WARNING for rookies...

[Curran Giddens]

WOW!!! How exciting for your first car to be a Ferrari! That's amazing. I call myself a noob and even I started out on an SVHS video camera 10 years ago...

Well, that could happen too. I've never had a car either....

I'm pretty exited about learning to master my RED. For my own projects I will have enough time to work on getting it just right. With my MoCo rig I will be able to perform the camera move first, without worrying about focus. Then I can playback the camera move while I work on getting the focus just right using the remote follow focus.

 

[Chris Forbes]

I know most professional cameraman do not use auto-focus. However, it looks like Canon might be breaking that trend.

The cost of those canon lenses with auto focus vs. without is about 4 times higher. It is much easier to hire a good camera man.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

How do it know?

How do it know?

I see that Graeme is on the boards right now so perhaps he will reveal a bit more about the "magic focus" ...

In any case, if it works in the manner it was explained to me I think it might be far more elegant and quicker than the joystick system.

My completely unofficial best interpretation of the waveform style focus assist is:

a waveform at the bottom of the EVF (and the LCD AFAIK) that reads high frequency detail in the corresponding portion of the image directly above that point on the waveform. My expectation is that I will be able to rack focus back and forth until the portion of the waveform under the subject I want in focus gets as tall as it will get and then I should be tack sharp.

If I have this right it should be a great tool for racking between two or more people in a shot since I can see the high point of my waveform move from right under subject one to right under subject two etc. It should also be good for tracking focus on moving subjects and other "as it happens" doco style gigs.

For set shots I am a big fan of tape measures but if time and/or crew is short I am hoping I can just trust the focus assist waveform.

I am wondering if the buttons on the side of the EVF will allow us to switch between the exposure histogram, the focus assist waveform and maybe audio meters along the bottom???

 

[Greg Voevodsky]

I see that Graeme is on the boards right now so perhaps he will reveal a bit more about the "magic focus" ...

In any case, if it works in the manner it was explained to me I think it might be far more elegant and quicker than the joystick system.

My completely unofficial best interpretation of the waveform style focus assist is:

a waveform at the bottom of the EVF (and the LCD AFAIK) that reads high frequency detail in the corresponding portion of the image directly above that point on the waveform. My expectation is that I will be able to rack focus back and forth until the portion of the waveform under the subject I want in focus gets as tall as it will get and then I should be tack sharp.

If I have this right it should be a great tool for racking between two or more people in a shot since I can see the high point of my waveform move from right under subject one to right under subject two etc. It should also be good for tracking focus on moving subjects and other "as it happens" doco style gigs.

For set shots I am a big fan of tape measures but if time and/or crew is short I am hoping I can just trust the focus assist waveform.

I am wondering if the buttons on the side of the EVF will allow us to switch between the exposure histogram, the focus assist waveform and maybe audio meters along the bottom???

WOW. I hope you're right. That sounds great unless everything is moving quickly and you're panning to keep up.

 

[Michael Brennan]

subjective hair splitting

subjective hair splitting

I think Jims warning regarding focus goes for everyone not just rookies.
Have a close look at blue ray or HD transmisson or movies on a large full res LCD.
There are numerous shots in many movies where the focus is not perfect.


A 4k digital camera combined with digital post and digital display will make focus errors a little more noticable.

Will be interesting to see if use of very shallow depth of field when shooting on RED, lets say eyes in focus but tip of nose and ears a little soft, common enough when shooting 35mm film to throw the background out, may be a little disturbing on large screen digital displays.

Perhaps confounded if the subject moves as little as 1/2 inch and the tip of the nose becomes sharper than the eyes.


Mike Brennan

 

[Justin O'Neill]

Mick is right. I watch some OTA HD on my big CRT computer monitor and I'm constantly amazed at how often shots will be out of focus for a second. This happens occasionally on every single show I've seen so its not just the result of an amature focus puller. I can't imagine what it's gonna be like once we start watching shows in 4k.

 

[David Battistella]

I see that Graeme is on the boards right now so perhaps he will reveal a bit more about the "magic focus" ...

I wonder if RED will have a great focus assist tool, like the one that exists on the HVX 200. That quickly zooms a portion of your frame and allows you to get a sharp manual focus.

I am all for manual apreture and lenses, but I like the great digital features that are offered with some camera's. The HVX has a pretty dead accurate focus distance which you can display in the viewfinder. I think with focus being such a critical issue, it would be great to have some of the new tools available.

I hope we are not talking about hardcore guys who just build an amazing camera, but wouldn't add some of the great features that enhance our ability to get great "in focus" shots in a multitude of situations.

The images we've seen posted from on set in the past couple of days are a good example of when you might want to use an electronic tool (not to autofocus) but to help you set your manual focus.

I am not sure there is a still guy in the world right now that doesn't rely on autofoucs for sports photography.

I hope that RED will be innovating in the areas of assisted focus and apreture too. The choice to leave out stages of ND built in to the camera assumes that every configuration will require a matte box, etc.

Not every shoot happens in the hyper controlled environment of a film set and some of these tools are very useful to small teams or one person operations.

We know that RED is not a rookie machine, but that does not mean we should be vaulted back to the days of our first Pentax K-1000's either. These tools just help us capture better images and I think that is the goal here, right?

David

 

[Fergus Meiklejohn]

I can't wait to get my hands on the camera (ok I'm not alone..:nerd: )
It's going to be a real challenge but it CAN produce beautiful images! That's the thing.. Like film.

 

[Phil Bates]

I am not the least bit concerned about users that have experience with 35mm film, or even a Viper or Genesis. My concern is for the shooter stepping up from an HVX200 or Z1. It certainly is going to be an eye-opener and a challenge to learn some new stuff. As long as they understand what they are getting into, I am sure it will be an incredibly satisfying experience. If these issues come as surpires, it might be a bit disconcerting. I just want all RED customers to be informed and happy.

Jim

Sorry if I am sounding like a broken record, but wouldn't sensor cleaning be just as a significant issue for someone upgrading from those cameras? A few dust spots on the sensor can ruin your whole day, and be surprising as well for someone used to fixed lens cameras.

Phil
wwww.artbeats.com

 

[Shawn Nelson]

If I can only afford two NDs and a pol at first, what's the most important two NDs to get?

 

[Gregory Karydis]

Focus. <---OK

ND's. <---No problerm

Exposure. <--- Erm... will look into this.

Jim <-- is this part of the warnings too?:sorcerer:

I come from the Eos 1D MkII and MkIII and the A1 (Z1's little brother) so I am a little freaked but I feel I'll be able to figure everything out

Thanks for the heads-up Jim

 

[JD Holloway]

If I can only afford two NDs and a pol at first, what's the most important two NDs to get?

Given the flexibility of the camera to under exposure, I would think going a little heavy would be useful when you don't have much control. Use a N6 + N9. Use your Pol as a N3(ish). Outside mix the NDs plus Pol as required (just watch for ghosting in high contrast areas, use matte box tilt feature if you need to) Try and shoot F5.6-8 minimum until you get used to the setup (read: can pull your own focus like a champ) or have a focus puller.

My .02$

 

[David Battistella]

If I can only afford two NDs and a pol at first, what's the most important two NDs to get?

I'd say you need three ND's a 3,6 and 9. That's one two and three stops of ND. You can use them one at a time or more depending on which matte box you have on the RED.

As far as I know the RED has no built in ND filters so these are going to be a must, especially for outdoor film when you need to create any sort of depth of field.

David

 

[Ken Willinger]

I find I use the 3 and 6 a lot more than the 9 but it's good to have in the kit. I'd also recommend getting the same set as ND grads. I use these often.

 

[David Battistella]

I find I use the 3 and 6 a lot more than the 9 but it's good to have in the kit. I'd also recommend getting the same set as ND grads. I use these often.

Yes at least 1 grad is a must.

d

 

[Jason Rodriguez]

I will leave it to more technically proficient folks to explain how this is possible but from the images that Jason showed at the seminar it sure looked like you could extract details from pretty blown areas.

Hi Paul,

What I was demonstrating at NAB was the fact that low noise, wide dynamic range cameras like the RED and SI, etc. have more information than is needed to render a "proper contrast" image on a typical TV screen. For instance, the typical computer monitor/TV screen can show around 6-7 f-stops of actual contrast range. Some a little more. But the point is that to get a good contrasty image, where you have an perceptually linear increasing greyscale ramp, you're going to get around 6-7 f-stops. To show more of the ramp at any given time, you're going to have to apply some contrast reduction (dynamic range compression). So, now imaging you have this 6-7 f-stop "window" in your 11 f-stop camera dynamic range. You can slide this "window" around, very similar to the "print-up"/"print-down" process of printing a color negative for viewing on a contact or answer print. So, if for instance, you use Redcine to make a contrasty "look" that only presents around 6-7 f-stops, you can choose which 6-7 f-stops you're going to shoot with out of your 11 f-stop range. Of course if you shoot with the lower portion of that range, you're gonna get some noise, especially if you need to apply a toe to the bottom ranges . . . i.e., too high a contrast curve at the bottom bits will create a large gain step as you climb out of the toe of curve, so you'll get lower bits with high gain applied, and that could make some noise visible. But the point is you can create a scene file that paints the camera in such a way that there's a stop or two remaining in the upper highlights of the image . . . so while it may looked clipped because of the active LUT you're using, there is still RGB information in the highlights of the RAW image. Now again, in normal shooting, where I would think you want to preserve the good SNR of the camera, you're probably only going to save a half-stop to a stop in a normally lit scene, and most likely blow-out in a bright constrasty out-door scene. But if you're more agressive in how your LUT normalizes the RAW data of the camera, you can save more highlight information . . . but increasing highlight headroom means you're reducing the overall effective SNR of your image, so depending on the camera, this might work, and this might not work, i.e., the noise floor and how much of it you're willing to tolerate seeing is your limiting factor. But it seems like from the images that Jim posted, you should be in good shape with the RED.

 

[Stephen Williams]

I find I use the 3 and 6 a lot more than the 9 but it's good to have in the kit. I'd also recommend getting the same set as ND grads. I use these often.

Hi,

As Red has a natve speed of at least 250 asa you will want a ND 1.8 (6 stops) to get you a T2.8-4 split on a sunny day. An ND 1.2 0r ND 0.9 (4 or 3 stops) will be useful when it's cloudy.

Stephen

 

[Steven Parker]

If I can only afford two NDs and a pol at first, what's the most important two NDs to get?

I always rate a pola as 1 to 2 stops lost depending on the shot/mood I'm in, so if you really can only get 2 NDs, maybe get an ND6 and an ND6 soft grad.

With a 3-stage mattebox you'd be knocking 3-4 stops off overall, and 5-6 stops off the sky if the shot calls for it.

 

[Antoine Fabi]

I am not the least bit concerned about users that have experience with 35mm film, or even a Viper or Genesis. My concern is for the shooter stepping up from an HVX200 or Z1. It certainly is going to be an eye-opener and a challenge to learn some new stuff. As long as they understand what they are getting into, I am sure it will be an incredibly satisfying experience. If these issues come as surpires, it might be a bit disconcerting. I just want all RED customers to be informed and happy.

Jim

Jim,

Why would it be so different ?

I mean, doesn't it work quite like a DSLR ?

If not, maybe it would be usefull to write a little article on that topic before we receive our cameras ?

thanks

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

Will we be able to see true exposure on an external monitor?