Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

Some new footage to play with

nice, Haakon. Given that there's a considerable out-of-focus(bokeh) area that begins right behind the talent, I'm curious to see how you're gonna replace the green and make it look natural.
 
jaadgy akanni said:
nice, Haakon. Given that there's a considerable out-of-focus(bokeh) area that begins right behind the talent, I'm curious to see how you're gonna replace the green and make it look natural.
Click to expand...
No biggie, that's for the post guys to figure out. :bleh:

Just kidding. :-) It actually keys out very nicely... I've already done some tests using keylight in After Effects and have gotten very good results. It knows to look for out of focus edges and take that into account. I'm trying to get a 4K image up for other people to try and do their own takes on keying/coloring the footage; I'm just having to move it between multiple computers and each system has different software on it. Check back tonight; hopefully I'll be able to get something up for everyone.
 
Cool colors, Grant! I like my images to be as clean as possible myself, but I like the hues you chose... the colors really pop. The skintones feel a little green to me (I feel they need a tad more red), but overall it's a really striking palette. It's so interesting to see people take your footage and put their own spin on it!
 
Hello, some clip, indeed !! I am moving to red pretty soon, for wildlife shooting purpose. You point out the sharp focus issue, and give a useful warning. I constantly use big or very big lenses, such as 600mm or more, and sensor was 1/2 or 2/3 inch, and have no experience of the 35mm format/nor specific DOF. No run and gun shooting, however, and I use a steady sachtler tripod. But NO WAY I can use someone pulling focus alongside of myself in a hide. To your opinion, shall I be that far off my marks when focussing ? Thanks for an answer, regards
 
Hi Haakon,

Its really great to see what Red can do in the hands of a pro. Its also really encouraging to know that these shots are straight from the camera, with little post. Thanks for sharing these tests with us.

I just ordered my Red last week, so I'm already looking forward to the second half of 2008 with bated breath!

I did notice one strange artifact when looking at your 1k footage. Its as the camera pans across the woman and her fingers pass over the out of focus lights. There appears to be some edge issue, a black line, looks almost as she is superimposed. (See the attached thumbnail)

attachment.php


This is a Jpeg, of a screen grab, of a compressed QT image so its going to look rough, but I was wondering if it is as noticeable in your original footage?

Could it be a Quicktime compression artifact? Just curious.

Thanks again for the sweet footage.

Phil
 
buhot said:
To your opinion, shall I be that far off my marks when focussing ? Thanks for an answer, regards
Click to expand...
Hi Buhot,

Well, one thing must be understood - this isn't your dad's autofocus handycam! You have to set focus yourself and you have to pull it if it changes. On a 600mm lens, you're shrinking that DOF even more substantially, which is going to increase the difficulty. The ace in your pocket, however, is that if you are shooting wildlife, you're probably doing it outdoors in the middle of the day - and even with a mild ND, you're going to have to close that iris way down. If you're shooting around the f/8 - f/11 range, you're not only maximizing sharpness but you're increasing your DOF. This may help to compensate.

I'm a narrative guy - most of the stuff I shoot is well thought-out, planned, and rehearsed. And yes, there is a huge difference between RED and an HVX, especially when it comes to focus. But I think in your situation, if your subject is standing still (or even moving parallel to you), if you can use a pretty tight iris, and you're on a tripod, you should be fine. Distance to subject also determines focal area and it sounds like you'll be pretty far away (another thing which will help you). You just have to look at the eagle footage that Jim posted to realize that it's entirely possible to use the camera on your own - he shot that himself and it looks fantastic.

The shot of the couple at the table I posted at the beginning of the thread is an entirely different environment; I was on a constantly moving dolly on an 85mm lens only about 1m from my subjects and shooting at an f/2. That's a recipe for disaster unless you have a really good focus puller (I didn't; that shot took us over 20 takes!). So you just have to analyze your situation and set yourself up for the best chance of success. But the long-winded answer is that I think you'll be just fine given the type of material you are shooting - just know that you're going to have to pay close attention to it at all times and modify the variables so that you have the upper hand. With RED's fantastic resolution, I think it's one of the best choices for shooting landscapes and wildlife out there!
 
Phil D said:
Hi Haakon,

Its really great to see what Red can do in the hands of a pro. Its also really encouraging to know that these shots are straight from the camera, with little post. Thanks for sharing these tests with us.

I just ordered my Red last week, so I'm already looking forward to the second half of 2008 with bated breath!

I did notice one strange artifact when looking at your 1k footage. Its as the camera pans across the woman and her fingers pass over the out of focus lights. There appears to be some edge issue, a black line, looks almost as she is superimposed. (See the attached thumbnail)

attachment.php


This is a Jpeg, of a screen grab, of a compressed QT image so its going to look rough, but I was wondering if it is as noticeable in your original footage?

Could it be a Quicktime compression artifact? Just curious.

Thanks again for the sweet footage.

Phil
Click to expand...
Hi Phil,

Thanks for your very nice comments. I have some even cooler side-by-side 35mm tests I am dying to share, but don't have access right now to the computer with the footage! There is more to come!

As far as that interesting halo effect, it wasn't overtly apparent to me before and it's entirely possible that it is a result of something in the postproduction chain - recompression especially. What I can do is go back to the original R3D and pull a TIFF to see if it's there. Sometimes these little oddities manifest themselves - and I don't think RED is by any means perfect - but I do think it's the best digital offering out there and they are working hard to constantly improve it. Remember also that this is an original camera, probably shooting on build 7 or 8, and they have already made significant improvements since then. Or it could just be a weird artifact of the RED. :-) I'll get back to you when I know more.

Häakon
 
Hi Haakon,

Yeah I just read on another thread about the update/improvements to the censor in the new firmware build.

To me, it does look like a post artifact of some sort. I noticed that your "Moments" clip is 23.98 and not true 24 fps, so maybe this could have something to do with it? It could also be the result of down rezing to 8 bit. Both the background and the finger are out of focus, so their outlines are spread and the compression might have a hard time resolving which is which!?

I'm just speculating of course, my knowledge of these things is very finite.
 
Moments 2k Clip

Moments 2k Clip

Häakon Cilp ‘Moments 2k Clip’ on http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0079/

Excellent light, I like the highlights on his hair, also the side light coming over his shoulders.
The play between perfectly crisp and clear face and film like grain of the background, how did you do it!!

Now aside of all above, I see QT speed recorded for 100MB/sec that my computer still eats it smooth and clean but how did you get this sharp and detailed face and hair?!

I have hard time to believe that it comes from RED #79

Did you upgrade the firmware/hardware to current improvements?
What lenses did you use in this shoot?
What software did you use for post?

This beats hands down the best film masters, and now if this would be the film it will take 3 copies before public could see it. Here if anything this clip is only 2K, does it look better in 4K pixel per pixel? Could you post there R3D file of this clip even if you have to cut it down in length by half, please.
I just have hard time to believe that this is from RED #79

Andrew
 
Phil D said:
To me, it does look like a post artifact of some sort. I noticed that your "Moments" clip is 23.98 and not true 24 fps, so maybe this could have something to do with it?
Click to expand...
It's actually not a post artifact - it's in the .r3D file itself. Curiously, though, I got a similar result on the film negative so I guess it is just a property of the lens and the way the light wrapped around the hand. I don't find it too distracting; I think it's just more of a weird circumstance that manifested itself under these specific conditions. I haven't seen it show up in other places, at any rate.

Also, I shot the project at 23.98 - not 24.00, so there wouldn't be any weird conversion taking place in post.

Andrew said:
Häakon Cilp ‘Moments 2k Clip’ on http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0079/

Excellent light, I like the highlights on his hair, also the side light coming over his shoulders.
The play between perfectly crisp and clear face and film like grain of the background, how did you do it!!

Now aside of all above, I see QT speed recorded for 100MB/sec that my computer still eats it smooth and clean but how did you get this sharp and detailed face and hair?!

I have hard time to believe that it comes from RED #79

Did you upgrade the firmware/hardware to current improvements?
What lenses did you use in this shoot?
What software did you use for post?

This beats hands down the best film masters, and now if this would be the film it will take 3 copies before public could see it. Here if anything this clip is only 2K, does it look better in 4K pixel per pixel? Could you post there R3D file of this clip even if you have to cut it down in length by half, please.
I just have hard time to believe that this is from RED #79

Andrew
Click to expand...
Hi Andrew,

Thanks for the compliments. I assure you that I shot the clip with RED #79 - using build 9, no less - and there was no trickery involved. :-) I very much think that the footage from RED holds itself up to film without question. It's a lot more of a joy to shoot, too, in my opinion.

The lens used on the boy in the room was the RED 18-50mm zoom; no fancy primes or expensive optics used at all. Also, that clip is from the 2K quicktime proxy brought right into FCP and exported as an h264 file - it's not even from a 4K DPX sequence or with any color correction. Pretty amazing, huh? The RED is just that good.

I will try to post the .R3D file tomorrow when I have access to it; it's rather large but you will see firsthand that the footage was shot completely with RED and that the claims are really as good as everyone has said. That's also an "original" (non-X) camera with an early firmware build; they've only gotten better from there.

Thanks for your question, if you still want some more information please don't hesitate to ask.

Häakon
 
Hi Haakon,

Thanks for investigating. I have been looking at other footage on this forum that had similarities to your shot and have not found it present in any of them. Which is great. I guess it was just one of those strange anomalies.

It did bother me either, was just nit-picking.
 
Unbelievable!!, I looked on another 2K clip called 2k_pageant.mov posted on our forum here and boy o boy is so soft. Same shot (face and shoulders) newer camera same 2K output file.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7681

I agree with Phil 100% “It’s really great to see what Red can do in the hands of a pro.””
Maybe if he would use higher bitrate to produce the QT file it will come out sharper.
For the quality demo posts I think using 50 or 100Mbits/sec is a must.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top