EPIC - ARRI, SIDE BY SIDE FACTS.

[shashbugu]

If Red calls back all Red-MX cameras and charges $5000 for a 2K 12 bit Prores Module upgrade another 10,000 Red-MX cameras will be sold. Demand and Supply.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Those of you that think 1080P and 2K are future proof... God love you. You are dead wrong.

Jim

Do you think they'll ever rescan Jurassic Park and re-render the VFX in 4k with improved assets? God bless you, you are dead wrong.

 

[paulherrin]

the issue is mainstream distribution... people are just now really picking up HD (because there's no longer a choice) and they/we aren't really getting any HD material, except through blurays... and all these theatres are still transitioning to 4k...

don't get me wrong, the wise man sees it coming. sadly, i only know a handful of wise men.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Mark, don't want to bother you or anybody else here but must say now that you are late more or less a year and half on this comparison between Alexa and Epic.

Search the forum...

Btw, I do have always early information what is the next big thing but there is no need to talk about it here...

 

[Jannard]

I'm watching HBO's "Game of Thrones" (great show) on a 10' screen... all I can think of is that it is soft. What happens to this show when a 4K release happens?

Sorry... I have no clue what I am talking about. Disregard my posts.

Jim

 

[Mark Toia]

Sorry Mark to be touchy about American Cinematographer, but I get tired of the bashing it gets online, it predates digital... when I was in college and couldn't get into a film program as an undergraduate, the magazine was my film school. I read every issue going back to the mid 1920's and I reread every issue starting from 1970 several times over by the time I graduated. I am eternally grateful for that, so feel the need to defend it as I would an old friend. Plus I'm involved in publication at the ASC, I know the staff of the magazine, and they are all fine people and there is no policy of letting companies that buy advertisements to dictate how articles are written.

I buy it every month religiously. all good mate.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I'm watching HBO's "King of Thrones" (great show) on a 10' screen... all I can think of is that it is soft. What happens to this show when a 4K release happens?

Sorry... I have no clue what I am talking about. Disregard my posts.

Jim

Haha, that makes two of us! But I also am seeing that a lot of the matte paintings barely stand up to 720p let alone 4k. Which is a shame, because it would be beautiful in a theater if they had invested in the future. But I doubt there'll be time/money to quadruple the resolution of their matte paintings.

Sometimes softness is a blessing to post production budgets. 1080p is already 'abusing' a lot of episodic TV budgets. You could get away with murder in 480p. Now everything has to be at "Almost" film quality VFX. Asking Producers to invest in 4k VFX for a future DVD release probably is going to push them past their sanity point.

 

[shashbugu]

Actually Jim is DEAD RIGHT... The producers who have been in the business for a long time understand the value of 4K catalog. The film business is simple, shoot 4k now, release 480p, 1080p now, 2k a few years from now and 4K later. Thats real value.

 

[paulherrin]

Haha, that makes two of us! But I also am seeing that a lot of the matte paintings barely stand up to 720p let alone 4k. Which is a shame, because it would be beautiful in a theater if they had invested in the future. But I doubt there'll be time/money to quadruple the resolution of their matte paintings.

Sometimes softness is a blessing to post production budgets. 1080p is already 'abusing' a lot of episodic TV budgets. You could get away with murder in 480p. Now everything has to be at "Almost" film quality VFX. Asking Producers to invest in 4k VFX for a future DVD release probably is going to push them past their sanity point.

sadly, you're right gavin. i've been trying to convince my colleagues for quite some time just to even start thinking about moving towards and preparing for 4k workflows... and i pretty much just get a "why?" reaction. then i get tired of explaining simple things... you really don't need a crystal ball to see things moving that way.

it's kind of like saving money. everyone acknowledges that it's a good practice and says "oh, yeah i need to do that (at some point i'll start...)" and then they wind up unprepared... big surprise.

there's going to be some fairly sized post hauses that might just find themselves unprepared and feeling foolish.

 

[shashbugu]

I'm watching HBO's "Game of Thrones" (great show) on a 10' screen... all I can think of is that it is soft. What happens to this show when a 4K release happens?

Sorry... I have no clue what I am talking about. Disregard my posts.

Jim

LOL, Jim I see you are Thrones fan. Great show.

 

[paulherrin]

haha... you said it

good move.

 

[AnthonyFlores]

I'm watching HBO's "King of Thrones" (great show) on a 10' screen... all I can think of is that it is soft. What happens to this show when a 4K release happens?

Sorry... I have no clue what I am talking about. Disregard my posts.

Jim

My thoughts exactly Jim. I love the show, and it's beautifully shot (I'm willing to give props to the DP and the Alexa, as it looks great) - but I can't help but think about how it's going to look LATER. And with as good as it is, people WILL want to watch years from now ....

I never quite fully grasped your point about 1080 not being enough, until I began temporarily living in a foreign country where many of the TV channels often appear to be even below standard definition - while few others are in full HD. Let me just say, the difference is so stunning that most of the SD programming is almost unwatchable. Yet back then before HD I would have never thought this because I didn't know any better ...

In other words, it's hard for us to see beyond HD as consumers - because we're not quite at that next level yet (I mean Apple doesn't even do 1080 yet!)

Yet many more consumers are coming to the point where it's hard for them to watch anything but HD. Standard definition looks terribly wrong to many of us (when I say "us" I mean consumers, not shooters) ...

Likewise, and sorry to state the obvious, 4k will eventually be the new HD and - at that time - we will feel the same about 1080p as we do now about SD.

P.S. - I do agree with Gavin about commercials. While 4k masters seems like it would never be a bad idea, it's less likely that a commercial is needed for anything other than a short period of time. But these are the minority and I would not shoot anything I thought would be viewed years later in 1080p.

 

[shashbugu]

Thank God you are not on twitter Jim LOL. :+). There are lots of vultures and vampires around.

 

[AnthonyFlores]

Jim, I would someday love to hear the full story behind Red ... why you sold Oakley and started this new company ... bringing in Jarred ... Graeme ... and all the other lore.

I get the feeling that part of you saw some gaping flaws (but also opportunity) in the marketplace -- arguably the biggest one being that HD digital (with it's limited resolution, DR, etc) would never truly rival or surpass film, and that no one else was building a high-quality yet affordable 4k camera that could properly compete.

True? Sorry if I'm stating the obvious but I'm still relatively new here and wasn't around in 2006 when the R1 was announced ...

 

[Jannard]

Pretty easy... I saw clearly that 1080P was not good enough for a film replacement. And that's where the industry seemed to be heading.

Either 1080P is not good enough for the future or I am really dumb. Take your pick.

Jim

 

[Mark Toia]

One thing I really like about EPIC.. or the RED ONE. Is I can ZOOM my images up shit loads without a single issue. I can't do that with HD Pro res.
One thing I like about EPIC or REDONE is I can grade to my hearts content in RAW on set. No burnt in colour information, complete 100% freedom to re look at every shot minutes, days years after and change my mind about its look.
One thing I like about the EPIC is I can rip a 70MEG 16bit still from my footage and hand it to my client who then sticks it on a 80foot billboard on the side of the freeway. Cant do that with a HD PRO RES image (well you can but it will be soft.

PRO's and CONS list guys. Come on. use your heads.
Arri is a really good camera. EPIC is a amazingly fantastic camera.

5k is not the future, It's here now! I use it everyday. Just because I downsize it for a bit of TV does not mean I don't need it or use it on a daily basisi.

Client leans over and say's, man I wish you shot that tighter, I say no problems dude.... Bang done. my 25mm is now a 35, 50, 75.. days later.
Creatively in post I still have a lot choice... Creative grading I have more choice,
A man is only as good as his tools.

So yes. who ever says you don't need 5k is an idiot... you can quote me on that.

The reasons why I shot RED exclusively.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

My thoughts exactly Jim. I love the show, and it's beautifully shot (with Alexa) - but I can't help but think about how it's going to look later.

Honestly, it's going to look the same later. The only question is whether tastes will change later, but it's not going to look worse later, only other (newer) things might look better in comparison. Modern 35mm film stocks are sharper and less grainy than they were thirty years ago, but guess what, I still watch movies made thirty years ago! And they look like they were made thirty years ago... and I accept that. I expect movies made in the 2010 to look like they were made in the year 2010 when I rewatch them in the year 2020, I don't expect to look like they were made in 2020.

I don't choose what to watch based on meeting the most current standards of technical quality -- speaking as someone who watched an episode of "Space: 1999" on Blu-Ray last night. Now of course one could argue that it was great that "Space: 1999" was shot on 35mm because now it can be retransferred to 1080P, and they'd be right... but I'm not sure it needs to be redone at 4K, I'm already starting to see the seams in the sets, the wires holding the models, the powder in the make-up, etc. at 1080P, and I'm not sure that the 5254 stock used back then would resolve 4K anyway.

In the future, "Game of Thrones" will just look like any number of TV shows shot on the Alexa in the year 2010, and whether you are rewatching it in 2020 will mainly depend on how much you enjoyed the show, the stories, the characters, the lighting, the production design, etc. Besides, some scenes are shot with a diffusion filter so clearly an ultra-sharp image isn't necessarily the primary look intended for the show. Look at "Excalibur" -- that was shot with a net over the back of the lens PLUS a Harrison Black Dot Texture Screen in front of the lens... it's a noticeably soft-looking movie, as it was in 1981 when it was released. That was intentional. Not everything has to be uber-sharp.

 

[Jannard]

I've always liked you... why is this stuff so difficult to understand? Boggles my mind.

Jim

So yes. who ever says you don't need 5k is an idiot... you can quote me on that.

The reasons why I shot RED exclusively.

 

[AnthonyFlores]

Pretty easy... I saw clearly that 1080P was not good enough for a film replacement. And that's where the industry seemed to be heading.

Either 1080P is not good enough for the future or I am really dumb. Take your pick.

Jim

I choose option A as you are obviously not dumb ... yet, I would still love to hear the full story of Red's inception someday. I'll even help write it if you want - no charge

 

[Jannard]

Features shot on film 40 years ago has 4 times the resolution of 1080P. That's a fact. When 4K home theater comes (next year)... all those old movies will be ready. Warner Bros. is already doing 4K scans of them. This is not the case with features shot on 1080P.

Jim

Honestly, it's going to look the same later. The only question is whether tastes will change later, but it's not going to look worse later, only other (newer) things might look better in comparison. Modern 35mm film stocks are sharper and less grainy than they were thirty years ago, but guess what, I still watch movies made thirty years ago! And they look like they were made thirty years ago... and I accept that. I expect movies made in the 2010 to look like they were made in the year 2010 when I rewatch them in the year 2020, I don't expect to look like they were made in 2020.

I don't choose what to watch based on meeting the most current standards of technical quality -- speaking as someone who watched an episode of "Space: 1999" on Blu-Ray last night. Now of course one could argue that it was great that "Space: 1999" was shot on 35mm because now it can be retransferred to 1080P, and they'd be right... but I'm not sure it needs to be redone at 4K, I'm already starting to see the seams in the sets, the wires holding the models, the powder in the make-up, etc. at 1080P, and I'm not sure that the 5254 stock used back then would resolve 4K anyway.

In the future, "Game of Thrones" will just look like any number of TV shows shot on the Alexa in the year 2010, and whether you are rewatching it in 2020 will mainly depend on how much you enjoyed the show, the stories, the characters, the lighting, the production design, etc. Besides, some scenes are shot with a diffusion filter so clearly an ultra-sharp image isn't necessarily the primary look intended for the show. Look at "Excalibur" -- that was shot with a net over the back of the lens PLUS a Harrison Black Dot Texture Screen in front of the lens... it's a noticeably soft-looking movie, as it was in 1981 when it was released. That was intentional. Not everything has to be uber-sharp.