How would the Scarlet(theoretically)/R1 have looked differently?

[Ed Ollei]

http://vimeo.com/7197831
This clip was shot using a 7D. I have been reading all of the drawbacks these DSLRs have. I have appreciated good indepth detail and knowledge offered. Since I do not make money for a living in this business, a video such as this looks frankly, great to me. It is hard for me to find something I don't like about it. So, as I am eagerly awaiting the arrival, as you are all too, the Scarlet, I would love to know in theory how much more bang for my buck would I be getting? So, how much more differently would this video have looked on an R1? What specific things? In theory, how do you think the Scarlet would have handled these scenes? What should I be looking for in this video as a critic? Thanks!

 

[Eki Halkka]

In theory, how do you think the Scarlet would have handled these scenes? What should I be looking for in this video as a critic? Thanks!

In some shots, there's some overexposed highlights (clouds, white fabric). Those would very likely be possible to avoid, while maintaining otherwise similar look, if you shot properly exposed raw.

It's possible that those could have been avoided with 7D too, by adjusting the color profile /gamma curve and exposure of the camera differently - can't tell for sure as i have no access to 7D or deeper knowledge of the settings.

The much talked rolling shutter, aliasing and moiré artifacts aren't a problem in this video, they might be on some other subject matter though. Other than that, the differences would very likely be neglible on a Vimeo video like this.

 

[David Rasberry]

Very nicely shot footage. It does look very good. Biggest difference with a Red or Scarlet would be better detail and tonal scale in the water I think. 7D so far looks the best of any of Canon's new VDSLR's I think.

 

[Stephen Strangways]

If you shot the same video with a R1 or Scarlet, and uploaded it to a low-res, highly compressed internet video site like Vimeo, with no color correction, it would look largely the same.

If, however, you were doing some extreme color correction, and/or you were watching it on a 1080 display or projecting it in a theatre, the R1 or Scarlet footage would look significantly better.

There are a few common faults to HDSLR video to keep a critical eye out for:
1) Compression artifacts
2) Much stronger rolling shutter effects (see article here)
3) Aliasing (see article here)

You're unlikely to see compression artifacts from the original video as they could just as easily be introduced when Vimeo compresses it.

There's not much in that particular video that would show rolling shutter effects, i.e. there are no fast pans or really shaky camera work.

I can definitely see some aliasing on the wires of the paraglider's chutes/sails, but it would be worse if shown at a higher resolution than Vimeo. There might also be some at the edges of the brightly colored chutes/sails, but that could just be Vimeo's compression.

In conclusion, the more demanding your presentation format, the more demanding you will need to be of the camera you are capturing with.

 

[Luis Filipe Cunha]

Will we have some RED sample footage to evaluate, next friday?
;-D

 

[Joel Kaye]

I own both of them. RED is more detailed at 1080P and doesn't have compression artifacts which are clearly visible in 7D footage at that resolution. In this video some of the shots of the paraglider strings and leading/trailing edges show jaggies. RED/Scarlet will be smooth.

The red paraglider at :33 seems like it's turned to mush. Seems RED should be able to handle that better. I wouldn't surprised if that blue sky showed occasional banding on the 7D at 1080P.

In short... if you're coming down to 720P or less the 7D offers some very nice possibilities. Rolling shutter hasn't bothered me much. If you're moving the camera fast enough to get rolling shutter then the shot will be blurred anyhow. Yeah, I can induce it. I can induce it on RED. I've shot plenty of whip pan jello on my RED.

Wide angled lenses of detailed scenes are far worse on the 7D (softer and more moire). 7D excels on shallow DOF stuff. Probably really good for sneaking a dramatic scene at a real location with no permits. I "believe" the 7D is better in low light but get back to me on that one. I see macroblocking and compression artifacts all over 7D footage. "Neat Video" cleans it up nicely but is time consuming.

I realize now that downrezzing for the web hides a litany of sins.

EXCERPTS from the guy's blog:
http://www.highdefedition.com/2009/10/paragliding-at-point-cartwright/#comments

"The aliasing on the 7D is definitely apparent in some shots...In my opinion it’s acceptable."

"The fact that my HVX has been relegated to shooting interviews and most of the time just recording audio that I can run underneath the main interview shot from the 7D, really is a testament to the quality of video coming out of these camera’s."

---------
Yeah. Sell your HVX. LOL. Sorry, I'm the one guy in the world that hates that camera. I owned one for a month. I personally would qualify the aliasing as unacceptable much of the time it arises. Everyone will be different on this issue.

 

[james anselm]

A testament to Canon that they can produce 2k cameras that are seriously critiqued with 30k ones. This helps RED long term, folks will spend 3k to wait another year instead of investing in Varicam for the next few.

 

[Jim Retar]

A testament to Canon that they can produce 2k cameras that are seriously critiqued with 30k ones. This helps RED long term, folks will spend 3k to wait another year instead of investing in Varicam for the next few.

Very interesting point! This vDSLR revolution could well have helped keep people interested in waiting for Scarlett (alongside a cheap 7d, for now) instead of going out and buying a different system.

 

[Alsone]

Interesting motion shots here:

http://vimeo.com/6992078

Slow motion capabilities look excellent. General motion looks quite good.