Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Trying to Achieve 8k

Expand Messages
  • Tom Kwasnitschka
    Patrick, my suggestion: Shoot some 7+k fulldome time lapse content and do your tests at different speeds. The nature of the content should give you the amount
    Message 1 of 20 , Jan 30, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Patrick, my suggestion:
      Shoot some 7+k fulldome time lapse content and do your tests at
      different speeds.
      The nature of the content should give you the amount of complexity you
      need, arguing for your statement.

      Tom

      --
      Tom Kwasnitschka
      executive associate

      allsky.de
      t. kwasnitschka, w. ermgassen und ges. gbr
      am dörpsdiek 37
      24109 melsdorf / kiel
      germany

      fon +49 700 allskyde
      fax +49 4340 4192945
      mobile +49 172 8546025

      kwasnitschka@...
      www.allsky.de
    • Ryan Wyatt
      Here at the IMERSA Summit in Denver, Brad Thomson geeked out for one slide yesterday and reminded me of a point I wanted to make on this 8k topic. Basically,
      Message 2 of 20 , Feb 4, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Here at the IMERSA Summit in Denver, Brad Thomson geeked out for one slide yesterday and reminded me of a point I wanted to make on this 8k topic.

        Basically, Brad noted that the Spitz Creative Media team works in higher bit depth (linear-gamma full float, to be specific) before “printing” to 8-bit for distribution. At the Academy’s visualization studio, we also work in higher bit depth, and while respecting some of the conversation about resolution and frame rate, I think it’s worth noting that bit depth is of critical importance for two reasons: 1) to have greater flexibility in final compositing and color or gamma adjustment for the display version of the show and 2) to optimize and to future-proof your content for various and emergent display system.

        On the topics of resolution and frame rate, I’ll just say that I think 8k is overkill and it’d be keen to create content at 48fps or 60fps (and I had an interesting conversation at dinner about how the former might make more sense than the latter from a production standpoint, in terms of the availability of technology that supports 48fps).


        Ryan, a.k.a.
        Ryan Wyatt, Director
        Morrison Planetarium and Science Visualization
        California Academy of Sciences
        55 Music Concourse Drive
        San Francisco, CA 94118


        On Jan 29, 2012, at 10:22 AM, animato727 wrote:

        Thank you Mike for taking the time to do this and for sharing your results. More of us need to do this type of sharing. And someone has to stick their neck out first. :)

        For all the sane and deeply thoughtful answers to the issues concerning resolution and frame rate on the dome, sometimes there is a simple insane answer. 8k 60fps. Our next, more traditional Planetarium show will be this insane. And were not doing it for press or bragging rights. There is a very noticeable difference for us and we hope to pass it along to our guests.
        But it is all content dependent. Slow moving object do not benefit as much from frame rate but fly a bit faster through a star field and 60fps almost looks magical.

        Does your 4k look like 2k? I would say someone didn't set anti-aliasing and/or sampling filters right. Or like Mike said, the 4k quality was never there to start. Sometimes you just have to get those render times down.

        To me, right now there are too many variables for any one test to be used as a reliable solution for general show making standards across all Planetaria. If anyone has an idea for a great 8k test, just let us know. We would be happy to facilitate it.

        Show making is an art and a science, and finding the right balance between the two is the key.

        Patrick



        Patrick McPike
        Technical Director
        Adler Planetarium
        pmcpike@...

        --- In fulldome@yahoogroups.com, Mike Murray <mmurray@...> wrote:

        I have to say again that if your creative canvas is a surface area as expansive as a hemispherical screen, an audience's perception of detail and realism won't come from resolutions beyond 4k. It's going to come from higher frame rates. I feel more confident than ever in saying this because we've spent the last 9 months creating (and comparing) 4k animations at 30fps to 60fps. The difference has been phenomenal not only in terms of visual impact, but also in terms of avoiding ridiculously long render times, stitching/geometry issues, and video encoding at bit rates that can accurately reflect 8k content with current technology.

        We're already seeing a situation where some of what is called "4k content" is actually composed of vector counts and textures that would look virtually the same at 2k. Sometimes I feel like the talk of "resolution" is more of a marketing buzz word than an actual measurable impact on viewer impression. The still photography of true 8k resolution might look a little bit better than 4k to the experienced producer's eye, but is it a really a huge „wow‰ factor *in the eyes of the general public*? Under most circumstances I would say no, but crafty marketing can make audiences feel like it is. Especially if they haven't even been to their local planetarium in X number of years.

        Our next full length feature show will be our first at 4k (a fully complex 4k environment) and 60fps. The higher frame rate make scene movements and color definition look amazingly sharp, smooth, and defined. In fact, because of the screen size, I hope someday to get to frame rates even higher than 60fps!

        I'm happy to see experiments with 8k content - it's a necessary exercise for comparison. But the next logical step ultimately comes down to a comparison of production techniques, discernible detail, public impression, cost-benefit analyses, and business sustainability.

        Stepping off my pedestal now...


        Mike.

        ********************************
        Mike Murray, Programs Manager
        Clark Planetarium
        Salt Lake City, Utah
        mmurray@...
        http://www.clarkplanetarium.org/distribution
      • Tom Casey
        I will agree with most of what is being said here from the producers viewpoint... taking in to account what current pipelines are capable of creating, what
        Message 3 of 20 , Feb 5, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          I will agree with most of what is being said here from the producers viewpoint... taking in to account what current pipelines are capable of creating, what works on the dome and then there's that budget thing and what the client asks you for (related to the budget usually). Working in a higher bit depth does little to increase the pipeline's load assuming you have the applications that can handle it. 8K is a massive increase in rendering with little gain in my opinion, But I still feel that things like motion blur will add far more to the viewer's impression than increased frame rates.

          Tom



          On Feb 4, 2012, at 4:36 PM, Ryan Wyatt wrote:

          Here at the IMERSA Summit in Denver, Brad Thomson geeked out for one slide yesterday and reminded me of a point I wanted to make on this 8k topic.

          Basically, Brad noted that the Spitz Creative Media team works in higher bit depth (linear-gamma full float, to be specific) before �printing� to 8-bit for distribution. At the Academy�s visualization studio, we also work in higher bit depth, and while respecting some of the conversation about resolution and frame rate, I think it�s worth noting that bit depth is of critical importance for two reasons: 1) to have greater flexibility in final compositing and color or gamma adjustment for the display version of the show and 2) to optimize and to future-proof your content for various and emergent display system.

          On the topics of resolution and frame rate, I�ll just say that I think 8k is overkill and it�d be keen to create content at 48fps or 60fps (and I had an interesting conversation at dinner about how the former might make more sense than the latter from a production standpoint, in terms of the availability of technology that supports 48fps).


          Ryan, a.k.a.
          Ryan Wyatt, Director
          Morrison Planetarium and Science Visualization
          California Academy of Sciences
          55 Music Concourse Drive
          San Francisco, CA 94118


          On Jan 29, 2012, at 10:22 AM, animato727 wrote:

          Thank you Mike for taking the time to do this and for sharing your results. More of us need to do this type of sharing. And someone has to stick their neck out first. :)

          For all the sane and deeply thoughtful answers to the issues concerning resolution and frame rate on the dome, sometimes there is a simple insane answer. 8k 60fps. Our next, more traditional Planetarium show will be this insane. And were not doing it for press or bragging rights. There is a very noticeable difference for us and we hope to pass it along to our guests.
          But it is all content dependent. Slow moving object do not benefit as much from frame rate but fly a bit faster through a star field and 60fps almost looks magical.

          Does your 4k look like 2k? I would say someone didn't set anti-aliasing and/or sampling filters right. Or like Mike said, the 4k quality was never there to start. Sometimes you just have to get those render times down.

          To me, right now there are too many variables for any one test to be used as a reliable solution for general show making standards across all Planetaria. If anyone has an idea for a great 8k test, just let us know. We would be happy to facilitate it.

          Show making is an art and a science, and finding the right balance between the two is the key.

          Patrick



          Patrick McPike
          Technical Director
          Adler Planetarium
          pmcpike@...

          --- In fulldome@yahoogroups.com, Mike Murray <mmurray@...> wrote:

          I have to say again that if your creative canvas is a surface area as expansive as a hemispherical screen, an audience's perception of detail and realism won't come from resolutions beyond 4k. It's going to come from higher frame rates. I feel more confident than ever in saying this because we've spent the last 9 months creating (and comparing) 4k animations at 30fps to 60fps. The difference has been phenomenal not only in terms of visual impact, but also in terms of avoiding ridiculously long render times, stitching/geometry issues, and video encoding at bit rates that can accurately reflect 8k content with current technology.

          We're already seeing a situation where some of what is called "4k content" is actually composed of vector counts and textures that would look virtually the same at 2k. Sometimes I feel like the talk of "resolution" is more of a marketing buzz word than an actual measurable impact on viewer impression. The still photography of true 8k resolution might look a little bit better than 4k to the experienced producer's eye, but is it a really a huge �wow� factor *in the eyes of the general public*? Under most circumstances I would say no, but crafty marketing can make audiences feel like it is. Especially if they haven't even been to their local planetarium in X number of years.

          Our next full length feature show will be our first at 4k (a fully complex 4k environment) and 60fps. The higher frame rate make scene movements and color definition look amazingly sharp, smooth, and defined. In fact, because of the screen size, I hope someday to get to frame rates even higher than 60fps!

          I'm happy to see experiments with 8k content - it's a necessary exercise for comparison. But the next logical step ultimately comes down to a comparison of production techniques, discernible detail, public impression, cost-benefit analyses, and business sustainability.

          Stepping off my pedestal now...


          Mike.

          ********************************
          Mike Murray, Programs Manager
          Clark Planetarium
          Salt Lake City, Utah
          mmurray@...
          http://www.clarkplanetarium.org/distribution

          ************************************************
          H o m e R u n P i c t u r e s

          Tom Casey
          President & Creative DIrector

          100 First Avenue - Suite 450
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Studio: 412-391-8200
          mailto:tom@...
          http://www.homerunpictures.com
        • Aaron Bradbury
          Re: bit-depth... I completely agree. Here at NSC Creative we also use a linear workflow, usually with OpenEXR half-float (16bit). EXR s are also incredibly
          Message 4 of 20 , Feb 6, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Re: bit-depth... I completely agree. Here at NSC Creative we also use a linear workflow, usually with OpenEXR half-float (16bit). EXR's are also incredibly useful for storing additional G-buffer channels such as reflection, z-depth, material ID's etc. It is worth pointing out that these require much more storage space and can slow down rendering and compositing, so it's a good idea to test them out at production level before committing to using them on a big project.

            Aaron Bradbury
            CG Supervisor - NSC creative
            National Space Centre, Exploration Drive, Leicester, LE4 5NS, UK
            Tel:  +44 (0) 116 2582151
            http://www.NSCcreative.com/
            aaronb@...

            -----Original Message-----
            From: fulldome@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fulldome@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ryan Wyatt
            Sent: 04 February 2012 21:36
            To: fulldome@yahoogroups.com
            Cc: Ryan Wyatt
            Subject: [fulldome] Re: Trying to Achieve 8k

            Here at the IMERSA Summit in Denver, Brad Thomson geeked out for one slide yesterday and reminded me of a point I wanted to make on this 8k topic.

            Basically, Brad noted that the Spitz Creative Media team works in higher bit depth (linear-gamma full float, to be specific) before “printing” to 8-bit for distribution. At the Academy’s visualization studio, we also work in higher bit depth, and while respecting some of the conversation about resolution and frame rate, I think it’s worth noting that bit depth is of critical importance for two reasons: 1) to have greater flexibility in final compositing and color or gamma adjustment for the display version of the show and 2) to optimize and to future-proof your content for various and emergent display system.

            On the topics of resolution and frame rate, I’ll just say that I think 8k is overkill and it’d be keen to create content at 48fps or 60fps (and I had an interesting conversation at dinner about how the former might make more sense than the latter from a production standpoint, in terms of the availability of technology that supports 48fps).


            Ryan, a.k.a.
            Ryan Wyatt, Director
            Morrison Planetarium and Science Visualization California Academy of Sciences
            55 Music Concourse Drive
            San Francisco, CA 94118


            On Jan 29, 2012, at 10:22 AM, animato727 wrote:

            Thank you Mike for taking the time to do this and for sharing your results. More of us need to do this type of sharing. And someone has to stick their neck out first. :)

            For all the sane and deeply thoughtful answers to the issues concerning resolution and frame rate on the dome, sometimes there is a simple insane answer. 8k 60fps. Our next, more traditional Planetarium show will be this insane. And were not doing it for press or bragging rights. There is a very noticeable difference for us and we hope to pass it along to our guests.
            But it is all content dependent. Slow moving object do not benefit as much from frame rate but fly a bit faster through a star field and 60fps almost looks magical.

            Does your 4k look like 2k? I would say someone didn't set anti-aliasing and/or sampling filters right. Or like Mike said, the 4k quality was never there to start. Sometimes you just have to get those render times down.

            To me, right now there are too many variables for any one test to be used as a reliable solution for general show making standards across all Planetaria. If anyone has an idea for a great 8k test, just let us know. We would be happy to facilitate it.

            Show making is an art and a science, and finding the right balance between the two is the key.

            Patrick



            Patrick McPike
            Technical Director
            Adler Planetarium
            pmcpike@...

            --- In fulldome@yahoogroups.com, Mike Murray <mmurray@...> wrote:

            I have to say again that if your creative canvas is a surface area as expansive as a hemispherical screen, an audience's perception of detail and realism won't come from resolutions beyond 4k. It's going to come from higher frame rates. I feel more confident than ever in saying this because we've spent the last 9 months creating (and comparing) 4k animations at 30fps to 60fps. The difference has been phenomenal not only in terms of visual impact, but also in terms of avoiding ridiculously long render times, stitching/geometry issues, and video encoding at bit rates that can accurately reflect 8k content with current technology.

            We're already seeing a situation where some of what is called "4k content" is actually composed of vector counts and textures that would look virtually the same at 2k. Sometimes I feel like the talk of "resolution" is more of a marketing buzz word than an actual measurable impact on viewer impression. The still photography of true 8k resolution might look a little bit better than 4k to the experienced producer's eye, but is it a really a huge „wow‰ factor *in the eyes of the general public*? Under most circumstances I would say no, but crafty marketing can make audiences feel like it is. Especially if they haven't even been to their local planetarium in X number of years.

            Our next full length feature show will be our first at 4k (a fully complex 4k environment) and 60fps. The higher frame rate make scene movements and color definition look amazingly sharp, smooth, and defined. In fact, because of the screen size, I hope someday to get to frame rates even higher than 60fps!

            I'm happy to see experiments with 8k content - it's a necessary exercise for comparison. But the next logical step ultimately comes down to a comparison of production techniques, discernible detail, public impression, cost-benefit analyses, and business sustainability.

            Stepping off my pedestal now...


            Mike.

            ********************************
            Mike Murray, Programs Manager
            Clark Planetarium
            Salt Lake City, Utah
            mmurray@...
            http://www.clarkplanetarium.org/distribution
          • dsm_clark
            Here here to high bit-depth composites!! Perfect Little Planet is a series of firsts for us at the Clark Planetarium. The rendered layers are openEXR, though
            Message 5 of 20 , Feb 6, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Here here to high bit-depth composites!!

              Perfect Little Planet is a series of firsts for us at the Clark Planetarium. The rendered layers are openEXR, though After Effects doesn't work well with the zDepth or other buffers in EXR. For that we just save a pass as a separate file. Also we're launching at 60 fps as Mike mentioned in an earlier post.

              On a side note, Aaron, are you experiencing as bad of a slow down using EXR as with PNG? We're finding the EXRs write in half the time as compared to PNG, without a lot more overhead as far as space.

              This also means that when we "clamp" the color for a given system, CRT, DLP, etc etc, we can get truer colors even with an exposure adjustment. This also means that when someone leases a show perpetually, they'll get an option to have EXR masters vs PNG. If you upgrade your system at a later date, you'll have that extra color depth to work with.

              And personally... I think any blur, other than to add a glow effect, depth perception or hide a rendered defect, is a huge loss. Your eye doesn't receive blurred images unless its out of focus. Feed the eye closer and closer to reality, in my opinion.

              Very glad we built two new servers before the floods. Cannot imagine trying to build the necessary space now. 4k for 40 Tb... yes please!

              David Merrell
              Production Supervisor
              Clark Planetarium

              --- In fulldome@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron Bradbury" <aaronb@...> wrote:

              Re: bit-depth... I completely agree. Here at NSC Creative we also use a linear workflow, usually with OpenEXR half-float (16bit). EXR's are also incredibly useful for storing additional G-buffer channels such as reflection, z-depth, material ID's etc. It is worth pointing out that these require much more storage space and can slow down rendering and compositing, so it's a good idea to test them out at production level before committing to using them on a big project.

              Aaron Bradbury
              CG Supervisor - NSC creative
              National Space Centre, Exploration Drive, Leicester, LE4 5NS, UK
              Tel: +44 (0) 116 2582151
              http://www.NSCcreative.com/
              aaronb@...
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.