Patrick Faith

A lot of the techie history is very well documented at www.smpte.org . All the old documents are now stored on the site, and go back to 1916. I would say in the old days, they thought of "moving pictures" as motion capture so there was a lot of research in that space (i.e. motion blur, movement capture, film rates, camera movement vs actor movement, moving 3D capture, etc).

I was testing some of the new fake LED lamps that have a flicker, but the flicker was a bit too obvious. I'm moving to using those small LED flashlights, they can really crank the light. Current lamp setup for those ... have a little piece of paper folded in half and on a wire placed over the led flashlight ... this allows a bit of a controlled flicker as the lamp moves.

Sorry to necropost but I had a few questions about this. I can confirm the Red One MX compression ratios FCP X shows footage from Red One MX as Redcode 42 (7.5:1) or similar wording of that nature which is nice....really wish I could use CF card modules on Scarlet even at a reduced bit rate (my deliveries won't be at 4K for a while thats for sure!). Your comment about 4.5K mode for 2.40:1 is sort of confusing...I just dealt with some 4480x1920 footage and it looks BEAUTIFUL but you make it sound as if Scarlets 4096x1706~ or so wouldn't stand a chance....now I realize that every bit of resolution is helpful but many productions mix 4K, 4.5K and 5K happily....are you talking about the 4480x1920 on the Red One MX or 4.5K anamorphic? I think both cameras can do 2.4:1 quite nicely though I imagine that having your bit rate wasted shooting 2.00:1 or 16:9 only to be cropped would be less quality but probably not THAT much. I do realize Red One MX is a more polished/Proven system and if I was given the choice of Red One MX vs Red Scarlet I'd choose Red One MX because its a proven system, might choose Scarlet if I needed some Canon support (as I have Canon glass). I mean I think both systems are win win...so Scarlet isn't built for major productions in mind...neither were Canon DSLR's and we've all scene pretty nice film outs from that. I'm completely open to debate/correction I just don't see the reasoning in potentially jumping on something with disadvantages/more money/etc when you don't have to. (Aka Epic vs Scarlet).

I shoot with both epic monochrome and scarlet, if your going for a 2.4 aspect ratio and doing a DCP at 2k, the bit height is only 858. So if your doing a 2k DI, then all you do is whatever sensor resolution you have, you move that to a 2k DI DCP in something like nuke or premiere, and you can't tell the difference between the epic and the scarlet. If you want to do a 4k DI (this is extremely rare) it's hard to match up the epic with the scarlet.