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 :)

Red High Speed vs S16mm High Speed

D

deadfred

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi All,

I have a job coming up that will require extensive use of slomotion shots and am considering using Red. How do people think Red Slomo at 120fps compares to the look of S16mm at the same speed?

Is the end result as sharp as S16mm?

The footage will probably be slowed down further in post to 240fps (if we shot 16mm we would shoot 150fps and slow down to 300). Anyone have any info on the best post method to slow down red raw files or any problems that have occurred doing so?

Thanks!
 
Also, will build 16 have any effect on possible frame rates?
 
Have you looked into using the Phantom HD or Phantom 65? I believe that thsoe cameras can shoot 300fps native.

davide
 
The Phantom is great but a lot of cash. It would be cheaper to go s16 route though i agree the phantom would give 300fps native. Just trying to find the right route for the money available.
 
Norm Li would be a great person to ask deadfred, he owns an a highspeed arri s16 and a Red. He seems like a very nice guy, if it were me I would pm him and pick his brain on the subject.

Check out his demo as well... very nice work. Hope you get your answer, good luck.
 
Perhaps budget is not of concern to you, but when you mentioned "extensive" high-speed, I immediately thought of the sound of dollars running through a film camera at five times the normal rate.

Your stock cost shooting Red is virtually nothing, a pittance for LTO tape, compared to quite a bit shooting high-speed film, even lowly 16MM.

I just shot a couple of ballet dancers with our Red at 100 fps and it really exceeded my expectations. Except for the absence of grain, I cannot tell it from film.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo
 
There are some software programs to extrapolate frame doubling, but they never work nearly as well as native high speed. I often see real image issues crop up with them.

The Phantom cameras do cost a bit to rent from us and others, but you will get native frame rates instead of false slow motion. It's still far cheaper than shooting film, even 16mm.
 
For high quality highspeed Phantom HD is the way to go, I think. I must admit I haven't shot with it yet but seen very convincing footage colleagues shot. S16 is not even close to what the Phantom HD can do. Also the Phantom shoots RAW and delivers very high fidelity in terms of colour space and noise; surely better than Red in 2K mode. And you have 35mm DOF. Horses for courses.

Hans
 
PhantomHD shoots @ 1000fps in 1080p

PhantomHD shoots @ 1000fps in 1080p

deadfred said:
Hi All,

I have a job coming up that will require extensive use of slomotion shots and am considering using Red. How do people think Red Slomo at 120fps compares to the look of S16mm at the same speed?

Is the end result as sharp as S16mm?
Thanks!
Click to expand...

PhantomHD can shoot upto 1000fps in 1080p
 
this is my first post on REDUSER....

I just shot 3 commercials on RED...two of them for NIKE....
all high speed (100 and higher fps) in a variety of high key and low key settings....I have shot primarily film, about 99% both 16mm and 35mm for the last ten years or so.... now with RED, I generally have no need to shoot 16 anymore when I am constrained by budget issues. As a matter of fact, I don't want to shoot 16 anymore, unless I have a purely artistic reason for doing so. There are other considerations I keep in mind when choosing between film and RED(digital capture), but those lines are very quickly blurring. I love film as a capture medium, but I also love the immediacy of the new technology and it's new found acceptance as a legitimate professional capture path, make my job (if I can call it that)even more fun and exciting.
if you want to shoot higher than 120fps then move on up to Phantom, it's a great camera system (at least when I have used it). Inside 120 fps means shoot RED.
hope my rant has helped...
Eric
 
spitfire44 said:
this is my first post on REDUSER....

I just shot 3 commercials on RED...two of them for NIKE....
EDIT....hope my rant has helped...
Eric
Click to expand...

Long time listener first time writer eh Eric?

Nice insite and welcome.
 
"For high quality highspeed Phantom HD is the way to go, I think. I must admit I haven't shot with it yet but seen very convincing footage colleagues shot. S16 is not even close to what the Phantom HD can do"

Not sure I agree with that, actually. Phantom HD is my big favourite camera at the moment, 1000fps at 1080 and 1500fps at 720, it's such a wonderful bit of kit. But to say it's a lot better than S16 image quality-wise is I think quite wrong. S16 has much more dynamic range, more resolution (depending as always how you measure these things!) and just a smoother look to it.
I'd much rather use the Phantom any day, but S16 has been written off for HD use for reasons other than image quality, it still looks great!
Steve
 
It's kind of Apples to Oranges as far as Phantom to RED or S16mm high speed.
Very different tools...

Originally the Phantom was invented for scientific (etc.) purposes

But the Phantom too, is "buggy" in it's own ways, for example it can tend to overheat or get hot pixels and other weirdness on the sensor etc.
But the footage from it is soo unbelievably amazing, it's RAD to work with.
 
It's kind of Apples to Oranges as far as Phantom to RED or S16mm high speed.
Very different tools...

Originally the Phantom was invented for scientific (etc.) purposes

But the Phantom too, is "buggy" in it's own ways, for example it can tend to overheat or get hot pixels and other weirdness on the sensor etc.
But the footage from it is soo unbelievably amazing, it's RAD to work with.
 
Billy.Summers said:
It's kind of Apples to Oranges as far as Phantom to RED or S16mm high speed.
Very different tools...

Originally the Phantom was invented for scientific (etc.) purposes

But the Phantom too, is "buggy" in it's own ways, for example it can tend to overheat or get hot pixels and other weirdness on the sensor etc.
But the footage from it is soo unbelievably amazing, it's RAD to work with.
Click to expand...


Billy...in a way I think it is pretty clear....if at 2k 120 fps is enough then go with RED, if you need more than 120 fps but less then 150 fps then go SR3HS....if you need more then Phantom (or Weisscam) will do, however i do agree that there has been some strange artifacting with the Phantom, but yes the footage is unreal....I love shooting 1000 fps!

personally, I just don't see the need to shoot with the SR3HS any longer with RED here now....of course that is a pretty general statement, not taking into account lighting, budget, subject, etc,etc.....just on frame rate considerations RED at 120 fps is enough.
Eric
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top