Robin Buday

http://www.fotokem.com/downloads/fotokem_R...mera_report.pdf These are new RED centric camera reports that we've developed here in the FotoKem: nextLAB. Please feel free to use them and offer any suggestions that you see fit. Note: We've had some issues trying to get the PDFs to work properly in OS X Preview. While a solution will be in place soon, please try to use Adobe Acrobat Reader to use these reports properly. Thanks! Robin Buday

The systems are there Hal, this is true. It just comes down to money. If I showed you the price sheet for a 4K DI with optimal printing it would send you through the roof. Besides, there isn't much incentive for anyone to be using these systems unless the results are going to be seen on the final print stock. When theater systems start going digital and the film never leaves a hard drive, the need for higher resolution DI sessions will also increase. It will be cheaper too...

"Wanted" was shot on 35mm. Only a few select effects shots were shot on RED.

Couldn't agree more. A lot of the shows I see every day are Super16. Not nearly as much leeway as 35mm in terms of adjustment but those images sure look pretty.

Note the "for the money" line in there...

Well, I would disagree here. Depending on the type of shooting you are doing film still has many advantages in terms of sheer image quality. There are digital solutions that achieve a more filmic looking image then most generic video cameras but if you want the look of film shoot with film. No amount of post processing will get you the same image as a clean 35mm negative. That being said, we are nearing the point where this won't be the case but we are not there yet. In my best estimation I would give it 2-5 years but I've been wrong before. My personal favorite of these solutions is the HVX. There are people on this board who will disagree with me (e.g. Adam Thompson) but there is no argument that for the money the HVX produces the most filmic looking video images you can get. If money is no option I would look into the Phantom series of cameras. They look very promising in this regard. Also, keep your eye on RED. I estimate within a year we will start seeing some very "filmic" looking images from that camera.

The film's "organic" look IS preserved with DI because it originated on film. If it originates on film it will always look like film. You are correct though in suggesting that data will eventually be able to achieve the same look. There are people here that will doubt this till their deaths and given the history of film and digital, they are right in assuming so. I can tell you from working with all sort of material every day that it is impossible to deny that with each passing year we get closer and closer to emulating the look and it is my opinion that eventually the two won't be able to be told apart.

Wannabe? I don't want to shoot. I'm not a DP. I work in the coloring world for a company called Laser Pacific that is owned by Kodak. Digital acquisition and film scans are my business. So okay, IMDB doesn't necessarily put you on the map you are right about that. That's why I asked you what you have done, something you still haven't answered I might add... I find it hard to believe that you can find my statements at all bizarre considering the insulting and crude nature of your own. Trust me Adam, jealousy doesn't factor into it. I feel sorry that we can't talk about this in a civilized way. Maybe we got off to a bad start... If I insulted you I apologize but please give us some idea of what kind of experience you have in this industry and the projects you have worked on. If you would like to see a list of our work, please visit laserpacific.com.

Adam, I'm not going to argue with you because it would just be a waste of time. Just know that time will tell what the future holds for film. I'm happy that you are a film purist but it is obvious from your posts that your knowledge of digital acquisition is minimal at best. It has been the goal for many years to have a "film alternative" in the digital realm. RED never advertised as such but it is poised to do just that in the coming years. I will check this forum for a response from you in a couple minutes because with the amount of time you spend here it should be there by then. Also, if you are going to be as brash in your coming responses as you have been so far, please be kind enough to list your credentials so that we know who we are really talking to. I looked you up on IMDB, but alas, nothing more then a couple entries. One of them video...

I think you'll be surprised. Over the next year or so you will be hard pressed to tell the difference. When the HVX first came out no one was extremely happy with the images but over time people tweaked with the settings and started getting some very filmic images. I think RED is going to be able to do it. Don't think that that "organic" quality won't eventually be replicated digitally. That would be a silly assumption.

Crossing the Line was shot with RECODE which means that the data was compressed. Could this compression not account for what you are seeing here? If the RAW data was captured from the sensor I imagine this would be eliminated.