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 :)

Arri Alexa and Mysterium-X...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok - think of newspaper half-toned image. That image started off as a high bit depth, but to print it, they made a half-tone, which is effectively a 1bit image (off or on, ink or no-ink) rather than a continuous tone image that you'd get from a photographic print. That is an example of using resolution (the halftone is very finely printed) as a trade for bit depth. The bit depth got reduced, but we still see a gradient because we used resolution to do some of the work that bit depth would normally do.

Graeme
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
Stephen,

next time I'll bring also RED1 and shoot at the same locations.



Also today Digital Revolution looks exactly something like this:

1. Get relatively cheap camera (RED1) and shoot great images with nice compressed RAW at 4.5K res onboard CF, HDD or SSD.

2. Get cheap camera (7D) and shoot great HD images in H264 with sometimes disturbing artifacts.

3. Get pretty expensive camera (Alexa) and shoot great images at ProRes HD/2K res only or uncompressed with tethered and expensive HDSDI recorder.
Click to expand...

LOL comparing 7D with Red1 is really funny isnt it :001_wub:
7D=2K$
Red1=More than 15K$

7D=1.8 Lbs
Red1=More than 10-12 Lbs

you read news about House Final Season shot on Canon HDSLR. Gale Tattersall and Greg Yaitanes dont know whats moire right ?
 
Lee Saxon said:
Oh man, Graeme, I was with you for like two whole sentences that time.

I would love to see you make a post one day that I understand the whole way through...
Click to expand...

Get a camera, photoshop and shoot an image with two resolutions similar in sizes to what we are talking about (one with twice the resolution) and grade the higher one through various levels and repeat on the lower resolution then downrez both to a web format. It will become remarkably clear what he is talking about in the final comparison.
 
Lee Saxon said:
Oh man, Graeme, I was with you for like two whole sentences that time.

I would love to see you make a post one day that I understand the whole way through...
Click to expand...

LOL, me too! Just when I thought I understood what he meant when he used the word spacial, he elabrorated. :-) In attempt to better understand, I went to the Wikki. Under Spacial Resolution was this:

Radiometric resolution

Main article: Color depth
Radiometric resolution determines how finely a system can represent or distinguish differences of intensity, and is usually expressed as a number of levels or a number of bits, for example 8 bits or 256 levels which is typical of computer image files. The higher the radiometric resolution, the better subtle differences of intensity or reflectivity can be represented, at least in theory. In practice, the effective radiometric resolution is typically limited by the noise level, rather than by the number of bits of representation.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution?wasRedirected=true
 
Sorry if this resolution tech primer has derailled the thread a wee. Graeme, I'm certain you have been called upon to explain this far more offer than you would like, and with varying degrees of success, but it is worth doing. If we took half of the time that has gone into every comparison post to cover this material a little then the quality of the discussion would be greatly improved. :-) Add to that a quarter of the "When is Scarlet coming?" posts and we could all qualify for an online Phd.
 
:jacked: :jacked: :jacked:
:jacked: :jacked: :jacked:

Oh well......it's for a good cause.
 
All of this cost re: cheap dslr cameras being used for shooting House etc seems to be missing the point a bit. Relative to the cost per episode of producing a show like House, there is no saving in fighting against an inferior format.

It's funny to me that a lot of the guys advocating the DSLR video revolution are shooting with Primos on the front, and having to process the footage through twixtor etc to try and undo half the crap that is introduced.

The moment you put a primo on something, you've neutralized the argument about body cost, and the moment you have to do a whole level of processing to try and hide the goofy artifacts your format has created, you're fighting the wrong fight.

I think the EPIC is exactly where we need to go. A RED ONE that won't break your back when you shoot hand held, and it rocks in low light.

I tried shooting DSLR video for the first a time a few weeks ago, and all I thought was, hmmmm, I really need my RED 7 inch LCD on this thing for focus, and 1:1 focus zoom, and cinelenses, and my audio i/os etc.

I can't wait till they tell us what numbers we've got on the EPIC bodies :)
 
When House decides to shoot a full season on DSLR, I'll take this conversation more seriously.

It's as if someone shot an episode in Super8 for fun, and suddenly everyone started arguing about whether Super8 is going to take over 35mm production.

The trend by some in this thread to argue that low quality is the wave of the future is fairly ridiculous, IMO.

Sure, Canon has a price advantage. So does Super8.

- Tim
 
Cal Brunker said:
All of this cost re: cheap dslr cameras being used for shooting House etc seems to be missing the point a bit. Relative to the cost per episode of producing a show like House, there is no saving in fighting against an inferior format.
:)
Click to expand...

Which is the real reason 35mm has not died & is still the first choice of many.
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
During Fall 2010. Need MX upgrade desperately!!!
Click to expand...

Funny that, how it makes me feel.

I've been shooting video professionally for over ten years. Most of it has been event work of varying kinds and only a fraction has been the kind of controlled shooting that I would put on a reel as a demonstration of my skill level as a DP. (Whatever that is.) Frankly I don't feel that there is enough of the latter to make a representative reel yet.

Some of the reason for this, I have felt, was that I didn't feel that the mediums that I have access to made an image that was good enough, as Sanjin seems to be indicating. It has always made me feel as if I were making excuses. I should have been shooting more scripted material all along, as I try to do now. I feel lame. :-(

By making the comparison, I don't mean to suggest that Sanjin is a lame, though it may seem that way. No offense intended.
 
Last edited:
Scott.

don't be confused with me because I'm not a sort DP or cinematographer in an old-fashioned way.

I feel more like a new-be or upcoming moviemaker that is also able to shoot by myself if I needed.
 
Film isn't bad. But it is dying.

Film isn't bad. But it is dying.

Kemalettin Sert said:
i have seen it last month but that doesnt change anything..Canon still 2K $ :closedeyes:
Click to expand...

And probably worth every penny. Of course, ask any RED ONE owners if they are happy with what they paid for their REDs. In fact, I doubt if any of them would even trade it for a 7D with a $15.5K refund.

I find these RED bashing posts humorous. On one side, you get people claiming that a 7D/5D is competitive with RED because they are cheaper and "good enough" to shoot a TV episode on. On the other side you get people defending film as still "better" and discussing, in the same context as RED, major productions, with budgets in the tens of millions, and cameras costing hundreds of thousands. I guess RED has everyone running scared.

Whatever you think the state of film vs. digital is at this moment, I can't imagine there are too many people who believe that film capabilities will advance from this point at that same rate as digital. Just like there are very few still photographers still shooting on film, the digital takeover in "movies" is inevitable. And two other things that new and indie "film makers" value from digital, and can't get from film, are accessibility and immediacy. When you shoot digital, you don't need a lab to process shots and provide answer prints, etc, etc. You get to see what you shot easily and immediately see where your mistakes were and what the effects of your technique were. You can start with a $500 consumer camcorder and work your way up to an Epic or Alexa, assuming you can make a success of your shooting. You just don't get the same immediacy and growth curve with film.

I have been somewhat interested in still photography and film/video for more than twenty years but never had the patience or budget to deal with film. I shot very little on my Canon EOS film camera because it cost a lot of money to shoot then process only to see what mistakes I made that I can correct. When I got my Canon D60 7 years ago, my photographic activity went straight up and the quality has followed. Now, as my digital processing capability has advanced for video (faster computers, cheaper storage) the same curve is beginning to emerge for my "movie making."

My best friend has a 26 year old daughter who is a talented fine arts photographer, getting her MFA at a prestigious school. She loves film. She shoots on 8x10 format cameras and lives for the dark room. But is there anyone who thinks she is "typical" of the photography world? Like it or not, the future is digital and it is here. Just my opinion, of course.
 
Canon 7D: Good for weddings, and low end web work. The occasional reality show.
Film: Good for "standard" high end productions with 6 million + budgets
Alexa: Good for television productions as main camera.
Epic: Good for everything else plus b camera on above film and television due to exceptional form factor and amazing resolution (special effects). Special effects TV. Films with the style as eternal spotless, Babel, Slumdog who use a lot of hand held> Epic.

Notwithstanding the tricks Mr Jannard has up his sleeves with the balls and desire to achieve them and exceptional track record in doing so.

Amirite?
 
Jason Sinclair said:
Canon 7D: Good for weddings, and low end web work.
Film: Good for high end productions with 6 million + budgets
Alexa: Good for television productions as main camera.
Epic: Good for everything else plus b camera on above film and television due to exceptional form factor and amazing resolution (special effects).
Amirite?
Click to expand...

im wondering when did you shot with Alexa sir?
About Canon7D yes only good for weddings
check this
http://www.vimeo.com/10432713
:violin:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top