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 :)

120FPS QUALITY - S16MM vs. RED 2K

If I was matching to a red, I wouldn't shoot more than 100 ASA film - I think the grain would really pop. Even Vision 2 250D and 200T look pretty grainy at 1080p off of Hdcam-SR.

That said, there are some pretty terrific degrain tools out there now, I use Furnace DeGrain from the Foundry, and am very pleased.

I would strongly recommend against skimping on post costs with S16 - the type of telecine, the operator, and the format you transfer to all have a huge impact on the image. Either scan to data at 2k, or telecine to HDCam-SR and capture to QT on a FCP machinewould be my recommendation.
 
Thanks all, great input. Doug, we've looked at that lens - we've got a ton of Canon and Nikon glass from pro-still shooting - but did not test it, as the CW is that its weaker generally than the 80-200 - for the shoots where 2K becomes critical, its generally going to be shooting with long lenses both tripod and on rigged lines handheld / suspended (quasi handheld). So the 80-200 is sharp and well reputed - I'd be surprised but intrigued if the glass you refer to was better. We're waiting for a smart Canon mount eagerly, as we have a lot more Canon glass, as well as experience with that glass. But I might test that Super 16 lens and see what we get - our 2K test footage so far is pretty soft - no, really soft. We're used to shooting 20+ Megapixel stills and tweaking them though, so we are very sensitive to softness...a curse.

As for 2K vs. HDCAM telecine - why would I consider anything BUT 2K data xfer? That's what I had planned, at a post facility in Denver - love to hear why I'd do something different....
 
I am getting nice results at 100fps 16x9 180 shutter. I have found that 2 things matter the most for me. First is glass... you need the highest resolving lens you can get. I have had great results with a Canon Cine style HD Video Lens with the B4 adaptor. Next is rendering with RED CINE. Strangely enough I have found that the results of renders out of RED Alert are not the same quality and smoothness as from RED CINE. Footage is pleasing my broadcast clients very much. Also effective ASA for the RED at 100fps 180 shutter is going to be in the 100 range or less.
If your committed to film though...check into the GZAP military 16mm camera system. Last time I needed one I got it from Birns in LA although that was a while ago. Nice, light and high speed. C-mount lenses too.
 
Hi A.,

Most of the freestyle kayaking footage in the MammothHD RED library was shot by me, I think most of it is overcranked, and I think it looks pretty good. I can upload some to you if you have an FTP site and you can see for yourself (Mammoth only showcases thumbnails, which won't give you a good idea about sharpness). I shot it with a cheapie $800 Angenieux lens, because that was the only option available to me at the time. And I still think it looks pretty good. Of course, I would shoot it with much better glass today, but when the RED first came out, PL glass was scarce, and there was no Canon option.

http://www.mhdp2.com/XRED1/REDL18/MHD_REDL18.html

Aren't you supposed to be on the Grand Canyon sometime soon??
 
Meryem - thanks, yeah, your footage on MHD looks good - I'd scrubbed through it a while back. Yes, if you would not mind FTP-ing one of your fav sequences from that shoot at 120FPS would be great. We're getting good, but not great, 120FPS results. Noise free, yes, impressive for digital, yes, looks good, yes, sharp, no. Cutting from 4K, 3K to 2K on a big screen just seems dodgy. For most shots, fine, but when we're spending 3-5 days this coming spring setting up ziplines and rigging for some shots, then have 20 minutes to shoot the event itself, we want to get the best footy we can!

Yeah, I'm on the Grand starting Aril 22. Man, I'd kill for that Birger mount before I leave! Getting all the cases, gear and especially power, and methods, worked out for shooting R1 on the trip is pretty daunting. R1 on the Grand. Might be a first.
 
Hdcam is cheaper than Hdcam-SR, which is cheaper than 2k - that's the only reason you would go to Hdcam.

You may find that S16 lenses are sharper for 2k work, because they are designed for a smaller format and therefore for more lw/mm to get the same lw/ph as a larger format. This is assuming a well designed S16 lens of the same era as the 35mm glass you're comparing to. S16 needs to be blown up twice as much as 35mm, so theoretically the lenses should be sharper. I heard this from Arri, I have also heard that in practice this is not always the case.

Charles
 
Not really, the S16 lenses aren't really any sharper in terms of MTF or lines/mm. While it's true that 16mm originated material will get blown up proportionately larger for theatrical projection, there still is a finite limit to the amount of detail that can be resolved from film stock before the grain begins to eat up your image. 16mm could theoretically deliver a more detailed or higher resolution image than RED One 2K. However, most 16mm film scans are done at 2K or lower. And as with the characteristics of the optical path on the RED One, bayer sensor, OLPF, et.. that yields less measured resolution than the full 2K, the same holds true with a film scan. Scanned 16mm film will probably yield a more detailed image overall compared to RED One 2K, but in terms of measured resolution I would think them to be very similar. Both yielding somewhere in the neighborhood of 1700 horizontal lines of identifiable resolution. Good focus pulling, good optics and good post processing are critical. Most people don't realize that their 4K footage on a RED One looks just as soft as the 2K mush they complain about. It's just a lot easier to sharpen it up when it's downsampled to typical 2K working resolutions.

If I were in your position, I would shoot a 16mm test and have it processed and scanned for comparison. If you're comfortable with shooting 16mm and the film process, extra costs, etc.. You can't go wrong by choosing it. I'm as big a RED fan-boy as anyone, but sometimes other tools are better for a given job.

Oh, and going back to Evin's post a ways back regarding 2K on the RED RAM. I don't believe it allows 120fps at 16:9. I think the camera and current media are still limited to 120Hz only at 2K 2:1 RC28. I'll connect the RED RAM and double check this for you later today.
 
hate to say it but why don't you rent a phantom hd for the day you shoot, they had it out on a show I'm working on that is a mainly red1 shoot and they did some explosion shots at 480fps, the fire looked like liquid it was rediculously beautiful and it might be cheaper than your rental plus lab on film.
 
Yeah the Red Ram is limited to 100fps at 16:9 in both RC28 and RC36:

http://www.red.com/faq/what-are-the-maximum-frame-rates-for-cf-card-red-raid-and-red-ram-recording-media/

What is your output aspect ratio for the show? If you need 120fps NOT at 2:1 the Arri would be a better option. But, I think cutting from 4K Redcode to film the grain will be more noticeable than the sharpness drawback of 2K. Obviously there are answers for grain in post . . . . but if you already own a Red it makes sense to shoot with that. You will get more material, you will be more comfortable with the camera, and you'll dodge the rental fee:wink:
 
I've shot both and I think if grain is your main concern, the R1 will have less grain, but if you shoot with the vision 2 50D it should be close - and day exteriors tend to hide any grain quite well because of the high key look and inherent contrast. As others have said, how you handle the film in post will be a major factor to achieving the look you want. Make sure to use a good telecine (eg Spirit) and have your color workflow planned.

All in all, I think you'll get better looking footage with film if you're shooting in uncontrolled daylight conditions. Film is ideal for the types of footage you described, but remember that you'll be blowing through stock like crazy at high speed. I shot a bunch of high speed on an SR-3HS - it would do 150fps. Is 120 all the SR-2 will do?
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Not really, the S16 lenses aren't really any sharper in terms of MTF or lines/mm. .
Click to expand...

Hi Jeff,

I would say the latest S16 lenses from Cooke & Zeiss are sharper, it's only really evident with the widest lenses which is why Cooke only makes a 6, 9.5 & 12mm however Zeiss makes a larger set of 6, 8, 9.5, 12, 14, 18, 25, 35, 50 mm

Stephen
 
Last week we shot a Big Air competition locally for the Aspen Skiing Co and had an opportunity to do newer tests of Red high speed, with new knowledge and experience from this forum and our ongoing tests. The debate is essentially over - we were finally able to get 120FPS/100FPS footy that is quite good - good enough to eliminate thoughts of film and the related cost and hassle.

As many have said here, it came down to very close attention to exposure and focus (glass is still still Nikon/Canon) and specific post practices. We also were shooting in abundant outside light, which red loves. The result is noise free, color accurate and fairly sharp images at 120 and 100 FPS. We also shot in the same location and light at 3K and 4K. The footage stands up cutting between rates.

Out experience so far shows its not about one single variable - but minor issues in lots of areas add up to significant differences. For example, using an IR Cut filter has made a very noticeable difference in overall quality for these tests. At 2K, full vs. half debayer is a lot more significant than for 4K or 3K. Exposure is SO critical - affecting, as everyone here knows, not just highlights and shadows and noise, but color accuracy and perceieved resolution. This forum is incredibly helpful, but you've gotta go shoot. A lot.

Now, if we could get a lighter red rig to shoot handheld at 120FPS when in awkward positions....we can't wait for Epic, with potentially lighter configurations, and 125FPS at 4K.

But for us, the debate is over, as we just got better and better at shooting Red.
 
Hi Afogel... don´t forget that the Arri S16 has to be the HS (High speed) moidel that may go up to 150fps; the regular model would only go up to 75fps. And... remember that a roll of film will only last slightly over 2 minutes at 120fps!!!
The Red, taking care of exposure, will give you nice footage at 120fps, and you can shoot... and shoot... and shoot...
Guido
 
Yep, thanks - we're finally getting 2K R1 looking good, so many critical variables. I was able too look at some 2K well scanned (spirit) 16mm high speed footy next to well posted/shot R1 120FPS, and, well, detailed debates aside, its not better overall - different, but probably not better to an uneducated audience.

We've yet to try good s16 long glass, but (here we go again) we've tested recently our red PL 18-50 vs. Canon L16-35, 10-22 and 24-70L, in 4K, 3K, 2K, and the 16-35 and 24-70 are on the whole just as good, and our Birger/Impero make concerns about mechanics largely moot. Have not tested Cooke/Ang/Zeiss PL glass, in long focal lengths its too heavy to consider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top