RED ONE footage

Dan Goulder · July 4, 2008

No. I have seen Red footage with 4K projection and my eyes tell me if this was footage with 1K effective resolution (16mm or worse) or rather excellent 35mm resolution if not 70mm like.

Now, if this camera could only achieve the greater than 14 bit color that's achievable on film...

Phil Rhodes · July 4, 2008

The idea that any film stock has 14 bits of dynamic range above the noisefloor is beyond preposterous.

P

Dan Goulder · July 4, 2008

The idea that any film stock has 14 bits of dynamic range above the noisefloor is beyond preposterous.

P

I was quoting that spec from a recent ASC interview with Wally Pfister and Christopher Nolan. (By the way, isn't "beyond preposterous" a bit melodramatic?)

John Holland · July 4, 2008

Phil havent read the interview but parts of it shot in Imax and rest 35mm anamorphic so thats maybe whats it about , anyway i dont think you can use the Bit theory to film neg.

David Mullen ASC · July 4, 2008

It's all relative anyway -- you can say that you can't use beyond 14-stops of range on film due to noise (or grain, really) but then you'd also have to say that you can really use all 11.3-stops of dynamic range that supposedly is on the RED because a stop or two of that lies in the noise floor.

So practically speaking, the relative superiority of color negative over digital in regards to dynamic range remains no what what total number of stops you want to assign to each format.

This is why I don't like throwing these numbers around too much, except vaguely as approximate ranges. Most DP's work in a practical realm anyway, i.e. how many stops over before something clips, etc. No one places important detail on the extreme ends of usable dynamic range. "My meter said that object was six stops underexposed... but that lies in the theoretical range of recorded information, so why isn't the shot usable? When I set the black level to where I like it, the object disappears!"

Matthew W. Phillips · July 4, 2008

How come with all of these RED vs film talks, everything is always mentioned about resolution and dynamic range? I seldom hear anyone mention about color rendition, light sensitivity, highlight/lowlight rolloff, stability of the medium(for both shooting purposes and archival purposes), learning curve, actual vs perceived cost structure, effect on viewers, the list goes on and on.

I have no problem with RED vs film debates, as long as 1) they don't become personal and 2) they consider more than just "does RED have more resolution than film resolves?" Resolution means little to many anyway. I shoot Super 8 over an HVX200...why? The HVX200 has way more sharpness and clarity of the image, and res, compared to Super 8 transferred on modern day telecines. Yes, but few (maybe none) would argue that the color rendition of the HVX200 beats Super 8 film. It's no contest really.

Paul Bruening · July 4, 2008

The idea that any film stock has 14 bits of dynamic range above the noisefloor is beyond preposterous.

P

Hey Phil,

You're inbox showed as full. Here's my reply to the PM thread:

Yes you do have it right - I typo'd your name when punching it into the messenger box.

However, what then happened...

I have now surrounded it with hazard warning tape and "do not touch" notices - I'm determined to make this work now!

P

When you're on site I'm off and vice versa. We can't get this timed. I appreciate all your efforts. Sorry, I can't seem to get to your link.

David Mullen ASC · July 4, 2008

I can pretty much predict everyone's opinions on the first RED films when they get released...

DJ Joofa · July 5, 2008

The idea that any film stock has 14 bits of dynamic range above the noisefloor is beyond preposterous.

I think you are mixing up linear and non-linear notions here. The way data is recorded on film, having a high DR is not always helpful as far SNR is concerned, because though SNR would remain more or less constant over a broad range of input variance, it would actually *decrease* after a certain value.

Max Jacoby · July 5, 2008

I can pretty much predict everyone's opinions on the first RED films when they get released...

I'm told the Vegas odds are 1-5 that I won't like the skintones.

Phil Rhodes · July 5, 2008

Paul - inbox no longer full and I did leave it all on overnight...

Fricken FTP.

P

DJ Joofa · July 5, 2008

I'm told the Vegas odds are 1-5 that I won't like the skintones.

There are several variables in digital skin rendition and it is not always easy to control the process using standard color space transforms that are employed frequently in digital processing. However, according to some studies Fairchild color appearance model, which considers incomplete chromatic adaptation of cones to the white point, gives pleasant results.

Michel Hafner · July 5, 2008

Now, if this camera could only achieve the greater than 14 bit color that's achievable on film...

I was talking about spatial resolution, fine detail, lack of noise/grain (that is the part that makes people talk about 70mm look). I can't comment on the shading detail compared to 35mm or 70mm, native or via digital projector.