Mike Miller Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 How does Red deal with this issue? Are they mapped out and corrected automatically? How many dead pixels the cameras in use have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 They map pixels like everybody else does. This has been asked and answered by Jim in the past. Why are you on an anti-RED campaign? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Miller Posted December 14, 2007 Author Share Posted December 14, 2007 I am not on anti-Red campaign. I just have some questions and some doubts on a brand that has no tradition. Should I become an instant fanboy? It takes more than reading through Red's marketing campaign on these forums. They are the manufacturer and if they want to come here and someone asks them for test results, they should provide it. They are getting a lot of free ride here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted December 14, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted December 14, 2007 I am not on anti-Red campaign. I just have some questions and some doubts on a brand that has no tradition. Should I become an instant fanboy? It takes more than reading through Red's marketing campaign on these forums. They are the manufacturer and if they want to come here and someone asks them for test results, they should provide it. They are getting a lot of free ride here. They should be treated like any other manufacturer. If I demand "test results" for the Genesis or F23, does Sony or Panavision jump in to provide them here??? They've already answered the question on how they deal with dead pixels too, here, so do some homework. There is a state between fanboy and being openly antangonistic, you know. You seem to be suggesting that if they aren't being attacked, they are getting a free ride, as if that's your two options. Your tone is bordering on the classic question "have you stopped beating your wife?" Instead of asking how the RED camera deals with dead pixels, which is a neutral question, you ask a loaded question like "How many dead pixels the cameras in use have?" What sort of question is that? What sort of answer is even possible? Try asking Sony that question -- "how many dead pixels are there currently in all F900's in existence?" How would they know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 There is a state between Your tone is bordering on the classic question "have you stopped beating your wife?" David, I do not care for this comment... I think that you could have chosen a different tone.. I'm sure you did not mean it the way it can be mis-read like I did when I read it the first time... I think its time to delete this whole new thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted December 14, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted December 14, 2007 David, I do not care for this comment... I think that you could have chosen a different tone.. I'm sure you did not mean it the way it can be mis-read like I did when I read it the first time... I think its time to delete this whole new thread... I reread it and I'm not sure what could be misread. The classic "when did you stop (or have you stopped) beating your wife?" is commonly used as an example in journalism of the loaded question that no one can answer without condemning themselves. Asking about how many dead pixels do their cameras have is the same type of structure, because it assumes that dead pixels are common aspect of their product, hence why it is a loaded question. People have to understand that tone generates tone. Some people wish to go on the attack mode and then act all upset when people start responding in a similar tone, as if they alone should have been allowed to have the tone. "Mike Miller" joined yesterday and proceded to blanket the forum with a bunch of hostile posts towards RED, designed to provoke a fight. That's very unhelpful and unproductive and I'm going to assume Mike is smart enough to know what he's doing, rather than think he's so dumb that he didn't know the results of his posts. And I stand by my statement that there are states between fanboy and being openly hostile. You know, like in the middle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 I have kept away from this for ages i still will apart from this. . i just dont understand its a camera system another one which i think will be great . Why do people get so uptight about it , i just want to see some well lit shots on 30-40 foot cinema screen . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 (edited) I reread it and I'm not sure what could be misread. Okay... I understand more... And I stand by my statement that there are states between fanboy and being openly hostile. You know, like in the middle? I'm in the middle myself... which to some means your on the other guys side... Here is all I want... 35m dof... I could live with 2k... And a way to conform it in post through FCP and Color... (if you have to cut on a high end post system you might as well shoot 35mm because the costs would be about the same.... I'm speaking as a person who mainly works on B movies) I can see the point of some if its not 4k... to them if you go in and buy a car with a v8 on sale and you drive out with a v6 in that car did you get what the ad said... And geez I can see Jannard's point... he wants to sell cameras and of course he want's to see it succeed... who knows maybe in more ways than making sunglasses... showing "hey I can do it a second time." And I don't care if some A list director likes it... to me yes it might prove a point that they're using it... but again... these guys have or can get the money to fix things in post... I'd be more impressed seeing a feature shot by the guy who shot the kid crying in the window footage.. Edited December 14, 2007 by Gary McClurg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Here is all I want... 35m dof... I could live with 2k... And a way to conform it in post through FCP and Color... Hey, you should try the Phantom HD! 35mm sized sensor, 2K res., and now Gluetools makes a plug-in to play the files natively in QuickTime, so FCP & Color are all set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted December 14, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted December 14, 2007 The problem comes from the casual use of the term "4K". The RED is a 4K RAW Bayer-filtered camera, like the Dalsa. You can convert that to 4K RGB. So it becomes easy to call it a "4K" camera because it gets tedious to type in "4K RAW Bayer-filtered" everytime. It's a laziness that works to the marketers' advantage though. The controversy is always whether a 4K Bayer-filtered image becomes 4K in resolution when converted to RGB. The safe thing to say is "no" there is some effective loss of course. Most manufacturers now don't say there is 100% restoration of resolution, most claim 75%, so a 4K Bayer-filtered camera gives you 3K effective resolution. I'm not going to quibble any further because it becomes a pointless intellectual exercise without a practical reference, i.e. a true 4K RGB digital cine camera. A 4K RGB scan of 35mm doesn't really count because I think you are introducing too many variables. The ONLY reason why the whole 4K issue is even relevant is that 4K has become more or less the industry benchmark for 35mm color negative quality in terms of resolution. And even that's not uncontroversial or debatable. But the truth is that in terms of matching MTF characteristics of 35mm color negative, all of these new digital cameras, from the Genesis, the F23, to the RED, are all in the ballpark. Some would say they fall just short of 35mm resolution, others would say they exceed it -- and these are engineer-types saying this. Probably even measuring MTF of a single frame is not completely accurate, since film has the advantage of a moving grain structure, so detail is stored in a physically different position on every frame, so perhaps some sort of three-frame average should be used when comparing different cameras. But what it boils down to for me is basically "how do these different cameras handle fine detail in a wide shot?" They all produce really sharp images in close-ups, sometimes too sharp. It's the wide shots where a lack of resolution can be a problem. And there is also the issue of aliasing, whether in order to gain that fine detail, they are allowing too much aliasing to happen. And even 35mm is not always great -- I see wide shots in standard 1.85 movies and some Super-35 movies and think "that's not very sharp". And I was watching "The Golden Compass" digitally projected and thinking that the Super-35 Fuji held up pretty well in the aerial photography, clean, fine-grained, sharp -- and then I read that all that was shot on the Panavision Genesis camera in HD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 (edited) Hey, you should try the Phantom HD!35mm sized sensor, 2K res., and now Gluetools makes a plug-in to play the files natively in QuickTime, so FCP & Color are all set. Yeah but at $2,500 (looks like minus lens) a day for a three day week $7,500 x 3 weeks... $22,500... add two days of reshoots so we now have $27,500... this is were the Red looks good to own... always can be updated (have always wondered how much)... on the next feature... the Red and package could be paid for... Edited December 14, 2007 by Gary McClurg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Lewis Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Is this poster 14 years old? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Gary, for you I'd cut it to $2495. It was a bit of a joke (there was supposed to be a smiley in there), but if anyone is seriously interested in a Phantom for a feature or otherwise, feel free to give me a call. Next week a major Hollywood feature wraps that had a Phantom HD on set for the entire production. Don't know how much they shot on it but I do know that they are very pleased. When I can talk about it I will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Gary, for you I'd cut it to $24.95. Just messing around... :lol: how close would it match to a viper... was going to book that again or a 950.... might work on a feature out of LA that was stopped for reasons that are hard to go into... I know after talking about high end post... but on this project could run it through a Paublo and match the look... but again... not sure if the original dp is going to be brought back or not... that would cut corners in post... again... kinda of hard to go into the reasons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Don't know how closely it would match, being single chip Bayer 35mm size v. 3-chip 2/3". Also it's 14-bit uncompressed RAW v. Viper "raw" which isn't really the same thing. Not bad, just different. Pablo works well with Phantom as it will take .tiff or .dpx stacks easily. I should think you could get them to match quite nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Booth Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Okay... I understand more... I'm in the middle myself... which to some means your on the other guys side... Here is all I want... 35m dof... I could live with 2k... And a way to conform it in post through FCP and Color... (if you have to cut on a high end post system you might as well shoot 35mm because the costs would be about the same.... I'm speaking as a person who mainly works on B movies) I can see the point of some if its not 4k... to them if you go in and buy a car with a v8 on sale and you drive out with a v6 in that car did you get what the ad said... And geez I can see Jannard's point... he wants to sell cameras and of course he want's to see it succeed... who knows maybe in more ways than making sunglasses... showing "hey I can do it a second time." And I don't care if some A list director likes it... to me yes it might prove a point that they're using it... but again... these guys have or can get the money to fix things in post... I'd be more impressed seeing a feature shot by the guy who shot the kid crying in the window footage.. Gary, I think you should do some research into the RED. It doesn't seem like you have done any at all. There are plenty of RED users out there (of all different levels) using this camera and FCS/Color. Try spending some time on reduser.net and you'll learn something. Also, you stated you work on "B movies". Sounds like you could live with HVX-type cameras if that's the case. Just my opinion I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Gary, I think you should do some research into the RED. It doesn't seem like you have done any at all. There are plenty of RED users out there (of all different levels) using this camera and FCS/Color. Try spending some time on reduser.net and you'll learn something. No I don't go to redusers... yes... I'm overstating to make a point... but you have to read through a 1,000 way to go Jim's to get any bit of information... I have a friend who wants to purchase the red... so I'll ask him and get the latest info... last time I asked him... he wasn't happy with the post workflow... and he is on your side... Also, you stated you work on "B movies". Sounds like you could live with HVX-type cameras if that's the case. Just my opinion I suppose. I'm not sure how to take this pro or con... no I'd rather use Cine Altas.... if I went with a camera purchase I'd buy the HPX 500 over a HVX200... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Tried to change my post guess I waited to long... See you don't get me...how to explain it... the last time I went to lunch with my pro red friend and he asked me... "You really do want to see the Red succeed don't you." I just smiled... now he understands... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Drysdale Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 (edited) Gary, I think you should do some research into the RED. It doesn't seem like you have done any at all. There are plenty of RED users out there (of all different levels) using this camera and FCS/Color. Try spending some time on reduser.net and you'll learn something. Also, you stated you work on "B movies". Sounds like you could live with HVX-type cameras if that's the case. Just my opinion I suppose. The larger Cinealta and Panasonic HD cameras would be used on lower budget features - the traditional "B movies". The HVX and the HDV cameras tend to be used on micro budget features and the RED would be outside their budget range anyway. That's unless the market really drops out and the RED rentals become really cut price or the camera supplier isn't costing his rental on a true economical basis. The RED post currently seems to be a stumbling block and the software still appears to be a work in progress. Edited March 27, 2008 by Brian Drysdale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Haywood Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Gary, I think you should do some research into the RED. It doesn't seem like you have done any at all. I think some of the posters here should do some real-world research that doesn't involve the Internet :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now