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 :)

15 Reasons why you shouldn't sell your DSLR for the SCARLET. yet.

Steve Sherrick said:
Not sure if you are being facetious or not but I would answer your question by saying people who want to make money. Some may find weddings low art form, but personally I think people who shoot weddings and do a really good job of it should be given more credit. There's a ton of pressure with wedding videography. You miss the moment, have a tech failure, etc and it can just about ruin your career or at least your psyche. I have a lot of respect for the good wedding videographers. In fact, I like to shoot one every once and a while just to see how on top of things I am. So back to the money part, unlike many struggling filmmakers, wedding videographers tend to make decent money. Now those struggling filmmakers may argue they'd rather be poor than shoot weddings, and that's fine but the successful wedding videographer could probably be doing both. Just food for thought.
Click to expand...

Very Nicely Put! Coming from a theatrical background, I see weddings as a live event, no second takes, get your shit together right now, or have your shit handed to you. As a budding filmmaker, I see a "controlled" shoot as more of a luxury, ie small crew, controlled lighting, time to address equipment problems, etc and a whole other animal called preproduction. Never knock the guys in the trenches working in real time, they are our brothers. Much respect!
 
just wanted to ad that i'm not only a wedding photographer.
i also do Product photography, Advertising, Portraits, Architecture and Corporate photography.
So just to remind you that this thread is not only about wedding photography. I think it applies to alot of different styles.
here's some of my work from 2007-2010:

Best%20Of.jpg
 
by the way, i stroke through some of the points that are arguable. Still applicable in my case, but maybe not for others.
 
Jiri Vrozina said:
yes,
and some of them like "StillMotion" are very gifted....more i can say about you......
Click to expand...

Jiri, why are you being like this? I am looking at getting into Weddings and I am happy your mate is doing well, I hate that people in weddings get knocked.

If i wanted to go down the nasty youtube mentality road with you I would have replied to your post calling me a Lost Woman, which I turned a blind eye to and instead complimented your friend.

Bloody ridiculous. Cant win either way.
 
Here`s my breakdown for capturing stills with the Scarlet X:

Mostly I will take advantage of capturing short motion sequences on 4K with 25 fps. Extracted stills with an aspect ratio of 3:2 will have appr. 3072x2160 pixels= 6.6 MP.
7 years ago, when moving from film to digital, I was blown away by the quality of my Fuji S2 pro (6MP) which rivaled that of 35mm film. I did quite a few images for advertising
posters with it and noone ever had to complain. Add the improved dynamic range and sensor quality progress in general and you now have a decent tool for capturing the decisive
moment like never before. I did some tests with MX-Epic footage and they look great.

Shooting in 5K with 12 fps will be a rare thing for me. I would have 11 MP (3:2) but no real motion sequence to work with. Just in case however I will not use APS-C lenses
on my Scarlet because at 5K, there must be strong vignetting.

Ok, I would not sell my DSLR, let alone my Phase back for the Scarlet, but for certain types of photoshoots, this new camera opens up a whole new world.
 
Will more then not get shot down by some here for what I am going to say, and BTW, do not mistake my low post count or join date, my account got screwed up, have been on Red user since 2008 about 5 months before i got my R1.

That said, someone stated, the right tool for the job, and I agree, I have a D5, a Nikon F3, F4, F5, D3x, Mamiya RZ Pro II, Sinar 8x10, etc, etc. I still shoot tons of film, still the best way for high quality B&W images, nothing, and I mean nothing comes close to shooting a 8x10 or larger piece of Kodak Plus X Pan, printed out to Silver paper or Platinum print. The right tool for the job, I swore I would never go digital, but after shooting with Canon Xl2's etc for video when Red came along for video I jumped on.

For stills, for my fashion work, I still love film, and shoot mainly medium format or large format, my 35mm DSLR's are quick to shoot not so critical stuff, still produce incredible images, but a 6x7 neg still has more data on it, even when film scanned.

Now my Epic is in transit and will be waiting for me when I get home and I cannot wait to try it out shooting some fashion work. And as a comparison, Mamiya has a digital back for the RZ, crazy expensive, as do a few others, all the way up to 80 Mega pixels, and still not a full 6x7 sensor size, for the price of 1 80 Meg back I could by 2 Epics, and have many more options. So film at times, and digital at others.

cheers
Ron
 
Thomas Kruesselmann said:
Here`s my breakdown for capturing stills with the Scarlet X:

Mostly I will take advantage of capturing short motion sequences on 4K with 25 fps. Extracted stills with an aspect ratio of 3:2 will have appr. 3072x2160 pixels= 6.6 MP.
7 years ago, when moving from film to digital, I was blown away by the quality of my Fuji S2 pro (6MP) which rivaled that of 35mm film. I did quite a few images for advertising
posters with it and noone ever had to complain. Add the improved dynamic range and sensor quality progress in general and you now have a decent tool for capturing the decisive
moment like never before. I did some tests with MX-Epic footage and they look great.

Shooting in 5K with 12 fps will be a rare thing for me. I would have 11 MP (3:2) but no real motion sequence to work with. Just in case however I will not use APS-C lenses
on my Scarlet because at 5K, there must be strong vignetting.

Ok, I would not sell my DSLR, let alone my Phase back for the Scarlet, but for certain types of photoshoots, this new camera opens up a whole new world.
Click to expand...

I would love to see a side by side comparison Scarlet / Epic of still frames. In terms of my clients requirements to shoot motion and pull the stills I'm not convinced 6mp is enough?
 
Kacey Baker said:
Jiri, why are you being like this? I am looking at getting into Weddings and I am happy your mate is doing well, I hate that people in weddings get knocked.

If i wanted to go down the nasty youtube mentality road with you I would have replied to your post calling me a Lost Woman, which I turned a blind eye to and instead complimented your friend.

Bloody ridiculous. Cant win either way.
Click to expand...

Why don't you guys work it out through Private Messaging
 
One of the things I have noticed playing with R3d clips and running test prints from tiffs is that RED nailed the OLPF/sensor calibration with MX. The reason many still cameras need high pixel counts is to avoid aliasing and moire on fine detail due to lack of OLPF filters. This is not a problem with MX since aliasing and moire are not acceptable in motion work.
For stills the lack of aliasing makes the image look like a much higher pixel count still camera with smooth alias free edges on things like hair and other fine details. It has a smoother more organic feel to it more like film instead of digital.
I did a straight print of a 3k 2/3" Scarlet frame, 4.5MP, at 150dpi and roughly 24" x 13" print size. Except for a bit of pixel blocking in underexposed deep shadow areas, you would have a very hard time finding an individual pixel in that print.
An Epic still frame, and by extension Scarlet X since the IQ is the same, doesn't show pixel blocking in the shadows. Somehow Red has developed its software to the point that there is a smooth fall off of detail in shadow areas more like the creaminess of good bokeh in shallow focus shots or the slight softness of diffraction effects at high Fstops. Again it has a much more organic feel to it like film.
Personally I have been very impressed by this.
 
David Rasberry said:
One of the things I have noticed playing with R3d clips and running test prints from tiffs is that RED nailed the OLPF/sensor calibration with MX. The reason many still cameras need high pixel counts is to avoid aliasing and moire on fine detail due to lack of OLPF filters. This is not a problem with MX since aliasing and moire are not acceptable in motion work.
For stills the lack of aliasing makes the image look like a much higher pixel count still camera with smooth alias free edges on things like hair and other fine details. It has a smoother more organic feel to it more like film instead of digital.
I did a straight print of a 3k 2/3" Scarlet frame, 4.5MP, at 150dpi and roughly 24" x 13" print size. Except for a bit of pixel blocking in underexposed deep shadow areas, you would have a very hard time finding an individual pixel in that print.
Click to expand...

Is there a workflow/methods outlined somewhere on Shooting Still on Epic?
 
interesting point on the sensor differences
very stoked to get my hands on the Epic and I also think we need to start a new section for the Still Workflow just like video has. I use currently lightroom and PS, used to use aperture, but found I liked the tools in LR better. Print out to an Epson 7880, fully calibrated with my monitor and tools using spyder. Set up a third monitor just for stills work on the Mac, as the color spaces are different then grading color for the videos

ron
 
Iain Philpott said:
I would love to see a side by side comparison Scarlet / Epic of still frames. In terms of my clients requirements to shoot motion and pull the stills I'm not convinced 6mp is enough?
Click to expand...

Back in the 1990s I shot a lot of Polapan 35mm instant slide film with a Leica M6. (Kind of a contradiction in itself, I know.) Such a bad resolution, fat grain and other defects. People loved it and images were printed as double page spreads. 10 years later, the Red One came along and photographers started using footage for publications in major magazines. 6 MP may not be enough for "descriptive" or "product" imagery, but for fashion/lifestyle/beauty with a certain amount of creative freedom, resolution is a minor issue to me. The resolution debate has been going on for too long anyway. It`s more about the moment, the atmosphere and of course post-production. If dynamic range is good and you don`t have to crop in too much, I don`t see why quality should not be sufficient. This said, I will still have to wait for the actual Scarlet to arrive and prove my point.
 
Anyone know of a source for comprehensive Cine tuts other than REDucation? Seems a bit ironic that such a potentially powerful digital product has only analog training support
 
Well said Steve. Were it not for the work that pays for our tools, many of us would not be able to afford them in the first place and I'm sure we've all done jobs we wish we didn't have to. Ah to be born wealthy & shooting full length features!

PCG
 
7D still makes a solid, cheap director's/DOP's viewfinder...still an excellent tool for location scouting...keeping mine. good for timelapse....Canon mount is still back ordered for my EPIC. I can still make money with it.

all good reasons not to sell it.
 
Yep, I know everyone loves to hate the 5D ii but I'm holding onto mine for time lapse it still pumps out 21 meg pixel stills . That's pretty hard to beat for the price & interchangeability of lenses with the new camera's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top