Vadim Bobkovsky

I don't mind the look of Cafe Society, though they say super high-res digital sensors and ultra sharp modern lenses aren't good companions if so called "cinematic look" is desirable. I've tried both and I lean towards creamier, vintage-looking or just older glass (was lucky to borrow a few oldies in perfect condition to test). F65 on Ex Machina looked great, at least outdoors. I do miss a bit of fine grain though, since "Cafe" is a period piece. I noticed some diffusion when KStew was on screen (not so much on Blake though, huh). Should've kept that one for the whole project. Hell, even on "After Earth" (also F65 job) they used Black Pro-Mist for the whole movie. Say what you want about the story, but that film never looked overly sharp or clinical.

That said, I still prefer film and I still can’t quite say why.

I know why. Excellent overexposure latitude, pleasing color palette and organic texture even when it falls apart in dark shadows. High ISO digital noise, even from the better sensors, looks like wet poop. But then again, digital technology is constantly moving forward.

Being Red, though, is it going to sound like a hairdryer and make thin, noisy pictures?

Your information on the Red is outdated. Sound is not an issue ever since they switched the fans and firmware settings in Dragon. Weapon body is even quieter. I always love when people that haven't used Red gear for years or not even looked at it for years keep making fun of old tech. Well, guess what, they fixed it.

Yeah, you get "thin negative" and severely underexposed crap images full of noise if you can't use modern digital cinema cameras. For some reason it is never a problem for great majority of cinematographers that actually CAN shoot.

Yeah, that's right. People were crying in a theater because of the 70mm film print, not the heartbreaking story. *facepalm*

This is gonna look awesome on all those iPads.

 

R,

And iPhones. And iWatches. :lol:

Seems to work well for this guy. A lot of diffusion helps, I guess.

Shame about the Delta, specs and test footage were promising.

I think that's the whole philosophy behind Red cameras and some other raw shooting cameras: use 20% less time on set and 10x more time on edit :lol:

That's pretty funny, especially knowing how guys like Scott or Fincher work. Fix all of it in post, yeah. Totally. Just because superior resolution, latitude and some other features allow certain tricks if necessary. I wonder if the joke still gonna be relevant when Arri comes out with the new 4K or 8K (IMAX) Alexas, which is obviously the camera for "real filmmakers" :D .

Rolling shutter is the least of new Total Recall's problems, quite frankly. I also noticed blown out magneta highlights in car chase scene couple times, ohhh nooooooooo. Just another excuse to bash "the inferior Red" I guess. So don't waste your time on this, go out and shoot with your camera of choice. Maybe you'll be successful cinematographer like Paul Cameron one day. They actually picked Red not because of 3D, too, oh nooooooo (2).

 

Nah! I just meant the whole thing from beginning to end really! :)

Shambles.

 

Freya

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

So is there any update on Red Ray, whatever its present incarnation is?

RedRay the player is on sale (http://www.red.com/products/redray). Projector is still in development hell.

For years they were saying "video won't ever look so clean and beautiful as film, especially 65" and things like that. Now it's "oooh too much resolution, digital 4K is bad!", that's absolutely hilarious. Well, if it's too sharp to you, soften it with diffusion filters and add subtle grain then to get rid of detail. And that's top cinematographers, jeez. Sounds like bunch of bitter old-timers to me.

Carrying celluloid on your shoulder? Haha, good luck with that, I'll stick with goddamn plastic box with terabytes of reusable SSDs. And one more thing, Blu-Ray has nothing to do with "strange motion" in expensive "smart" HDTVs. Turn off "tru-motion" (or however its called) option in your tv.

As long as it makes top dollar it's good for the studios. Maximize the profits, it's in the very nature of capitalism, after all. If the audience pays for intelligent entertainment, good. If the great majority prefer Adam Sandler flicks, 3D roller-coasters, superhero sequels and things of that kind, then "fast-food movies" will continue to dominate.

That one?

Since Red abandoned "all-in-one" concept when Epic replaced Red One as the main camera, I don't see them going back anytime soon. Now it's all modular and people who don't like that sort of thing go to Arri or Sony, which pretty much got that market covered.

Previous two "Riddick" features (Pitch Black and Chronicles of Riddick) were shot on 35mm film and both had "hot sun" shots that some hotheads immediately associate with poor overexposure latitude of digital sensors. That effect was so obviously enhanced in grading. To me it looks just like Pitch Black, maybe better.

I believe film holds overexposure better, look at the evening sky. Something is off.

I wish fine gentlemen and ladies in Rochester start selling more affordable fine grained 16mm motion picture film, at least with that you could still attract young filmmakers to the format, not necessarily used to celluloid or enamored with "delicious" smell of chemicals. Even though there are all sorts of related costs to it, you could still brainwash some of them with all the talk about "the only true discipline" or "unique organic grain structure" and many will actually believe that. Just don't be frustrated if a lot of the youngsters will be making faces at you "Don't waste my time with that, I'd better focus on how to light the scene". Two very decent labs nearby actually raised developing costs last month again, haha. Thanks, but no thanks. Good luck with that, Agent K.

Oh yeah, about the ad.

"Tired of hearing "Kodak is desperate"? Well, that's kind of true".

Seems unlikely Panavision would spend so much money developing a large sensor camera that can't use their huge inventory of lenses. I expect their camera to have a Super-35 sensor.

The rumor is that there's an option to window down the 70mm (8K?) sensor to 42 and 35mm frame.

Is it being shot on an Alexa? Well, at least it isn't a f*%king RED.

Hahaha, talk about fanboyism. This place isn't any better than "fanboy" forum like reduser, really. Hatred, hostility and celluloid fanaticism, have I missed something?

There has been many discussions between film and digital formats.

 

But as technology improves and cameras become more affordable, will digital formats be chosen over pixel count?

 

Being a R1MX owner, I am noticing many gearing up for that 6K sensors and those just satisfied with 2K raw.

 

As technology improves will there be a point that pixel count would be considered a film stock?

 

***************

yes I am worried about my investment into the R1MX to practice and exercise but will we be looking at an industry that 4k would not be enough?

Some guys say the "true" resolution of proper 35mm neg is 8K... In a real world, often you'd want to scan a negative at 4K for 2K finish, a must for VFX work in post, really. In digital, especially with CMOS sensors, oversampled image is always better, with finer, grain-like noise structure. Sony F65 records 4K from 6K sensor and, judging from the raw footage, it looks fabulous as it is, if properly exposed and you can grade it to match a look of celluloid without that much sweat.

I guess old movies with painted backgrounds shot on sound stages and with use of rear-projection screens should not be mentioned in public, because it's "fake" too, right? Only if it's shot on glorious motion picture film, on location in broad daylight, only then it counts, right?

It sounds weird, like motion picture film must prove something to anyone. It's really not. Film was a golden king of Rome for more than a century and still very much remains at that position in eyes of many people in Hollywood and rest of the world. Yes, digital is rapidly catching up in visual quality, so what? If anything, Kodak really should be more concerned about their obscenely overpaid executives, R&D work, preserving the legacy color science and archiving, than fancy (and arguably useless) marketing. That's just my little opinion, of course. Fanboys shall feel free to bash it.

Let's see if they win this time, because Sony is no joke. It's not unheard of, though, Kodak lived on stuff like this for longer than I'm alive.

Everyone is obsessed with Caucasian (white) skin tones, but reptiles are sexy and glamorous too!