Lance Flores

José - the D20 is a very nice HD which is over sampled in the sensor from a Super 35 CMOS sensor. I've looked at your work and think you will like the feel of , the D-20 or the Dalsa. Haven't done any extensive analysis or testing with the D20. The Dalsa is a 4K camera with a similar size sensor. The first 4K data I had from the Dalsa had a little noise at the bottom end but nothing I couldn't remove with post ingest processing algorithms I have written for other applications. I suspect this problem has been resolved. Just remember, you need to have the workflow and computing power (capture and render farm if you have effects) when you are working frame sizes this large. Both uses the same lenses as 35 mm film cameras and you'll have the same depth of field as 35 mm film you are used to working with. We are working with another camera coming out of development at the moment which we will use if this past Friday's tests hold up and we can have it ready for a April shoot. Otherwise we will probably try to use the Dalsa. Don't know what you application for the camera is so I can't be more specific. Lance Flores

That was funny. Reminded me of some of the strange folks I used to know who worked in the Mines of Moria at Kodak Park.

Actually there are a number at various stages of development and production. We just completed testing on the 35mm 2K camera we will be using for some of our shots, and will begin testing the 4K 65mm camera at some of our interior and exterior practical locations as well as building the first profiles and LUT's, on the week of January 13th.

Wow. Well okay. Now we've got an idea about what you're doing. 52' screen projection from HD is pushing it. If you're going to do that then you ought to be overscanning and do a 2K aquisition rather than doing a 1920x1080. If you're intent on getting the quality I think you're after then you have to think about film or a higher end camera. Michael Most is correct about the "few disks" characterization, and rather conservative on his estimate. Think he was trying not to shock you. I'd be surprised if you could get your movie in done with under 7TB, assuming 2K acquisition and well planned shooting of 3:1 to 5:1. I understand your drive to go digital, but this must be tempered with what you want to accomplish. So heed David's suggestion about going film, and look hard at shooting with film. If you are convinced you want to go digital then look at moving toward digital cinema rather than the limits of HD, but at the least 2K. We've decided to commit to digital. We also have three feature productions (not all ours) in the cue, negotiating another book deal and writing two more screen plays. So our digital investment is a wash. And here?s some numbers to sober you. We are shooting with two crews; one for the period shoot and one for the contemporary. Each frame is 46.088MB; 4K 4:4:4 uncompressed. Our SAN storage system is 72TB expanding to 112TB to accommodate the next film while we are editing this one. Scenes: 75% INT, 23% EXT, 1% Other. This should give you an idea what you?re looking at for storage. Of course if you?re in for the long haul ... you can reuse that same space for the next film. If you work efficiently, shoot 2K, and PreVis everything you can get it in under 7TB and in budget.

If you're intent is to stay in the realm of HD/DVD/TV then a Sony 900 will be all you need. However, market demands and your "want" for the best HD for the long term, as well as your suggestion that you are planning on"shoot[ing] a film" (or movie feature), you might be best served by the Sony F950 or Viper; something with a 4:4:4 color space. Though viewers wouldn't perceive much difference between 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 on television (generally speaking) there are a number of reasons for the latter. "[N]ot planning to shoot a film with any SFX/CGI" may be your famous last words. Unless you're planning on doing only documentaries and soap opera stuff, then inevitability, you will be doing CGI of some form; and the better color space and dynamic range [latitude] the better off you will be. This is nature of storytelling involving humans, because much of human thought and perception is abstract and require some presentation of that abstractness in color, visual distortion (alteration of the human 50mm view) or other temporal or spacial/dimensional presentation of a scene/event. In these circumstances you need all the data (image information) you can get out of you acquisition so that your effect, correction, etc. looks natural or real, come edit time. I can't say how many times I?ve expressed vile expletives in the edit room because there wasn?t enough color space to get rid of blue or green traces in certain motion processing, or enough saturation to hold the colors when changing the color temperature of a scene, not to speak of artifacts introduced by errors from tape compression while employing effects. If you?re decision making for the future and your choice is the F900 or the Cinealta F950, I would choose the F950. But you ought to have an good idea what kind of productions you will be doing. I have a quote from Sony for four 950's with capture stations, but after scrutinizing our needs and what the F950 can provide I?ve decided against the purchase and have chosen a different camera. Just be sure of your needs and expectations. Without knowing exactly what you want to accomplish, it is hard to advise. If it is HD and not digital cinema, then you can?t go wrong with the F950.

Thanks for the response Paul. Called the L.A. number where Colin Ritchie was in a meeting. Didn't know how to get hold of you. Lance

I hate to burden you with questions during your shoot, but I was wondering if you had problems with the Codex Digital during your evaluation? I was looking at two for our project because of its bandwidth as I don't believe the S2 will work for us. Otherwise, if the Codex has some shortcomings I'll build a capture station from scratch, but I'd like to go with something off-the-shelf. TNX Lance

Try http://www.claudiomiranda.com/angel.html ... it will take about 3-6 minutes with a high speed line with the present network traffic. Lance

Thanks Chuck .. from some of the posts that followed I might give Max a try tomorrow. Had the flu which is why I didn't call today, but thanks. I agreed not to release out first tests .. it didn't matter because I wasn't doing extensive tests anyway. Mostly looking at extremes .. particularly where the highlights blew out - but I'll get some frame grabs for you. We intend to do extensive testing on the 65mm camera. I have some concerns about where I can go with lateral pans for a couple of the street action scenes with that wide format sensor; otherwise, I think the camera will meet my expectations and do a nice job. Maybe .. it may be the next best thing to film .. it depends on your expectations. Certainly there are attributes in which it will excel, and somethings film may do much better, after all, it is a well measured technology which has served us well. The point is to tell the story the best way possible ... within the budget.

Karl these are the specs: # 4K (4096 x 2440) resolution # Up to 125 frames-per-second (fps) frame rate at full resolution # Adjust frame rate in 1 fps increments # Shutter speeds as fast as two microseconds (1/500,000 second) # 14-bit sensor depth (42-bit color) # 11-stop dynamic range # ISO 600 I've only tested the HD which is their 2K version of the sensor. It uses the same cell layout as the 65. Beginning of January we'll take the Phantom 65 for a test ride to some of the Int./Ext. practical locations and also run it through some performance tests.

That would do it. It's tempting, but I'd hate to keep flying all that glass back and forth between shoots. We're trying to queue up three productions for next year so we're looking at purchasing all the lenses. I'll give them a call Monday. Thanks Max.

Yes. Have done testing on the Phantom HD. Will begin testing the Phantom 65 in a couple of weeks. Those are excellent lenses. Do you just have one set?

Sorry .. missed some of your message .. coming down with the flu. Anyway .. The camera will mount a Mimaya lens right now. The answer is Yes .. I'm shooting 65mm digital 4K 4:4:4.

The images are being captured on a 65mm sensor. We'll begin testing in a couple of weeks using Mimaya lens setup, but I want to make sure I have enough glass for all the cameras we're going to use. The other option is to use the Super PL lens mount and rent lenses from CSC in New York.

Yes .. I just realized I posted it in the wrong section. My apologies. Trying times ... preproduction. The time you loose your mind. I reposted it to Cinematography. Thanks. Have a nice holiday.

Originally posted this in the wrong section, my apologizes ... I'm looking to purchase an equivalent Panavision System 65 camera set up for a digital cinema feature. The feature is a 12 week shoot to begin in April. I need mounts, follow focus, remote ... i.e. everything except for the camera. Looking at using either Mimaya or Hasselblad 70mm lenses. etc. I'd appreciate suggestions for sources.

Looking for an equivalent Panavision System 65 camera set up for a 12 week shoot in April. I'll need mounts, follow focus, remote ... i.e. everything except for the camera. Looking at using either Mimaya or Hasselblad 70mm lenses. etc. I'd appreciate suggestions for sources.

A good bad movies list, but I'd add Bubble (2005/I) to Mr. Philliips list.

Chris - I'll be doing some tests on a Phantom Thursday or Friday - outdoor shots in sun and shade and a few indoor darker scenes w/o little or no artificial light. So you might keep track of this thread you started. So you know where I'm coming from, some background. Before moving into filmmaking, inter alia, I was worked as a physicist, mathematician and engineer in the computer industry and the semiconductor industry in physics, failure analysis and material sciences. So I have been looking with a critical eye on the technology and the cinematic performance yield from various cameras for our own purchase. I have interspersed responses. It?s hype ... but the hype is quite accurate. These guys have been around for quite a while resolving much more technically challenging image capturing tasks. Not much glamour when you?re solving complex problems for scientists. So the touchy/feelie terms (attributes) of image capture are expressed in mathematical or physical terms (just as they are by the physicists and chemists at Kodak Park). » Lance

Read the August DC story MOOD MYSTERY HD Production On THE QUIET couple of days ago in the latest issue. I am really impressed with the effects David got with the filters, smoke and lighting. Excellent production especially considering the budget and still getting into 2.35:1 from an 4:2:2 acquisition. Like the smoke for softening effect. I was impress with the results by his method of cooling the room with the filtering as we will be shooting a lot of scenes in a dark room in blue cast with gas heater flames creating the effect. So I was especially interested. I missed the crushing of the black which I had planned in going the other direction. Going to take another look this evening in Mesquite which happens to be where the editor I thinking of signing lives. Perhaps I can drag him in with me. Interesting article. Congratulations David.

I downloaded the 1020i HD MV trailer to take one last look before we make our final commitment to the Viper Filmstream. Actually I was rather impressed about the facts that it was ?record[ed] with HD processing, not RAW mode? and the SA was 270. I had concerns about flattening out the highlights and saturation in night shoots of muzzle flashes and street lights for our shoot -- but the Miami Vice night scenes looked rather good. I?m sure the large shutter angle was and high gain was thought out. Though I?d feel safer not pushing much past 180 degrees. So I?m convinced the Viper will be our choice. My last concern now about using digital or optical filters for color balance. Which I?ll begin a new thread.

A lot depend on how much post effects you're going to do. If there is much digital pan & zoom or extensive pixel manipulation then you need the pixel and colour seperation that a f950 or Viper will give you. If your work is mostly documentary with high quality image something like a Panasonic 200 will work just fine and you can buy a couple or more, which is what we did for the documentary and "making of" part ofour next feature(s), also our storyboard/previs work. If you need to do a lot of or extensive work at post, green screen or extensive digital fx, you need to go with a camera with a hight pixel density and seperation like the f950 or Viper. We are doing evaluation right now and are working with the Viper people now. I've never used the Viper before but just got my hands on upprocessed footage, or rather data, for 2.37:1 and working with it on a Avid Nitris. Right now, I like the Viper Filmstream far better for the wide screen work. If the evaluation continues to go as the way it is now, we will purchase four. We should be finished by next weekene. drop me a line and I'll let you know things work out. The f950 is a good camera, but it looks like for all the 2.35:1 work we're doing, it's going to be the Filmstream for us. Depending on the how you're going to use the data/frames you capture will be the criteria for your choice of camera.

I am looking to purchase cameras and capture stations shortly and cut the field down to the F950 or Viper. I like the ability to get a 2.37:1 aspect without degrading or using anamorphic lenses. The F950 has proven itself in a number of productions, and has a larger experienced cinematographer base. Robert Rodriguez up the road from us has had good results, particularly in his green screen work. I was interested if someone has used both cameras, and could share comparative experience with cameras. We are shooting a historical, drama, action, feature production in Baton Rogue and San Antonio with little green screen, but mostly ext practical and sets, and another feature production almost back to back. Thanks