Films shot on the RED?

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Look at what Canon is doing right now with their 5D2. They crippled all the iris and ISO controls, and disabled 24p, in a move almost seemingly designed to piss off indie filmmakers! :angry: Anyway, that is why Jim is seen as a sort of Robin Hood-like figure.

 

You asked, and I explained.

Here's why Jim has had so many supporters, including among his customers. Proud customers, actually.

[Sam Wells]

i'm just saying that many indie people view a move like Canon disabling 24p in the 5D2 as pure BS. it ticks people off! the camera can shoot 30p, so Canon is CLEARLY going out of their way to disable a tool that might useful to indie filmmakers.

 

I'm not sure we can say they "disabled" anything. They let you record the Live View (without pic info) and that 's 30p. Live view on my D3 is 1080i / 15fps on the HDMI out.

 

Maybe Canon will enable 24 fps in firmware upgrade ?

 

IOW I don't think they invented much in order to do this. I do think they're "fishing" to see what the response to this is.

 

-Sam

[John Sprung]

So then, no Bayer pattern sensor could ever be considered 4:4:4, correct? Even as uncompressed data. What would you rate the RED as then? 4:2:2? 4:4:2?

 

The Bayer pattern and 4:2:0 etc are sort of related in that they both take advantage of a couple fundamental facts about human vision to make wiser use of a limited bit budget. The human visual system has much higher resolution for variations in brightness than in color. It also has a tendency to take whatever color information it gets, and fit it to the brightness picture it has.

 

4:2:2 is a sort of historical oddity. Back in the days of analog component video, they used to give the luminance channel bandwidth equal to 4 times the color subcarrier frequency, and twice the subcarrier frequency for the red minus luminance and blue minus luminance channels. With early digital, this naming convention was retained and refers to the number of samples across a scan line.

 

All that was before we could afford enough memory to have frame buffers. Now that frame buffers are cheap enough to be used all over the place, we can take advantage of the lower color resolution of the eye both in the horizontal and vertical direction. That also lead to a notation mutation. The term 4:2:0 was coined for that, to indicate that the bit rate was the same as if you had discarded one of the color difference channels. In the old understanding, 4:2:0 would have meant that you actually did discard the blue record, which of course wouldn't work.

 

Bottom line, 4:2:2 and 4:2:0 should look exactly as good as each other. To the extent that 4:2:0 seems not to, it's a matter of 4:2:2 being used in more legacy high end implementations. So, that's why 4:2:2 is a weird old thing. Now that we have memory, we should forget about it.

 

The Bayer idea is related to all this because it gives you two green samples for every red and blue. Green is the most important color in determining luminance. Luminance is where we need more spatial resolution. So, giving Green more spatial resolution makes sense.

 

Typical luminance equations are something like:

 

Y = 0.2R + 0.7G + 0.1B

 

Of course, in real world systems, the numbers are specified to three or four decimal places. But the heavy weighting of green is why it gets twice the spatial resolution of the other primaries.

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Scott Fritzshall]

i'm just saying that many indie people view a move like Canon disabling 24p in the 5D2 as pure BS. it ticks people off! the camera can shoot 30p, so Canon is CLEARLY going out of their way to disable a tool that might useful to indie filmmakers. i'm just trying to explain what drives average Joe's to appreciate Jannard's approach. to me, it's no mystery at all why people really like what he is doing.

Well sure, it's totally understandable that people appreciate being able to use better stuff. What doesn't sit right with me is when it progresses from "yay, a neat new product to use" to "I love Jim Jannard for giving this to us." He's a guy who saw a big gaping hole in the other guys' plan, and filled it. He's not like the savior of the indie world, he just took an inevitability and made it happen sooner. Again, it's really just the level of emotional investment that people put into this that weirds me out, and I think that's what contributes to the fanboyism and a lot of really unhealthy attitudes. I don't have anything against the camera itself, I just think people need to chill out about it.

[Matthew Buick]

For all this talk about at RedUser about how RED is going to destroy ARRI and Sony, these people forget that some people with deep pockets like paying top dollar just to feel that they are getting a high-end piece of professional gear -- there is a snob appeal to the whole system, beyond the actual benefits of buying well-made, solid, precision equipment with a long corporate history/tradition behind it. On the other hand, with today's failing economy, those deep pockets have holes in them and RED may benefit from the belt-tightening.

 

Good point David. I can't see RED destroying either company, but it is rather refershing to get away from the pretentious jumped-up marketing campaigns. That's one of the reason I love the HV30, no snob value whatsover, except over the HV20, perhaps.

[Matthew Rogers]

REC 709

 

What will didn't mention was that this was a normal nurse (aka, only had on whatever makeup she put on at home), who was standing over an infant in ICU that had a light over it (tungsten bouncing off the blanket into the nurse's face) and a window with natural light on the left hitting her side. Even without "lighting" skin, the skintones come out very nice on the RED.

 

Matthew

[Anatole Sloan]

i'm just saying that many indie people view a move like Canon disabling 24p in the 5D2 as pure BS. it ticks people off! the camera can shoot 30p, so Canon is CLEARLY going out of their way to disable a tool that might useful to indie filmmakers. i'm just trying to explain what drives average Joe's to appreciate Jannard's approach. to me, it's no mystery at all why people really like what he is doing.

 

Canon's actions are, however, clearly understandable. While they have the advantage (if you would call it that) of not being in the 'professional' video market, and therefore not having a such market to cannibalise, creating a 5D Mark II capable of full video would damage their prosumer camcorder market.

 

Canon is acting for its own benefit as a company:

-They may be waiting to include this in the 1D(s) series

-or, they might introduce a prosumer camcorder capable of extremely good video, using technology similar to the 5D II, but better implemented; this could potentially steal a lot of the video market for Canon; however, this would also mean video will be not be fully fledged for a long time in the Canon's DSLRs, unless it is a response to Nikon.

 

Either way, the video market looks good in the future; especially with Scarlet, other companies may be forced to be more competitive. I do not doubt that Red has the potential to steal a lot of market-share from the camera giants, but these larger companies will react; they have the advantage of economies of scale - they are much larger than Red, and can do much more.

[David Mullen ASC]

Well, Japanese companies have always been somewhat clueless in regards to 24P; it's such a niche application to them that they easily ignore it until customers start screaming for it.

 

I remember when that Olympus Ultra HD camera prototype came out a few years ago, the one with four HD sensors, two of them green using pixel offset to double the resolution in the luminence channel from 1920 to 3840 pixels, it only shot 30P -- and when we asked the Olympus engineers about a 24P option, their response was "why would you want to do that?" And mind you, this was at a test screening where the Olympus footage was transferred 1:1 to IMAX and projected, so it had to be slowed down from 30 fps to 24 fps!

 

Lucas and John Galt (I believe, or maybe it was Larry Thorpe) experienced the same attitude from Sony when they first proposed a 24P option for their HDCAM technology back in the late 1990's. "Why would you want that?"

 

They all live in a world of broadcast technology, which means 30P/60i or 25P/50i. Cinema applications have, for a long time, been second fiddle -- and probably rightly so, it's not a big seller like broadcast cameras.

 

Why is one reason why it is less of an issue with companies like RED who don't come out of the broadcast video world.

[Guest will griffith]

What will didn't mention was that this was a normal nurse (aka, only had on whatever makeup she put on at home), who was standing over an infant in ICU that had a light over it (tungsten bouncing off the blanket into the nurse's face) and a window with natural light on the left hitting her side. Even without "lighting" skin, the skintones come out very nice on the RED.

I was waiting on someone to ask what the lighting setup was! :)

 

I knew we had some REAL skin tones to show,

as opposed to ...

[Patrizio De Sica]

shot w/ Red? :)

[Guest will griffith]

shot w/ Red? :)

Obviously not!

Red makes you lose at least 40lbs and look 60 years younger.

[Paul Bruening]

She's hot.

[Stephen Williams]

[quote name='Brad Grimmett' post='264153' date='Dec 15 2008, 08:45 AM']Actually, that's not entirely true. Posts CAN be edited by the moderators in that particular forum. The difference is that we don't edit posts except in extreme circumstances (of which I think there have been none).
I just wanted to make it clear that people can't just post anything they want here and not have it deleted if it needs to be.[/quote]

I think in the General forum only, no possibility in HD

[Keith Walters]

I think in the General forum only, no possibility in HD

I have seen entire threads vanish from the HD folder though, so perhaps that's something only Tim Tyler can do.

Depending on how long they were up before they were removed, they can sometimes be recovered from the various search engines, if you know how :P

I've noticed a few posts where the poster's name appears as "Guest Spieden" or some such, which suggests their account no longer operates.

[Matthew Buick]

She's hot.

 

She's not! Yuck!

[Peter Moretti]

...

For all this talk about at RedUser about how RED is going to destroy ARRI and Sony, these people forget that some people with deep pockets like paying top dollar just to feel that they are getting a high-end piece of professional gear -- there is a snob appeal to the whole system, beyond the actual benefits of buying well-made, solid, precision equipment with a long corporate history/tradition behind it...

 

I think there is another side to the advantage for the more traditional approach. Filmmakers want to make beautiful films a heck of a lot more than they want to be casualties on the front line of a technological revolution--even if the revolution is ultimately successful.

 

We have seen stunningly beatutiful results with traditional equipment, but equivalent results with the Red, et al, are apocraphyl. There are some great looking movies shot with the Genesis, F900, etc, but they've yet to look like "Atonement."

 

I just finished watching "Che 2" at the Laemmle Sunset 5. I thought it looked pretty marginal. I have no idea how much that was: intentional, due to colorist limitations, or due to format limitations. But the dynamic range was challenged, the color "washed out" and the highlights sometimes significantly blown-out. One scene had men sitting around a pile of yellow corn husks, but the pile was so blown-out, so they were actually sitting around a large yellowish-white texture-less shape.

 

The shots which looked the best, IMHO, were were slow pans. I think the gradual movement creates an effect similar to film grain, but it's the result of subject's uneven surface providing texture moving. But when the movement stops, the subect "locks in" and becomes excessively sharp. This is very noticeable in "Che 2" during the wide depth of field shots where men are running through trees and then stop to take rests or hide. There are a lot of these in the film.

 

With a show like "Che," I wonder if when it's all said and done, the production wishes it had opted for more traditional equipment? In very professional hands, such eqipment is going to yield amazing and reasonalbly predictable results.

 

BTW, I do think "Che 2" looked quite a bit better in the last town the rebels visited. I don't know if it was intentionally colored differently or not.

 

JMHO.

Edited February 4, 2009 by Peter Moretti

[Peter Moretti]

P.S. I sure wish I had a little more time to edit posts.

[Peter Moretti]

Well I just watched "Che 1" tonight, and I have to say it looks so much better than "Che 2" that I'm really left wondering why the staggering difference. I know "1" was shot anamorphically, but I don't see how that would contribute to a less washed out and blown-out look. "Che 1" looked really good.

[Brad Grimmett]

P.S. I sure wish I had a little more time to edit posts.

If you become a sustaining member you'll have more time.

[Peter Moretti]

If you become a sustaining member you'll have more time.

Hey $50 for ten years, money well spent, IMHO. ;)

[Jose Figueroa Baez]

I remember hearing that David Fincher's movie Zodiac was shot on the RED, but I'm not sure if that's true. Does anyone know the truth behind that?

 

Also, if anyone can list any major films that were shot on the RED(if any), I would be really interested to see what films would be listed. Thanks.

 

On the Red website, Wanted and Jumper were posted as being shot on red. From what I understand, there were certain scenes, such as the viper chase sequence in Wanted, that were shot on Red. Go to their website and check out the "Shot on Red" section.

[David Mullen ASC]

On the Red website, Wanted and Jumper were posted as being shot on red. From what I understand, there were certain scenes, such as the viper chase sequence in Wanted, that were shot on Red. Go to their website and check out the "Shot on Red" section.

 

Supposedly none of the RED footage ended up being used in "Wanted", for whatever reason.

 

Right now, if you want to see RED footage, "Che" is in some theaters, "My Bloody Valentine" in some others, "Knowing" is coming out in March, and on TV you can see RED being used on "Leverage" and "Sanctuary" -- don't know if the RED episodes of "E.R." have started airing yet.

 

http://www.red.com/shot_on_red/

[Keith Walters]

On the Red website, Wanted and Jumper were posted as being shot on red. From what I understand, there were certain scenes, such as the viper chase sequence in Wanted, that were shot on Red. Go to their website and check out the "Shot on Red" section.

Only a few seconds of RED footage appeared in Jumper; just a bit of footage of some heavy surf, (which I certainly wouldn't have wanted to risk an expensive camera in:-)

The RED cameras were trialled on the set of Wanted, but always in parallel with film cameras. None of the RED footage made it into the final cut, but maybe it was just a cheap way of putting it through its paces and getting some experience.

 

As I said in another thread, I don't think you will be able to fairly judge the RED based on My Bloody Valentine.

The Librarian 3 should be coming out on Blu-Ray in the US fairly soon. That looked pretty good to me on DVD at any rate.