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 :)

The Big Mistake...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jannard

Jannard

Red Leader
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
8,248
Reaction score
7
Points
0
I have said this before but I'll say it again, shooting features or serious television in 1080P is a big mistake. Since this view will certainly get thrown around the industry, let me explain why.

1. With the certain new standard of 4K delivery for movies AND tv, anything shot on 1080P will be left in the cold for a re-release. Several major companies have 4K displays and projectors nearing release to theaters and to the public. Sony has already converted many theaters to their 4K projectors. Epson has a killer home 4K projector in waiting. Panasonic, Samsung, Christie, Barco, Sharp, Meridian, and others are ready to get their fair share.

2. 1080P is not a quality replacement for film. It has 1/4 the actual measured resolution of film (some less than that). To make the "big screen" it needs sharpening. Often times lots of it. Sharpening is not good for the skin. Real resolution beats sharpening every time... by a lot.

It is my firm belief that hindsight will show the 1st two digital standards, SD and HD, will be considered "mistakes" in the not to distant future. Film will never be considered a mistake. It is the gold standard. It will hold up to 4K releases and you will see many classics re-released in 4K.

Don't count television out of 4K. The delivery mechanism is coming.

I started RED because I did not believe that 1080P was an adequate replacement for film. I love film. When its day is done, we need to honor it with at least as good an image... hopefully better. 1080P is not it.

(Steps down from soapbox)

Jim
 
Last edited:
And we're all thankful you did Jim. On a daily basis. Thank you for sticking stubbornly to your views.

And by the way, I think you can add in passing off cameras at 1440 x 540 as 1080 as another mistake.
 
Always shoot at the highest available resolution, then downconvert it to whatever resolution is required for delivery (720p, 1080p and so on).
 
BTW... we had such a good day at the Spider-man shoot. John Schwartzman is so good at his craft. The EPICs are beating expectations. The images are absolutely incredible. Today felt like the payoff for everything we have worked for. I can't sleep it was so good. 4:45am here...

Jim
 
Tired of saying that also Jim.
Like preaching in the desert.
But a mistake got some virtues like... not making it again.
"When the ears are shut don't mean that the eyes must be too".
 
1080p digital acquisition has an inadequate lower res pixel grid. With a goal of adding a detail which isn't there applied sharpening enhances unnatural contrast on a pixel level. Subtle transitions which natural image requires are turned into harsh edges, which makes 1080p digital image look unappealing on a big screen...because it's fake. UHD allows subtle transitions all the way to the details. 1080p does not.

Contrary to how other camera reps and "scientists" define and measure human vision, eye doesn't look for pixels on a screen, and differentiates "clarity" from "grid".

UHD does capture more detail and can show unwanted imperfections, more than 35 mm film, but those consequences can be manipulated by a skilled colorist. Worry about UHD showing too much can be avoided by better choice of who plays with the images in post.
 
John Schwartzman used the RED ONE MX for pick-up shots in The Green Hornet which was primarily shot on film. His comment was "that no one can tell the difference between the RED shots and film". Peter Jackson said the same thing about The Lovely Bones. Both said they either needed to dumb down or add grain to the RED footage to match because it was cleaner than film.

For me, this says it all. The RED ONEs were a perfect match for film. EPIC is an entirely different story altogether... what we are hearing is VistaVision.

Jim
 
Jannard said:
I have said this before but I'll say it again, shooting features or serious television in 1080P is a big mistake. Since this view will certainly get thrown around the industry, let me explain why.

1. With the certain new standard of 4K delivery for movies AND tv, anything shot on 1080P will be left in the cold for a re-release. Several major companies have 4K displays and projectors nearing release to theaters and to the public. Sony has already converted many theaters to their 4K projectors. Epson has a killer home 4K projector in waiting. Panasonic, Samsung, Christie, Barco, Sharp, Meridian, and others are ready to get their fair share.

2. 1080P is not a quality replacement for film. It has 1/4 the actual measured resolution of film (some less than that). To make the "big screen" it needs sharpening. Often times lots of it. Sharpening is not good for the skin. Real resolution beats sharpening every time... by a lot.

It is my firm belief that hindsight will show the 1st two digital standards, SD and HD, will be considered "mistakes" in the not to distant future. Film will never be considered a mistake. It is the gold standard. It will hold up to 4K releases and you will see many classics re-released in 4K.

Don't count television out of 4K. The delivery mechanism is coming.

I started RED because I did not believe that 1080P was an adequate replacement for film. I love film. When its day is done, we need to honor it with at least as good an image... hopefully better. 1080P is not it.

(Steps down from soapbox)

Jim
Click to expand...

Then why does your firm release a 3K camera...
 
I've said it a few times.... the day 4K takes off in the home is the day sports get shown in 4K. Sports networks hold the key to consumer purchasing power, when it comes to upgrading their TVs... not tv, not films.

Until there is a 4K live broadcast camera and the sports networks feel there is enough "groundswell" to sell this format... it is not going to happen, in the mainstream. Moving the sports industry to 4K would cost billions, that's without even thinking about the consumers buying expensive TVs. We are in recession, you know?

As a potential Scarlet 3k buyer, these posts worry me.... but I personally think 2K/1080p is here for a long, long time and is not just "good enough" but is a great format.

Sorry if this sounds blunt.
 
On the contrary, in a good way, shooting 3K/60p with RED cameras and use the footage for 1080/60i project is so amazing. Ending up as the video format(1080/60i) with smooth motion and the resolution that broadcast video cameras can never achieved.
 
Jannard said:
I have said this before but I'll say it again, shooting features or serious television in 1080P is a big mistake. Since this view will certainly get thrown around the industry, let me explain why.

1. With the certain new standard of 4K delivery for movies AND tv, anything shot on 1080P will be left in the cold for a re-release. Several major companies have 4K displays and projectors nearing release to theaters and to the public. Sony has already converted many theaters to their 4K projectors. Epson has a killer home 4K projector in waiting. Panasonic, Samsung, Christie, Barco, Sharp, Meridian, and others are ready to get their fair share.

2. 1080P is not a quality replacement for film. It has 1/4 the actual measured resolution of film (some less than that). To make the "big screen" it needs sharpening. Often times lots of it. Sharpening is not good for the skin. Real resolution beats sharpening every time... by a lot.

It is my firm belief that hindsight will show the 1st two digital standards, SD and HD, will be considered "mistakes" in the not to distant future. Film will never be considered a mistake. It is the gold standard. It will hold up to 4K releases and you will see many classics re-released in 4K.

Don't count television out of 4K. The delivery mechanism is coming.

I started RED because I did not believe that 1080P was an adequate replacement for film. I love film. When its day is done, we need to honor it with at least as good an image... hopefully better. 1080P is not it.

(Steps down from soapbox)

Jim
Click to expand...


Jim, where does this "4K standard" leave Red Scarlet 2/3" fixed which I understand is 3K. Is upconverting the image to 4K to future-proof the content technically feasible? I'm probably showing my blatant ignorance of the technicalities in this question, but I honesty don't know. THANKS!

John
 
Gareth Gerrard said:
Jim, you think the future is 4K? Don't you mean 5K or maybe in three years 28K :-P
Click to expand...

4K delivery is a package size. The more resolution you begin with the more you fill up that package. Down-scaling is much better than up-rezzing.

But you knew that when you posted... :-)

Jim
 
Jim Retar said:
Until there is a 4K live broadcast camera and the sports networks feel there is enough "groundswell" to sell this format... it is not going to happen, in the mainstream. Moving the sports industry to 4K would cost billions, that's without even thinking about the consumers buying expensive TVs. We are in recession, you know?
Click to expand...

I disagree with you completely... 4K sports will absolutely happen and won't cost billions. It actually won't cost any more.

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top