Curious Case of Benjamin Buttons

[Evin Grant]

Hi Evin.
Do you generally see this level of compression noise in the blue channel?

I wouldn't call it compression noise, it's just the normal noise you see when exposing at ISO 640. I have no way to know what is compression and what is just regular old noise. As far as the blue channel it's typical but not bothersome.

 

[jaadgy akanni]

I would also love to know what exactly him and David saw, was it the wedge tests, milkgirls, or what...?

All we humans are fallible, and sometimes see things through the eyes of a prejudiced mind, eyes that are predisposed against a reality. And as stubbornness takes the best of us, we can't see things with our real eyes.

 

[Paris Remillard]

I saw the Digital Cinema Society/Offhollywood demo at the NY Tech Expo thing last week or the week before, whenever it was, and they had some night shots that they were playing with in Scratch, if I remember right. Well, it was either Scratch or RedAlert. Either way, they were pulling a lot of information out of the blacks in those shots. And they were pulling the exposure all over the place in a few others shots, as well. There really was a lot of information to be found in there without the shots falling apart at all. I was very happy with what I saw. Then again I'm not shooting with a Viper or F23 everyday so I can't make a direct comparison, but...the RAW images looked very flexible to me.

 

[Bruce Allen]

Poor Claudio, it must feel like hiting a hornet's nest, but you'll survive, don't worry.

Claudio is right but sadly is facing the normal Reduser reaction.

My favorite is when people who clearly haven't shot much on either film, higher-end HD cameras or even the Red One itself get very emotional defending it!

Personally I'm finding I'm having to do more roto / painting / tweaking than I expected on the Red footage that I'm working on (across multiple projects / shoots) because there's a bit more noise / compression in the blacks and less information than I thought there'd be. But hey, my expectations in hindsight were stratospheric. Red delivers stratospheric minus 10 feet for an awesome price.

Again, this doesn't mean Red is not a mind-blowingly good camera!

Also, it will improve - eg:
1. Red's announced hardware improvements that will lower noise floor
2. Gradual improvements in RedCode
3. Future uncompressed / higher bitrate storage options.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[David Mullen ASC]

All we humans are fallible, and sometimes see things through the eyes of a prejudiced mind, eyes that are predisposed against a reality. And as stubbornness takes the best of us, we can't see things with our real eyes.

You're talking about a pro-digital director, so why would he have a prejudiced mind against RED footage? Fincher is a visual artist, and thus he has a well-developed but personally idiosyncratic taste that isn't going to follow everyone else's notions of what looks good or bad necessarily. In this case, I don't think it's not an issue of being prejudiced or predisposed, just that he saw something that he didn't like. But obviously he probably saw earlier footage where whatever it was that he didn't like may have been fixed by now, or maybe it's just a taste issue. He may even prefer the depth of field characteristics of 2/3" cameras, who knows.

You're talking about a director who made one of the first big, expensive studio movies to be shot digitally and recorded only to hard drives -- and for some reason, you think he's somehow stubbornly stuck in the past?

 

[donatello b]

when somebody like Scott Billups states that 4k DPX from RED alert are the BEST chroma keys he has EVER seen - ... and RED > DPX pulls a key
better than all film and all digital formats. = i listen ...

if you are having problems keying then i have to ask what did you/they do wrong when they shot the green screen ??

 

[Jannard]

There can be a huge difference between the results you are getting and what the camera is capable of. It is one of the reasons you hear "this is the best footage I have ever seen" and "well, it's good, but not as good as I thought".

There are 100 things to go wrong in shooting and processing RED footage. If you get it right, this is an incredibly noise free, high resolution, accurate color camera. If you are not seeing it, we need to know some details so we can help. However, if your expectations are that it is noiseless at ISO 2000... that just isn't fair.

We have had several "name" DP's tell us they are now getting better images from RED than anything they have ever shot before. And several of the highest profile VFX masters tell us they have never seen footage this easy to pull a key from. If you are not, something is wrong somewhere.

Talk to us... we are here to help. But we need more than "the image is not as good as I expected".
Jim

 

[Brandon Fraley]

...exactly what i was going to say

 

[jaadgy akanni]

You're talking about a director who made one of the first big, expensive studio movies to be shot digitally and recorded only to hard drives -- and for some reason, you think he's somehow stubbornly stuck in the past?

David, I wasn't referring to Fincher. I haven't read or heard him actually state his impressions on the RED, so I couldn't possibly have the audacity to deem him "stubbornly stuck in the past." I was actually referring to Claudio's statements. The more professional one is, the more careful one should be not to make statements that are non-empirical.

 

[Yash Keough]

Well I'm only an amateur really...and while I don't have any clue who is right on the compression and wha is actually going on...but what I find impressive is that the images are a major step above anything indies have had to work with at the price point for years. Now I may very well be wrong but I think that the average cinemagoer, when shown something shot on Red, would be hard pressed to tell the difference between red and film... Up until recently... I think there was still a noticeable enough difference that it wasn't too uncommon for somebody to notice that something was different. Anyways... Just my two cents

Cheers

 

[Rudi Herbert]

There can be a huge difference between the results you are getting and what the camera is capable of...If you get it right, this is an incredibly noise free, high resolution, accurate color camera.
Talk to us... we are here to help. But we need more than "the image is not as good as I expected".
Jim

Jim,

In the spirit of RED and RedUser and the openness and genuine disposition to help the whole RED team continues to show, would you consider at some point posting some sort of "guidelines" if you will, knowledge based on your own experiences and those shared with you by many RED users, whereby it would help us "get it right" and make the camera produce the best images it can? I'm thinking some loose suggestions as to what settings work best for bright exterior shots, overcast exteriors, interiors, etc. I know it is impossible and even counter productive to compare and/or base one shooting condition with/on another one, since everything changes from shot to shot, including the DP and director's tastes and aims. However, I think that it would be useful to know that, for example, if you want to shoot crisp, clean, saturated images under bright sunlight, such and such setting should be enabled to conserve highlights, save the blacks, etc, etc, etc. Perhaps these guidelines could be based on meter readings/ISO settings, in an effort to even out the intended target with the advice offered?

This may be impractical or sound amateurish, but I still wonder how you would eliminate the harsh clipped highlights visible on "Crossing the Line" (still my favorite RED piece), which appear on far more places that the clouds by the way (helmets, weapons, leather jackets, etc) to bring an otherwise perfect scene into balance. And I am concerned because we just put our reservations down for three REDs and out first feature with them will feature plenty of bright exteriors. So, if someone has already figured out how to fix something that eluded a very accomplished cinematographer, well then, I would be very grateful for the advice. And for what is worth it, we are set on RED, we believe in it and we'll do whatever it takes to remedy its shortcomings to enjoy its advantages, but any help from the pioneers that come before us would be a god sent.

Regards,

 

[Bruce Allen]

And several of the highest profile VFX masters tell us they have never seen footage this easy to pull a key from. If you are not, something is wrong somewhere.

Talk to us... we are here to help. But we need more than "the image is not as good as I expected".
Jim

We're talking more about latitude and recovering detail from noisy shadows, not pulling a key.

Pulling a key is easy on Red with well lit footage. But you don't need 11.3 stops of latitude to pull a key.

EDIT: BTW, I still advocate Red over everything else to all and sundry, including random people I meet on the street. But I do warn them that reduser is full of crazy folks who haven't actually used the camera who rush like angry ants to defend it against any perceived threat (even if the "threat" costs a ton more, doesn't have cool 35mm DOF, needs expensive storage, etc - eg isn't really much of a threat at all).

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Jannard]

We're talking more about latitude and recovering detail from noisy shadows, not pulling a key.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Bruce... I need some help. What ISO, what type of content? What app are you using and which settings did you use?

I'm keenly interested. We have footage here that is noiseless (really) at ISO 320.

Maybe you could let me know where I can upload the RAW file and see what you are talking about.

When you talk about more latitude... what are you comparing to? Are you trying to recover detail in the shadows due to under-exposure or are you just not seeing enough range? Any details would be helpful.

Jim

 

[Stacey Spears]

But I do warn them that reduser is full of crazy folks who haven't actually used the camera who rush like angry ants to defend it against any perceived threat

Sadly this is not limited to REDUSER. This seems to be common on most forums these days whether is it food, car or AV related. My favorite is still the Blu-ray forum where if you post anything positive about HD DVD, or negative about BD, they ban you.

There are those who know their stuff, those who are there to learn and those who parrot what others have said, right or wrong. Its the parrot's that are the loudest, so they must be right.

Sorry for the off topic post, but I know how Bruce feels.

 

[Jannard]

Stacey... we are all just trying to get to the bottom of issues to make our program better. We are not in denial. I was the 1st to post over-heating issues on Soderbergh's 1st day of shooting. Problems come and we fix them (or try to). Bruce has said that there are issues in trying to recover detail from the noisy shadows... a legitimate concern. I also know that we have the least noisy cinema camera in existence so it makes sense to try to understand the disparity. Real issues, real info, real solutions... whether it means we have something to fix or some info to share. Not rocket science, just a community trying to help each other.

The RED fans are worked up because the anti-RED sentiment runs deep... from day one. It is hard to control emotions on this topic. But here, we need to separate the "war" from the "quest". We are all in this together.

Jim

 

[claudio]

I originally came to this site to state that the RED camera was not used on CCBB. This was the original start of this thread.

When I started CCBB we were considering RED, D20, Dalsa and Viper. I looked at all these camera's. The only camera ready and best photographically at shoot time was the Viper. I do not believe there is anything wrong in stating I was not happy with the images I was presented. I have no allegiance to any medium. I have no sponsors. I shot Fincher's first HD (Viper) commercial (Xelibri). It is in my best interest to use the best camera possible for the job and if the camera is cheaper it will make the producers happy as well. I am very open otherwise I would not be doing these tests which we will all benefit from.

 

[Warren Kommers]

Fincher and Viper

Fincher and Viper

Although Zodiac was one of the fineset photographed HD films to date(savides da man), it had issues because of the limited 2/3" chip. There were definate scenes(35mm ish wide shot) where the DOF was not shallow enough to tell when they were racking between characters and I could not tell who I was supposed to be paying attention to. But they were racking and there was intention from Fincher that was not being communicated because of the medium. Now I love David Fincher movies but it was confusing enough that it took me out of the movie. Which is one of the worst things that can happen. For me this is the hierarchy of image characteristics.

1) DOF - Focus or should I say lack of focus is the ultimate control. This is the most effective way to get the audience to look at what you want them to. It is storytelling. It is control. When a image pops up the first thing your eye is going to go to is the thing in focus 80 percent of the time unless it's in the total dark and the rest of the image is not. Also assuming that not everything is in focus. As a director/storyteller this alone is worth far more than latitude.

2)Resolution - When I watched Baraka in 70mm this struck me. The less noise/grain the more 3D the 2D screen looks. Grain/Noise identifies the screen. The whole point 98 percent of the time is to make the audience forget they are sitting in a theatre right! However, thats not to say you may want to identify the screen at some point. Noise/Grain is part of the palette.

3) Color space/Latitude - Very important don't get me wrong. However, all I have to say is Saving Private Ryan or.....Traffic. How unrealistic is the color in these films or the crushed contrast. We as an audience have a lot of latitude(no pun intended) on the color and dynamic range. Again thats not to say it's very important it's just in the grand sceme of things.

RED has the first two in the bag over the Viper for sure. I would also argue that it probably wins number three as well. Who knows what images people have seen that makes Claudio and David feel this way. However, I think the unlikely dynamic range factor over RED is less important than what RED has going for it that the Viper does not. Wait....did that make sense?

In the end it's all a personal preference. Maybe there is something about the size of the Viper that allows David to get a shot he could not with 35mm or RED. And if that were the case then my personal list would have to be reconsidered to what these new shots were adding to the story.

 

[I Bloom]

This thread is like a fog.

Claudio. Your website is an education. I'm going to be back many times.

I guess I'm very confused about what one could want from Emmanuel Cambier's tiff file, that isn't there. Is is possible you could post a DPX file of an image with lots of information in the blacks for comparison.

IBloom

 

[Stacey Spears]

Jim, I am sorry, I think you might have misunderstood my post, at least I hope.

I understand the history of RED and the uphill battle for respect you have had to endure. I completely get the passion. My comments were not directed at the REDUSER community, but all enthusiast groups in general.

We are a passionate, if not a crazy, bunch of people and sometimes coming in from the outside can be difficult if you are not wearing your flack jacket. I think an anthropological study of new group behavior would be a fascinating project. Perhaps a documentary on social networking in general, which covers news groups, facebook, MySpace, Internet Cafés, etc…

I was not making any comments on the RED One itself. Your participation clearly shows you care. As I posted before, RED is as good as it is because you built it for yourself (The ultimate camera enthusiast), the rest of us just happen to directly benefit from your passion. I enjoy my daily fix of REDUSER. More like multiple fixes per day.

 

[Emmanuel Cambier]

Black is black…

Black is black…

First, thanks to OFFHOLLYWOOD for providing the wonderfull image I have been posting earlier, and to DIGITAL FX for hosting it.

Well I am ready to face the fact that the RedOne is not without limit.
In all the pictures shot on the camera, I have laid my greedy hands on, I have noticed that there is 2 kinds on cliping.
The obvious one is in the highlights of course, and the obvious fix is to only allow white regions presenting no noticable details, to clip.
The less obvious cliping that red shows is in the black zones of an image. It is true that some zones don't have any details in it, just a noisy grey, with no cure in sight. Come on guys check all the footage you want, and you will find those zones. So I would agree with Claudio that there is a limit to the amount of informations in dark unlit areas, and when you reach it it's like cliping your highlights, no way back, i'm facing the truth here.

Where I would tend to disagree with Claudio is in the conclusions one could draw from such discovery.
It seems that this limit hapens when the sensor will output a luminance of around 25 (RGB). 25 seems to be the lowest luminance reading in all uncorrected images downloaded, 255 being the highest.
If you leave those dark zones as is you have no detail and a lot of noise, and if you lower it by approx. 10 you are left with zero noise and still no detail, but your zone now looks like pure black (still reading 15 in luminance).
So, to me, the problem is where in the picture are located these zones in terms of exposure.
From all the images I've seen I would tend to conclude that these zones happen to fall where a deep black is expected if not desired.
Therefore I wouldn't object them as long as the Display system can reproduce blacks in a satisfying manner, otherwise you're stuck with grey patches in your images.

Now maybe there is something for Red to look for in those blacks, we shall see.

Sincerly yours

Emmanuel