Full Length Music Video Shot Using Red

[Michael Nash]

It's one sample production -- hardly enough to judge a camera. Many film stocks and video cameras don't have quite the desired "look" right out of the box, either. A good DP will take the time to massage an image by choice of lenses, filters, exposure and other image control (not to mention lighting, composition, etc.). Sure, the camera has a unique look among motion pictures, because it is unique. That doesn't mean it will always look "video-y" or whatever. How many of the most admired films out there are the result of simply loading film into a camera and turning it on?

[Tim Carroll]

What we need is a side by side test shoot.

 

-- J.S.

 

Been WAY out of the loop on the whole RED "thing" since I saw the first splash at NAB in 2006. Just took a look today and I am a bit confused. I glanced through what was posted on 2-POP, and RedUser.net, and then this forum. With the exception of this forum, what I mostly saw was an absolute feeding frenzy of hype.

 

When I finally found some footage to look at, I was shocked. Everything I could find posted looked like very high resolution video. Very contrasty, pretty harsh, but unbelievable detail (I guess 4K will do that for you). The hype kept saying, "Revolution in filmmaking" and the like, but I am not seeing what they are talking about.

 

Now in RED's defense, it looks like most of the footage has been shot by folks who have just received their cameras and talked their friends into standing in front of it with a bright light on them. Maybe when some real cinematographers, real actors (with real make-up persons), real directors and real camera operators get ahold of the camera, they can make some beautiful images, but so far, what I've seen is rubbish.

 

-Tim

[John Sprung]

.... but so far, what I've seen is rubbish.

You've also been looking at it as highly compressed files on a computer, I guess. Panavision/Plus 8 has some coming, in the 100 - 125 serial number range, IIRC. At that point, we'll probably see some good side by side tests with film and Red.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Mike Hunt]

Ha ha ha ha... oooooohhhhhh Ha ha hah ahahahahah....

 

 

Please!!!!!! You guys have to stop.. You're killing me!!!! I can't stop laughing!!! Ha hah ahaha.. Looks like Rubbish?????!!!!!! Ha ha ha ha ha... You certainly did not dig around on the red forum. There is stuff in there that makes me walk away from the computer and shake my head saying, "I can't not believe how amazing that stuff looks."

 

Hmmmmmm.. I guess guys like Peter Jackson and Steven Soderbergh must feel it looks like video too. Certainly they would never use a camera that shoots rubbish. He he.. ops.... sorry

 

 

Oh my I can't believe how loud the crickets have been chirping in this forum. H aha ha... I love to come in here and see whats cooking in this good forum. God I sure learn a lot in here.

 

You guys finally got what you wanted. Footage.... And yet a huge bunch of you sit around and do nothing but slam the poor guy trying to shoot and learn. It was you all who always said and continue to say, "Gee... Never wait for a camera. Get out there and go make a movie." And when someone does try hard and is learning, a huge majority of you guys sit around and slam the work. I can't believe you guys sit around and say, "maybe once the camera is in the hands of REAL cinematographers." ha ha hah aha hahahahahhahahaha.... God that Kills me!

 

 

Okay.. now back to work. wheeeewwww

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ha ha ha ahhahahahahahahahahahahah

[Andrew Stroud]

Quote "Hmmmmmm.. I guess guys like Peter Jackson and Steven Soderbergh must feel it looks like video too. Certainly they would never use a camera that shoots rubbish. He he.. ops.... sorry"

 

 

Actually , after some extensive testing by Andrew Lesnie , Peter Jackson has decided to shoot "The Lovely Bones" on film.

[David Mullen ASC]

You can't have it both ways -- suggest that no one is posting because the naysayers were proved wrong and put in their place... but also complain about critical posts in regards to the footage! You're simultaneously complaining about critical posts while pointing out that the critics are no longer posting???

[Jonathan Bowerbank]

I'm just wondering what frame rate they shot it at, because it does look like just plain ol' HD video, on par with an HD presentation of Late Night with Conan O'Brien ;)

[Mike Hunt]

David,

 

 

I have mad respect for you. Trust me. Out of most posts here, I always read what you have to say. The problem I have, is that I see guys here slamming other people who are out there trying to do something cool and artistic.

 

I have seen guys who admit that they are new to film-making and new to cinematography.com and they get nailed for posting something they are trying to say.

 

Go back a couple of posts and look at what this guy Adam Thompson replied to someone here who was trying to learn. This should be a place to ask questions and to learn from others. But when you get an idiot like Adam, I can't help but to stir things up again.

 

Again- It bothers me when I see you answer my post, because I know who you are and I have seen you do some beautiful work. I have total respect for you. And to be honest, if you told me to leave cinematography.com, I would do it. Any of my posts would never be aimed at you David. Please know that.

 

I have never once seen you slam someone for being creative. If you had a problem with something someone did, you would give a good suggestion on how to fix something or improve. Not just slam their work. You are someone I will always look up to. No doubt.

[Mike Hunt]

It is important to talk about the footage, and I don't mind people coming in here saying it looks video-y. What bothers me, is we are all suppost to be peers to each other. It just seems like instead of asking questions about maybe how it was shot and maybe giving out ideas on how to light things better, everyone wants to just dump on the work this guy made and not try to help improve ideas for the future.

 

I know how critics can be. I get enough of that from my commercial work I do. I would expect that from maybe clients, newspapers and etc. But not here. Isn't this a place to learn and get ideas from others? It just seems like everyone is wants so step on everyone else's d-ck.

 

To be honest, I did not think it was all that bad. I certainly loved the girl. So that sold it for me.

 

Maybe I should go into the porn industry. Might be good for me. he he

[Patrick McGowan]

It is important to talk about the footage, and I don't mind people coming in here saying it looks video-y. What bothers me, is we are all suppost to be peers to each other. It just seems like instead of asking questions about maybe how it was shot and maybe giving out ideas on how to light things better, everyone wants to just dump on the work this guy made and not try to help improve ideas for the future.

 

Nice user name Mike. :huh:

Edited October 23, 2007 by Patrick McGowan

[Mike Hunt]

Thanks,

 

Family given name. Sometimes I was beat up at school though... he he

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm looking back at these posts now... and most of the opinions expressed are not overtly hostile or rude, they are just observations, whether or not one agrees with them.

 

Sure, I agree that sometimes we're not the most supportive group for each other, but I don't see this thread as being an example of a group dogpile on some poor beginner.

 

Some of the RED footage posted isn't that interesting, and if that's all someone has run into so far, I can see them not being impressed. But there is also some nice stuff out there to see. But overall, it's hard to make definite decisions based on stuff posted on internet forums.

 

My question, or concern, is the divergent opinions regarding dynamic range I run across regarding the RED. I see this clippy stuff online and I have the same reaction that some other people have, that it's sort of video-y. Then other people tell me that the dynamic range is great. So I have no idea what to think. Even Adam Wilt has wondered publically about the dynamic range. I guess I'll have to test it myself someday.

[Seung Han]

My question, or concern, is the divergent opinions regarding dynamic range I run across regarding the RED. I see this clippy stuff online and I have the same reaction that some other people have, that it's sort of video-y. Then other people tell me that the dynamic range is great. So I have no idea what to think. Even Adam Wilt has wondered publically about the dynamic range. I guess I'll have to test it myself someday.

 

I have to admit as a res holder I was pretty concerned with the blownout highlights. Some shooters have taken their images back into Red Alert after numerous posts trying to figure out why this was happening, if the purported dynamic range was just hype. It turned out that a few shots with clipping taken under a bright sun without nd filters or mattebox was recoverable in Red Alert.

 

I think as far as the workflow with the Red is concerned people coming from film as well as others coming from video will have to realize that this workflow is a hybrid of both worlds from capture to post. I am no post expert but have put in about five + years in the professional post world from editing to compositing and I can say playing with some Red footage in photoshop and AFX, it is pretty amazing. The images are very malleable and if you have a particular aesthetic or vision for your images the Red footage is a great starting point to achieve it.

 

* Just as a side note -- I find people who are always bringing up the idea that talent, experience and my favorite, a good story, is more important than the tools to be very condescending... Honestly, is this really necessary -- to point something out that everybody already knows? It just sounds like the annoying drunk guy in the bar who has outlasted his welcome by constantly dropping platitudes as if they were pearls of wisdom.