4k numbers

[Häakon]

Amen.

[Max Jacoby]

It is my guess, that if red archieves their goals, the red 1 will be the most popular camera for scenic top-end photography here within a short period of time, lets say 1-2 years. the cinealtas will have their place as well, but i think the 70-80% 35mm we had here 99/00, which dropped to ~20% in 06 will be even less.

Where is 'here'?

 

20 % for 35mm, is that in the world of corporates? In the feature and commercials world that I work in, 35mm is still used almost exclusively.

[Max Jacoby]

And if one visits a regular cinema with classical photochemical projection, one can be happy if one can get 800-900 lines of resolution...

Yeah, yeah. Yadda, yadda...

 

I'm sick of people saying the 35mm is so bad and only gives you less than 1000 lines of resolution. If you have proper projection (and most cinemas that I've been to do) 35mm still blows away any 2k digital projection when it comes to sharpness, not to even mention color and contrast.

 

And projection is a whole different matter than acquisition. In acquisition paltry 1080p capture just doesn't cut it, no matter what you later project it on.

[Häakon]

I'm sick of people saying the 35mm is so bad and only gives you less than 1000 lines of resolution. If you have proper projection (and most cinemas that I've been to do) 35mm still blows away any 2k digital projection when it comes to sharpness, not to even mention color and contrast.

 

And projection is a whole different matter than acquisition. In acquisition paltry 1080p capture just doesn't cut it, no matter what you later project it on.

I think you both need to take a chill pill and just relax for a bit. Max, don't take the bait of those who want to downplay the quality of film. I don't think it can be disputed (in a serious manner, anyway) that film has the capability to give us brilliant images and it will continue to do so for several years. The resolution argument is moot anyway, because film is not made up of pixels and trying to do a 1:1 comparison to digital is futile. You are also probably correct that 35mm will handily outperform a 2K projection regardless of the medium of acquisition.

 

However, the point of RED and the reason that people have such an interest in these new technologies is that we're moving beyond "paltry 1080p capture" and getting awfully close to being able to acquire digital images with comparable sharpness, latitude, and resolution of film. Someday in the not too distant future (perhaps even with RED, though this remains to be seen) we will easily surpass it as we have in the still photography world. At that time, the images are good enough from a technical level on both sides that quality is not the most important benchmark of what format you use, but other things like cost, workflow, ease of use, and flexibility are. No matter how "cool," "organic," or "artsy" you think film is, people are ultimately going to move to a format where they can view (and review) their footage instantly, duplicate and cut it without any degredation whatsoever, and perhaps most importantly not have to continually reinvest in stock, development, processing, or scanning - esepcially when everything ends up on a computer these days anyway. I know you have a love for film, and I respect that - I truly don't think it is going to dissapear within our lifetime like some would have us believe. However, the advantages that digital brings with it will easily carry it over to mainstream use once the quality, cost, and workflow benefits are proven and commonplace. There really is no denying that. To constantly reject digital acquisition as a legit practice is only doing yourself a disservice in this era, and while I agree that some of jan's statements are a little loaded, everyone needs to keep an open mind as we move forward because we're heading there whether some people like it or not.

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Hey Häak, good perspective, as usual.

 

But I thought this would be the HD only sub-forum:

 

Cinematography.com > Cinematography Forums > HD Only > RED

 

Or am I wrong?

 

So, I don't understand why these people have coming here to bash the others' options when we aren't doing the same in their places!

 

If this new camcorder doesn't bother your professionals lifes :unsure: why such bickering?... :huh: :lol:

[John Holland]

If this Red system is not aimed at a pro. market why turn up at IBC and what ever other pro. exhibitions they have been to ??? . Prehaps as you seem to be suggesting it just be in Wal-Mart and Asda over here . John Holland ,London.

[Max Jacoby]

If this new camcorder doesn't bother your professionals lifes :unsure: why such bickering?... :huh: :lol:

Actually this camcorder doesn't bother me in the least since I am already in a position where I can choose and afford the recording medium of my preference. To me the Red will be only one of many options, not the prosumers long awaited key into the world of professional filmmaking.

[Matthew W. Phillips]

Someday in the not too distant future (perhaps even with RED, though this remains to be seen) we will easily surpass it as we have in the still photography world.

 

With all due respect, this is not an informed statement. Try taking the best digital still camera known to man and comparing it to Velvia 4x5 format film. There is no contest in that department. And, for the record, in still photography, 35mm is not a pro format. It is amateur. Most pros use medium format, 4x5, or even 8x10.

Edited September 25, 2006 by Matthew W. Phillips

[Kris Bird]

With all due respect, this is not an informed statement. Try taking the best digital still camera known to man and comparing it to Velvia 4x5 format film. There is no contest in that department. And, for the record, in still photography, 35mm is not a pro format. It is amateur. Most pros use medium format, 4x5, or even 8x10.

 

Matthew, you are right of course, and my pro photographer friends will very happily point this out to me whenever I make digital/analogue comparisons... (even the ones who have substituted their 35mm work for digital, resorting to film only for higher end medium format commercial work).

 

But, by this logic, perhaps you will agree that although medium format and above far exceed current digital technologies, meeting the resolution, contrast and dynamic range of 35mm (in terms of film AND video) is actually not such a high bar, and now becoming a real possibility for digital?

 

p.s., I am of the opinion that it will take a couple of generations for 4K+ video cameras to iron out the quirks and poorly-understood subtleties that contribute to the aesthetics that make film so appealing, and give digital the reputation of being soulless .. there is no doubt that the 'quality' of an image is more than just the raw resolution and dynamic range- it will be interesting to see whether people can obtain the warmth and soul we associate with "film" through the means of competent (or advanced) grading of digitally aquired video... Anyone predicting the death of film are clearly mis-informed, but there's no denying that these are interesting times, and digital is coming of age!

[Ash Greyson]

The market for RED is not people shooting 35mm. Maybe they want it to be and maybe, eventually, it will be but I think the market is REALLY guys like me who shoot a lot of 1/3" and 2/3" CCD stuff. I spent more money renting SDX900s and Varicams last year than it would cost to own RED. For guys like that, of which there are MANY, it makes perfect sense.

 

It reminds me of when DV came out. I jumped on it the day it was released. Nobody and I mean NOBODY thought it was viable for pro use. I was often laughed at and made fun of. On my first big project, I had to dub everything to BetaSP, then into AVID, then into an online room. The cost was not any less than if I had shot it on Beta but I could not lug a BetaCam around the world in the situation I was in. Also, we pretty much had to lie to everyone about what it was shot on. Within a couple years, DV had really infiltrated the ENG and even down the dial (MTV, etc.) scene so much that it was a non-issue. By the way, that DV project went on to be the best selling longform music video of all time...

 

 

 

ash =o)

[Tim Terner]

With all due respect, this is not an informed statement. Try taking the best digital still camera known to man and comparing it to Velvia 4x5 format film. There is no contest in that department. And, for the record, in still photography, 35mm is not a pro format. It is amateur. Most pros use medium format, 4x5, or even 8x10.

 

Where on earth did you obtain the facts that "Most pros use medium format, 4x5, or even 8x10", that is totally ficticious. Maybe for 'product shots' that might have been the case but more and more pros even in this field are going digital, and those specialising in this field make up only a small percentage of all professional photographers

 

Oh, and by the way Mathew, you shoot medium format on 120 film and 4"x5" and 8"x10" is known as large format

[Jonathan Benny]

35mm is not a pro format. It is amateur. Most pros use medium format, 4x5, or even 8x10.

 

I don't think one can categorize it into pro vs non-pro. The use of 35mm/DSLR vs Medium format is less of a pro vs non-pro issue and more of a Type of Photography issue.

 

For certain types of photography, 35mm is definitely a professional format in the stills industry.

 

If you put all professional photographers together from all different types of photography, I wonder if it is true statistically that most use medium format.

 

AJB

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Actually this camcorder doesn't bother me in the least since I am already in a position where I can choose and afford the recording medium of my preference. To me the Red will be only one of many options, not the prosumers long awaited key into the world of professional filmmaking.

I wouldn't define the RED buyers or its future shooters as "prosumers" but your on your own... If you think all of these «believers» are what you decide 'cause your wishes, the mistake is yours.

 

So are you saying the use of film or other medium is just a question of position inside the industry? Even if on the subject of the «positions inside the moviemaking» there would be a lot to discuss but not from behind a keyboard of a computer.

[Matthew W. Phillips]

Where on earth did you obtain the facts that "Most pros use medium format, 4x5, or even 8x10", that is totally ficticious. Maybe for 'product shots' that might have been the case but more and more pros even in this field are going digital, and those specialising in this field make up only a small percentage of all professional photographers

 

Oh, and by the way Mathew, you shoot medium format on 120 film and 4"x5" and 8"x10" is known as large format

 

Ok, if you are shooting landscape, which wins out?

 

As far as the remarks of medium format and such, the context was that someone said that digital still cameras have exceeded film cameras in quality and so forth. I was pointing out how ridiculous that is. When you step up to even 120, you are way ahead of digital. And at large format, digital is not even in the park.

[Emanuel A Guedes]

But I thought this would be the HD only sub-forum:

 

Cinematography.com > Cinematography Forums > HD Only > RED

 

Or am I wrong?

 

So, I don't understand why these people have coming here to bash the others' options when we aren't doing the same in their places!

 

If this new camcorder doesn't bother your professionals lifes :unsure: why such bickering?... :huh: :lol:

Regarding such high level of hostility (not without reason but it's a shame it's just related to the interests of one side) coming from some people of these boards against this project and their supporters, Jim decided what he posted here:

 

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=7...p;postcount=177

 

Now all the RED reservations holders that would like to participate in the work in progress (where's other similar camera manufacturer?) of this camcorder, they must be dvxuser.com or dvinfo.net members. Actually these naysayers have done a good job in behalf of the motion picture and of this cinematography.com community, surely they did...

[Häakon]

...the context was that someone said that digital still cameras have exceeded film cameras in quality and so forth. I was pointing out how ridiculous that is.

The context of RED is motion picture. The vast majority of major motion pictures are shot on 35mm film. In terms of resolution, digital has handily caught up to 35mm in the still world. RED aims to close the gap on the motion picture side, and they very well may do so. I'm sorry I have to spell everything out for you in basic sentences, but hopefully you have a better understanding of the situation now.

[Matthew W. Phillips]

The context of RED is motion picture. The vast majority of major motion pictures are shot on 35mm film. In terms of resolution, digital has handily caught up to 35mm in the still world. RED aims to close the gap on the motion picture side, and they very well may do so. I'm sorry I have to spell everything out for you in basic sentences, but hopefully you have a better understanding of the situation now.

 

You basically said that because digital still cameras caught up to an amateur still format, that it equates to digital catching up to film. I guess I dont have to tell you that there is a big difference in creating a still camera that can come close to matching 35mm film than there is a motion picture camera matching it. There are frame rates to consider, storage, etc. I just dont think the technology is there to do it to the level that would finish film off.

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Regarding such high level of hostility (not without reason but it's a shame it's just related to the interests of one side) coming from some people of these boards against this project and their supporters, Jim decided what he posted here:

 

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=7...p;postcount=177

 

Now all the RED reservations holders that would like to participate in the work in progress (where's other similar camera manufacturer?) of this camcorder, they must be dvxuser.com or dvinfo.net members. Actually these naysayers have done a good job in behalf of the motion picture and of this cinematography.com community, surely they did...

I stand corrected: «...coming from some people...»

[Patrizio De Sica]

Regarding such high level of hostility (not without reason but it's a shame it's just related to the interests of one side) coming from some people of these boards against this project and their supporters, Jim decided what he posted here:

 

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=7...p;postcount=177

 

Now all the RED reservations holders that would like to participate in the work in progress (where's other similar camera manufacturer?) of this camcorder, they must be dvxuser.com or dvinfo.net members. Actually these naysayers have done a good job in behalf of the motion picture and of this cinematography.com community, surely they did...

 

Worst: now we will have not more balanced viewpoints on the Red project. These naysayers could be useful as skeptics. Only as skeptics and with respect being positives. And it would be enough and could be efficient. At dvinfo and dvxuser Jim Jannard is highly protected. The power exercising authority over the territory where it can do its work with certain discretionary and unrestrictive powers (it means the same as: alone) it is extremely dangerous and counterproductive.

[Matthew W. Phillips]

I know that Richard and I are "villains" here for expressing certain things to Jannard. But I would like to say that I think Jim left because he doesn't just get "yes-men" at Cinematography.com. He actually has to talk to people who question him about key ideas and scenarios. I dont think I or Richard or anyone else has to apoligize for asking the tough questions. I think that he prefers DVinfo and ESPECIALLY DVXuser because there, he can say whatever he wants without being called on his mistakes and shortcomings. I, however, personally feel that accountibility is a good thing for a project of this magnatude.

[jan von krogh]

I don't think one can categorize it into pro vs non-pro. The use of 35mm/DSLR vs Medium format is less of a pro vs non-pro issue and more of a Type of Photography issue.

 

For certain types of photography, 35mm is definitely a professional format in the stills industry.

 

If you put all professional photographers together from all different types of photography, I wonder if it is true statistically that most use medium format.

 

AJB

 

sorry, guy, why do you feel you have to contribute here.

 

did you ever shoot a single movie?

 

 

 

I know that Richard and I are "villains" here for expressing certain things to Jannard. But I would like to say that I think Jim left because he doesn't just get "yes-men" at Cinematography.com. He actually has to talk to people who question him about key ideas and scenarios. I dont think I or Richard or anyone else has to apoligize for asking the tough questions. I think that he prefers DVinfo and ESPECIALLY DVXuser because there, he can say whatever he wants without being called on his mistakes and shortcomings. I, however, personally feel that accountibility is a good thing for a project of this magnatude.

 

hey, your former life seems to be have been spoiled. but could you leave out your personal disappointments for a second here?

 

thank you very much. 4 (champarne drinking) employees of laguun berlin.

 

p.s. next post of yours then will be something about why you alwaly have been misthreated?

[Matthew W. Phillips]

thank you very much. 4 (champarne drinking) employees of laguun berlin.

 

Maybe if you would lay off the alcohol, you could speak in a manner that people could understand. Argue with yourself Jan, Im done with it.

[jan von krogh]

Maybe if you would lay off the alcohol, you could speak in a manner that people could understand. Argue with yourself Jan, Im done with it.

 

If you are done with it, dear mr. phillips, i would be quite happy. that certainly would reduce the negative-biased, hostile-toned posts in here.

 

you haven´t been a constructive contributor here.

and: i won´t reply to your personal -projected?- attacks.

[Max Jacoby]

I wouldn't define the RED buyers or its future shooters as "prosumers" but your on your own... If you think all of these «believers» are what you decide 'cause your wishes, the mistake is yours.

I think it is obvious to any working professional that there is a large amount of people who are hoping for the Red to be their entry into filmmaking. They are quite easy to identify, because their posts clearly show that they have little to no professional shooting experience and are basically hoping for the Red to be some 4K XL1. Hence their unquestioning support for a camera that is their one and only hope at this point in time.

 

 

sorry, guy, why do you feel you have to contribute here.

 

did you ever shoot a single movie?

What on earth are you attacking Jonathan for? He made a valid argument and certainly has something to contribute with his posts.

 

And if you had actually bothered to click on his name, you'd have gotten to his imdb page with quite an extensive list of credits...

[Arni Heimir]

I think it is obvious to any working professional that there is a large amount of people who are hoping for the Red to be their entry into filmmaking. They are quite easy to identify, because their posts clearly show that they have little to no professional shooting experience and are basically hoping for the Red to be some 4K XL1. Hence their unquestioning support for a camera that is their one and only hope at this point in time.

What on earth are you attacking Jonathan for? He made a valid argument and certainly has something to contribute with his posts.

 

And if you had actually bothered to click on his name, you'd have gotten to his imdb page with quite an extensive list of credits...

 

I agree with you Max. The Red camera does seem like a ticket to better and greater thing for some people. But isn't this the DV arguement in the late 90s repeating itself?