Jump to content
Evan Winter

Full Length Music Video Shot Using Red

Recommended Posts

Here is a link to a music video that was shot on the Red camera:

 

http://www.hd4.tv/red/Sep1_8K_1k.html (this was initially posted on Reduser.net)

 

First off, well done and congrats to the production team for getting 'er done.

 

I must admit though that I'm not thrilled with the footage. Here the Red stuff feels very video, we suffer from some undexposure meant to indicate the sexiness of a dimly lit club, and for many of the shots it seems like everything is in focus from 2 inches in front of the lens to the wall 30 feet away... :(

 

Just wanted to throw the vid up here so people who hadn't seen lots of Red stuff (and especially Red stuff put towards creative use, as opposed to test use).

 

Evan W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I must admit though that I'm not thrilled with the footage. Here the Red stuff feels very video"

 

Not only that but the Red camera totally messed up the dialogue. I couldn't understand a word of it, sounds like the worst English ever.

 

R,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Richard,

 

Sarcasm? As in, Red does acquire digitally so to suggest that the resulting footage looks video'ish is akin to being surprised that people speaking another language don't sound like they are speaking English. Is that the idea? If yes then... lol.

 

Now that I've lol'ed, allow me to clarify - some of the footage looks like low quality video on the level of adequately shot mini-dv or HDV as opposed to what one would expect from a camera with Red-like specs. Some of the stuff also looks pretty nice though and I've definitely seen some Red footage (from other projects) that has impressed me.

 

Evan W.

Edited by Evan Winter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The music video really has a video feel to it.

 

I'm sure we are going to see video from total garbage to extraordinary with the Red just as we see with any other camera.

 

Sooner or later, more and more people will realize it is not the camera, it's the people shooting with the camera that makes the difference. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree that I wasn't overly impressed. I did like one shot, though; where they're up against the bright white light-wall and the almost silhouetted. The light just has a nice wrap 'round their faces, I feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure we are going to see video from total garbage to extraordinary with the Red just as we see with any other camera.

 

I agree we can speculate all we want about the video but with out knowing exactly what they used we just can't say why it was good or bad. I think (from looking at footage on reduser) that this is not an "on the fly" camera. you have to set it up and take the time to light it well to get good quality. This video had a mix of both. and it also suffered from the restraints of digital video that is going to happen. After all it is a digital camera. Which is what red promised, a super amazing digital cinema quality camera it will never mount up to the romantic look of 35mm film.

 

I think it all has to do with who is behind the camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this actually look pretty good compared to the footage I've seen on Reduser. Most of the other footage looks very CG and very fake. Like the Airplane flying at the camera. It looks like a very bad CG shot. So again this looks pretty good for Video. So if this replaces 16mm I will be shocked! To even compare it to 35mm Film seems kinda funny to me.

Just my opinion.

Toby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the low-light performance.

 

One cautionary result of this video: Don't get in too close to someone with bad skin/no makeup at 4K! "I'm ready for my closeup, Mr. DeMille."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I liked the low-light performance.

 

One cautionary result of this video: Don't get in too close to someone with bad skin/no makeup at 4K! "I'm ready for my closeup, Mr. DeMille."

 

Did you work on this shoot? If so what lenses did you use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree we can speculate all we want about the video but with out knowing exactly what they used we just can't say why it was good or bad. I think (from looking at footage on reduser) that this is not an "on the fly" camera. you have to set it up and take the time to light it well to get good quality. This video had a mix of both. and it also suffered from the restraints of digital video that is going to happen. After all it is a digital camera. Which is what red promised, a super amazing digital cinema quality camera it will never mount up to the romantic look of 35mm film.

 

I think it all has to do with who is behind the camera.

 

It's not a matter of "restraints of digital video" like video/TV camera deficiencies restrained by 5stop limitation, limited color depth, etc., but the characteristics (and parametric) of the acquisition medium. Film has its own image capture deficiencies, however, talented and ingenious chemists, film processors, cinematographers, directors, editors, and others over the decades have either evolved the technologies or created art inspired uses for those attributes of film; and we have learned to love them. They are illusions. That's one of the reasons why we go to movies.

 

The video suffers from inappropriate lighting, inter alia. This is going to be the case for a while, as the learning curve matures and knowledge is disseminated throughout the industry. Like others, I noticed that the linear characteristics of the acquisition is the most telling attribute. I have experimented with algorithms to modify the bottom of the curve to resemble the toe of the , the spectral response curve. As a result there is a quite indescribable feel of film, or more precisely, something not video.

 

The other attribute is the organized nature of the cell layout of electronic sensors vs. the naturally occurring integration of image resolution and color information from the randomness of grain size and orientation, which are used to stylize the motion capture on film. And like 24FPS we have become accustomed to those attributes as we have the aspect ratios of the presentation format. All this is a function of physics, mathematics, and "better living through chemistry." To this point video, or rather, electronic image acquisition has had neither the latitude, gamut, and resolution, to be able to manipulate the image information as has been available though film acquisition; and herein lies the issue to be overcome with 4K high dynamic range digital acquisition. The image information need to manipulated as is that in film that occurs as a function of film's physical/chemical nature or the extraordinary innovations by filmmakers over the years by lighting techniques, filters, gels, processing, etc.

 

The challenge for digital cinema production is to apply the mathematical manipulation of the data acquired as has been done in film acquisition, in order to create an illusion of moving images as imaginative as has been done in the past.

 

I think the foolish bickering about the process of image capture I see here, is mostly driven by irrational and overemotional chauvinism of close minded irrational thought. I am so pleased that over they years such people didn't work for Eastman Kodak, I really like color film as well as B&W.

 

Same for the guy who invented the indoor electric coffee pot. I hate boiling coffee in a cast iron pot over an open fire in the rain. Even if it does seem more organic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lets be honest even if this was shot on a 10K camera or 70mm it would still be a load of cheasy poop. good story, good lighting, good direction then we' be in a better position to discuss. but this is horse dung with flies on top...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lance,

 

With regards to your analogy,

 

"Same for the guy who invented the indoor electric coffee pot. I hate boiling coffee in a cast iron pot over an open fire in the rain. Even if it does seem more organic,"

 

I'd imagine that the main reason indoor electric coffee pots were invented (like most inventions) was for convenience's sake. But what if iron pot boiled coffee really does have a better taste? For the average person, the end result of slightly better taste still wouldn't be enough of a reason to deal with the antiquated methodology.

 

But for an artist the end result is everything. It should not and would not matter to a true artist if the methodology was antiquated or less convenient as long as the result is better art that more accurately expresses the artist's intent (or at the very least the other options, if chosen, should not damage that intent).

 

This is why the film vs. video debate is so heated, so interesting, and so difficult to decide; it's because we're talking about artists, their art, and their methods of creating that art. Indeed, if anyone is guilty of "close minded irrational thought" it is the man who is perturbed by debate and discussion and not those who attempt, through such discussion, to arrive at some greater conclusion.

 

Evan W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lets be honest even if this was shot on a 10K camera or 70mm it would still be a load of cheasy poop. good story, good lighting, good direction then we' be in a better position to discuss. but this is horse dung with flies on top...

 

Tell us how you really feel. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Same for the guy who invented the indoor electric coffee pot. I hate boiling coffee in a cast iron pot over an open fire in the rain. Even if it does seem more organic,"

 

I'd imagine that the main reason indoor electric coffee pots were invented (like most inventions) was for convenience's sake. But what if iron pot boiled coffee really does have a better taste? For the average person, the end result of slightly better taste still wouldn't be enough of a reason to deal with the antiquated methodology.

 

Now you're discussing consumers and thats a whole different kettle of fish (*groan*).

 

An electric kettle saves the average person plenty of time and, perhaps, money.

It is the afficianados that debate about the true merits of a system based on it's end result. Average people want convenience.

 

If the film vs video question were posed to a consumer, he or she would probably ask "Will shooting movies on video make it cheaper for me to see them?" (fat chance, I know...)

 

I, myself, prefer espresso from the cafe by my house, and I pay a premium for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure we are going to see video from total garbage to extraordinary with the Red just as we see with any other camera.

 

Sooner or later, more and more people will realize it is not the camera, it's the people shooting with the camera that makes the difference. ;)

 

 

Words to live by, man. I am constantly mystified when I hear all these people talk like getting the highest definition camera is going to suddenly turn them (and their projects) into cinematography award winners. That's the truth about the leveling of the playing field: While most cameras are still out of most of us's price range, some, like the HVX200, give most people the opportunity to get their feet wet with moviemaking. At the end of the day, though, the ones with experience, skill and talent will outshine the rest of them no matter what the format chosen to film on is . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I must admit though that I'm not thrilled with the footage. Here the Red stuff feels very video, we suffer from some undexposure meant to indicate the sexiness of a dimly lit club, and for many of the shots it seems like everything is in focus from 2 inches in front of the lens to the wall 30 feet away... :("

 

 

 

Well, IT IS video. And not very well lit and shot. Personaly, the only times I have been fooled by video as film is when it is properly shot and colored, then goes to film out and it is projected using a film projector. And then, maybe, it can look like film originated.

 

Perhaps someone should finally set out to define the HD aesthetic in its own right once and for all, as opposed to always trying to make it look like film . . . And being bummed out when it doesn't. I am thinking Julien Donkey Boy, which is one of the best (and most beautiful) examples of Lo-Fi video in its own right one can ever see. And even that one was printed on film, and then, from that print, to video distribution. But then again, one's got to see the film print version though, otherwise it looses a lot of it charm.

 

Ultimately, I guess the jury is still out on ithe film vs video issue. Perhaps just using the best of each format as dictated by the script or thematic content of the film, as oppossed to simple economics of not being able to afford shooting on film. Not very realistic in the day to day, I know . . .

 

Still I think a lot of cash-challenged filmmakers could make the best of the video format -embracing it for what it is, warts and all- instead of always pursuing the ever-elusive, never yet fully attained, "film look" on low budget video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

This is just badly lit, poor quality pop video mash.

 

To me it looks like it has suffered from the " we're shooting on video so we don't need to light it like we are using film" syndrome. To me the opening sequence looked far better than the rest, but perhaps it was the subject matter that helped them up thier game.

 

Until we see something that has been lit and graded wtht the same amount of time and money as 35mm neg iet will always be apples and oranges. At least then it might be oranges and lemons.

 

 

Kevin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Until we see something that has been lit and graded wtht the same amount of time and money as 35mm neg iet will always be apples and oranges.

What we need is a side by side test shoot.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I must admit though that I'm not thrilled with the footage. Here the Red stuff feels very video"

 

Not only that but the Red camera totally messed up the dialogue. I couldn't understand a word of it, sounds like the worst English ever.

 

R,

Gotta love that...

 

 

 

I thought the footage was ok. But very, very, video'ey.

 

However I think the fact that us being artists who are into film will probably be more biased towards film anyway. A lot of the average people actually preffer the video look because it's, sharper and clearer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some folks forget that you can have what some say is the 'best tool' in the world, but without talent, all you have is a camera. Seems too many folks are too concerned with specs and the like thinking that is what makes good cinematography. It's a crutch for wannabe filmmakers who use it as their entry card into what they consider being accepted as professionals. Good cinematography always comes first and foremost from a good cinematographer. Tools never do anything without the right hands. A $10 can build a house in the right hands. I never saw a resume that listed the equipment a person used on a production. Why should I. It means nothing. Lately I've seen a few. Sad and misdirected!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gotta love that...

 

 

 

I thought the footage was ok. But very, very, video'ey.

 

However I think the fact that us being artists who are into film will probably be more biased towards film anyway. A lot of the average people actually preffer the video look because it's, sharper and clearer.

 

Ya, that's why we always hear "can you make it look like a Soap Opera" It's quite the opposite. It's more like "I'm going to shoot Video and try to grade it to look like FILM!"

 

Toby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't like the stuff at the brick wall, but I really liked the stuff at the beginning and the silhouetted shot against the white BG!

 

PS.. He would never get her :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Ritter Battery



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Rig Wheels Passport



    CineLab



    Metropolis Post



    Wooden Camera



    Paralinx LLC



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Glidecam



    Abel Cine



    Tai Audio



    Visual Products



    Serious Gear


×
×
  • Create New...