Jump to content

I've been Banned from Reduser


Stephen Williams
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not really, I suspect Jim just didn't entirely understand quite what the quote was saying or was in a hurry and read it fast and only saw certain bits of what was said. So yeah it seems like he did misquote phil but suggesting he needs to eat his words seems a little extreme.

 

Jim I think you need to try and not take everything so personally. There are clearly people who aren't so into the camera and other people who love it to bits. Personally I hate sprouts and coconut. Putting coconut in chocolate is truly an abomination and I feel should never have been allowed to happen but I've met people who actually like it. *shrug* It's okay because when I get a box of assorted chocs I can give all the cocunut ones to someone else and it's almost like I'm doing THEM a favour or something!

 

Why does it upset you so much that some people don't like it? Havn't you made a camera that is in use by many people all over the world for all kinds of projects? Would anybody deny that? Isn't that enough? Does EVERYBODY have to love it to bits?

 

Actually for a lot of people it's just not the right camera. Me included at the moment. However it clearly seems to be a match for a lot of peoples needs. I'm sure it depends on your budget and what you are doing. For myself shooting on an ex3 would actually be luxury! :)

 

I guess you have to go with what works for you!

 

love

 

Freya

 

 

It sounds like Jim doesn't like misinformation to be spread around about the camera that isn't true. I hate that as well because when I run into someone that has actually listened to something said by a RED hater they seem to think its the truth, which most of the time it is far from the truth. So then producers, directors or whomever is making a misinformed decision based on something they heard from someone that didn't know what they were talking about. It just takes time out of my day to try and get these people the right info so that they are informed about what is really out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 317
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Jeremy Hunt
I like Jim because every time I have met him he has been extremely nice to me and all the other people talking his ear off. He shows incredible patience for someone that deals with some of the people I have seen him deal with. If he wasn't that way I would be indifferent about him but I would still like RED because its better than anything else out there and within my reach financially. Getting a RED One has changed my life in a way I had always hoped for.

 

I really don't care if you like me. You have nothing I want so you might as well not even exist in my eyes. To me your just some name on a screen.

 

Chill, its just a camera

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member
Three out of every four pixels are an estimation by a computer, not an actual measurement

 

Well yes, that's the point I was trying to make. Although to be scrupulously fair, that's not entirely true either, given that the per-site frequency response will cross over a bit, and they will be using that factor to improve things. If I can borrow the great Ben Goldacre's approach, there's almost nothing you can say about any non-trivial technology, or in fact any subject at all, which can't be validly suffixed with "...but I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that".

 

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this bickering is useless and non productive, it doesn’t add anything to the art of filmmaking or cinematography.

 

There seems to be a clear divide here between the fanboys and the rest of the community, and all this -- mine is bigger then yours, makes no sense for grown men that are supposedly artists or at least skilful craftsmen.

 

I have been here for a long time and been reading reduser from day one, the information has been invaluable to me, everything from Technicolor dye transfers to 10 bit RGB files.

 

I have great respect for Jim as an entrepreneur his Oakley story is very inspiring, at least for me who is also interested in business.

 

I also like what they are doing with the Red, it makes everybody else raise their game, so competition increases and prices drops. I don’t think anybody will argue with the price/ performance of the Red, it’s just wonderful.

 

Digital is now thanks to the price/performance/easy of use/SAG AFTRA rules, a real alternative to film and it’s up to each production to choose what’s most suited for their needs, it’s as simple as that.

 

Now what’s been disturbing, is what I feel has been a pretty recent turn in tone in the reduser community: Treads closed, people banned, and everybody that’s just have a simple question being called old and useless, and now it has crept in to this thread as well.

 

I can’t remember this sort of behaviour on these forums before but I can be wrong, but it really needs to stop, this is a community for people who love cinema, who want’s to share there passion and knowledge about the subject, analog or digital it doesn’t matter.

 

I’m humbled every time I login here and see all these great cinematographers, that are willing to share there time and experience in an increasing hostile environment, we don’t want this to turn in to another debacle like the Roger Deakins site.

 

Now as a finally note how would it be if Jim and the Red team, would put out an affordable film scanner, you could include Dan Hudgins in your team, and bring down the currently ridiculously over priced scanners that are out there, now if you do that you have my deposit on Monday...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like Jim doesn't like misinformation to be spread around about the camera that isn't true. I hate that as well because when I run into someone that has actually listened to something said by a RED hater they seem to think its the truth, which most of the time it is far from the truth. So then producers, directors or whomever is making a misinformed decision based on something they heard from someone that didn't know what they were talking about. It just takes time out of my day to try and get these people the right info so that they are informed about what is really out there.

 

Perhaps but it is just a camera at the end of the day and stuff like thst happens all the time. As someone else suggested theres people who love the mac, and as I have suggested theres people who like coconut in their chocolate, or god forbid, sprouts!

The people who don't like Red, don't like it and it is the truth to them. The people who love red cameras love it and that is the truth to them.

 

For example, coconut in chocolate is disgusting. I KNOW it is disgusting. I know because I have eaten it and really hated it. It is just wrong. Other people seem to just eat it and don't have to wash their mouth out with chilli sauce or something. They claim to actually like it!!! :o

 

As for people listening to gossip and believing it as the truth, that being something they heard about on the internet or some other place, well it is those people where the blame should lie. Gossip is NEVER the truth. Sadly there are people who just listen to gossip and make no real effort to find out for themselves. Thats just life I guess. I'm sure there are plenty of film fans who have the same problem for example. That people read that film is dead and you can now shoot everything on a DVX100 for example, and to be fair, you can shoot everything on a dvx100 if you so desire, so there you go really.

 

I could for example tell you to never eat coconut flavoured chocolate because it is disgusting. If you listened to me and never did then I would feel good because I would have spared you the suffering! You would never have to taste the foul concoction. How lucky you would be.

 

One thing tho, I never get angry or insulting with the misguided people who like coconut in their chocolate.

I just give them my leftovers.

 

love

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I really didn't.

 

And no, I'm not going to spend time responding with even the faintest eloquence to such pathetically transparent attempts to smear. Go and look up the actual quote - it's on this forum somewhere - and get back to me.

 

P

 

I'd stand on oath that you told me it was a 1k camera. I know you've changed your mind since, but that was your opinion that you personally told me at least one point during that event.

 

As for the "If you want true, full whack, no holds barred 4:4:4, Red is a 1K camera!", it is also incorrect as say you were just to totally ignore the 2nd green in each bayer block, you have an RGB triple at 2k resolution.

 

Graeme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member
it is also incorrect as say you were just to totally ignore the 2nd green in each bayer block, you have an RGB triple at 2k resolution.

 

Yes, in the green, give or take (well, take) antialiasing provisions. And yes I know you're fully capable of trading saturation for sharpness and aliasing performance and both of those for MTF. At some point where you pitch that tradeoff is, of course, a matter of opinion.

 

But this has become a religious crusade. What I'm most amazed by is that a millionaire and a presumably fairly heavily-engaged design engineer are getting this worked up over something I apparently mentioned in passing, four years ago. Because I, let's face it, am a nobody. Even Dalsa didn't bitch and whine this much.

 

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member
I heard that it was mostly shot on the F23. Oh yeah and David Fincher is shooting with the new M-X sensor in two RED Ones on his new movie. Now lets sit and think why would he choose to shoot RED when there seems to be so many better options out there than RED, according to some of the people here. It might be because RED smokes all the others.

 

Hospital scenes F23, some film, mainly Viper. I am interested if his next film looks better than Ben Button.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member
Stephen... not sure why you are having skin tone or highlight roll-off issues. Stop on by at RED and we can help you with this. There are a lot of ways not to get the best results from our cameras.

 

Jim

 

Hi Jim,

 

It's not just me, the crew of Knowing seemed to have a problem too. With MX I think the issue is mostly solved, from the limited material I have seen posted. Unfortunately I was shooting all last week so could not see a European RED day.

 

Pleased your still posting here.

 

Best,

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, in the green, give or take (well, take) antialiasing provisions. And yes I know you're fully capable of trading saturation for sharpness and aliasing performance and both of those for MTF. At some point where you pitch that tradeoff is, of course, a matter of opinion.

 

But this has become a religious crusade. What I'm most amazed by is that a millionaire and a presumably fairly heavily-engaged design engineer are getting this worked up over something I apparently mentioned in passing, four years ago. Because I, let's face it, am a nobody. Even Dalsa didn't bitch and whine this much.

 

P

 

Fair enough Phil.

 

I guess the problem comes from the vast number of anti-bayer comments our there, that we hear on nearly a daily basis, from all manner of sources - some big, some small, some very big and should know better, but nearly all incorrect. For some reason, those anti-bayer comments always fly in our direction, not Arri's. We like what Arri are doing - their approach makes sense to us and sense to them, although we'd probably disagree on a few little bits, there's a lot of mutual respect there. And the one that I just don't get is that somehow bayer colour filter array patterns are bad, and that RGB stripe colour filter array patterns are fine, even though they demonstrably show the chroma aliasing issues that supposedly make for bayer pattern CFAs being bad.

 

So in so much of the religious crusade - and I can just imagine the T-Shirt advertising that in my head and it's rather funny - I don't see it as out of proportion compared to the FUD from the anti-bayer (and sometimes pro CFA) crowd. Although only a small number of people ever take time to post of forums, a lot more people read them, and pass on the wisdom they have learned.

 

Graeme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jim,

 

It's not just me, the crew of Knowing seemed to have a problem too. With MX I think the issue is mostly solved, from the limited material I have seen posted. Unfortunately I was shooting all last week so could not see a European RED day.

 

Pleased your still posting here.

 

Best,

 

Stephen

 

We've been working hard on the development of the RAW data, learning from users' best practise in developing the R3D files to ensure a very good starting point for grading. The posted MX footage used that new starting point and we got very good feedback on how it was to grade and work with that validates the learning we did to create it. On the exposure side of things we've been re-working the in-camera metering toolset to provide more good exposure tools to. Once you've had a chance to use them - both the post development and in-camera, feedback please.

 

Graeme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member
Fair enough Phil.

 

I guess the problem comes from the vast number of anti-bayer comments our there, that we hear on nearly a daily basis, from all manner of sources - some big, some small, some very big and should know better, but nearly all incorrect. For some reason, those anti-bayer comments always fly in our direction, not Arri's. We like what Arri are doing - their approach makes sense to us and sense to them, although we'd probably disagree on a few little bits, there's a lot of mutual respect there. And the one that I just don't get is that somehow bayer colour filter array patterns are bad, and that RGB stripe colour filter array patterns are fine, even though they demonstrably show the chroma aliasing issues that supposedly make for bayer pattern CFAs being bad.

 

So in so much of the religious crusade - and I can just imagine the T-Shirt advertising that in my head and it's rather funny - I don't see it as out of proportion compared to the FUD from the anti-bayer (and sometimes pro CFA) crowd. Although only a small number of people ever take time to post of forums, a lot more people read them, and pass on the wisdom they have learned.

 

Graeme

 

Hi Graeme.

 

With the new MX sensor resolving a true 4k can I assume that blue screen will be as good as green screen?

 

Thanks Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 4K sub pixel Bayer pattern composed of a grid of square boxes is simply not how the human retina perceives the world and cannot be considered either organic or natural in any way. Of course the human eye does not have a seperate retina corresponding to each color as a 3CCD system does but the human retina has a much more complex geometric pattern than typical digital sensors which are only crude aproximations of their biological equivalents.

 

That being said it can be argued that if you have enough square boxes of sub pixels you can emulate any geometric pattern that you desire. There is some truth in that statement however if one were to do justice to the emulation of a biologically inspired artifact such as a human retina You would need a sensor with ten times as much resolution as your final output because an average of 10 each of sub pixels would have to be binned or grouped in order to form a single pixel.

 

Thus to prevent scaling artifacts the maximum resolution of the Red One Sensor is 4048 sub pixels across which divided by the square root of 10 (which is 3.16) would equal 1280.

 

Thus if a truly natural look is desired that surpasses the organic look of film your final resolution output will only be equivalent to a 1280x720p resolution camera and any and all attempts to increase the resolution beyound this will result in unacceptaple digital blocking artifacts.

 

I can certainly understand how marketing considerations demand that high pixel counts be used in order to sell more cameras however this should not stop multi-format suport for a software upgrade that can emulate a space variant pixel structure based on a logarithmic polar arrangement of pixels which is how the human eye sees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Graeme.

 

With the new MX sensor resolving a true 4k can I assume that blue screen will be as good as green screen?

 

Thanks Stephen

 

On all silicon based sensors, blue always has less response / is noisier than red and green, so the advice would still be to stick with green-screen.

 

Graeme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On all silicon based sensors, blue always has less response / is noisier than red and green, so the advice would still be to stick with green-screen.

 

Graeme

 

That's really no different than with film.

 

 

I forget which layer is coated first on neg. stock, working mostly with print. But on print it is magenta on top, then cyan, then yellow, I think.

 

Assuming that it's the same way with neg, and I think it is, the yellow dye (blue) gets light that's already been scattered and diffused somewhat by the green, then red layers.

 

(I could be totally wrong with the color order though. Might be reversed with neg. In fact, it may be that red is the weakest with film, thinking back now on shooting through the base)

 

 

Anyway, I think film is great, but let's not hold it up on a golden pedestal and pretend it has no limitations; that's just silly. There are areas where digital wins hands-down, every time. Low light sensitivity, I'd say it already wins. That is why we're seeing more and more movies that are otherwise all film opting for HD cameras for low-light or nighttime shooting.

 

And RED certainly produces footage better than certain cameras that cost ten times as much, or ones that aren't even for sale, if you know what I mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like we might be getting somewhere!

 

Okay. Earlier in the thread Jim suggested that the 4k bayer sensor might produce something in the region of 3.2k of measured resolution.

 

Phil was a little offended at being misquoted. This appears to be the case.

 

Graeme swears that he once heard Phil say something to the effect that you could conceivably describe red one as a 1k camera. Phil seems to be saying that he may have made some offhand comment that might be somewhere in that direction some 4 years ago. The actual quote about the viper would seem to indicate this might be the case too.

 

 

I have noticed over the years that the conversations between Phil and Jim seems to go somewhat like this:

 

Phil: "I told you butter would be no good for the works!"

Jim: "...but it was the very finest butter!"

 

 

From what I can tell Phil gets upset that the claims about the camera being 4k are not strictly accurate and are misleading people. This offends his strong sense of integrity. Jim tends to counter this by saying it is a wonderful camera that can produce great images for high quality productions. I get the impression that Jim is worried that Phil is suggesting his camera is no use for proffesional productions whereas Phil is bothered about the accuracy of claims being made. These are two very different things. Since then this has escalated to the point that the parties have made personal remarks about one another and there is bad feeling.

 

However... It now seems that Jim is suggesting that the 4k bayer can produce something like 3.2k of measured resolution. I've seen this number vary and this might be at the higher end of what I have seen bandied about but it doesn't seem like a figure that is THAT out of order. This seems to be now somewhat accepted by fans and critics alike. Surely this description more closely fits your concerns about accuracy Phil?

 

Jim, I think even Phil would suggest that the red camera has now been used on a fair few professional and semi proffesional shoots and that some people are getting good results with it, even if he largely doesn't like the look that the camera produces personally. I note that Phil has also expressed some interest in the scarlet which seems like it might be a camera that more closely fits his own needs, so perhaps you shouldn't be taking his suggestions about the camera personally.

 

So Jim and Phil can you agree that the camera has a 4k bayer sensor that produces something in the region of 3.2k measured resolution as a reasonably accurate description? Can you also both accept that the camera is being used on various professional productions and is considered to be a valid option for some in the digital cinema field?

 

It seems to me from things being said, like you both can, and if so could we not let go of all the hurt that has built up over the years stemming from this disagreement and let it go?

 

What do you guys think?

 

love

 

Freya

Edited by Freya Black
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough Phil.

 

I guess the problem comes from the vast number of anti-bayer comments our there, that we hear on nearly a daily basis, from all manner of sources - some big, some small, some very big and should know better, but nearly all incorrect. For some reason, those

 

Graeme

 

Hiya Graeme,

Clearly you are a fan of the bayer technology.

 

Red seems like a company with great marketing. People have even described some of the red fans as being like members of a cult they are so devoted! It seems to me like you could surely add information to the red website and maybe post a sticky on the red forum, explaining about Bayer and giving clear and accurate information.

 

I think it's kind of wonderful that people are taking an interest in the sensor technology and trying to educate themselves on quite a complicated matter. You could explain that the red can resolve 3.2k of measured resolution from it's bayer sensor. You could compare that to other high def video cameras that use bayer.

 

You mention F.U.D. which stands for Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt. All 3 of these usually relate to a lack of accurate information.

 

Maybe the way forward is not to supress anti bayer feeling but to promote a more positive view of bayer technology, more akin to the way you feel about it!

 

love

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


Forum Sponsors

CineLab

FJS International

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Film Gears

VidGear.com - Broadcast Video Warehouse

Serious Gear

Visual Products

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...