<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Frames from Peter Jackson short up</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.indie4k.com/archives/36/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.indie4k.com/archives/36</link>
	<description>A blog about the technical, financial and creative aspects of HD and Ultra-HD independant filmmaking.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 11:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: David Newman</title>
		<link>http://www.indie4k.com/archives/36#comment-179</link>
		<dc:creator>David Newman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 22:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indie4k.com/archives/36#comment-179</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Great blog idea.  Are you open for conversations beyond Red spin? It would nice if someone would filter the messaging being reported on reduser.net.  Like the whole TIFF vs JPEG was a little misdirect over compression issue in the source vs compression issue in the web presentation.  A 3:1 JPG will not introduce visible artifacts.  Also 8-bit is not an issue for presentation, after all most of the digital theatres are using 80Mb/s MPEG2 8-bit, and that look excellent.  Red will for course do their best to address these compression issues, until then we will not be seeing TIFFs or new JPEGs. However they are more likely to address them if there are open discussions on a blog like this.  I hope you are up for the challenge.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I could do the same on my blog, yet I would not be considered unbiased with a competing compression solution in CineForm RAW.  I rather see them fix the in camera issues so my company can focus on helping the post workflow, where we shouldn't be considered competition.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;David Newman
CTO, CineForm
http://cineform.blogspot.com&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great blog idea.  Are you open for conversations beyond Red spin? It would nice if someone would filter the messaging being reported on reduser.net.  Like the whole TIFF vs JPEG was a little misdirect over compression issue in the source vs compression issue in the web presentation.  A 3:1 JPG will not introduce visible artifacts.  Also 8-bit is not an issue for presentation, after all most of the digital theatres are using 80Mb/s MPEG2 8-bit, and that look excellent.  Red will for course do their best to address these compression issues, until then we will not be seeing TIFFs or new JPEGs. However they are more likely to address them if there are open discussions on a blog like this.  I hope you are up for the challenge.</p>
<p>I could do the same on my blog, yet I would not be considered unbiased with a competing compression solution in CineForm RAW.  I rather see them fix the in camera issues so my company can focus on helping the post workflow, where we shouldn&#8217;t be considered competition.</p>
<p>David Newman<br />
CTO, CineForm<br />
<a href="http://cineform.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://cineform.blogspot.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
