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 :)

My first handheld field test - Belvedere Chicks

Sanjin Jukic

Sanjin Jukic

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
8,929
Reaction score
1
Points
36
Location
Vienna, Austria
Website
www.sanjinjukic.com
Belvedere_chicks.jpg

My first handheld field test - Belvedere Chicks.

Here is my first handheld field test - Belvedere Chicks.

Report:

RED camera with a basic production pack, RED handle, top handle, LCD, RED arm 9", RED cradle, battery, RED hard drive, follow focus, matte box, 2x12" and 18" 19mm steel rods, 2x15mm 12cm long rods, 15mm adaptor, 2 universal mounts, ND filter 1.2 and Circular Polarizer, very light prime Arriflex Zeiss Planar 85mm T2. a portrait tele lens that has a size and weight of egg.

The first impression:

For a longer then half an hour of handheld shooting you have to be a bit strong like an Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Terminator movies to keep RED on your shoulder.

A short brake between the shots are strongly recommended.

2K test clip H.264, file size about 10.3 MB, duration 5.7 sec., a short CC done in Shake using color match.

THE BEST VIEWED ON LOOP AT 30" LCD USING ENTER FULL SCREEN.

Here is the link of short test:

Belvedere Chicks 2K >>>
 
Yes, the good thing I found is that you can really do handheld pretty well.
I think I'd drop a big mattebox for a smaller clip-on in that situation, though, but I'll know more about that soon enough.

Cheers Sanjin. You can finally shoot RED!

REALLY looking foreward to hear about your P+S experiment.

I'd be a bit wary of doing CC in Shake from QT movies, these days - as it's hard to keep the full bit depth through Shake (from moviefiles) these days.
I think you may be better off with image sequences, but I haven't tested it yet, my main focus is on making Color work the way I want.

Gunleik
 
It will be great when full audio is enabled ... As for now from what I could determine ( Fluent lip reader that I am ) apparently the chick on the far left says - "Is that a Big Red One you`re pointing at me or are you just happy to see me"?

Yes the possibilities are endless - Happy Hunting - Dont forget to stop, and actually smell the roses, dont just shoot them...


DogDay
 
gunleik said:
Yes, the good thing I found is that you can really do handheld pretty well.
I think I'd drop a big mattebox for a smaller clip-on in that situation, though, but I'll know more about that soon enough.

Cheers Sanjin. You can finally shoot RED!

REALLY looking foreward to hear about your P+S experiment.

I'd be a bit wary of doing CC in Shake from QT movies, these days - as it's hard to keep the full bit depth through Shake (from moviefiles) these days.
I think you may be better off with image sequences, but I haven't tested it yet, my main focus is on making Color work the way I want.

Gunleik
Click to expand...

Gunleik,

I did it in Shake because at that very moment I did not have power on of my AVID/MEDEA RAID that Color needs for a speed.

So I decided to go Shake route and here below is a detail description with help of the screen shots from Shake:

chicks_shakeA.jpg

File in Shake where you can see more pink on the leather jacket.
I had ND1.2 and Circular Polarizer on with aperture T 2.8, K 5600, ISO/ASA 320, Shutter 1/48. 24 FPS, 4K 2:1.
It was 6.15 PM with low sunset light that could give you a mild orange skin beauty effect.
Also I forgot my optical glasses (took another box) and it was all done like a half blind man focusing and in camera setting up.

chicks_shakeB.jpg

Using Color Match filter trying to get rid of pink.

chicks_shakeC.jpg

Then hit the Film Light's True Light plug-in filter and BOOM! The leather jacket have got TRUE BLACK within a click.

chicks_shakeD.jpg

A bit of Saturation (1.1) is always good to get chicks a bit HOTTER.
 
chicks_shake_Final.jpg

The final comparison before and after. Pink almost has GONE. Love this sort of A FILM CONTRAST EFFECT.
 
As I said before above that I did not have my optical glasses with me and also did not set up camera in a field and a focus was not 100% accurate.. Then a combination of ND 1.2 and Circular polarizer was maybe too strong for that sunset light because the lens was opened at T2.8.

Next time will do it better for sure.
 
Actually I was playing a try out to achieve a look of "Godfather" film shot by Gordon Willis that
"has been called "the prince of darkness" by fellow cinematographer,
Conrad Hall, for his underexposed expressionism: the shadows hiding Brando's eyes in The Godfather,
the blackness enveloping Allen and Diane Keaton when they meet at Manhattan's planetarium...
Willis pioneered such visual story-telling techniques as low-key lighting to establish moods.
He allowed windows to blow-out, lights to flare, and he underexposed film and used forced
processing to alter the look and mood of scenes."

I still deeply believe that "darkness" look belongs perfect to result that you can get the best from RED today.

Looking forward to watch soon the Soderbergh's Che movies to confirm that.

Al_Pacino_and_Robert_Duvall_in_the_Godfather.jpg

PP30555-the-godfather-offer~Pate-Der-Poster.jpg

Godfather II
 
you're unique Sanjin.. if you wouldn't exist, we would have to order one.. :wink: me loves your passion and the way you're going out to justify all your moves.. even this sort of..

one status you've got to find.. what for do we need SS, PJ, MA, DD, SB?.. you're the best way to test the red one limits so far anyway.. :sorcerer:

edit
hey dudes and dudettes, they're just tests.. no more no less..
 
I had ND1.2 and Circular Polarizer on with aperture T 2.8, K 5600,
Click to expand...

This may be why you had pinky blacks on some fabrics - stacked filtering tends to exaggerate the IR response in the blacks on the RED - great research HERE.

Also exporting from RA/RC at 5600 given you were shooting at sunset may not have helped. You might be better off tweaking the colour temperature in RAW space rather than correcting in Shake or anywhere else.

That said, looks damned good! I sympathise with the Terminator comment, it's a bit of a beast handheld, but hey; I needed an excuse to hit the gym :D
 
cailyoung said:
This may be why you had pinky blacks on some fabrics - stacked filtering tends to exaggerate the IR response in the blacks on the RED - great research HERE.

Also exporting from RA/RC at 5600 given you were shooting at sunset may not have helped. You might be better off tweaking the colour temperature in RAW space rather than correcting in Shake or anywhere else.

That said, looks damned good! I sympathise with the Terminator comment, it's a bit of a beast handheld, but hey; I needed an excuse to hit the gym :D
Click to expand...

Cailyoung,

thanks for your very good point about Kelvin.

I had Formatt ND filter and ND1.2 was maybe too much.

Anyway I have to do more tests and find a right balance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top