Roger Deakins, ASC vs. 4K

[shashbugu]

I have not posted in a while because I have relegated to shooting on the Alexa. What starts out to be a bulky and heavy camera (reminiscent of R1) suddenly grows on you in the manner the R1 did. Unlike what my big brother Toia says, my Alexa fits in a bag with 2 zooms and 3 primes, evf, monitor, batteries etc. Or you can simply buy a pelican. Traveling with a 17 in Mac book pro. You basically need two cases for matte box, FF, and plates. Set up time for kit is just as long as the Epic.
I love the Epic and will revert to it once the progress module and dragon sensor are updated. In the mean time I have joined the dark side

[António Fagundes]

I'm afraid I've gone over the wall and purchased an Arri Alexa this week. I'm joining Mr. Deakins in his corner and see what the view is like from there for a while.

I will keep my two Epics and my Red and look forward to the Dragon sensor, but after much thinking on the subject have decided to explore the aspects of the other system that I have been desiring for a while. I simply like the images that it produces - I find I miss the often-derided film-look, I like it's film-like "distance" that cannot be replicated on Red - or at least, I've never seen it. Don't get me wrong, Red is terrific - but the look is always definitively "Red". Some prefer it to film, some don't. I personally prefer the film look.

Much hay has been raised over the film look here - that it is non-existent, that it is old-fashioned, that it is fluid and subject to a million different interpretations etc - all of these might be true for some of you, but for me, I find the images that over-sharp electronic cameras produce to be quite ugly. Someone recently showed me frames of footage from a certain camera and lens combo as being how good they were and all I could think is how horribly ugly the image is, how boringly devoid of the most important thing : soul.

This is my big bugbear with electronic systems and zesty supersharp glass. And people will tell you that you can do this stuff in post - well, I disagree - you can add lens flare, and veiling glare, and narcissus, and warmth, and diffusion, and halation, and CA, and everything in post - except for two things: that it always looks ugly and post-added and more importantly: It doesn't add soul to the image.

No question that as an engineering pissing-contest the images are sharp and bright etc but what struck me is how devoid of any life they were. It seems to me that people have fallen in love with resolution, and charts, and testing, and spreading the gospel of whatever camera they KNOW is the best FOR EVERYONE but have lost any kind of touch with the process's main raison-d'etre: To create images that feel.

This is not directed at anyone in particular but more of a feeling I am getting recently - All this : "I can't wait for 12K TVs" and "Everything must be shot this way or people are idiots because I've brought into a brand and not a philosophy" strikes me as juvenile fanaticism - And this fanaticism is only remotely connected with the job of cinematography in my opinion.

I look forward to seeing the Dragon and hope that some of the image feel that film had - that cinematic distance - is considered, not just resolution.

I'm still a supporter of Red - I will continue to purchase their great cameras. They are a great company who will thrive, no question - and they should be proud that they managed to get the electronic cinema industry kickstarted by pulling a mini-industrial-revolution with their groundbreaking cameras and delivery systems - but they are a company after all. Like Apple. Like Avid. Like Microsoft. Like Arri.

I feel it is unwise to latch your philosophical beliefs to a company if it is you job to be an unbiased working cameraman. But that's just my opinion.

At last, some sensible rationale! Beautiful thoughts, James. Thanks for posting them.

[Kemalettin Sert]

[Ryan Koo]

Roger was kind enough to stop by my website and leave some comments on our article about him (which contains the same videos above). He left a few comments, but here are a couple tidbits of interest given the title of this post is Roger Deakins vs. 4K:

"Many films are still finished at 2K and most effects work is still done at 2K. I am sure this will soon change and surely must change.... I use the DI process primarily to control contrast and saturation and almost every film I have finished digitally has been scanned and recorded out at 4K."

http://nofilmschool.com/2012/09/roge...comment-239920

[Blair S. Paulsen]

WADR to James I have to wonder what the equation would look like that takes issues like frame rate, shutter type, color rendition, grain, resolution, etc into account in creating the "feel" that one recognizes as the "filmic" look.

For example, shooting WFO (T1.3) on Master Primes on Epic. Does the sharp, clinical lens character take it to the ugly side of digital or does the large portion of the frame that is out of focus on many compositions take it over toward the sweet creamy side of digital?

FWIW I look for synergies in choosing cameras, lenses, filtration, lighting, composition, etc AND post processing techniques in achieving creative intent. While any one particular choice might lead the image in a particular direction, IMO its the interplay that results in the "feel" of the finished product. I also think that we tend to attach certain perceptions to aspects of presentation and association with previous viewing experiences that may lead to spurious conclusions.

In any case, I hope James will stay engaged with the RedUser community as he goes out and shoots with his new Alexa as well as his Epics. Understanding the proclivities of each system on a more granular level is very valuable information - especially if you have a gig that is going to be shot on the Alexa whether you like it or not and you need to get images out of it that meet project objectives.

Cheers - #19

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Roger Deakins wants an optical viewfinder. RED will not do one. I am not sure why it is not possible to do that, ofcourse that would mean sacrificing a few EVF sales. It can come as an option for people.

However, if you see the entire three part interview, then you realise he is not talking about high resolution of 4k or 5K. It is the fanboys who are trying to use that to hit at Roger Deakins. Towards the end of the interview, he was asked about RAW. I felt it was a subtle hint as Arri has that RAW ability. He clearly said no, the present is fine. He likes the image as is. He would get the lighting as per his requirements and then shoot. He would not need the extensive manipulation that is possible with the RAW. He is a master who knows what is to be done. Laughing at him or mocking him is like mocking ourselves.

Every camera has its strengths. Epic has its strengths too. Use it to your advantage and if the scene demands a different equipment use that too.

If I remember correctly, Roger asked for an optical viewfinder for the RED but did not get the answer he wanted.

Can this be part of a slight personal bias against RED?

[Holger Rytter]

Roger Deakins wants an optical viewfinder. RED will not do one. I am not sure why it is not possible to do that, ofcourse that would mean sacrificing a few EVF sales. It can come as an option for people.

However, if you see the entire three part interview, then you realise he is not talking about high resolution of 4k or 5K. It is the fanboys who are trying to use that to hit at Roger Deakins. Towards the end of the interview, he was asked about RAW. I felt it was a subtle hint as Arri has that RAW ability. He clearly said no, the present is fine. He likes the image as is. He would get the lighting as per his requirements and then shoot. He would not need the extensive manipulation that is possible with the RAW. He is a master who knows what is to be done. Laughing at him or mocking him is like mocking ourselves.

Every camera has its strengths. Epic has its strengths too. Use it to your advantage and if the scene demands a different equipment use that too.

It does not just mean sacrificing a few EVF sales, it means a different construction of shutter/mirror, so it's not just a small option.

[James T Mather]

WADR to James I have to wonder what the equation would look like that takes issues like frame rate, shutter type, color rendition, grain, resolution, etc into account in creating the "feel" that one recognizes as the "filmic" look.

For example, shooting WFO (T1.3) on Master Primes on Epic. Does the sharp, clinical lens character take it to the ugly side of digital or does the large portion of the frame that is out of focus on many compositions take it over toward the sweet creamy side of digital?

FWIW I look for synergies in choosing cameras, lenses, filtration, lighting, composition, etc AND post processing techniques in achieving creative intent. While any one particular choice might lead the image in a particular direction, IMO its the interplay that results in the "feel" of the finished product. I also think that we tend to attach certain perceptions to aspects of presentation and association with previous viewing experiences that may lead to spurious conclusions.

In any case, I hope James will stay engaged with the RedUser community as he goes out and shoots with his new Alexa as well as his Epics. Understanding the proclivities of each system on a more granular level is very valuable information - especially if you have a gig that is going to be shot on the Alexa whether you like it or not and you need to get images out of it that meet project objectives.

Cheers - #19

As long as you and other good people keep bringing good insights here Blair - and Red keep pushing their boundaries and imagemaking tech - As Morgan Freeman said: I'll be around.

Red is taking a little bit of a bashing lately - some unwarranted, some maybe not - but I love their cameras and despite my minor reservations with all electronic systems - this is the future. I hope that they take all this feedback - both good and bad - and use it to push themselves intelligently. You can't please everyone all the time. It is wise to consider that. No-one really likes criticism - I know I'm not hugely fond of it - but, when received, it has always made me better in the long run despite the sting at the time. I hope that Red evaluate the criticism intelligently and use it's sting to provoke improvement where possible - which they have done since day one. I have every faith they will.

On the plus and minus scales -the Alexa is a heavy beast - and I have my reservations about aspects of it. As I do about all cameras. It's not a case that one is simply better than another - and I certainly haven't opted out of the Red game. In fact, being bipartizan in this regard hopefully might make me have a more balanced viewpoint on things - as my economic survival doesn't depend on allying myself to one nor the other. They're both great systems. Both offer things that the other doesn't - and when looking at one you often wish it had aspects of the other - such is life.

[Josh Snyder]

I'm afraid I've gone over the wall and purchased an Arri Alexa this week. I'm joining Mr. Deakins in his corner and see what the view is like from there for a while.

I will keep my two Epics and my Red and look forward to the Dragon sensor, but after much thinking on the subject have decided to explore the aspects of the other system that I have been desiring for a while. I simply like the images that it produces - I find I miss the often-derided film-look, I like it's film-like "distance" that cannot be replicated on Red - or at least, I've never seen it. Don't get me wrong, Red is terrific - but the look is always definitively "Red". Some prefer it to film, some don't. I personally prefer the film look.

Much hay has been raised over the film look here - that it is non-existent, that it is old-fashioned, that it is fluid and subject to a million different interpretations etc - all of these might be true for some of you, but for me, I find the images that over-sharp electronic cameras produce to be quite ugly. Someone recently showed me frames of footage from a certain camera and lens combo as being how good they were and all I could think is how horribly ugly the image is, how boringly devoid of the most important thing : soul.

This is my big bugbear with electronic systems and zesty supersharp glass. And people will tell you that you can do this stuff in post - well, I disagree - you can add lens flare, and veiling glare, and narcissus, and warmth, and diffusion, and halation, and CA, and everything in post - except for two things: that it always looks ugly and post-added and more importantly: It doesn't add soul to the image.

No question that as an engineering pissing-contest the images are sharp and bright etc but what struck me is how devoid of any life they were. It seems to me that people have fallen in love with resolution, and charts, and testing, and spreading the gospel of whatever camera they KNOW is the best FOR EVERYONE but have lost any kind of touch with the process's main raison-d'etre: To create images that feel.

This is not directed at anyone in particular but more of a feeling I am getting recently - All this : "I can't wait for 12K TVs" and "Everything must be shot this way or people are idiots because I've brought into a brand and not a philosophy" strikes me as juvenile fanaticism - And this fanaticism is only remotely connected with the job of cinematography in my opinion.

I look forward to seeing the Dragon and hope that some of the image feel that film had - that cinematic distance - is considered, not just resolution.

I'm still a supporter of Red - I will continue to purchase their great cameras. They are a great company who will thrive, no question - and they should be proud that they managed to get the electronic cinema industry kickstarted by pulling a mini-industrial-revolution with their groundbreaking cameras and delivery systems - but they are a company after all. Like Apple. Like Avid. Like Microsoft. Like Arri.

I feel it is unwise to latch your philosophical beliefs to a company if it is you job to be an unbiased working cameraman. But that's just my opinion.

You seen Hobbit yet?

Great post btw.