Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

More HDRx...

Jannard said:
We have been thinking about everything! :-)

I have been on the phone with Graeme about all the possibilities. Both of us, plus Jarred and Deanan, know exactly how big a breakthrough this is. Graeme is working 24/7 to give us the best post tools possible. The Foundry is also involved. Big stuff.

...I have posted a lot and people can decide whether or not to believe me, but there was NO light in that barn. I am so blown away that I can hardly stand it. I'm so excited that I can't sleep. You will see for yourself soon.

Jim
Click to expand...

:emote_happyhappy::emote_happyhappy:

Holy frack is this impressive!!! When I first saw some of the higher res HDR images coming out of latest gen still digital cameras, I instantly imaged video cameras set up in a 3D-type rig (multiple cameras) with genlock. And then, one could color correct and blend them into HDR in post.

What you've done is beyond belief, and you've just made every budget-calculation software program in the industry obsolete.

You've also lifted my chronic depression about living in the 21st Century without a lot to show for it. You've made me feel like I really could afford to make a great movie some day. THANK YOU!

ps Quick marketing suggestion: "Better than terminator vision!" James Cameron is going to kiss you on the lips when he sees this, I'm sure you can work something out.
 
Michael Stanmore said:
OK, I voted against this feature showing up on my Scarlet... I just changed my vote. That shot should be impossible.
Click to expand...

All the "waiting for Scarlet" crowd should rejoice! Jim may be charging $1K more for the camera, but he just saved everyone [who doesn't already own them] from buying $1500 worth of ND and grad filters.
 
....and lights and nets and bounce and post and time and and and.

Scarlett doesn't cost more, it cost less in real terms because of "added value".

Doc and indy guys should be having a "crisis".

I know I am.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
All the "waiting for Scarlet" crowd should rejoice! Jim may be charging $1K more for the camera, but he just saved everyone [who doesn't already own them] from buying $1500 worth of ND and grad filters.
Click to expand...

Oh I couldn't possibly agree more...
 
Jeffrey T. Morgan said:
Michael Stanmore,

I am going to guess you used the spacebar preview on your MBP? For me, almost identical computer, I open the file in QT 7.6.6. I don't really use QT 10 because its missing certain controls and things. But when I look at the clip I don't see anything at all funky in the wood slots. Not in AE or FCP either, all looks good. VLC is jittery in the slots...

the ONLY funky thing I saw was in the red surface of the Gas Pump by the back left window. And that was after I color corrected the image, I think it just fell between my threshholds on my quick color pass. My fault.


Jeff
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply... I used VLC... so you got me there... I also used QT 7.6.6 though... so you're not seeing anything at all in the top right hand corner between those slats, during the pan? A sort of flickering effect?
 
RivaiC said:
Every DOP that i spoke with says the limitation of digital camera lays in its dynamic range and that's why film wins ! And this is it, EPIC ! ...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm not knocking the guys who love film, but this (almost as a side-effect) is the nail in their coffin. A nail shot out of a 1000psi air gun.

I actually really like the analog look of film. I've just always wanted it at higher res than 24 frames a second. But higher frame rates for film require even MORE light, so I never got it.

So bye-bye to that limitation. Sin sorrow.

GOD I'm glad I read this in the morning. I MAY be able to get over it in time to sleep tonight. If I'd read this last night, forget it.
 
Michael Stanmore said:
...so you're not seeing anything at all in the top right hand corner between those slats, during the pan? A sort of flickering effect?
Click to expand...

Yeesh, talk about impatient. Even if there were HUGE motion artifacts in this brand new footage, I have total faith in the software skills out there. To fix any small issues that, let's face it, 97% of the population wouldn't notice in IMAX. Tech analysis is fine, so long as we can all agree that this isn't the day to nitpick a millennial breakthrough in filmmaking technology.
 
Detlev Eller said:
lol

yeah!

P.S: SANTO CIELO!
Click to expand...

Hehe,

that is because I have been testing with HDR with several systems, form Canon to MF bodies in still capture, and even with 5 to 7 exposures some times is hard to get that much detail in dark shadows, never mind in Motion!!

So I really got blown way by seen what they have captured, especially nothing that the images are yet to be taken to Post!!

I can only imagine what can be pulled out of the Sky and some of the outside areas, just literally mind blowing!!
 
I cannot wait to use HDRx in our casino shots. It is going to give us so much flexibility to capture people as well as all the lights and LCD screens on the machines. As well as hotel rooms - being able to see our golf course outside the windows, etc...
 
Hey Jim, What did you get...4 hours of sleep? These Red guys never rest. Sleep is one of many things a person gives up when they set out to do the impossible. Thanks to the entire sleep deprived Red team :)
 
Oh boy, this is so freaking cool!
 
Steven-Marc C. said:
Got it. ... There's always room for more, but until that 18 stop sensor becomes a reality, I'll gladly use HDRx™™ knowing it may (or may not) have a few limitations.
Click to expand...

Everyone is crapping their pants at this footage, celebrating the upcoming capabilities of this remarkable and inexpensive camera, and jumping in on real or potential limitations.

It seems there's an elephant in the room (barn?) that needs proper respect: This tech will get better, the hardware will get better, the software will get more refined. Jim just killed dynamic range as a limitation in filmaking.

Stepping back, this is SO friggin huge I still can't think straight.
 
Why was the other version from Sunday deleted (WalkXwebX.mov) ? I think it looked even more impressive than this one ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top