• SLR

  • Question regarding difference between SLR Original file sizes

Hey everyone,

Is there a noticeable visual improvement in the SLR Original biggest file download options?

For example, I love the Lena Paul SLR scene but only downloaded the 12.8gb 6k file. Is the massive 42gb file really that much better?

Thanks for the help!

That is all in the eye of the beholder, but realistically the 6K is what they would consider the best quality for a reasonable file size. Maybe when 12K headsets are the norm in 8 years and your eyesight is 20/20 you can say it's worth it, but realistically the 13GB is great enough.

    Both videos are 6K though.
    The difference can be seen rather easily, I think, for example in skin texture. Honestly, even the original versions lack detail there. I'd like if they could lower the sharpness setting, probably directly on the cameras. With the current sharpening, you get this effect where texture goes from being super sharp to virtually non-existant very quickly (both spatially and temporally), which looks artificial, and not very professional. You don't see that on real, commercial movies, for example (unfair comparison, true). Also, these artificial, sharp edges consume a lot of bits when encoding these videos, because the encoder believes they are important. Those bits could be better used elsewhere.
    SLR Original does still have the best looking videos. I just want them to look even better. 🙂

      gurphh We are hitting the lim tech with current cameras, if you are knowledgable in building PCIe cameras, email me to philip at sexlikereal.com 🙂

          Philip I believe you. I just thought maybe they have a sharpness setting? But maybe they don't?

              Philip Not only resolution and focus. Additional sharpening is applied when resampling pixels from the sensor to the output frame. Bicubic interpolation, for example, has a factor that controls sharpness. High-end consumer and prosumer video cameras usually have a sharpness setting that affects this resampling. All video cameras I have owned have had such a setting, anyway. (In professional cameras you usually shoot raw, so there I believe the sharpness of the resampling is decided afterwards instead.)

                  gurphh cameras are recording at sensors top resolution, files are saved in h265 cbr 200 I believe. Writing in raw would cost us a leg and TBs of storage just for one video 👀

                      Philip Cameras do resample pixels from the sensor to the output. For example, the pixels on the sensor are usually either red, green or blue. So, this has to be combined to real colored pixels.

                      I'm not saying you should shoot raw. I was just asking if the camera had a sharpness setting. If it doesn't, don't bother. If your future cameras do, please consider lowering that setting. 🙂

                          gurphh oh, I get you now, if you speak about debayering then certainly there is interpolation between values, but you get that on raws too, difference is that in raw you might slightly tweak it to make it "look better" but current generations of cameras could rather use some extra spatial resolution then trying to juice out any "sharpness" from debayering. Also fisheye lenses are very tricky to focus and easily "messed up"

                              Philip Yes, debayering. 🙂
                              But no, raw video is unprocessed data from the sensor, and that's before debayering.
                              Regardless, I take it the camera you use doesn't have a sharpness setting then.