yet Z9 is the noisier one:

Ah, so theoretical discussion completely divorced from reality it is then.

Well, umm..   good luck with that.

[ghostwind]

14 minutes ago, kye said:

I suggest you read the thread before posting - this is the second post from you that I've seen where you have come in half way through the conversation making comments that look a bit silly.....

https://www.eoshd.com/news/adobe-cancel-nikon-n-raw-support-is-redcode-raw-coming-to-a-mirrorless-camera-near-you/

I'm not sure what you're so angry about today...Which of my posts sounds silly? The one stating that N-RAW on my Z9s is better than H265? Or the one asking where how you concluded that N-RAW will not be on any camera "soon"? 

I've read the thread - it's about Adobe "dropping support" for something they never had to begin with and otherwise just speculative talk. Sorry I joined "late"...Calm down... Yeah, things will probably change. That doesn't mean Nikon will remove N-RAW and replace it via firmware with a new RAW codec in existing cameras. That was my second point. As far as the comparison with NRAW and H265 on the A1 - yeah, very useful....

[TomTheDP]

 

8 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

The big difference is that when Nikon Nraw came out, their was no real good workflow. Their is actually a big DR difference between Nikon h265 and Nraw, because Nikon has been very conservative in the Nlog  which is quite contrasty. CINED today has a nice set of DR test of the different cameras. And as Nikon featured very low in the Synthetic DR test with Xyla chart and Imatest. It shines in the truer real life latitude test. In their the Z9 is the better than every Sony camera by at least half if not 1 stop better DR. +4 stop above and - 5 stop lower.  Even better than the Venice 2!!! Which is at least 1 stop lower. I think Sony perhaps focused on speed of the sensor, 3 ms. Because their are other Sony cameras that look better. 

The VV Red Raptor was half to a stop better and this test really show how the Alexa's are better, with at least 1,5 stop higher for the traditional Alexa and at least 3!!! for the Alexa 35. 

True latitude tests are the best indicator. With firmware 3.0 the Z9/Z8 does peform incredibly well and like you said bests the Venice 2 which is crazy. The Venice 2 captures 16 bit linear RAW which I would imagine gives you a much beefier file to work with. That said 8.2k 12 bit RAW with that kind of latitude is more than enough for any application. 

One of the biggest draws of the Z8/Z9 for me is the NRAW, Prores RAW, Prores, and H265 options all in camera. Pretty much can fit to any workflow in any NLE without needing to transcode. 

If they actually put REDraw that would be awesome for possible compression options. 

No Opengate square aspect ratio options for anamorphic but hey you can't get everything. I appreciate Nikon's new move of not holding back. Feels like Lumix until recently where they seem to put out the same thing over and over again. 

[Eric Calabros]

1 hour ago, kye said:

so theoretical discussion completely divorced from reality it is then.

The reality is if you lift the shadows in both Z9 and A1 "uncompressed" raw images, at base ISO, you get different results. If you do demosaicing on A1 images, and apply temporal NR, you get even more different result. If Nikon ditch the NRAW, its probably related to license costs, not the quality of the codec.

[kye]

5 hours ago, ghostwind said:

Which of my posts sounds silly?

No, actually, you're right.. it's me, I'm the silly one.

I'd forgotten that the threads about industry news always devolve into everyone arguing about inconsequential rubbish that has no bearing on film-making.

Thanks for the reminder and best of luck y'all.

[Eric Calabros]

RED stays RED, for now.

[TomTheDP]

5 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

RED stays RED, for now.

Says a lot of nothing imo.

Will we see redraw in mirrorless is the question from me.