quote from "wanted"

[jan von krogh]

"We're shooting RED side by side film. We scanned the film 4k and took both into the Baselight, compared them and then did a filmout of both. When we screened side by side, we literally could not tell the difference. In fact, most people picked the RED footage as film because of a greater dynamic range in the highlights than in the 5218. It's not enough to say it is the best digital image out there. The fact is, finally, we can intercut digital with film. It looked remarkably better than the filmed images. I thought I would never be able to say that"

 

Jon Farhat, VFX Supervisor, "Wanted".

 

so. will this thread be locked by the mod now? its a positive opinion...

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0267331/

[Stephen Williams]

"We're shooting RED side by side film. We scanned the film 4k and took both into the Baselight, compared them and then did a filmout of both. When we screened side by side, we literally could not tell the difference. In fact, most people picked the RED footage as film because of a greater dynamic range in the highlights than in the 5218. It's not enough to say it is the best digital image out there. The fact is, finally, we can intercut digital with film. It looked remarkably better than the filmed images. I thought I would never be able to say that"

 

Jon Farhat, VFX Supervisor, "Wanted".

 

so. will this thread be locked by the mod now? its a positive opinion...

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0267331/

 

Hi Jan,

 

What I find interesting is 5218 is rather grainy & contrasty, not my favourite stock. Other stocks have a greater DR than 5218.

 

YMMV

 

Stephen

[Max Jacoby]

so. will this thread be locked by the mod now? its a positive opinion...

It is not an opinion, but an advertisement. And an unpaid one to boot.

 

Is that really so hard to understand?

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Well Jan, it is a such a huge quote, this one from Jon Farhat! [PS] This cinema camera is a winner.

Edited August 4, 2007 by Emanuel A Guedes

[Emanuel A Guedes]

;)

[David Mullen ASC]

When are we going to start hearing quotes from cinematographers (ignoring cinematographer/director Soderberg) and not directors, producers, or efx people???

 

When I see a quote from a director about a digital camera, I think "advertizement" - because directors are celebrities, more or less, and cinematographers less so.

 

Also, Jim Jannard quoting someone making an positive endorsement and then someone requoting Jim quoting someone does come very close to being advertizement, not useful information. I'd rather see someone directly involved with using the camera posting here. I'd also trust evaluations that were a little more neutral in tone. But mainly I'd love to hear what real cinematographers are saying about using the RED camera, not directors. What does "Wanted" DP Mitch Admundsen think?

 

I respect Peter Jackson tremendously, as I do James Cameron, but remember that when HD first came along as Cameron was using it for "Ghosts of the Abyss", he publically said that HD was closer to 65mm resolution. So just because Jackson says that 35mm is "2K with some grain added" doesn't mean it's true. Trouble is that he's been working with 35mm-to-2K for so long, starting with "Lord of the Rings", that he's come to believe 35mm really is only 2K resolution. But anyone who has compared the same shot through 2K versus direct contact print (as I have) can see with their own eyes that there is a resolution hit by working in 2K.

 

To be very crude and imprecise...

35mm neg = 4K, 35mm print from neg = 2K

65mm neg = 8K, 70mm print from 65mm neg = 4K

35mm-to-4K and digitally projected in 4K = 70mm print + 35mm grain

4K digital origination projected in 4K = 70mm projection w/ no grain

 

In other words, depending on how it is shot, both 35mm and 4K digital can look very good projected in 4K or 70mm blow-ups. Or to be even cruder, 35mm and 4K digital cameras produce similar resolution, but 4K digital has no grain, which gives the impression of being from a bigger negative and allows more flexibility in enlargement. This is one reason why HD, though lower in resolution than 35mm, gives the impression of being similar because it lacks telltale grain size clues. And the other reason is that we've been looking at so many 35mm-to-2K D.I.'s over the years that 2K/HD origination naturally looks similar in resolution -- our standards have been lowered. So now that we finally have some 4K cameras that match 35mm resolution, more or less, people think erroneously that they are like 65mm cameras.

[Nate Downes]

So true there David. But then again, I still have seen Super8 scanned at 2k, and resolution-wise it was still 2k, just with larger film grains.

[Phil Rhodes]

And the usual path is of course 35mm print from neg from print from neg.

 

Ouch.

 

Phil

[Stephen Williams]

And the usual path is of course 35mm print from neg from print from neg.

 

Ouch.

 

Phil

 

Hi Phil,

 

I think you mean IP rather than print from OCN, previousely a CRI duped the original neg and release prints were made from that.

If you make a DI then multiple film out are an option.

 

Stephen

[Max Jacoby]

This is one reason why HD, though lower in resolution than 35mm, gives the impression of being similar because it lacks telltale grain size clues.

Also a video image had a higher contrast than 35mm (because there is less detail in the image) so at first sight appears to be sharper than it really is. But when you look at it closer you notice a lack of detail compared to 35mm.

[David Mullen ASC]

I just want to clarify that Jannard reporting from the sets of these beta testers is certainly valuable and interesting, nor do I expect him to not use famous names to promote his camera through their evaluations -- just that (1) I'd prefer not to have his posts repeated by other people like some sort of viral marketing; and (2) I'd take evaluations from cinematographers using the camera a little more seriously than I do directors and producers, so I'm looking forward to hearing more from the cinematographers.

 

Trouble with directors who do their own cinematography, like Soderberg, is that while I actually think Soderberg is a great cinematographer in his own right, it's in the very nature of the film industry that everything a director says while he is working on a movie is a form of self-promotion, hence why negative evaluations of their own work or the way they are working almost never appear in print. Plus feature directors who do their own cinematography often simply haven't shot as much as a typical cinematographer.

 

It's hard enough for the cinematographers themselves to be honest in print about their own work on a movie, only there is even more pressure on a director to think carefully about what they are saying because more people will be repeating it in print somewhere.

 

For all of these reasons, I take anything I read with a grain of salt, but technical evaluations by directors on one of their own projects, even more salt is consumed... I just want to hear more from cinematographers using the RED camera, that's all.

[Scott Webster]

Given that Rodney Charters had a prototype for 3 weeks of unrestricted testing and is an ASC brother David, perhaps he would be a good place to start?

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Given that Rodney Charters had a prototype for 3 weeks of unrestricted testing and is an ASC brother David, perhaps he would be a good place to start?

 

Yeah but in all fairness Rodney Charters was the same one who was getting excited about 1/3" Prosumer cameras a year or two ago. He seems pretty easily impressed (not that that's necessarily a bad thing).

[Scott Webster]

Yeah but in all fairness Rodney Charters was the same one who was getting excited about 1/3" Prosumer cameras a year or two ago. He seems pretty easily impressed (not that that's necessarily a bad thing).

 

I was more thinking that in David's case he is already involved in an organization that has an established network of peers and one of those members has had extensive hands on time with the camera.

 

I'm pretty sure the first and only answer David would get, would be 'NDA'.

[Chuck Toeti]

Jon Farhat is good at what he does but.... if you look at his website http://www.jfi.net/ he states that he is a RED Team Member and says "Proud to have participated as a member of the RED CAM development team." As David said it will be more useful to get feedback form cinematographers....

[Max Jacoby]

If it were up to VFX people we'd all shoot HD because due to the lack of grain the compositing is easier...

[Guest]

"Plus feature directors who do their own cinematography often simply haven't shot as much as a typical cinematographer."

 

I would of course agree with this, given that I am one of those director/DP combos.

 

I have to spend a huge amount of time on pre-production and post, and during this time period a dedicated DOP could have easily shot another movie, and moved onto yet another. It's not uncommon for a director to "live" with a script for a year before shooting. A DP could bang out two movies in that time period.

 

On the commercials I just finished I had a DOP in for one of the four days, first time ever. It was quite luxurious, and his stuff is excellent, but......frankly, my enjoyment level of the filmmaking process dropped by 80%.

 

Not sure how I'll overcome that?

 

R,

[Max Jacoby]

Not sure how I'll overcome that?

Did you operate at least? I find that more pleasureable than lighting.

[Guest]

No the DP operated, with the ACs by his side there was little for me to do after telling him what the shot was and how it needed to be done. If there where actors instead of product, I would of had more to do. Instead I was relegated to pouring sauce onto pasta to keep things moving on set at least.

 

Industry people keep telling me my days as director/DP/and operator are numbered. For two reasons, 1) As my budgets go up the producers will insist that I spend my time with the actors and not that "camera stuff" 2) A union some place at some point will make sure I don't touch the camera.

 

Those will be nice problems to have to solve, because it means I will have gone to a new level. Time will tell if that ever happens or not?????

 

As a last resort there's always my BL2 and more stock footage :D

 

R,

[Stephen Williams]

Not sure how I'll overcome that?

 

R,

 

Hi Richard,

 

You were just looking at a video assist, imagine looking at a 4k monitor!

 

Stephen

[Guest]

Funny you should say that...for four days I was explaining to the execs sent to the set, "that's just the video assist," "the video what?"

 

Geez don't get me started :D

 

R,

[Stephen Williams]

Funny you should say that...for four days I was explaining to the execs sent to the set, "that's just the video assist," "the video what?"

 

Geez don't get me started :D

 

R,

 

Richard,

 

PM me as soon as your RED arrives, I would like to fly over & test it.

 

Stephen

[Guest]

You'll be sleeping with my four year old.

 

R,

 

Meaning.....in his room, because I assume you'll be staying with us when you come over :D

[Max Jacoby]

2) A union some place at some point will make sure I don't touch the camera.

The US union gave the mandatory operator position away, are you telling me the Canadians held on to it?

[Guest]

The US union gave the mandatory operator position away, are you telling me the Canadians held on to it?

 

Good question no idea? But on an IATSE shoot if the director is not IATSE I don't know if he can operate the camera or not?

 

I'm still amazed that we in a free society ever got into this mess of allowing unions to tell creative people what they can and can't do.

 

Yes union people I know that a production does not HAVE to go union, and union people don't HAVE to show up and picket non-union productions either.

 

The funny thing is where I live producers talk about shooting non-union if the shoot is out of Toronto because the union people won't bother to drive to the shoot and make a fuss outside of downtown Toronto. I shot in Barrie which is 60 mins north of Toronto, way too far for the union bosses to drive.

 

R,