HD DSLR and aliasing

[Florin Andrei]

http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20

Which brings us back to the HDSLRs – the GH1, the 7D, and the 5D Mark II all look like they're rendering incredibly sharp, highly detailed images, but they're not. In reality, according to the resolution charts, they're rendering images that fall somewhere around a standard-definition camera, and maybe a 720p camera. Any additional “sharpness” you see in the image is fake – it's aliasing, it's smoke and mirrors, it's image contamination.

Comments?

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

speaking off

speaking off

:beatdeadhorse5:

 

[Kalani Prince]

I guess perceived reality and reality are the reality. The good news is most of the planets standards will accept an entertaining or "good" story on any of the above cams. I have the 5d2 and am happy using it till Scarlet comes out. I think the key is just being outside with your hands on any camera that shoots still or moving images. Understanding exposure and light for the use of story is so valuable.
I can't wait for Scarlet but will shoot with a shoebox if it makes an image.

 

[Rob Ruffo]

I guess perceived reality and reality are the reality. The good news is most of the planets standards will accept an entertaining or "good" story on any of the above cams. I have the 5d2 and am happy using it till Scarlet comes out. I think the key is just being outside with your hands on any camera that shoots still or moving images. Understanding exposure and light for the use of story is so valuable.
I can't wait for Scarlet but will shoot with a shoebox if it makes an image.

That's a great attitude for a hobbyist, not for a serious professional working with other people's money and putting other people's careers at risk.

 

[Sam Eilertsen]

That's a great attitude for a hobbyist, not for a serious professional working with other people's money and putting other people's careers at risk.

Serious professionals have used the 5Dmk2. It's just one of many tradeoffs. Is your audience more likely to notice aliasing and compression artifacts, or the fact that your sets are made of cardboard because you spent all your money on a RED or on film stocks? You just have to make a judgement call, and then do the best you can within the limitations of that decision.

Before the DSLR trend there were people using DVX's and prosumer HD cameras to make films that could've afforded much better, because they wanted to save their money for locations, talent, etc.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

http://prolost.com/blog/2010/9/2/ha-ha-very-funny-canon-now-get-back-to-work.html Stu gives comparisons showing what the image should look like, compared to the blurry half-detail you actually get.

Graeme

 

[Dan Kanes]

If you're forced to work with crappy video from DSLRs (all the current generation and foreseeable future) try this transcoding program;

5DtoRGB

It has chroma smoothing and some other neat tricks.

I'd rather shoot narrative works on a dslr than any handycam or Eng cam, but I'd rather use Red MX than anything else on the market today.

 

[Zhibo Lai]

Here is the link. You'll have to fill out the form and then they send you a link to download.

http://rarevision.com/5dtorgb/

I just started using it, and it makes a huge improvement over various other converters, though does take extra time to convert, but worth the trade off.

If you're forced to work with crappy video from DSLRs (all the current generation and foreseeable future) try this transcoding program;

5DtoRGB

It has chroma smoothing and some other neat tricks.

I'd rather shoot narrative works on a dslr than any handycam or Eng cam, but I'd rather use Red MX than anything else on the market today.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

http://prolost.com/blog/2010/9/2/ha-ha-very-funny-canon-now-get-back-to-work.html Stu gives comparisons showing what the image should look like, compared to the blurry half-detail you actually get.

Graeme

Did the same test here in march.

It is fun.

 

[Brad Webb]

Here is the link. You'll have to fill out the form and then they send you a link to download.

http://rarevision.com/5dtorgb/

I just started using it, and it makes a huge improvement over various other converters, though does take extra time to convert, but worth the trade off.

:thumbup1:

This is fantastic!!! Thanks for the link.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

http://prolost.com/blog/2010/9/2/ha-ha-very-funny-canon-now-get-back-to-work.html Stu gives comparisons showing what the image should look like, compared to the blurry half-detail you actually get.

Graeme

Nice comparisons. They show what lot of folks are not aware off when reading "1080p video" in DSLR specs.


Too bad for the rest of the text and pissing on Canon's 4K cam concept. Seems like 2006 Déjà Vu.

 

[Rob Ruffo]

Serious professionals have used the 5Dmk2. It's just one of many tradeoffs. Is your audience more likely to notice aliasing and compression artifacts, or the fact that your sets are made of cardboard because you spent all your money on a RED or on film stocks? You just have to make a judgement call, and then do the best you can within the limitations of that decision.

Before the DSLR trend there were people using DVX's and prosumer HD cameras to make films that could've afforded much better, because they wanted to save their money for locations, talent, etc.

If you are working on a real set, then the cost of Red rental, even purchase over a few prods, is peanuts. Film stocks are expensive, but Reds no. Now a self-financed short film or whatever, use whatever you like, and I get it, but real pro set is something else.

You should stop stop calling them work-arounds, and start calling them "severe shot limitations" - no hard-lit faces, no bricks in focus, no deep focus of any kind (looks soft, codec breaks down) A work-around is not supposed to be a list of things you can't do - it's supposed to be an actual solution.

A 5D also costs a lot of money - as you stand around like a moron trying to check if something is going to moire, your crew is collecting a salary, rentals are running for equip. and locations, your actors are getting paid and getting tired.

The real cost of a 5D is when a distributor or network turns down your project beacause it is not even real HD, and he or she does not, unlike you "want to believe"- now the 5D just cost you your entire income.

 

[Kalani Prince]

That's a great attitude for a hobbyist, not for a serious professional working with other people's money and putting other people's careers at risk.

That's true Rob : )