Peter Moretti

Okay, Keith, I'll bite. I've waded through the threads you linked to. I think the "secret" to RedRay is that it's probably playing compressed mosaiced image information. So the RedRay is probably a mixture between a DVD player and RedRocket card (which performs demosaicing and decompression). There is no DVD or Blu-ray player that can do both of these. And this is probably why the RedRay hasn't been released, b/c it's going to be wildly effing expensive when compared to a B-r player. So home theater consumers aren't going to buy it. And why would movie theaters buy it, b/c when they they go digital they are going to need DCP players? DCP is consortium that I doubt Red will be allowed to crack. Anyway, RedRay images would use significantly reduced bandwidth by dealing with mosaiced images (one half the bandwidth when compared to 4:2:2 and 2/3rd's the bandwidth when compared to 4:2:0). Hope my math is correct, LOL. It's a slick idea, and I'll bet that it works. But I'm not exactly sure who buys it. ... Well that's my take/guess on it, FWIW.

He almost sounds like Charles Manson.

Keith, I believe I uderstand your beef with resolution charts. It's that the lines get closer at a predictable rate and follow a simple pattern. This makes it easier for the lines to be reconstructed by interpolation. It also makes it so that you will have a point after the Nyquist limit is hit where the lines will align perfectly with the sensor grid, so extra resolution appears. A simple thought experiment would be to have a completely black frame except for one vertical white line that would project on the sensor as would the white valley of 3K resolution lines. This white line will always hit at least two colums of pixles, it could even hit three. That means a 3K res line will be interpreted by the sensor as a 2K (4K/2) or a 1 1/3K (4K/3) line. Now processing can make things look better, but probably not perfect. Now let's make the line so it projects on the sensor as would the white valley of 4K resolution lines. This white line will always hit one or two colums of pixles. That means a 4K res line will be interpreted by the sensor as a 4K (4K/1) or a 2K (4K/2) line. So in the case of when the line lines-up exactly w/ one row of pixles, you have 4K resolution, but that's really the result of a happy accident. The gradual nature of resolution charts makes these types of happy accidents more likely and adds to measured resolution. I believe this is the issue that you're talking about. So claiming resolution of 4K sensor above Nyquist, i.e. greater than 2K, involves some processing trickery and fortuitous alignments that may not carry over to real life shooting. Is that correct?

These threads tend to become rather circular: Red isn't really 4K >> Actually Red claims it's 3.2K >> Well Red isn't really 3.2K either >> But this test chart says it is >> That test chart is flawed for measuring resolution >> So what digital cinema camera has better resolution >> Resolution doesn't matter >> Then why make a big deal that Red isn't really 4K >> B/c film has more resolution >> How much resolution does film have >> At least 4K >> But isn't the Red 4K ... and so it goes. BTW, I agree with you that resolution is one small aspect of IQ. And I think that all its competitors have the advantage in terms of color rendition.

I'm not saying that resolution is the be all and end all of an image. But there are standardized ways of measuring resolution, and that's with test charts. Camera makers, to DP's to the BBC all use these. If they are overly optimistic, fine, but then they are overly optimistic for all digital cameras, not just the Red. Some people write paragraph upon paragraph of why the Red really isn't 3.2K. Fine, perhaps they're right. But then show us a digital camera that does better. If the Red isn't really 4K or 3.2K, then what is the F35 or the Alexa?

Can anyone point to a large sensor digital camera that does suffer from these very same issues? Does any digital cinema camera maker measure resolution how Keith is describing? No matter how you measure resolution, the fact of the matter is that the Red One has more resolution than any other digital camera out there. If that is not correct, then show us an example.

Gerog, I don't get it. The 4K render is clearly sharper. And the HD render looks good, but it's downrezed from shooting the Red at 4K. If you don't think the Red is the sharpest digital camera out there, then please show an example of one that is as sharp or sharper. Red doesn't say 4K gives 4K resolution. 4K is the sensor's (horizontal) pixel count. They say 4K gives about 3.2K luma resolution.

One of my first posts here was about this very topic. Can't find it, I guess the archive doesn't go too far back? "The Waitress" and "American Splendor" motivated the post. There were colors and intensities all over those films that are just not possible to create with real lighting. Mattes/secondary CCing can make this really jarring. Many times it works, and even with "American Splendor" (which has comic books woven into it's storyline) it can be justified. But I fully believe it can become rather tiring for the viewer. It's like MSG or high fructose corn syrup or walking along Universal City Walk at night. P.S. I found the thread I mentioned above: http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=31034

Paul, I agree with your assement of "Winter's Bone" completely. Just finished watching it with a friend. I pointed out the clipping to her and some of the grading, esp. the day for dusk. She saw them right away and didn't like them either. I definitely felt that a more graceful roll-off would have helped a film like this to bring out the odd beauty of the production design and locations. BTW, a documentary S16 film that does exactly that in similar locations is "Serching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus."

Just finished watching it. WOW, VERY NICE!

Karl, I admire your love for film and I hope it continues forever. As for digital monitoring, you can use a waveform monitor and some cameras have histograms. So you can tell pretty much exactly how close you are to the extremes.

Just a note, apparently the 60D has better video controls than the 7D. Just wanted to let you know if you wind up going the Canon route.

I don't understand why Ultra 16 didn't/hasn't taken off more. Similar in size to S16 but instead of extending one side of the image, both sides are extended.

I would try applying a windshield treatment, something like Rain-X, carefully to the paths you want the drops to take. Just an idea at 5am, so take it for what it's worth. ;)

Richard, Would you be willing to share some of the budget breakdown for "Dark Reprieve"? Thanks for considering this :).

Karl, I just want to say that I really appreciate and respect you for this very stand-up post.

I've heard of this issue w/ Vegas. I'd pop over the DVInfo.net and search their Vegas forum for the latest. HTH.

I am watching "The American" right now. I have to say that I love the cinematography in it. It reminds me of an extra-lite version of "The Conformist." Great use of colors and the opening scene going through the tunnel is beautiful. I esp. love the thought put into the little touches. E.g., a Sergio Leone movie is playing on the TV, BUT it's NOT an immediately recognizable scene and it does NOT literally tie into the action at hand or to immediately happen. It must have been tempting to use a shot everyone would recognize and play that classic sound refrain, but it would have felt hokey in this context. But no restraint works well too. The prostitute Carla's room is about as heavy handed as it can be. But it works perfectly b/c by this time you trust the reality of the film. This is a beautiful film, that I have to go back to right now to finish, :P . P.S. Well, I have to say that I didn't care for the very last camera move of the movie, panning up to the tree. Staying on the car and Carla would have been pedestrain/less artsy, but it would have been more powerful and better illustrated their relationship and what just happened. After staying on that for awhile, if you really need to, go up to the tree. JMHO, of course. P.P.S. I loved the priest.

I just finished watching "Tetro," which really illuminates (pun intended ;)) this discussion for me (b/c it's B&W but with color flashbacks). There are some B&W shots that look absolutely gorgeous when filming a static frame, but when the actors' move it somehow break up the frame into something less, while other B&W shots do look beautiful the whole way. I can't say why this seems to happen more w/ B&W than color, but that's what it looks like to me. Next observation, there are just some things that are very hard to convey in B&W, e.g. a happy sunny day, esp. if much of the film is dark/moody. It's just very difficult to catch that change to this is now a bright, gleaming, frivolous, sunny day. On the other hand, the color shots all worked very well. They had a yellow-orange tint to them, which restricted their pallet and allowed for a few selected colors to really pop, which helped with the imagery. So of course the answer to this poll is "It depends."

I realize that the MX sensor has significantly less noise. But something looks a little bit odd to me in the shadow detail. It's as if the shadows have been "cleaned" and some detail removed. Maybe I'm losing it, as I haven't read anyone else voice this opinion. But to me, it looks like a (somewhat heavy handed) noise reduction is being performed in the chain that is making the footage cleaner. I know the MX is a physicially different sensor. But I--as nutty as it sounds--wouldn't be surprised if the electronics of the sensor are just as noisy as the old sensor. But the new sensor allows for in camera denoising that the old sensor could not work with.

Okay, Gabe, I'm going to have to live somewhere between you and John. I think you could certainly make an interesting film locking down the camera. IIRC, "Raise the Red Lantern" was essentially locked down (and deep focus). More recently, IIRC, "500 Days of Summer" was mostly locked down. I remember this b/c I loved the camera movement in "Juno" so much, that I was disappointed to see so many static shots. But locking down the camera as an edict is just not supportable (no pun intended), AFAICT.

I think the title sequences and the effects are are a few notches above the actual film. I do like the projected images. I think the bulb should have been changed or ND or diffusion gel added to the lampshade of the standing lamp it was way too hot and distracting. The actions the scientist was taking were unclear and muddled, which made the piece feel longer than it is. That said, it is highly creative and original, which I do like a lot. JMHO.

Okay John, I'm going add another film to my "challenge." The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. That movie also employs camera movement in a very effective way, as many of the early shots that would normally be locked-down have motion. I'm not trying to pick on you. But I am trying to get you to defend the thesis that you state so emphatically. I would LOVE it if locking down the camera and walking away is always correct. Then no worries about dolly tracks, cranes, zooms vs primes, balancing the camera on the tripod, making nice pans with fluid heads worth many thousands of dollars or steadicam operators walking in front of lights or rebalancing their rigs. So I WANT you to be right. But I just don't think it's so. But please, prove your point.

Christopher, I don't know where you're getting that 5 stops of DR for DSLR's, but that number is widly off base. DSLR's measure between 8 to 10 stops, depending on model and settings.

Part of the impetus for starting this (somewhat frivolous) poll is this very short short: It was originally shot in color on a Canon HV-20 w/ a 35mm adapter. The filmmaker said that he did not intend to finish it in black and white, but the colors of the chosen locations just made no coherent sense. So he converted to B&W and felt it worked much better. This seems to make sense; I'd also like to add that I found the lead actor, Yoyao Hsueh, very effective. BTW, I saw in a documentary on Haskell Wexler that he's color blind. Don't know if that adds to or detracts from one position or the other, LOL! And of course it does make sense that each format has it's own strengths and challenges.