Emanuel A Guedes Posted November 1, 2006 Author Share Posted November 1, 2006 i exaclty understood what you were saying.... maybe because english is my third language and we share the crosslingual advanced freestyle grammar... :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted November 1, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted November 1, 2006 Like I said, I do not wish to get drawn into another useless film vs video argument which only leads to childish comments the ones below: lol. elaborate please. religious autosugestion or what do you think might be the reason? is the light travelling different if it knows that it won´t hit chemicals? its even getting better... now tell THAT to a colorist or VFX supervisor... but ok, HARD SCIENCE then... how do you qualify "sculptural"? Is it like "the arri 435 has a DONATELLO FACTOR of 3.5, the aaton 35III however has the RODIN CLOSURE of 2.2, while panavision genesis, arri d20, sony 950, red one, dalsa origin, VR phantom 65 indeed only offer a BARLACH SYNC of 1.2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arni Heimir Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 (edited) Is it me or does Jim Jannard and the RED team have a phallic imagery obsession? Women puffing on cigars, milk maids drinking milk from the bottle. What ever happen to a nice romantic candle lit dinner for two lovers (Master Primes anyone)? As for the actual image. I'm impressed. But I hope the sensor isn't natively so de-saturated. Edited November 2, 2006 by Arni Heimir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Greenwalt Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 I don't think the second shot was color graded, my guess that I posted on DVXuser.com (Yes I am That One Guy) was that it might relate to the relative sensitivities of the filtered sensors. The R G and B curves won't natively be linear and will need some massaging from the demosaic software to force them to respond in a linear fashion. As to the "Painterly Look" my guess is that's because it hasn't been properly graded. If you take that first shot and grade it well it should also look better "sculpted". To quote my sculpture teacher from college: Depth creates form. I.E. you want something to look more "sculputed" make the blacks blacker and the whites whiter. (And then add grain to sharpen it.) You'll have a sharper, more 3 dimensional image. Although that's all basic cinematography. If something looks flat, I wouldn't blaim the sensor, I'd blaim the lighting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Downes Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 Without wanting to turn this into another useless film vs video thread, your wife has rightly spotted that electronically captured images look flatter than film images of the same scene. Film looks more sculptural, more three dimenssional. That is something which struck me when I first saw images shot on the Genesis, backgrounds looked like painted backdrops, there was no depth to the images. Unfortunately that is the nature of electronic images and it cannot be changed. What I find facinating is that being call that being negative. I look at this, like any camera, as a tool. And you use the right tool for the job. It gave me ideas on how if I wanted to shoot something that, literally, looked like a painting come to life, which I'll admit sounds like a facinating concept. And, from what I've seen thus far, using the right tools Red could likely pull it off. As for my wife not liking it, she doesn't like a lot of things she's seen shot lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 being on that topic: do you recommend that we change the 24bit96khz DAW audio back to multitrack analogue tape? i have heard -exaclty- that 3D nonsense in that context before. It's not a valid analogy: film and CCD/CMOS cameras are capturing focused light onto defined flat regions - if you were comparing photochemical and digital holography maybe it would be. Plus, the differences between analog & digital *signal* recording are not profound. But we're talking about image formation here essentially. -Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jan von krogh Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 It's not a valid analogy: film and CCD/CMOS cameras are capturing focused light onto defined flat regions - if you were comparing photochemical and digital holography maybe it would be. the original poster was seeing depth and spoke about sculpted look in optochemical film, so its pretty hard to use a valid analogy, as the reference is false in itself already. I pointed out, that, when digital daw lunched the multitrack analogue many analogue fans (who are mostly digital today anyhow) also bailed out to esoterical criteria as "the space in the sound is much deeper". heck, they even discussed the "sound" of empty cd-rs back then, even if they were 100% dataidentical after being burned. ok, back then a cd-recorder was ~5-8.000 and burnt 30$ CD-R frisbees... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Greenwalt Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 the original poster was seeing depth and spoke about sculpted look in optochemical film, so its pretty hard to use a valid analogy, as the reference is false in itself already. I pointed out, that, when digital daw lunched the multitrack analogue many analogue fans (who are mostly digital today anyhow) also bailed out to esoterical criteria as "the space in the sound is much deeper". heck, they even discussed the "sound" of empty cd-rs back then, even if they were 100% dataidentical after being burned. ok, back then a cd-recorder was ~5-8.000 and burnt 30$ CD-R frisbees... Ahhh the good old days when you bought a 10 pack of CDs with the intent of getting 2 working copies out of the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jan von krogh Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 Ahhh the good old days when you bought a 10 pack of CDs with the intent of getting 2 working copies out of the deal. you must have had a better model than i :) but then, it was much more exciting back then, with no barbie-burnproof and single speed. 1 Hour of suspense! Will the datarate be enough? Will someone delete a file? will the computer crash? will the power fail? is enough space on the valuable 12 multisessioned CD-R? Btw, we had the Kodak CD-recorder back then, ~12.000 deutschmarks (~6000 euro or so), heavy, big, slow, impressive and everybody had to see "THE DEVICE WHO CAN MAKE CDs!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Greenwalt Posted November 2, 2006 Share Posted November 2, 2006 I remember when a 4x recorder came out. We were all trying to justify the expense. My favorite part were the discs. They were called "Jet Fuel". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filip Plesha Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 That looks way too soft to be considered 4K resolution. But the "look" is wonderfull for a digital camera. Much better, as a photograph, than something from Sony HD we have seen so far. Not in terms of quality, but in terms of getting close to "organic" look of film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Yernazian Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 O COME ON EVERYONE.... STOP THE STUPIDITY I'M REALLY TIRED OF BOTH STUPID OPINIONS..... COME ON! THE GRABS LOOKS GREAT KEEP IT UP.... I CAN'T BEILEVE THAT AS MAKERS WE HAVE HATRED ENVY , TO EACH OTHER.... I mean don't get me wrong I get that but I recognized something COOL when I see it Jim is arrogant ..... so what good for him I preffer a guy that is an ass but is true to himself and it won't change his ways to pleased the " industry standarts" ..... MY say... EVERYONE THAT HAS AN IDEA SHOULD GO FOR IT IF THE BELIEVE ON IT..... BREAK ALL THE RULES, BREAK ALL THE BARRIERS, MAKE MAKE MAKE NEW THINGS , UNEXPECTED.... TO THE RED TEAM..... KEEP IT UP.... YOU GUYS REPRESENT A NEW VOICE.... GO FOR IT !!! BREAK ALL THE BARRIERS... this is from a guy that is buying a regular 16 camera and is going to converted to S16 to shoot his next 2 features.... Stop killing Ideas, stop.... from both ends respect each other and .... one more thing IF YOU GUYS ARE FILMMAKERS WHAT TEH HELL ARE YOU DOING DISCUSSING AND ARGUING ABOUT A TOOL INSTEAD OF MAKING NEW THINGS .... DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME ... MAKE BEST TO ALL MARTIN "THE CRAZY ARGENTINE" YERNAZIAN PS: you guys better prepare after a year of been in bed for a stupid accident I'm coming with all my guns to make some damage Best again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Nathan Milford Posted April 10, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 10, 2007 Actually, this thread stopped two months ago. You're very wise and all that, but it sincerely distresses me when someone digs up old threads about controversial issues and decides to put their two cents in. It is like riping off a scab, taking a thread like this and drawing attention to it for people to argue about again to no great end other than wasting kilobytes and minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Yernazian Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 (edited) You know what Nathan you are right but this is for everyone..... This threat finish a long time ago.... but it wasn't until Tim froze the red argument that people stop..... my thing wasn't a last say... it a fu**ing order to put a stop to this poop how old are you all?...5 just shut the fu** up and start making stuff that they are worth watching...... That's what it is! They don't call me crazy for nothing.... and if I'm crazy and make sense what makes you....... Thanks Edited April 11, 2007 by Martín Yernazian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted April 11, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 11, 2007 I guess it's time to close down yet another Red thread because of unproductive and insulting comments. Thanks Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Yernazian Posted April 11, 2007 Share Posted April 11, 2007 well Max if you just follow my advice and you stop commenting we don't have to argue so Thank you..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts