Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

House pisses me off

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rob Ruffo said:
This is a sad truth fro some people- but Discovery, Nat Geo, the BBC and many other networks have admirably stood up for high quality standards by barring DSLR use. I've also had clients and collaborators who were very serious about quality and appreciated all of the little extra bits of effort we put into their shows. I wish they were all that way.
Click to expand...


and I absolutely applaud those networks... but this is FOX we are talking about. Need I say more?
 
Tom.Wong said:
and I absolutely applaud those networks... but this is FOX we are talking about. Need I say more?
Click to expand...

No, you needn't, although I do very much love Fringe.

It should also be noted that Fox is only 720p, so resolution is less critical than on 1080i (again, gives 1080p once deinterlaced by your TV) networks. Only Fox, ABC and some sport networks are 720p, all the rest are 1080i, and some movie networks are even 1080p - a waste of bandwidth that will only give a visible difference on Tvs incapable of properly deinterlacing 1080i, but still. On a 1080i network, resolution standards must be more stringent.
 
Rick Burnett said:
Very much so, I agree with you there. The image quality of CSI:somewhere isn't going to be as critical as Planet Earth where the image quality is EVERYTHING (and amazing I should add).
Click to expand...

I LOVE Planet Earth
 
Martin Weiss said:
The interview is now online

http://philipbloom.co.uk/2010/04/19...-of-house-season-finale-shot-on-canon-5dmkii/
Click to expand...

Great interview. It was interesting to hear him talk about the audience connection with the 5DII that just wasn't possible with 35mm, and also how it helped the actors turn in a better performance. The image quality was there. Focus was a challenge, but many other aspects of the production were better. It will definitely be a tool in their tool box as House continues.

I don't know what to tell you, Rob about what to tell your clients that are continually requesting the 5DII. I guess refer them to someone that can shoot the 5DII with professional results because there are pros out there that obviously can. It may be a bit more of a hassle but obviously doable. Yaitane says he would have no problem tackling a series with the 5DII, and many aspects of the work flow would be appealing. This is just 1st gen. I can only imagine what the improvements will be in the following generations. And the real kick in the gut is, Canon wasn't even trying. Canon has been getting much feedback about what this cam needs from the industry. It will be interesting to see how they respond.
 
Jerry W said:
Great interview. It was interesting to hear him talk about the audience connection with the 5DII that just wasn't possible with 35mm, and also how it helped the actors turn in a better performance. The image quality was there. Focus was a challenge, but many other aspects of the production were better. It will definitely be a tool in their tool box as House continues.

I don't know what to tell you, Rob about what to tell your clients that are continually requesting the 5DII. I guess refer them to someone that can shoot the 5DII with professional results because there are pros out there that obviously can. It may be a bit more of a hassle but obviously doable. Yaitane says he would have no problem tackling a series with the 5DII, and many aspects of the work flow would be appealing. This is just 1st gen. I can only imagine what the improvements will be in the following generations. And the real kick in the gut is, Canon wasn't even trying. Canon has been getting much feedback about what this cam needs from the industry. It will be interesting to see how they respond.
Click to expand...

Are there truly effective ways to deal with the jello & skew? Seems like that's a big issue. I think if that could truly be overcome, I'd consider shooting with a DSLR.
 
Chris Pickle said:
Are there truly effective ways to deal with the jello & skew? Seems like that's a big issue. I think if that could truly be overcome, I'd consider shooting with a DSLR.
Click to expand...

Jello and skew can be overcome by never filming fast moving vehicles and only doing slow pans. the worst issue is aliasing which cannot be overcome without a series of antialiasing filters which deliver a 600p measured resolution at bets, often less) image, do not work on wide-angle lenses, and are not a 100% solution.
 
Last edited:
Canon may be listening, and they certainly do like the press this all generates but I don't expect them to ever really compete with Red or Arri. Quite simply they are a volume electronics Co. Red can sell 7000+ R1s and it's a fantastic success, but Canon needs to sell 700,000 5D MIIs to be happy. There just aren't enough filmmakers for Canon to make a real cinema specific product with an S35 or larger chip. ENG and wedding types don't want to deal with shallow DOF or manual exposure and they outnumber us by at least an order of magnitude. The DSLRs image quality will continue to get better but it will require intrepid and talented entrepreneurs to modify them for acceptable use in real production. Even then the speed and ergonomic versatility of an Epic or Alexa will continue to dominate this segment. As we can see though there will soon be a "Slumdog Millionaire" shot on a DSLR and some will say that it's the exception that proves the rule, but the reality is DSLRs are not often the proper tools for the job, but they are certainly good at some things.
 
Jerry W said:
Great interview. It was interesting to hear him talk about the audience connection with the 5DII that just wasn't possible with 35mm, and also how it helped the actors turn in a better performance. The image quality was there. Focus was a challenge, but many other aspects of the production were better. It will definitely be a tool in their tool box as House continues.

I don't know what to tell you, Rob about what to tell your clients that are continually requesting the 5DII. I guess refer them to someone that can shoot the 5DII with professional results because there are pros out there that obviously can. It may be a bit more of a hassle but obviously doable. Yaitane says he would have no problem tackling a series with the 5DII, and many aspects of the work flow would be appealing. This is just 1st gen. I can only imagine what the improvements will be in the following generations. And the real kick in the gut is, Canon wasn't even trying. Canon has been getting much feedback about what this cam needs from the industry. It will be interesting to see how they respond.
Click to expand...

Let's leave improvements from the future out of this. I'm sure there will be many future things that will be great, including Scarlet. I will gladly use any future camera that delivers a quality image, and I don't care if it costs $50 000 or $100. I am talking about the 5D/7D.

Let's also state something to think about: No talent in the world, from now, from history, not even Hithcock risen from the grave alongside his favorite DP can make a 600p image with tons of aliasing look good in 1080p (and you suggestion that I refer my clients to such a person are quite frankly offensive). NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO you are left with the limitations of the sensor and the compression, no amount of talent can really fix this, although maybe a lot of $$ for post can HELP this, at best. This aliasing is present ALL THE TIME on ANYTHING IN FOCUS, faces teeth, hair, ALL OF IT. If you want to get rid of it, as mentioned above, you can use blurring filters that leave you with about 600p of resolution, at best, and not that reliably. (This is not only my finding, you can look it up.)

Now, if your standards are low, or the delivery is SD, like the web. Thats' fine. If not, it's really not fine to deliver something shot at 600p. Yes talent is the most important thing, but there's a limit to how bad your tools can be, beyond which talent can no longer save you.

Here a suggestion for you: If you want to learn about cameras, don't do it from the likes of Phil Bloom who makes good money promoting shockingly overpriced SLR gear for Zacuto. I am also still on the fence about Canon funding for all this. Certainly that guy went home with a nice case of free L glass, at the very least. Maybe Zacuto is slipping him a few bucks on the down-lo too. I don't know, but neither do you. Peopel in the business get offered free stuff all the time. For example a screenwriter I know of got offered a free luxury car, off-book, to write it into his greenlit screenplay. He shall remain nameless because he took the car.

You should also trust your own eyes, not what somebody says. You speak like you have proof he got good results without having seen the episode. I frankly doubt it will meet my idea of good, nor that of my most cherished clients who look at images with refined sensitivity.
 
Last edited:
Canon did not make any payments to Gale Tattersall

Canon did not make any payments to Gale Tattersall

Rob Ruffo said:
My feeling is that House DOP got paid big time by Canon. Otherwise it makes no sense, no sense at all.
Click to expand...

Rob, you started this rather contentious thread by making a pretty damaging claim that Canon paid the DP, Gale Tattersall to shoot the season finale of 'House, M.D' on the EOS 5Ds Mkii ... I was somewhat concerned by your assertion and have double checked with a senior Canon manager who is in a position to know exactly what went on with the final episode ... he re-assures me that NOTHING of the kind happened and for you to suggest otherwise is an insult to a professional and highly respected DP ... unless you have some hard evidence to the contrary I suggest you retract that claim and maybe even apologize to Gale and Canon.

Professional DPs and Producers make all kinds of decisions based on a mixture of financial and aesthetic reasons ... just because you don't understand why a popular and well made TV show should want to shoot on HD DSLRs doesn't mean a thing ... if you listen carefully to Philip's interview with Gale and Greg you might just learn something about the art and craft of visual story telling.

Cameras are tools for skilled professionals to use in all kinds of creative ways .... but sometime you need to think outside the box .. we faced the same uphill battle when Jim first launched the Red One ... lots of people didn't want to believe that you could shoot great looking imagery on a $17,500 camera .... it seems that some people are having a hard time believing you can shoot great looking imagery on a $2500 HD camera.

There is plenty of room in the digital content creation world for REDs, Arris, Sonys and Canons .... why not embrace the technology and help your customers tell the best story they can with all the tools at their disposal?

Neil
 
Evin Grant said:
Canon may be listening, and they certainly do like the press this all generates but I don't expect them to ever really compete with Red or Arri. Quite simply they are a volume electronics Co. Red can sell 7000+ R1s and it's a fantastic success, but Canon needs to sell 700,000 5D MIIs to be happy. There just aren't enough filmmakers for Canon to make a real cinema specific product with an S35 or larger chip. ENG and wedding types don't want to deal with shallow DOF or manual exposure and they outnumber us by at least an order of magnitude. The DSLRs image quality will continue to get better but it will require intrepid and talented entrepreneurs to modify them for acceptable use in real production. Even then the speed and ergonomic versatility of an Epic or Alexa will continue to dominate this segment. As we can see though there will soon be a "Slumdog Millionaire" shot on a DSLR and some will say that it's the exception that proves the rule, but the reality is DSLRs are not often the proper tools for the job, but they are certainly good at some things.
Click to expand...

Evin - some good points about the volume. However, what is interesting is that Canon didn't even try here. They simply added video to their existing still camera. They didn't set out to make a HD camera to kill the Red camera or sony or panasonic or whoever, they made a kick ass still camera better and more marketable. I had a 5D (v1) just for taking awesome full frame stills. That chip is just lovely. When the 5D MKII came out I bought it so not only could I still take my creamy photos but also do some HD work with it and only have to carry a single body.

Don't underestimate Canon. They are well aware of the success here and have more than enough resources at their disposal to put some hardware in the DSLR to read out the entire chip instead of line skipping and store it in a better codec. The question is will they act on this?

Don't worry about them having to sell hundreds of thousands of cameras because they do every year. Remember they are adding this to an already established still market. The still guys who have no interest in HD will still buy these cameras with or without the HD as long as the still image looks good (which is does) and the price doesn't go up just because of the HD features. So what this means is that Canon can offset the cost of the additional R&D for the video features by spreading it out over their existing still camera sales.

Also the other great thing from a consumer standpoint is that after selling my used 5D1 for a little over a grand my loss of investment was not bad at all. It's a lot harder to absorb the tech change when your camera investments are in the 20K plus range. That is why I rent cameras in that price range.

Now, this is a "Red" forum. Lets not forget the bias that exists here which is fine, I would expect this at any forum tied to a particular product. I just laugh sometimes at the fact that no matter how good some other camera looks it won't be as good as the next Red camera. Sometimes it's loyalty, sometimes fanboys, sometimes trying to protect or justify their purchase and sometimes spot on. Heck, in another thread someone bashed Roger Deakins because his opinion of the Red One was not the same as theirs. Hello? That is just rediculous.

Look at the footage of the MX posted in this thread there is major rolling shutter going on in the fast pans. Yet just earlier Rob was listing that as one of the flaws of the 5D. Well guess what the Red has the same flaw. So who cares? Work around the limitations and use the cameras to their best. I shoot good looking HD with the 5D all of the time. Why am I not using the Red? Because it's not out yet. At least not the Red that I want. I knew when the Red One first came out that it would be slick but a work in progress. So I said I'll wait for the next round. Give Jim some time to get his feet planted properly and learn from their first go around. Well I'm still waiting and when and if the Scarlet or Epic is available without having to stand in line or get on a 2 year waiting list I might just pick one up. I know they will look good, I know they will have great features, I know they will have a solid post workflow. But if I can't get a full frame or Super35 Scarlet for under 10K, I'll just rent it because I know that not long after those cameras are actually obtainable in numbers something else will be close on its' heels - at least in the sub 10k market.

I hope that doesn't make me sound like a basher. I hope Jim sees that I'm all about getting on board but until it's real I can't touch it. By real I mean, let me touch one, test one and then give him my credit card. I would I hope that I can exist on this forum with an open mind to all cameras and all tech and give kudos to Red or Arri or Canon. Jim himself has given props to Arri because he probably understands the hard work that goes into making something like an Alexa first hand. Sure it's competition but Red seems to be doing fine. I doubt it needs endless fanboys to succeed as the proof is in the images Red produces. We have all seen them. Thus why i don't feel the need to keep kissing their rear end. Hopefully they already know I love them and I'm just waiting for my turn.

Rob - Come on man. I can show you plenty of nasty Red footage that is just plain awful - yes even on the big screen. Did you see The Informant?. Does that mean Red sucks? No way. It means like any tool you need to understand it and use it properly. Rob if you are worried about losing clients or jobs because House used the 5D then you need to rethink your business model. You should be able to pick up your Red, Canon, Sony, etc. and please your clients at any budget and if not then maybe you are more technician than artist. I don't know. The 5D has serious flaws but it's easy to work around them when you know what they are and still make some pretty damn good looking images. Remember the price my friend. I want to use the 5D the Epic, the Scarlet and every other cool camera that shows up in the coming years.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
This is a sad truth fro some people- but Discovery, Nat Geo, the BBC and many other networks have admirably stood up for high quality standards by barring DSLR use. I've also had clients and collaborators who were very serious about quality and appreciated all of the little extra bits of effort we put into their shows. I wish they were all that way.
Click to expand...
These are networks that show footage that people tune into (and buy the disc for) because of the quality.
​
Americas Funniest Home Video's footage actually came from some of the gear people joke about here. People tuned in for the gags.
Never the less, if you can make someones jaw drop with amazement, people will seek out the stunning.
To aspire to inspire.​
 
Am I the only one that found it incredibly ironic that the OP is complaining about misinformation damaging his career, all the while spreading misinformation about the DP of House (that he was paid off to use inferior products) thereby harming his career.

Shameful.
 
Andrew Thomas said:
Am I the only one that found it incredibly ironic that the OP is complaining about misinformation damaging his career, all the while spreading misinformation about the DP of House (that he was paid off to use inferior products) thereby harming his career.

Shameful.
Click to expand...

No, you're not.

Rob: It is one thing to complain about the impact it is having on your business and that there are many clients that don't understand the real differences. But it isn't hard to understand how a show would choose to shoot a single episode with a less than state of the art camera that does have some attractions (size, cost...) - even if it is primarily a stunt. "Gimmick" episodes are done all the time (ER live, Scrubs musical, crossovers with other shows, etc.) So why do you have to accuse them - either Canon or "House" - of commercial bribery? Like it or not Canon 5dII is extremely popular and has garnered a lot of press and using it gives House PR people something a little different to talk about and promote. And sometimes, doing something different or throwing out that kind of challenge can even energize the crew - even if it is only for that one show - it's a change of pace.

I highly doubt that either side paid or got paid - because it wasn't necessary.

Did Jim pay Peter Jackson to shoot "crossing the line" or Soderbergh "CHE" with R1? No because it wasn't necessary. RED probably loaned them the cameras (because they were preproduction) but these guys did it because they thought it was cool and wanted to try the new thing. And I hate to say it but in the case of CHE I suspect they got a LOT more publicity having shot on RED than they ever would have if he just shot it on film. I doubt very many of us would ever have heard of it if it hadn't been shot on RED. Nothing against CHE, it just was a small film in terms of marketing exposure. Same with Girlfriend Experience - would we have heard of it at all if it had been shot on film with some mid-level mainstream actor instead of on RED with a pornstar? Producers will generally grab onto anything to use as a PR "hook".
 
Tim H.

very nice write up mate. Unfortunately it doesn't matter. Folks here are brain washed and consider RED as a religion or a cult, not a tool. Its basically Scientology 101 here. People here, dont consider anyone a human being unless he/she prays to the RED one camera. Many folks here made $30-400k investment in technology by buying RED and expected the world the stop the development while they build up the cult. Not very clever. The last thing I would invest my money is into technology that changes everyday. Thats why its hard for them to accept the change. They have money but not creativity and it just sucks for them when students right out of film schools can have tools to take away their market and make their investment less and less valid.
HDSLRs aren't going away. Smart people are embracing this technology while red users pray to the non existing scarlet.

Tim, I would consider you the free human being. You have the ability to enjoy life and the technology. You re not brain washed, you re not in a cult, you re just free. You can use red, genesis, 5D2 and create amazing footage and believe me, there are more folks out there are just like you and me. We re free human beings that respect each other, a dying breed, but we re still out there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top