IBC 2014 product launches place 4K in the mainstream

A round-up of 4K items of interest from IBC 2014 in Amsterdam.

Those of use who use DSLRs like the Canon 5D to shoot time lapses have been aware of the 4K phenomenon longer than most. The detail it produces and the ability to move the video around within an HD raster without quality loss are just two of the benefits of shooting in 4K. The football World Cup in Brazil was a testing bed for broadcast 4K and many high-end TV series have been shot in 4K - some have even been transmitted (on Netflix) in 4K.

The biggest drawback with 4K is its size. File sizes are huge and because it is such high quality you don't want to compress it too much. Most versions of HD codecs such as ProRes and H264 have been beefed up to handle 4K images but the obvious omission was a new DNx codec from Avid. Most people expected Avid to enhance their AMA system which uses plug-ins to handle other codecs within Media Composer. Most of the time I get to a point in the edit where I transcode the AMA material to DNxHD which Avid handles beautifully and is compatible through the Avid/EVS system. 

Yesterday at IBC in Amsterdam Avid announced they have developed DNxHR a 4K (strictly a UHD) version of their codec which will be available in Q4 of this year. They have called it "4K beauty without the bandwidth" and are releasing a new version of Media Composer to cope with it. Hopefully this will be a universal codec that once added to a PC or Mac can be used in Adobe, DaVinci Resolve and other edit systems. I have yet to discover the all important MB/sec size of this codec but it could be a good alternative to H.265 for distribution of 4K material.

Blackmagic Design has been an early advocate of 4K and is now producing very usable firmware for its 4K Production Camera. In the older HD Cinema Camera DNxHD was one of the recording options so I hope the Production Camera will gain DNxHR recording when it is released.

Blackmagic also added a new monitor to its line-up today with the SmartView 4K, a 15 inch rack mount (or VESA mount) LCD monitor for under $2,000.

Blackmagic Design SmartView 4K

Not sure how good it will be for grading (no gamut information), but it has built-in LUTs so it is intended to be used by creatives and not just engineers. It is due out in December 2014 and hopefully won't experience the delays of other Blackmagic products.

One monitor that you can definitely grade on is Sony's new BVM-X300 4K OLED Master Monitor. I am sitting in front of its HD cousin and it is the best monitor I have ever seen, I cannot wait to see the 4K version but unfortunately I'm not in Amsterdam this week but an edit suite near Heathrow.

Sony BVM-X300 4K OLED master monitor

Unlike the Blackmagic Design monitor this 30 inch monster is true 4K (4096x2160) with an extra wide gamut range, although Sony must be gutted that is doesn't cover the full ITU-R BT2020 wide colour spaces and have to admit it in their documentation. Of course this will probably cost more than a small car, even if that small car is a mini with all the extras on. Canon's competing monitor, the DP-V3010 is currently £29,000 at CVP.

Blackmagic Design Production Camera 4K - initial thoughts.

The old adage "be careful what you wish for" may be true in fairy tales but in real life it can sometimes work out pretty well. In an earlier blog back in January I wrote the following lines:

"My dream machine though is the Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera MKII with a larger sensor (so wide angles are possible) that can shoot 2.5K in RAW and 4K in GoPro's Cineform codec. Even if the price doubled for such a beast I doubt Blackmagic Design would have much trouble selling them."

I even posted a mock-up of the apple of my eye:

My mock-up in January of a dream camera

Well I don't know if Blackmagic Design had been reading my blog but yesterday on day one of NAB 2013 this is what they released:

The Blackmagic Design Production Camera 4K

So I got the logo on the wrong side and it looks like the same designer from Channel 4 in the UK drew up the logo but that doesn't matter, here is a "proper" 4K camera for less than $5,000. To clarify that, you can shoot 4K using a $400 GoPro but not at a broadcast frame rate and the new Blackmagic camera is officially $3,995, but won't work without a fast SSD inside it, oh and a lens would be handy. So let's call it $5K for 4K.

Blackmagic Design have elected not to take up my suggestion of using GoPro's Cineform codec and instead chosen ProRes which is a great format but not when you are using Windows machines. Avid's DNxHD codec has been dropped altogether but if Avid can get their heads out of the sand and come up with a good 4K codec it may be added in a later upgrade. 

A pleasant surprise is that you can shoot compressed CinemaDNG RAW in 4K which for stock material will be fantastic but there is no information I can find about file sizes or how much footage you can shoot in CinemaDNG on a SSD, but with ProRes 4K maxing out at 880 Mbs you only get 36 minutes on a 240 Gb drive. Little caveat here, one bit of the BM blurb says a full version of the DaVinci Resolve grading software is included with the camera but only the lite version is listed in the included software on this Blackmagic page:

Blackmagic Design have dropped the 2.5K resolution that was the main feature of the BM cinema camera, which gave HD editors a bit of leeway for stabilising and shot positioning; now the choice is 1920x1080 or 3840 x 2160 the specification for Ultra-HD. At least it looks like all frame rates including PAL 25p will be working from the start although rather strangely considering the CMOS sensor there are interlaced options in the 1920 resolutions but I can't see this camera being used for sport much.

Although I didn't get the Cineform codec of my dreams I did get my wish for a larger sensor to get wider angles. Below are a couple of grabs from the very useful Abelcine website where you can check field of view for a variety of cameras and lenses. 

The first shows the Super 35mm sensor from the new Production Camera and the field of view using a 35mm lens and on the right is the FOV of the original Cinema Camera. The new camera offers a 39.1 degree angle compared to 25.5 degrees on the original.

The second grab compares the Production Camera (again on the left) with the Canon 5D MKII full frame sensor. The 5D doubles the FOV again with a 54.4 degree so although the new Production Camera gives a much wider view, if you are used to using a full frame DSLR to shoot then you may be disappointed. In fact the new camera is very close to the Canon 7D or Nikon D3100 in field of view.

Within hours of the NAB launch I read criticism of Blackmagic Design retaining the shape of the original camera and the fixed internal battery, but there must have been a huge amount of development to get this form factor and it is also instantly distinguishable from other cameras, which as any marketing student will confirm is a huge advantage. Also like the GoPros, a large number of 3rd party companies have produced vital accessories for the BMCC and these will still be compatible with the new camera.

I think this will be the perfect camera for shooting ultra-hd stock footage and I am extremely pleased that I resisted my urge to order the original camera 12 months ago and can now use another old saying - "good things come to those who wait". Just hope it won't be as long a wait as for the first version; the first cameras are due to ship in July 2013.

4K codecs - the good, the big and the ugly. Part 2

The first part of this blog looked at the file sizes of a 1 second 4K video clip using various QuickTime codecs. This part looks at the image quality of the codecs that use an efficient lossy compression system. Some codecs can compress an image and uncompress it without any loss of information (lossless compression), but these produce extremely large file sizes and I have left them out of this test as they should, in theory, show no difference to the original.   

The codecs compared here are GoPro's Cineform, Avid's DNxHD, MJPEG A, MJPEG B, MPEG 4 and Photo JPEG. Here is the table of file sizes for the various versions I made:

File sizes of 4K 1 second clip

Here is the link to the 1 second clip at HD 1920x1080 size in the MPEG 4 codec at 90%.

I made 2 JPEG (100%) stills of the first frame of the clip. One is the full size 4K image and the other is a 640x360 pixel crop with the image zoomed up to 200%. The cropped image is the top of the tower with the crane by the side. All the images are shown below, but I also made a stack of the crops in Photoshop and sliced out the layers for a comparison. 

Quality of various codecs 90% quality. 200% zoom and cropped

I haven't included MJPEGB here because it is no different from MJPEGA, but both MJPEGs show a large variation in the original colour, lifting the gamma significantly. All the other codecs were consistent and matched the uncompressed version.


The original purpose of this test was to see if the Avid DNxHD codec was suitable for 4K use but when I saw how poor the quality was I looked at all the other codecs to see what was wrong. You can see from the sliced picture how blurred the image of the crane has become, but the MPEG4 version is as sharp as the Photo JPEG image below. I was surprised when I looked at the file size how much DNxHD was compressing the image because I hadn't seen such degradation when editing high definition material and the file size is larger than MPEG4. I rendered out this clip in 1920x1080 with the codecs again set to 90% quality. The DNxHD clip was 44 MB in size and the MPEG4 was only 14 MB in size.

To be precise the HD version of the DNxHD codec was 44,808 KB in size which is exactly the size of the 4K version, which gave the solution. The DNxHD codec is only designed for the 1920x1080 video space and when the image dimension goes beyond that the pixels are duplicated (or more) to fill in the gaps, hence why it is blurred and the file size doesn't increase.

I think this is a mistake and Avid should limit the dimension the codec can produce, like H.264 does. Or it should ignore file size and produce a similar quality of image that the other codecs show here. I assume Avid will come up with a native 4K codec very soon which can be used in the next generation of cameras such as the Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera and their edit tools.

Meanwhile the best solution for moving 4K videos around the web appears to be MPEG 4 because it scales well, reproduces the original colour and is the smallest of all the options. However I hope that the GoPro Cineform codec becomes more widely used (and free) as it is robust and platform agnostic. And of course we wait for the launch of H.265 which is likely to be the choice of the broadcast world.

For videographers producing 4K clips the only solution is to use a lossless codec 

Here are the JPEG images of all the test clips. Please download them to compare.

Cineform 90%

Cineform 90% crop with 200% zoom

Avid DNxHD 90%

Avid DNxHD 90% crop with 200% zoom

MPEG A 90%

MPEG A 90% crop with 200% zoom

MPEG 4 90%

MPEG 4 90% crop with 200% zoom

Photo JPEG 90%

Photo JPEG 90% crop with 200% zoom

4K codecs - the good, the big and the ugly. Part 1

There can be little doubt that there is going to be a huge increase in the demand for 4K footage over the next few years and much of that early demand will have to satisfied by stock material. Currently broadcasters can turn to an enormous library of SD and HD material compiled over decades of shooting, but that won't cut the mustard when intercut with newly acquired 4K footage.

Which is good news for those of us who are planning on making our own library of high quality 4K stock shots. One question I would love to answer is which flavour of 4K will be the choice of stock libraries and I really hope that the big boys can come to some sort of agreement here, because uploading four different versions of a 4K clip is not a quick process.

Now H.265 has been announced and I think this will become the bookies favourite even though its younger cousin H.264 is not currently stock libraries first choice for progressive footage. But efficient as H.265 is, it's unlikely to be a good format to edit with for reasons I won't go into here. This means any stock footage will have to be transcoded to another format or codec before editing.

So I ran some tests on existing codecs using a 4K clip from a time lapse within Adobe After Effects to see if any of them would be good enough to host on the web and edit with natively. Here is a still from the sequence. 

The One Tower, St Georges Wharf, Vauxhall, London

The crane on the tall building behind Vauxhall Bridge was unfortunately hit by a helicopter in January 2013 in case it looks familiar - you can see a 1080p version of the time lapse here. I chose this clip because of the complexity of the image with lots of vertical and horizontal lines and a lot of detail in the sky and water.

Here are the codec candidates:

Avid DNxHD - works on Mac and PC and the codec is free.
BlackMagic codec - great quality but probably too big and not widely used.
Cineform - again works on Mac and PC but you need the Premium version of Cineform Studio to create files and this is $299.
Photo JPEG - An old codec, with good compatibility. Currently the choice of many stock companies but not the most efficient of compression choices.
TIFF - Using LZW compression should give a perfect image but with file sizes to match. Also tried a QT using TIFF.
Animation - Not used so much any more but moving between editing and graphics tools is used to be the king. Huge differences in file size depending on the compression ratio.
MPEG A & B - Had their day I think and largely used only for interlaced  
ProRes - A really great codec but will not play well (if at all) on PCs, which really is a ridiculous situation. If it did this would be numero uno. I'm working on a PC so couldn't produce any test results. Pah!

I created a 4K (4096x2304) 1 second clip in each format at two or three compression settings (75%, 90% & 100% where possible) to look at file size and quality. Here are the results:

File sizes of  1 second 4K clip in various codecs 

The TIFF sequence adds up to 288 MB for the 25 frames. 

Unsurprisingly the uncompressed or lossless compression codecs are significantly larger than the lossy compressed versions. The embedded TIFF QTs were significantly larger than the sequence of stills using the LZW lossless compression and the TIFF sequence would still be a good way to exchange between editing and graphic systems.

The lossy compression codecs start with Cineform (100% quality) at 126 MB for a 1 second clip. Bearing in mind that the maximum  length of a clip on iStock is 30 seconds and you could end up with a files of 3.78 GB! At 75% quality it would be a mere 1.8 GB

The tests showed that DNxHD 444 10 bit was almost the same size at 100%, 90% and 75%. Somewhat surprisingly it made little difference on MJPEG codecs whether 75% or 90% compression was chosen. But Cineform at 100% jumped up to 126 MB - almost double the 90% file size, which shows remarkably efficient compression if the quality stands up.

Photo JPEG and MPEG4 also showed a big difference between 75% and 90% and a 30 second clip at the higher compression (75% quality) would be just over 1 GB in size.

In Part 2 of this blog I look at the picture quality of the smaller files to see whether they have a future as a 4K stock format.