Justified!

[William Donaruma]

Shot on Epic and one of the absolute best shows on TV! Shouldn't we be reveling in how good this is vs the various Alexa shows? My God, producers have to take note and get on board!

 

[Sid Idris]

The show is good because of outstanding writing and acting. I don't think the camera contributes much in that respect.

 

[William Donaruma]

Yeah, exactly my point. Stop thinking Alexa makes your show better. Great looking show and great production period.
.

 

[Mike P.]

The thing is you have to pay more to get that result out of RED (via more post and/or rendering and/or kitting up the camera to do what Alexa does stock). Alexa makes images that are as good (more often better) directly out of the camera and (usually with TV) direct to prores. Sure, you could get an offboard prores recorder for RED, but why bother dealing with the additional hassle when Arri's implementation is comparatively simple, bulletproof, and stupid-fast.

In 3-5 years when everyone is clamouring for 4k content, they'll release an upressed versions of hit 1080p-shows and people who loved the shows in 1080p will STILL love them in pseudo-4k. (Also, I'd be surprised if Justified or Pretty Little Liars or Criminal Minds kept their 4k/raw files. I bet they archive a 2k/1080p master.)

Also, in my experience a 2.88k raw still from Alexa blown up (and sharpened accordingly) to 4k, looks about as sharp/clean as Epic 5k downsampled to 4k when sitting a reasonable distance from the display... Add in broadcast and/or deliverable compression and you're only lying to yourself if you think the difference is hugely substantial.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

Sorry I don't get your point Mike P.

Never had any hassel situation with RED footage. Oh... yes, perhaps back in 2008?

Pat

 

[paul engstrom]

And for any relatively decent size show (by that I mean even for low budget Movies of the Week and certainly for larger budgeted TV series) the large Alexa ProRes files get graded/transcoded into offline edit files and transcoded again for internet dailies EXACTLY THE SAME as on an Epic show. DITs do the same work with the same pay needing special expensive equipment (Leader waveform instead of a Rocket card) for Alexa shows as they need for Epic shows.

The main issue in a few years won't be over the shows that were abundantly successful--and therefore have audiences that will tolerate the uprez therefore justifying the uprezzing cost (last quote was $1k per minute to uprez from 1080 to 4k by the way--which is more than the camera rental budget for most projects). No, the issue will be for the comparatively ordinary content (and content producers) that would LOVE to get a second economic window of opportunity from distribution that only accepts uprezzed material in exceptional circumstances. Then they'll wish they'd shot on Sony or GoPro or RED or film scanned according to the recommendations of Arri's Film Scan division.

How's everyone doing with their uprezzed Standard Def???

 

[Robert L. Mickles]

I don't agree that Alexa looks as good as RED mastered and shown in 4K. Seeing something shot on Alexa in a 4K theatre vs something shot on RED (or film or any other 4K camera) shown is 4K, the true 4K looks much better in comparison. The Alexa footage looks soft and often slightly pixelated and has no where near the amount of fine detail. The Alexa is a great camera as are many other HD
Cameras, but as Ketch Rossi put it, if you have the option to shoot hi-res and don't do it then you're not respecting your work. You're not preserving it for now or the future. The 2.8K Raw of the Alexa isn't enough. I'm
Actually quite shocked that they STILL don't have at least a 4K sensor.

 

[Andy Roberts]

The thing is you have to pay more to get that result out of RED (via more post and/or rendering and/or kitting up the camera to do what Alexa does stock). Alexa makes images that are as good (more often better) directly out of the camera and (usually with TV) direct to prores.

The thing is.... this is a Red forum and Red users are proud of how great Justified looks. The thing is, I like owning an Epic so I can pull 5K and soon 6K frames from my footage. I like the full power of Red RAW. I like being able to upgrade my sensor. I like HDRx. I like modularity of components. I like capturing in the highest resolution I can for today.

 

[M Most]

The thing is you have to pay more to get that result out of RED (via more post and/or rendering and/or kitting up the camera to do what Alexa does stock). Alexa makes images that are as good (more often better) directly out of the camera and (usually with TV) direct to prores. Sure, you could get an offboard prores recorder for RED, but why bother dealing with the additional hassle when Arri's implementation is comparatively simple, bulletproof, and stupid-fast.

While this is generally true, it isn't implemented the way a lot of people here seem to think it is. The advantage of the Alexa Prores files when compared to R3D has much less to do with dailies creation than it has to do with final conforming. For dailies, the primary difference is render speed, as the Prores files can be rendered to multiple deliverables (always required for TV series) considerably faster than R3D files, even with Rocket assistance. But in conforming, the difference is more pronounced. Since most shows these days are cut on Avid and conformed largely in Symphony, the Prores files offer the ability to do the conform step largely as a simple AMA relink operation. If you're originating on Red, you likely either make a mezzanine file (thus negating a number of the advantages of Red in the first place) and conform from that, or relink in the color corrector (usually Resolve, but it can be Baselight, Nucoda, or others), requiring you to preprocess a lot of Avid created effects separately and/or set up the post path as a round trip operation, something that is often a hard sell to producers who expect to view the completed show in the color correction room. Since pricing and the presumed time factors for conforms today are based largely on the Symphony relink method, most productions are not anxious to be told they need to make and keep a mezzanine file (at an additional cost) to do an efficient conform, hence one of the reasons for the popularity of the Prores approach (and one of the reasons for dailies operations largely moving away from facilities and towards remote carts located either near editorial or the production office, but that's a whole other conversation.....).

Also, I'd be surprised if Justified or Pretty Little Liars or Criminal Minds kept their 4k/raw files. I bet they archive a 2k/1080p master.)

Define "archive." If you are referring to the finished show master that is then used for other distribution, today that is still almost always an HDCamSR videotape. If you're referring to original footage, that is almost always archived to LTO5 tapes at dailies time. So all of that material is still available if the studio decides to reconstruct the show in a 4K version, although it is not always assured that those tapes will either mount or be recoverable. In the past some studios (notably Warner Bros.) have archived 4K DPX sequences of shows that were shot on Red as a way of having those images in an open format that didn't depend on having additional software to decompress and reconstruct them - software that may or may not be around in the future, and in the proper version for those particular files. That's what was done for the first few seasons of Southland and the last 6 episodes of ER, as well as one or two other projects.

 

[M Most]

I don't agree that Alexa looks as good as RED mastered and shown in 4K. Seeing something shot on Alexa in a 4K theatre vs something shot on RED (or film or any other 4K camera) shown is 4K, the true 4K looks much better in comparison. The Alexa footage looks soft and often slightly pixelated and has no where near the amount of fine detail.

Except that it's very unlikely that you have ever seen either one in a theater played from a 4K DCP, or even finished via a 4K DI. So what you're seeing almost all the time is a 2K image being uprezzed to 4K in the projector, regardless of the camera used to shoot it. The things you're referring to have more to do with camera characteristics than they do the method of presentation, because for the most part, what's being shown is from a similar 2K source.

 

[Joe G.]

Bogus metric. The DR on Alexa leaves Red in the dust, and you don't need a 16K supercooled projector to notice it. It's in nearly every realworld use. That's why a lot of people prefer Alexa: 14.3 stops of DR off the sensor vs. 12.something. The highlights clip too soon and the highs compare badly. To me it even feels more like film,and I have been fooled several times by Alexa movies that they were film. Never by Red.

When Red gets its Dragon tame the tables may flip the metaphor. As of now, it's a silly thread.

 

[NateWeaver]

Shot on Epic and one of the absolute best shows on TV! Shouldn't we be reveling in how good this is vs the various Alexa shows?

Why? Is Red a sports team now? What?

My God, producers have to take note and get on board!

A lot of the producers doing episodic TV on that level learned the ins and outs of Red back in 2008-2009. Most of them had a good 2 years doing things the Red way before they went Alexa.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Justifying a point of view?

Justifying a point of view?

As Mike Most and others have noted previously the Alexa, ProRes Log-C to SXS cards topology is an excellent fit for episodic television production. Moreover, Mike's note about simpler conforming workflows on Avid, still the dominant NLE/finisher for episodic TV, are important to producers under heavy time pressures. As ad revenues continue to shrink at the network level, per episode budgets of all but the very top rated shows will continue to decline, which means producers will cut every nickel in sight. Even if one could prove empirically that Epic 5K acquisition created superior MPEG-2 1080 deliverables would the differential sway producers in the current climate?

Projects with theatrical exhibition demands are a different animal. All other things being equal (budget, talent, etc) there are compelling reasons to choose Epic over Alexa for features - even though instances of actual 4K DCPs played out at 4K on 4K projectors is still minuscule. As Deakins proved with Skyfall, the Alexa can shine for theatrical projects, so the differential is hardly a chasm. That said, if I was the decision maker on camera package for a feature I'd choose the Epic - not because I'm a Red Kool-aid drinker, but because 14 megapixels of RAW is a better starting point if a really big screen presentation is on the menu.

FWIW I love Justified and have publicly encouraged Jim and Jarred to defray the costs of re-mastering the last 2 seasons at 4K and putting them up on ODEMAX to prime viewer interest in 4K.

Cheers - #19

 

[Björn Benckert]

The thing is you have to pay more to get that result out of RED (via more post and/or rendering and/or kitting up the camera to do what Alexa does stock). Alexa makes images that are as good (more often better) directly out of the camera and (usually with TV) direct to prores. Sure, you could get an offboard prores recorder for RED, but why bother dealing with the additional hassle when Arri's implementation is comparatively simple, bulletproof, and stupid-fast.

In 3-5 years when everyone is clamouring for 4k content, they'll release an upressed versions of hit 1080p-shows and people who loved the shows in 1080p will STILL love them in pseudo-4k. (Also, I'd be surprised if Justified or Pretty Little Liars or Criminal Minds kept their 4k/raw files. I bet they archive a 2k/1080p master.)

Also, in my experience a 2.88k raw still from Alexa blown up (and sharpened accordingly) to 4k, looks about as sharp/clean as Epic 5k downsampled to 4k when sitting a reasonable distance from the display... Add in broadcast and/or deliverable compression and you're only lying to yourself if you think the difference is hugely substantial.

Mike, can you post some samples of 4k alexa upress frames next to the 5k to 4k epic frames. As I have great difficulty in believing you. I see huge difference in noise levels etc even in HD between even 4k scarlet and Alexa, same lens same light same everything, the alexa still stands out as noisy and soft.

I will post side by side in a few minutes.

 

[Björn Benckert]

So maybe you can not see the difference on those two frames bellow but I can tell you this much....

1. When you key on them then you will for sure see difference.
2. When you key on them in 16bit colorspace you will see huge difference.
3. When you look at them in 1:1 pixel resolution you will see shitload of difference.

So here is a frame from a scarlet shooiting 4k, with no post sharpening or such.

http://www.syndicate.se/Files/~usr/hawk/scarlet4k.jpg

And here is a frame from the alexa, same lens same light same everything, different lady but that does not hide the differences...

http://www.syndicate.se/Files/~usr/hawk/alexa4k.jpg


This Alexa frame has been going trough my flame and got the best upscale algorithm possible (lanczos with 5.25/0.83 precision) Simply put, that's as good as the alexa gets in 4k, and to me it quite obvious that the hair looks rather soft and the noise in the lowlight and greenscreen is way more than whats in the scarlet
.
It's actually bigger difference than I expected and to me it quite frustrating to hear people talking about differences between cameras without actually having shot the same setup and done the proper comparison, i.e compair it in the resolution of the better camera.

But also the difference between those two frames gets almost even more obvious in HD, as then the scarlet frame gets super sampled and the alexa is... well soft to say the least.

So stop saying that these cameras hold up just as good in 4k... it does not. Alexa does not even match the scarlet 7:1 compression, putting a alexa next to an epic that shoots 5k 3:1..... I find it stupid to compare even when the alexa has the codex its still in the dust.



Also The dynamic range talk is nonsens the 10bit log file from the alexa is nothing more than a 8 bit file after it's been graded. The r3d file on the other hand lands on about 12 bit post grade. Thats something that has to be taken into consideration when comparing stops.
Alexa might look more like film striaght out of camera as it is softer and more grainy. Today the 50 Iso film stocks are not used much, more so the 250 iso's they hold up in resolution quite poorly and has huge grain when scanned in 4k so to match film even alexa needs added grain.

 

[Simon Knight]

Blimey,
I read the OP as "what a great show Justified is..."

Well it is... We know that because it's very well written and acted.. It is filmed beautifully and on OUR cameras.

I then read the OP's second point to say "well done to Red for having a great show out there." We all know Alexa rules the TV waves so lets just be happy we are in the TV world as well as the Hollywood movie world.

Perhaps i'm off base?

 

[Robert L. Mickles]

Except that it's very unlikely that you have ever seen either one in a theater played from a 4K DCP, or even finished via a 4K DI. So what you're seeing almost all the time is a 2K image being uprezzed to 4K in the projector, regardless of the camera used to shoot it. The things you're referring to have more to do with camera characteristics than they do the method of presentation, because for the most part, what's being shown is from a similar 2K source.

I can't speak for the rest of the world, but in the USA, 4K finishes and DCPs are becoming more and more common. The AMC I often go to has all Sony 4K projectors and I've seen my share of 4K and 2K on there. There is a notable difference. I don't know why alot of people in the business claim that 4K is a rare beast especially in today's American movie theatres.

 

[M Most]

don't know why alot of people in the business claim that 4K is a rare beast especially in today's American movie theatres.

Because to a very large degree, it's true. Very few studio level pictures go out as 4K DI's, especially those with a healthy dose of visual effects - which, these days, means just about every picture.

Out of curiosity, what pictures have you seen that you think were being projected from a 4K DCP? And how did you know?

 

[Robert L. Mickles]

Because to a very large degree, it's true. Very few studio level pictures go out as 4K DI's, especially those with a healthy dose of visual effects - which, these days, means just about every picture.

Out of curiosity, what pictures have you seen that you think were being projected from a 4K DCP? And how did you know?

The two that come to mind more recently, which are examples of film and digital capture released in 4K are Django Unchained and Side effects. There are a few ways that I know. 1.) most of the time if you look on the technical specs on imdb, it will tell you if it was mastered in 2K or 4K. Usually if its mastered in 4K, it's a 4K DCP in the capable theaters. 2.) built a good relationship with a few of the projectionists and so I can be certain which movies they have from a 2K or 4K DCP. 3) and most important to me, it is a noticeable difference in picture quality. One example of a movie shot on Alexa and projected on a 4K projector from a 2K DCP is This is 40. After seeing Django in 4K a day or 2 before, 2K/Alexa was noticeably softer and at times there was a bit of pixelation, that most people may not notice but if you and paying attention to picture quality, it was there.

 

[M Most]

... most of the time if you look on the technical specs on imdb, it will tell you if it was mastered in 2K or 4K. Usually if its mastered in 4K, it's a 4K DCP in the capable theaters.

If you're relying on IMDB for accurate information in this regard, you're in trouble already. And "mastering" in 4K (I assume you mean the digital intermediate) does not imply a 4K DCP distribution unless the studio is named Sony. In fact, a 4K DI doesn't mean a 4K image either, especially when large amounts of visual effects are involved - almost all of which are done at 2K. Or less.

One example of a movie shot on Alexa and projected on a 4K projector from a 2K DCP is This is 40. After seeing Django in 4K a day or 2 before, 2K/Alexa was noticeably softer and at times there was a bit of pixelation, that most people may not notice but if you and paying attention to picture quality, it was there.

Unless you're watching the same images through two different paths, it is impossible to know whether what you perceive as "softness" is intentional, a result of the camera, a result of the projection, or all of the above. Not to mention relying on "memory" to discern such a difference.

I'm not saying there isn't a difference. I am saying what you already said - that for most people, it's not significant, unless you happen to only frequent theaters with the largest screens and sit within the first 10 rows. And I'm also standing by the statement that very few large studio level releases are being done in 4K, although that is largely due to the visual effects requirements and their inherent current limitations given budgets and release schedules.