Evangelos Achillopoulos

I think that they already covered from existing adaptors? Aren?t they? Evangelos

Just to point your attention to this http://www.motionfx.gr/ggrelay_galery.htm What?s your opinion? Evangelos Achillopoulos Athens, Greece

Hello to all forum members For some time I measure, with a Danes Picta TS28D transmitive step chart various cameras in order to understand their behavior. My study has shown different results of what is the market belief. I?m using an image quality assessment software to analyze results. Probably many of you will be shocked of the results. Never the less, I thing that I have to publish them and learn from the forum collective knowledge. The software that I use is www.imatest.com and costs 129$. Many of the big manufactures are using it for R&D purposes. In the link below are the results of an objective dynamic range comparative test. http://www.motionfx.gr/Files/Latitude%20Ob...son%20Sep07.pdf The images that these results have being taken can be given on request because of the huge size that they have. I would like all of you, to comment the results which are including RED, Cinealta, Varicam, Canon EOS 5D, Leica etc. The results are very interesting. I don?t have access to all the cameras available but a 16bit tiff still from a Stouffer T4110 transmitive step chart will be enough for me to run a noise/f-stop analysis and publish it in the forum. I follow the debate related to how we can have common measuring methods in image quality assessment. My proposal is to use imatest software as a common ground. If we all use the methods of camera quality assessment that are provided from imatest software, we all, going to have a common ground in comparing image acquisition systems. Waiting your comments. Regards, to everyone Evangelos Achillopoulos Elec. Engineer DIT, DI/VFX supervisor Motion FX Technologies S.A. 62 Amarousiou - Chalandriou & Dodonis, Marousi, Athens Greece Tel: +302106857975 Fax:+302106857824 Mob: +306932834153 lakis@motionfx.gr

Their are few posts that are dealing with the Cinegamma of Varicam which is similar to Cinelike mode of HDX. You can check also the following link Varicam cinegamma guide Regards

Sorry guys for not reply promptly but somehow I was dropped by the system and didn?t allow me to post? Now it?s OK Big thanks to John, and I feel too small to say something about you? Just my best wishes and god be with you. I added all your answers to my knowledge base, many thanks

Hello to forum gurus, another question for you guys. I know from the available bibliography that intermediate stock like 2242/5242 has a gamma of 0,6 and again this is more of a feeling than a certainty, no ware in Kodak specification is stated what?s the gamma value of a film stock. So the question is: What is the gamma value of Kodak 5201 and Kodak 5212? Thanks in advance

Stephen No am not referring to the tweaked DVX as the example that originally were discussing. What I quote to David was with a typical DVX not the andromeda one? I thought that our discussion has concluded regarding DVX and 790, as of 970 I cant have an opinion. Regarding to Cinealta and HVX you should read my post in the Cinealta sub forum? Now for your general education about Cinegamma technique and general knowledge of what is happening around as you should read also the reelstreem tweak because this guys they don?t do anything else than bypassing recording mechanism and record directly RGB from CCD using the Panasonic Cine gamma technique in full. What is odd, is that it appears that HVX (and probably other cameras) are downgrading heavily the image quality right after the DSP in a point that before recording to have an almost 75db of headroom for latitude and after recording to have no more than 58db. That?s very odd. And sad? I would say. Regards, PS. Please read carefully what I?m writing in full, not a part of it every time. We don?t have anything to fight for, we just exchanging knowledge. I wouldn?t want to start ignoring offensive posts, because I don?t want to believe that there are other reasons to make someone offensive. Cinematography.com is a public forum for exchanging ideas and knowledge it?s not a battlefield.

Stephen About Cinealta read the sixth post http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=22911 About Varicam Filmrec read that PDF http://www.motionfx.gr/files/HD%20Varicam%20Film%20Rec.pdf Also check this tweaked DVX http://www.reel-stream.com/ check out the gallery, see the lighted room!!! Note that the Log mentioned everyware and they also using CineLike-D (If you have read the Varicam FilmRec PDF you will understand). This is a simple DVX, imagine what a Varicam can do? if you read the Cinealta post you will (again) understand? Finally read what an American cinematographer did in DC/Baltimore http://www.chrisnuzzaco.com/ Regards,

I wouldn?t disagree for 970, I haven?t put my hand on it, and so I can?t have an opinion. Here in Greece they went directly to 750 and 730 HDcam?s? Photographers should have to take very seriously the CineGamma future which introduced from Panasonic back in 2003. It?s a Log encoding mechanism that mimics the film acquisition. There are lots of posts that I have in this forum regarding to that. With the correct processing a small camera like DVX can outperform a much bigger one easily at least in Latitude and Highlights handling. In these two words is hiding a lot of what we usually referring as ?film look?. Of coarse its resolution also but believe me the richness of film is not resolution. I have recently measure HVX200 and it was a touch better than F900R! As far as latitude matters? So beware, as I have said in the past, our job has a lot of traps in the road?

Stephen, probably is the language barrier? I?m writing in my post that we have recapture everything from original digibeta tapes in uncompressed 10bits within FCP. We didn?t use media from avid, we didn?t take a tape out we just batch capture again everything in 10bits uncompressed. All our process in everything that we do is always uncompressed from original media. From Avid we simple use OMF2 to transfer the metadata (timeline info and bins) to FCP with NO media. Then we recapture everything in uncompressed 10bit and we import the audio guide, again uncompressed. So NO LOSS workflow, just maximum for all our projects. It?s more difficult but it?s much better. After all, as much effort as you give this much better the result is. We don?t have the volume of others, but because of that we care more. Regards

Stephen Last year I transfer to film a future called the ?Crossing? it was shoot with 790 in 16:9 and then transferred to film. I requested the original tapes and I remaster from Avid OMF2 the movie to FCP and in uncompressed 10bit. Then we color grade with Final Touch 2K. We deinterlace the film as well as upscaled to 2048x1107 1,85:1 all that in internal rendering with FT at 32bit per color. The result was very good for a digital beta orientation, but from my work in other futures or shorts the deinterlaced process, that?s result a loss of about 40% of vertical resolution, plus the very bad highlight handling in 790 (edge coring) they have a devastated Video look in the final filmout. In contrast of the DVX cinelike mode that doesn?t need deinterlace so it has by far better resolution and the very good highlight handling make that small miracle to out perform Digital beta. Just have in mind that I was competing with Swiss Effects and Cinepix for the CC and film transfer and we selected after test prints that we all submitted. I remember the reaction of DoP in the theatre he was jumped from his chair after the first 8 seconds of our test projected yelling ?its obvious, its obvious!!!?. I have transferd to film more than 20 futures the last three years... from all camera types even 35 to 35 16 to 35. I have done all the 2K to HDcam-SR colorgrade and finshing for the Greek Eurovision last year!! So as far as experience matters, according to Greek Cinematographers Guild I?m probably the only real DIT in Greece. Plus am electronic engineer with more than 10 years R&D in my back in digital video and with international patents under my name in the video domain. And finally this IS MY OPINION. And Im not forcing anyone to belive it.

Exactly David, plus the cinelike mode that has much more latitude than Digital beta and don?t mention the Firewire no generation loss of the DV editing process.

Mike Yesterday I was testing again the F900R and I see what Jance is describing in a certain level of exposure a horizontal noise pattern that was vanishing when light was a little up or down by ¼ of a stop. As for the output of camera I haven?t found (even in op. manual) anything saying that the HDSDI out is inferior of what is being recorded on tape. Actually this is compliment the camera since in that way we have 10bit 4:2:2 uncompressed recording in full bandwidth and not HDCAM compression in 1440x1080 3:1:1 8bit. Lastly it would needed extra electronics to downgrade a signal that comes from camera head and this is not cost effective for a manufacture. If you have any documentation about your argument I would like you to make it public. How I can get the best curve for Cinealta? We have an official test in two weeks? can you point to me the best settings that you have to surpass the performance that I measure? Best regards,

Dominic, John, everyone? False alarm the lab guys, didn?t ever had print with that film, they didn?t new that they have to add some pre filters and they were telling me that the LAD that I print with my CRT printer was wrong... They found out what they have to do with the contact film printer and everything now its fine... Dominic, Since 2383 cant go higher than 3,7D which is no more than 1,25D on the negative why we have to print (CRT negative print) in densities like 1,7D or 2,0D? Except in the case of creating heavy negative in order to have more dense blacks but this again doesn?t need more than 1,4D to be achieved? Thanks For the help and sorry for the buzz?

The stocks are quite new, something is wrong here, am in the investigation process? In order to assist me: If I subtract the base density from the gray patch, is it correct to find 0,7D status M in all RGB? Thanks in advance

When I measure the base of 5242 inter negative I get R0,14 G0,55 B0,93 status M densities. 5242 is with acetate base. Kodak says that the Gray card for 5242 & 2242 should be R1,10 G1,45 B1,55 which is true for 5242 but not for 2242. If I measure the base of 2242 inter negative I get R0,08 G0,60 B0,66, the difference is the base material which is, in case of 2242, estar. So between the two types there is a huge difference in base density of R+0,06 G-0,15 B+0,27. In blue the difference is huge. How came, and in the Kodak technical papers are having the same LAD values? I haven?t been able to get this numbers from 2242. I compare the measurments of LAD from both 5242 & 2242 and I found that If I subtract the base densities from both measurements, I?m getting exactly the same values of 0,7 in all colors (RGB). I?m having a feeling that 2242 needs a special pre filter to be added in the positive printer (to print in 2383) in order to fix the blue, in contrast of 5242 that doesn't need it. I also think that there is an error in Kodak documentation that says, both films are having the same LAD values in status M. Any suggestions? John, Dominic ???

Mitch has gave a quick answer and he is right, on T2,8 lens DL 500% and Master gamma 0,45 the EI is 640? This is a small piece of the above document (first post), it by any means, doesn?t resemble the level of understanding that someone gets by reading it. Most of the people are working with the n.4 method, if someone wants to exploit the level of performance that this camera is capable of; it has to read it in full. ?So what can be done with material recorded using FILM REC? The original intention of the feature was that data might be handled like a film negative (or more precisely, positive). Either it is color corrected to be sent to a film out, or it can be color corrected tape to tape and optimized to be shown on another electronic medium, (just as is done in tele-cine). By delivering superior dynamic range at image capture FILM REC delivers the one-source-many-uses possibility previously unique to film. The following workflows have been used by VariCam productions using the FILM REC mode. 1. The DP sets up each shot adjusting the dynamic range, black stretch and other camera parameters until the light levels (determined by the cameras internal spot meter ?Y-GET? function) register where the DP?s experience tells him they should be. From here a special look up table for the Arri Laser is used, such that the scenes are accurately reproduced during a film out without any color correction. This would be a workflow similar to using color reversal, and has been successfully utilized in Japan. A look up table (LUT) created for this purpose can be obtained from Panasonic. Using a custom LUT, a film out was created that very closely approximated the density curves of 35mm print, derived from 35mm negative (see below). 2. Another operational mode, favored by some DPs in the USA (many of whom are unfamiliar with HD or video) is to simply treat FILM REC as a 640 ASA film stock (depending on how parameters are set 400 ASA or 800 ASA might be more appropriate), and light using a light-meter, as if film were being exposed. By shooting tests beforehand the DP can learn the highlight and shadow behavior (these tests would be necessary when approaching any new film stock). Color correction using a high-end, system proceeds as if it were a digital intermediary, having skipped the 2K scanning process. For any video deliverable, color correction would be approached similarly to tele-cine for a DVD or broadcast release. 3. Another approach would be to keep a waveform monitor on set, and light as if shooting for broadcast, getting maximum information within the full camera imager dynamic range and color correcting in post to match lighting scene to scene. The difference for FILM REC would be that normal exposure would be kept closer to the middle of the range. 4. Lastly, it is still possible to simply ignore the fact that the camera is recording a wider dynamic range than the monitor can show and simply use FILM REC to achieve a desired look. By exposing to the highlights the user has a way of shooting that can deliver superior highlight handling without making knee adjustments. This is similar to how Cine Gamma features are used on the standard definition cameras with Cine Gamma modes. A helpful item to keep in mind here is that video is like a film positive (not negative) so when in doubt you should close the iris a bit rather than opening it as would be wise when exposing film.? We using a combination of 1 and 2 with unbelievable results, far superior than any Sony camera can achieve, results that are closer to Viper, when printed on film. Regards,

There are no quick answers to that question. The answer is in that document read it and if you have more questions post it Varicam FilmRec guide

My problem is that English speaking people not easily understand the differences between nations that don?t speak English, Max. I don?t now if its education or lack of perception or something else, arrogance perhaps, but my/our problem is size of the market only. And because of the size of the market we don?t have the level of funding in order to be able to do the art of cinematography properly, because is so much related to technology and funding. In other forms of art, I think, that we are in a good level since music or sculpture or dance or painting or even theatre doesn?t need the technology to be created. Its just talent against capital. So that?s why we starving for new technology that will enable a lower cost for the same quality in order to express our talent. In example see FCS2 from Apple. I?m strongly urging the manufactures (like Dalsa) to profit from volume and not from high margins. This is the way we see thinks from little Greece? Max.

This is the absolute maximum of all the Greek cinematography history, what an example Max? We almost didn?t have any production for two to three years because of that trilogy the GFC (Greek Film Center) has been totally dry of founds. ?The touch of a spice? had something like a 1M? of which the 40% was marketing, all the rest are 150K to 350K? 65% of the movies are 16mm or HD to 35mm film. HD is the only way to make some profit IF you get the 200K ticket mark. Otherwise only GFC funding make it possible. Who is going to take the risk? Angelopoulos has being funded from Government and actually drawn the whole budget for years that usually is being spread to 10 to 15 features! I don?t have anything against him, the guy is making Art (with capital A)? But no way to use this as an example.

Dear Mr. Illya I have found no buy price for the Dalsa products. Dr. Savvas, our fellow Greek Cypriot, doesn?t think to sell the evolution camera, and let us revolutionize the film market? Or it?s going to be another propriety camera rented only to the big Hollywood productions? Because with more than 2000$ ++ a day rental is making all of us to think that anamorphic 2,35:1 35mm is much cheaper for a 8 weeks of work? At least all of us that we live in small countries that speak languages like Greek that are spoken by just 20mil people around the world and we don?t have a market that will make more then 400K tickets whatever we do (even the Titanic in Greek !)? So the maximum budget for a feature would be no more than 250K?. I hope that all this 4K hype will benefit lower budget cinematography that can?t be categorized as Indie filmmaking by any means? If it?s just for Hollywood I don?t want to hear about Dalsa ever again, for me and many more on the other side of the globe, its just noise somewhere in LA. I feel very proud that a Greek scientist has put an eye on behalf of the humanity in the surface of another planet, am hoping that he didn?t forgot how difficult is to live on the other side of the earth?

I didn?t notice that you are from Greece? Sorry Nichola The Varicam set is out of question in Greece it costs more than 190000?. Check the HPX500 and the rest of the package? only the lenses will be at 58000? the camera to 30000? and the Mac at 12000? so you are their. Call me if you like at 6932834153 if you want to visit me to show you same footage with our film transfer.

A Varicam H with two Canon primes FJs9 and FJs14 plus a Cinestyle zoom 11x4,7 KLL for the rest of the focal lengths, a matte box, a set of NDs in order to operate wide open, a good tripod, a Panasonic LCD with Gamma correction, and a FCS2 package for HD online and finishing. VTR not needed, you will rent it every time you need it, all the rest (i.e. TV commercials) directly capture from camera. Varicam will give you 11,5 stops latitude something like 0,4 less than Viper and about 2,7 more than Cinealta, JVC, Canon etc. As for resolution with 1,85:1 the 720 lines are enough for film projection. The look and feel of the image is very cinematic when transferred to film with LOG processing. RED question is remain to be seen, the latitude as for now is 2 stops less than Varicam, the extra resolution doesn?t come out of the Cinema projector so wait and see, if you can wait until next year? The above proposition is around 140000$ If you select JVC style camera take a look also to HVX200 or 500 PS. With the above lenses wide open you have the some shallow depth of field like 35mm in 2,8 1/3 so no need for adapters...

The link in the above post is http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=22911

Without knowing you lost one generation by using DVCPRO HD and yes one of the problems is the resolution degrade. The next time use only the uncompressed 8bit for no generation loss. But you need fast disks ? see a raid 0 stripe with a couple of sataII disks thay would do the trick. Varicam is bit difficult but it?s worth the effort, take a look in the following post read my post the no 6? Next time do dupes in pal, edit, batch in HD from Aj-HD1400 in 1080 25p mode and you are ready. The problem is in the over crank and the under crank then you have to do the uncompressed trick? Regards