Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can only mean lossy. It makes no sense to talk about visually lossless if it is exactly the same image.
PNG is truly lossless yet smaller than raw BMP.
PNG is lossless. There is no adjective or qualifier needed.
Apple's petition against RED
81–89 of 89 posts
Re: Apple's petition against RED
#82> RED wanted to find a way to make digital compression visually lossless (i.e. no perceivable loss in quality). What does that mean? Is it lossless like lossless webp or png, or is it lossy and well performing under some metric like PSNR? "no perceivable loss in quality" can mean anything, including a lossy codec.
Cinema cameras need to be able to record at 4k (real 4k, 4048x2028) at upto 32bit per channel. 24 times a second. Thats a lot of data. Now, RED at the time didn't have a way of recording to large disk arrays, (unlike the alexa) so they used their own SSD pack things. This limited the amount of space, and shooting time. So they needed a way of doing more than RLE compression. This meant that they had to start chucking…
What camera system can record 32-bit? As far as I knew industry standard currently tops out at 16?
Re: Apple's petition against RED
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
But what happens when you make multiple roundtrips with this perceptually lossless codec? Is it still passing the test or does it degrade over time?
Quality degrades, just as it would if you did the same with film.
It's not a given though I imagine. For audio for example you could discard inaudible parts of the spectrum and compress the rest losslessly. In this case only the first round is lossy and it doesn't degrade over time. But I'm not sure the same exists for images.
Re: Apple's petition against RED
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to be expecting consumers to make completely logical decisions on these matters. Past a certain saturation threshold, name recognition alone can be enough to tip the scales of consumer preference. That's exactly why people still buy Apple hardware at all anymore - their friends/peers already have them. It's surely not due to superiority by any metric for the price point.
I disagree about Apple. Their laptops are junk hardware, agreed. But the iMac is competitive for a machine with its specs, especially if you add in the advantage of OSX (IMO, better than Linux or Windows for a large-screen desktop). And the iPhone/iPad line are the only mobile devices with decent specs, decent apps, and not built on Adware and privacy leakage. Worth money if you can afford it.
I really want to know what plane of existence you're at where Macbooks are junk. If all you care about is spec sheet per $dollar then sure you can do a little better with other consumer laptop vendors I don't think I would ever call them junk. Pricey for sure but leagues above similar HP/Dell/Lenovo sets.
Re: Apple's petition against RED
#85> RED wanted to find a way to make digital compression visually lossless (i.e. no perceivable loss in quality). What does that mean? Is it lossless like lossless webp or png, or is it lossy and well performing under some metric like PSNR? "no perceivable loss in quality" can mean anything, including a lossy codec.
I'm finding some of the disagreements under this comment frustrating. Movie people, please don't redefine what lossless actually means. If you find a way to encode say a cryptographic key, or a text document, say, your employment contact, through the codec and then retrieve it back and it comes back garbled or useless, it's lossy! It doesn't matter if you can't see a difference with visual data, it has changed the data. That is lossy. That is what lossy means. That is what it has always meant and that is what it always will mean. And if you try to change the meaning for a narrow context driven by marketing, well, words cease to have a meaning, don't they.
Re: Apple's petition against RED
#86Does it legally matter when RED had this working, rather then when they filed for a patent? If so, it would seem you can game the system by documenting your invention well, only filing for a patent years later. Also, if that’s true, comparing when you made the invention to when others filed for a patent is unfair. That should be a concern for RED, as a comment on https://nofilmschool.com/red-camera-apple-patent-chall…
Yes. If they released it publicly in 2007 they can't then go and patent it in 2008.
The USA and certain other countries allow a grace period between disclosure of an invention and the patent application for that invention before that invention disclosure becomes prior art. For the USA, the grace period is 12 months, for other countries, it's 6 months.
Re: Apple's petition against RED
#87I believe the recently announced Afterburner card for the upcoming Mac Pro is an FPGA. [1] Maybe they're trying to make a reconfigurable accelerator? Would be amazing to be able to decode REDCODE RAW, ProRes RAW, etc, then turn around and reprogram the FPGA to accelerate encoding of H.264/H.265/AV-1/etc faster than a CPU could. Further, I think RED has a pretty close relationship with Nvidia [2]. For RED customers, i…
> Afterburner > Threadripper LOL are they marketing to children?
There are some companies keeping the joy in tech alive (see thread about Google renaming Android Q to 10)
Re: Apple's petition against RED
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quality degrades, just as it would if you did the same with film.
It's not a given though I imagine. For audio for example you could discard inaudible parts of the spectrum and compress the rest losslessly. In this case only the first round is lossy and it doesn't degrade over time. But I'm not sure the same exists for images.
In the VFX industry you don't roundtrip lossy codecs; first step is to decode to something lossless like EXR or TIFF, and those are what you pipe through your workflows. (With maybe lowres JPEG "proxies" to make iteration a bit quicker.)
Film/TV more generally I think tolerates slightly lossy codecs like RED or Pro Res, as there's often only 1-2 intermediate steps that could cause extra loss. (E.g. the part of editing that is just 'cutting' is pass-through, but color-grading would require a second encoding step.)
Re: Apple's petition against RED
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cinema cameras need to be able to record at 4k (real 4k, 4048x2028) at upto 32bit per channel. 24 times a second. Thats a lot of data. Now, RED at the time didn't have a way of recording to large disk arrays, (unlike the alexa) so they used their own SSD pack things. This limited the amount of space, and shooting time. So they needed a way of doing more than RLE compression. This meant that they had to start chucking…
What camera system can record 32-bit? As far as I knew industry standard currently tops out at 16?
Sorry, its recorded as 32bit float. the actual sensor is nowhere near capable of 32 bit though.