Why does RED not recommend shooting principle photography in 2k?

[PatC]

I suppose I would like to add that some of my favorite RED shots do have some level of slow motion on them and therefor are windowed shots. It's not that the footage becomes ugly or unusable, it's just that the image quality gains in 4k are worth every 1 and 0 you can throw it it.

I am right there with you Eric!

 

[Rob Castiglione]

I am shooting in 2k and after some negative comments about 2k was expecting the worst. Using some older super 16 glass. Everyone is absolutely delighted by the images which are just creamy.

 

[Paul Kalbach]

Another reason to shoot 4K even if you're releasing in HD, is that you have the flexibility of zooming in and re-framing the shot in post.

 

[Jannard]

There is nothing wrong with 2K... especially for high speed shooting. There are plenty of examples of 2K RED footage in features that have been released. Actually, one of the Ché movies was shot ALL on anamorphic "less than 2K" and people think it looks incredible. If it is the look you want, go right ahead. But it is not necessarily the best of RED. Test 1st. Make sure you understand exactly what you will get before you are surprised and disappointed that you didn't get monster resolution. It isn't spoken in 2K. That's all we mean.

Jim

 

[Rob Castiglione]

When I was asked whether we should in 2k I actually recommended against it. But then we did some testing using some older Zeiss super 16mm lenses and it was exactly the look the director was looking for.

2K has a aesthetic of its own very different to 4k and there is nothing wrong with the image quality if you feed it enough light.

 

[David Birdy]

There is nothing wrong with 2K... especially for high speed shooting. There are plenty of examples of 2K RED footage in features that have been released. Actually, one of the Ché movies was shot ALL on anamorphic "less than 2K" and people think it looks incredible. If it is the look you want, go right ahead. But it is not necessarily the best of RED. Test 1st. Make sure you understand exactly what you will get before you are surprised and disappointed that you didn't get monster resolution. It isn't spoken in 2K. That's all we mean.

Jim

Agreed Jim!

My 2 cents!

We have shot hours of 2k that is broadcast on Television each week and it looks great!
This may be a good time to point out and confirm that the MYSTERIUM sensor has a uniform amount resolution across the entire chip.

The chip is "scaled" to 4k,3k & 2k sizes. 4K has more resolution because it covers more physical "area" on the sensor, not because of less resolution in the center of the chip!
The ability to scale the sensor is not only revolutionary, but it is one of my favorite features of my Red camera, allowing selectable frame rates up to 120FPS!

Dave

 

[Mitch Gross]

I hope no one thinks that feel that RED's 2K image quality is "bad." It's just distinctively lower than 4K, which makes obvious sense since it is 1/4 the pixels. If it works for you, then great. But not all 2K is the same, just like not all 1920x1080 is the same or SD or anything else.

 

[Noah Kadner]

Also for me the crop factor off the lenses is too much. Especially if you're shooting in close quarters and you don't have any super wide angle lenses. Unless you like your closeups Sergio Leone tight, then you're fine (exaggeration).

Noah

 

[Emanuel A.]

(...)

Actually, one of the Ché movies was shot ALL on anamorphic "less than 2K" and people think it looks incredible.

(...)

Jim

Inherent to the (squeezed) format itself, isn't anamorphics an effective higher (than 2K in case) resolution @ the end, after all?

E.

 

[Stuart English]

2K

2K

Inherent to the (squeezed) format itself, isn't anamorphics an effective higher (than 2K in case) resolution @ the end, after all?

Not at the time that movie was shot, no.

 

[keicol]

The key to shooting nice looking 2k is to "not" shoot with your widest lenses and to have enough light to have your iris stopped down, simply do not shoot with your widest lenses wide open.