Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted March 21, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted March 21, 2008 HD camcorders, particularly consumer ones, use all sorts of sharpening tricks, whereas the RED shoots essentially a RAW image with no sharpening at all. With the right sharpening tools, you can make something lower in resolution look as sharp as something higher in resolution. The lack of sharpening in most RED images I've seen has been one of the more pleasant film-like aspects of the image. And if you really wanted to, you can sharpen the heck out of it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Williams Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 HD camcorders, particularly consumer ones, use all sorts of sharpening tricks, whereas the RED shoots essentially a RAW image with no sharpening at all. With the right sharpening tools, you can make something lower in resolution look as sharp as something higher in resolution. The lack of sharpening in most RED images I've seen has been one of the more pleasant film-like aspects of the image. And if you really wanted to, you can sharpen the heck out of it... I prefer to turn the sharpness completely off on the Sony EX-1. My image doesn't look soft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tylerhawes Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Any link to any D.I.'s you have done? There's a link to our web site in my signature, and some of my work is listed on IMDB. The web site is old and a new one is going up in a week that is much more complete. But if we want to talk about mua, we should continue offline. Email link in my sig as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakaree Sandberg Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 god, i havent posted here in a long time.. but i feel compelled... ever since before the release of the camera, certain people .... have been bashing it and trying to discredit. I find these post enjoyable in a sick and twisted way, because those words simply do nothing!! The camera is out.. its proven.. and its working on sets that you unfortunatly are not. The guys who feel threatened by this equipment are just hurting themselves. Are you afraid that gear is going to ruin your career? in the long run, you will be outdated and will either have to give up or give in. Im starting to think most of the hate posts are made by certain competitors who should really feel threatend.. anyways... nab08 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted March 21, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted March 21, 2008 I prefer to turn the sharpness completely off on the Sony EX-1. My image doesn't look soft. A lot of times, there are still forms of edge enhancement going on either in the camera sensor processing, the recording, or the viewing stages even when you switch it off. But I was referring to the notion of a Canon HD image looking "as sharp" as the RED. Sure, it may look as sharp -- or even sharper -- but often that is due to image processing. You also have to be careful because in many cameras, a Detail setting of "0" is not the same as "off". And even when it is turned off, you don't really know if there is some base default sharpening unless you look at same frame enlargements. If you can post a frame from your EX camera, maybe we can determine if any sharpening is going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Zakaree, I haven't posted in a while... but let me ask you one question... are you not a mod on reduser.net... And basically I'm on the fence with the camera... but like any camera... I want to know the warts as well as the pretty stuff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Sprung Posted March 21, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted March 21, 2008 My friend told me about a test with the Red and a Canon XLH1. Canon is under $10,000! Canon with the Canon lens and the Red was shot with the Red zoomlens. He says the Canon looked equally as sharp and has more of dynamic range. This kind of thing usually comes from the viewing environment. You can shoot an Arri 765 side by side with a cell phone, and if you look at both of them on a cell phone, you won't see as much difference as is really there. With Red, the right way to look at stuff is in front projection on a big screen. You could window on a smaller display with 1-1 pixel mapping, but you have to be sure that it's *really* pixel to pixel with no processing to screw things up. -- J.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted March 21, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted March 21, 2008 This is the main reason why Viper footage looks soft - it has no sharpening whatsoever. It doesn't even have aperture correction, which is to image processing what equalisation is to audio, in that it corrects for unevenness of the sensor's response over the range of its spatial bandwidth. I strongly suspect that no other camera, or almost no other camera, offers this level of really, seriously, no processing operation. Not that it's particularly a good or bad thing. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M. Andrew Benz Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 No Gary he is not a mod at red user nor was he ever... I think anyone who dropping a lot of green on a red wants to know warts and all... as would be anyone spending tens of thousands of dollars on any camera system. Gary, you live in Missouri correct? Maybe when I am in your area next and the schedules allow, I would be happy to meet and let you check it out. Take care, Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 I'll be in Nashville for the next 7 weeks... co-producing another feature... We're shooting with a Cine Alta again... or on some days a couple of them... So drop on by in May... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 This is the main reason why Viper footage looks soft - it has no sharpening whatsoever. It doesn't even have aperture correction, which is to image processing what equalisation is to audio, in that it corrects for unevenness of the sensor's response over the range of its spatial bandwidth. I strongly suspect that no other camera, or almost no other camera, offers this level of really, seriously, no processing operation. Not that it's particularly a good or bad thing. P And when we say almost no other camera, then I can point out the entire line of Vision Research cameras (Phantom, Miro) which all shoot uncompressed RAW without any processing whatsoever. Do what you want in post to your taste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Walter Graff Posted March 21, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted March 21, 2008 And when we say almost no other camera, then I can point out the entire line of Vision Research cameras (Phantom, Miro) which all shoot uncompressed RAW without any processing whatsoever. Do what you want in post to your taste. Phantom is a great camera but not for general cinematogrphy. It's a high speed camera. Has anyone seriously considered it for anything else but? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Noir Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Let the trashing begin. This time... I'll smile. I think. No need. This is a Jannard I can get behind (metaphorically speaking). ;) I'm sure all of us could lighten up a bit at times. Be a little more careful about how we phrase things. Eat more fiber. That kind of thing... :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted March 21, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted March 21, 2008 You also have to be careful because in many cameras, a Detail setting of "0" is not the same as "off". And even when it is turned off, you don't really know if there is some base default sharpening unless you look at same frame enlargements. If you can post a frame from your EX camera, maybe we can determine if any sharpening is going on. Hi David, The EX has a detail OFF setting, the pictures look very natural with real resolution when set to off. Amazing value for money IMO. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakaree Sandberg Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Zakaree, I haven't posted in a while... but let me ask you one question... are you not a mod on reduser.net... And basically I'm on the fence with the camera... but like any camera... I want to know the warts as well as the pretty stuff... I am not a mod anymore. i never edited words out of peoples mouths either when i was... and also i agree with you. there is no problem learning about the good and the bad, however... just as long as people understand that the bad is a temp thing. the camera will always be under construction, which is awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Phantom is a great camera but not for general cinematogrphy. It's a high speed camera. Has anyone seriously considered it for anything else but? Yes. We just had a job that shot everything on the Phantom HD. They did have a bit of high speed, but the DP told me that he would have shot with the Phantom HD even if it was all 24p. We have a feature that is soon to start that will shoot entirely on the Phantom HD and I am told that there is no high speed currently planned, but they will be shooting sections in anamorphic and others spherical. The Phantom HD with CineMags is a very versatile camera system and it is not just for high speed anymore. It is small enough to fit on any motion control system, perch atop a Steadicam, run & gun handheld or use on pretty much any other rig you can think of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamo P Cultraro Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Yes. We just had a job that shot everything on the Phantom HD. They did have a bit of high speed, but the DP told me that he would have shot with the Phantom HD even if it was all 24p. We have a feature that is soon to start that will shoot entirely on the Phantom HD and I am told that there is no high speed currently planned, but they will be shooting sections in anamorphic and others spherical. The Phantom HD with CineMags is a very versatile camera system and it is not just for high speed anymore. It is small enough to fit on any motion control system, perch atop a Steadicam, run & gun handheld or use on pretty much any other rig you can think of. What does it typically rent for per day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattuhry Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I'm posting here with some reservations, but what the hell. - Red's marketing is very consumer spirited for a professional product and at times I find it very off putting. Likewise reduser.net contains a great deal of hype and BS, but valuable information can be found there too. In no case should anyone be banned for posting negative statements. I've had my red for about a month now, I really enjoy shooting with it. In most cases I would consider the camera and post system superior to Super 16mm, F900, Viper, f950 - both in terms of look and usability for the kinds of jobs that I do. Preferable to 35mm? that depends on the job... If it's a very well budgeted commercial where I can have the best of camera and post I think 35mm is probably better... Part of my reservations is the education that I still need to do for some of my clients, perhaps as they get more used to it and the post path gets smoother we'll see less and less 35mm for commercials and music videos. It seems clients who are looking to save money are more willing to learn how to handle a .r3d file, than the well budgeted ones that are trying to decide which sushi place to order from! The camera is working a lot and it looks like my partners and I will pay back our investment fairly rapidly, all in all I'm very glad to have purchased the camera - I also must say I'm surprised by the backlash people seem to have against it. Matt Uhry www.mattuhry.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Brennan Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 walter G wrote " a secret! Want to hurt Red? Don't post. In marketing we say any PR is good PR. " Normally I would agree with this sentiment Walter but I am finding in Europe that producers are telling me of the current pitfalls of using RED (normally it is me telling them about the traps of new kit!) It is interesting to compare this level of producer consciousness and technical awareness to the introduction of HD. In 2001 the anti HD feeling, from those with a vested interest in film, was far more severe than RED is facing from pro HD and digital guys. Although the anti film lobby has lost some of its steam in the intervening years, in its hey day Kodak and Arri and others had sizeable budgets and used the best and worst corporate tactics and behaviour to keep one and all away from shooting digital. Also there were few HD owner operators and rental companies were not willing to spill the beans about problems with HD (namely the f900) Also in the early years no coherent balanced forum or site existed. In comparison RED owners have it easy!. REDuser is a useful source of red hot spilled beans direct from owner operators. That it is run by RED is neither here nor there, I'm yet to hear of a substantiated claim of pressure being born on RED owner operators not to report a fault to the group. However I seem to recall that one early adopter decided not to report a couple of faults the group as he was using beta software or hardware. It appears to me that Euro producers are coming to sound decisions about use of RED. On balance I'd say they are being conservative, not so much from shying away due to camera faults or performance as the workflow issues, an aspect of production which has bitten many a producer in the past 5 years. There appears to be least 500? RED owner operators, some with limited funds and high expectations that RED will bring art/love/money/success. As the honeymoon comes to an end and cameras hit the streets, they could easily turn into REDs worse critics if life deals them a bad hand. We seem to be twice as vocal when things are going wrong! Jim said it was unexpected that RED would take off in the way it has for pros, but now that it shows promise REDuser will become an even more multifaceted community. Mike Brennan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 What does it typically rent for per day? The Phantom HD rents for $2500/day and the 512G CineMag rents for $1250/day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Haywood Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 (edited) Back to REDuser ethics: This thread seems to have disappeared. It's nowhere to be found on the REDuser site, although it was there until quite recently, and it still can be found with a google search. If you click on the link you get strange messages to the effect that you need to subscribe or log in, even if you are! (Not the link shown below, that's just a "picture" of the link! Click here if you want to try it.) I just wonder why. It was far from being the most inflammatory thread there. They chose the Dalsa over the RED for one apparently extremely tricky multi camera shot. So what? Edited March 26, 2008 by Luke Haywood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 That appears to be the start of one of my posts. I guess I've been edited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 The Phantom HD rents for $2500/day and the 512G CineMag rents for $1250/day. This is one of my peeves with HD over 35mm. Yes the film stock costs money to buy and process, but, you can rent a BL4 camera package for a whole lot less than $2500/day!! Plus the costs to go back to 35mm from your HD master are a lot more expensive than doing a neg cut. One has to wonder if you are really saving that much money in the long run??? R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 Care to factor in the cost of filmstock, developing and transfer in there? Btw, maybe 1 out of every 500 jobs shot on film ever gets printed out to film. Just to keep things in perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 Back to REDuser ethics: This thread seems to have disappeared. It's nowhere to be found on the REDuser site, although it was there until quite recently, and it still can be found with a google search. If you click on the link you get strange messages to the effect that you need to subscribe or log in, even if you are! (Not the link shown below, that's just a "picture" of the link! Click here if you want to try it.) I just wonder why. It was far from being the most inflammatory thread there. They chose the Dalsa over the RED for one apparently extremely tricky multi camera shot. So what? Well there was a nearly identical thread on the exact same topic, so perhaps it was merged? Geez, a lot conspiracy theories around here. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts