Focusing, or Image Sharpness, using Canon stills and LCD screen.

[Les Dittert]

If you process the footage with a red rocket card, it will look slightly sharper.
For me, when I first saw the Scarlet frames in RXC, it looked as if I had applied a 0.5 Gaussian blur in Photoshop to the image. Even the sensor noise was soft. A lens does not soften noise !
Indeed, taking a red rocket image and applying a 0.5 photoshop blur to it makes it look like the RCX image !
Many of us are very accustomed to RAW DSLR processing and are not worried if we see some gritty noise in the image. Gritty 'sharp' pixel noise is a natural thing, and can be removed remarkably well with denoiser tools like 'neat video'. Blurring the noise makes it harder for the filters to discriminate between true electronic noise and picture details.

I am still hoping that they will offer some more options on RCX debayer styles soon.

[Scott Crawley]

The Canon 24-70mm lens is an ok lens for DSLR work but a terrible lens for Scarlet. It works ok in the 50 to 70 mm range but anything wider will be very very soft, get a cheaper f1.8 28mm Canon lens if budget is an issue.

If the lens were not up to the task, to you think they would have chosen to use it here: http://reduser.net/forum/showthread....16-Fighter-Jet that looks like a 24-70.

[Patrik Kisucky]

I have to say, I shot with Canon 24-70 today, used the image magnifier, and the images are looking great. Now I need to figure out, the best post workflow to process the footage, so that I can use it in combination with the EX1 footage, in the fcp7. I'm shooting a documentary with both cameras, and don't want to switch to the Premiere Pro in the middle of the project, because I'm not familiar with it. Any good threads on the fcp workflow, and getting the best images using RCX to FCP? Thank you, for helping me, to be able to use the Scarlet better, and getting the most out of the camera.

[Les C.]

I have to say, I shot with Canon 24-70 today, used the image magnifier, and the images are looking great. Now I need to figure out, the best post workflow to process the footage, so that I can use it in combination with the EX1 footage, in the fcp7. I'm shooting a documentary with both cameras, and don't want to switch to the Premiere Pro in the middle of the project, because I'm not familiar with it. Any good threads on the fcp workflow, and getting the best images using RCX to FCP? Thank you, for helping me, to be able to use the Scarlet better, and getting the most out of the camera.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/forumdi...Apple-Workflow

[Joel Mielle]

If the lens were not up to the task, to you think they would have chosen to use it here: http://reduser.net/forum/showthread....16-Fighter-Jet that looks like a 24-70.

I assume it's a little awkward to change prime lenses at a high and fast altitude, I was hoping to demonstrate actual shots but unfortunately my Scarlet had to be returned for some issues. Just to clarify, I'm not stating that the 24-70mm is a such a bad lens, I use one myself but for pure crisp images undistorted images, and the full quality Scarlet can offer, there's better options out there, more so for wide angles, CU's are quite ok. Stay tuned. :)

[Al Lougher]

I just ran into the exact same problem with the 24L. After shooting some test footage today on my 1 day old Scarlet I was most disappointed to find all my footage was soft. I even had focus assist turned on and I could tell on the LCD I was nailing focus yet all my footage was soft, even with unsharpen mask applied it was not enough to bring back the details. I've no idea why but on my 5D2 it's pretty sharp (and that's with sharpening in camera turned OFF) yet on the Scarlet as soft as butter. Threw on my 50mm 1.4 and nice and sharp, well not as sharp as I liked but sharper than the 24L. I tried all focal lengths on the 24L and same softness as a result. Most disappointing as I liked this lens on my 5D2 but now will have to trade it for something better on the Scarlet.

[Marie Turock]

Although there are myriad discussions about the somewhat confusing reality of Red footage sharpness, there have yet to be any objective and definitive responses from Red that I can find. Obviously these cameras are excellent, but it would still be nice to know why an image is soft at 100%. More important than why, even, is IF everyone achieves the same relatively soft results.

Thus far, the sharpest results I have obtained is with my Canon EF 50mm 1.4. That said, it does not approach the sharpness of images from my comparatively lame T2i DSLR (still photos). There is obviously an explanation for it, but on the most basic level it just doesn't sit well with most people who expect razor sharp focus.

By the way, I have worked with Red footage for a number of years in post, and everything I have seen to date is slightly soft at 100%. As for glass, the footage was shot with Red primes. It is never fun to have the client ask why the footage is out of focus, but they always do!

The reason I went with Scarlet is because everything I do is delivered as 1080p, so the footage looks PERFECT when debayered and scaled down, but I knew that from the beginning. This is a concern that people have now because they didn't know about this unique phenomenon when purchasing their cam, so I hope that the question will be answered in the coming months by a Red tech.

[Scott Crawley]

Although there are myriad discussions about the somewhat confusing reality of Red footage sharpness, there have yet to be any objective and definitive responses from Red that I can find. Obviously these cameras are excellent, but it would still be nice to know why an image is soft at 100%. More important than why, even, is IF everyone achieves the same relatively soft results.

I don't remember the context of the thread, but I'm fairly certain Graeme has addressed this directly. As I recall the point was this: While no camera system is perfect for all types of jobs, The goal at Red is to make a system that is the best tool for the most types of jobs. Not everyone wants a razor sharp edge, so they leave sharpening to post where it can be dialed in to taste. It is consistent with the philosophy at the heart of RAW so it rings true enough. Oversampling has also been part of the approach from the beginning.

I understand why some clients would be confused initially, but expect that a quick demonstration of sharpening technique should quiet them pretty quickly. That doesn't seem to be your experience and I am curious why that is.

[Al Lougher]

I think this is the problem I'm seeing and it might not be my lens at fault after all. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...t-Field-Report

Like I said still new to this so learning all these little nuances.

[Scott Crawley]

I think this is the problem I'm seeing and it might not be my lens at fault after all. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...t-Field-Report

Like I said still new to this so learning all these little nuances.

Monitors and display... That is what I was thinking about as well.

That's just it. Let's not burn in anything to the image that we can avoid burning in.

Graeme

Graeme isn't talking about sharpening specifically here, but this sums it up.