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 :)

Build 16... taste

nahawand said:
I Love the RED ONE Camera as I think its the best digital cine camera out there in the market without the huge capitalists domination...
that's a word I had to say before saying any defect about the image..
well the image is ofcourse perfect, but, on of the images on this thread (the Close UP) can I ask what lens was used to shoot it?
coz I see a bad Chromatic abberration in the edges between darks the reflections which disapponts me.... does this have something to do with camera/sensor/lens ??? which?
Click to expand...

Red 50-150. I saw that too, and chalked it up to the glass. (sorry, but I hope I'm right)

M
 
Mark Pedersen said:
Red 50-150. I saw that too, and chalked it up to the glass. (sorry, but I hope I'm right)
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the close-up of the threaded dolly part (message 81 in this thread) upon closer examination what appears to look like chromatic aberration is more likely just the color patches from the chart behind it being reflected back into the metal.

I see an orange-red fringing on the front horizontal edge, but it looks to me more like a direct reflection of the light source that is clipping. CA is usually magenta/green not orange.
 
ibloom said:
I agree, hence the joke. DP's are famously mathematical magician characters throughout the history of Hollywood. We are the "geek" backbone of the whole operation... It can also go a bit too far. Balance is a good way to describe it. Consider famously well balanced characters Hall, Deakins... Storaro has his own line of gels... But we digress...

I'm interested in this notion that build 16 could be less sharp than other builds. I imagine this idea arises because we are used to the experience that noise reduction has some inherently negative effects on small details in an image. A couple of things might stand in opposition to this notion:

1. Because they are looking at noise from a specific sensor, they have a very good idea what ratio of noise to expect from what values. Meaning they could possibly tune their NR to look specifically at the blacks, leaving high value parts of the image alone.

2. As I said, the OLPF filters out high frequency data, purposefully softening the real image. However the noise occuring on the chip has not been softened, it is a random value per photosite. So they have an excellent avenue for distinguishing noise from image. In fact, the more noticeable the noise (the further out on the bell curve) the easier to recognize.

So in other words the situation that they are in, creating a noise reduction pipeline, if that is the right way to describe it, is different than if you were writing a filter that could recognize noise in any randomly acquired image that has already undergone OLPF compensation. So you can expect much better results and less, if any, image degradation.

Speculation on my part again.

IBloom
Click to expand...

Although, the test images look really good, shooting color cards is a very limited test. Noise reduction and compression do alter the image, and fine detail can be lost. Color cards shots are not good showing at how fine detail is lost. It's just impossible to know exactly what is actually is getting removed from the image without comparing these stills to a completely uncompressed RAW unaltered image directly from the sensor. Still images, also, won't show any temporal noise that could be in the image, as well.

At the end of the day, if you like the image then that's all that matters. Things are looking really good though for build 16.
 
Mark Pedersen said:
Evin, I totally agree, the more you understand the science and technology of your tools and your craft, the more effectively you can use them. I'm a former medical illustrator, so I totally relate to your Da Vinci reference. The intersection between art and science is very dynamic place.

M
Click to expand...


Mark, the more I get to know you, the more you fascinate me!


That belief has had me on a self-induced knowledge-building merry-go-round the last two years, and I must admit I've gotten a little dizzy. Technology is changing so much, that DPs now have to spend a lot more time than they used to learning about technology.

Being a cinematographer is 1/3 technical, 1/3 artistic and 1/3 managerial.

I know a lot of people who forget about developing the other 2/3rds. (This winter, I got bored of the merry-go-round and I took a leadership course and went to a bunch of museums and gallery shows. Now I'm longing to dig into my new "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" book!)

It's been in about the last 6 months that I've realized how out-of-balance I've been feeling about my craft. There's no end to how much there is to know, and it's an easy trap to get caught in, thinking you need to know everything. I became a DP because art, image-making and storytelling inspire me, not because I was interested in being a technologist. As I'm being invited on more & more speaking engagements to share my knowledge, lecture about digital cinema etc., I'm realizing more and more that I'd much rather be known for my talent and the quality of my work than for how much I know about pixels, bit-depth, and the MTF of the OLPF! This was the conversation from which the joke between Ian and I started about being an artist. Ian and I are both known to be DPs who are very knowledgable about the technology, but working with Ian this last week, I came away very inspired and impressed with Ian's vision and artistic sensibilities, and his talent and imagination!

In this round of tests in particular, I felt very empowered by the immediacy of seeing results of shooting experimental stuff (time-lapse, slow motion, heavy filtration, shutter effects, etc.) to be more bold, artistic, and experimental. Stop worrying about if it would come out "right" or playing it safe because film is expensive and you don't want to get it wrong. Try something, look at it, if it didn't turn out how you like, do it again. Freedom! Makes me want to have my own camera around to mess around and try stuff whenever I want.

Ironic that it was a similar conversation about DPs being a mix of technical and artistic (just like editors and architects) and how that suited my talents and personality type that got me involved with Red Digital Cinema in the first place. And yes, there was alcohol involved. :sarcasm: It was a conversation in the kitchen of Mark's Sundance condo, with some guy I had just met named Ted...
 
Graeme Nattress said:
One day I'll put together a rogues gallery of OLPF offenders.... :-)
Click to expand...

If you do, here's a candidate for you. The Canon 20D has been a workhorse DSLR for a lot of folks, me included. But it certainly is not free of aliasing. Have a look at this 200% crop (taken from my test here: http://www.bealecorner.org/red/test-080108/index.html#Test_3 )

At first glance it looks like there's a lot of detail. But on my original zone chart, all the circles are concentric! In fact, the entire upper right part of the rings in this image is false detail. If this was in motion, it would be even more obvious and pretty disgusting to look at.
 
Jannard said:
One more to chew on... ISO 200.

Build 16 now lets you use slower ISOs with no penalty.

Jim
Click to expand...

No penalty for lower ISOs... could you expand on that a bit? Do you mean no reduction in highlight range?
 
Sounds like I'll be un-learning alot of the knowledge I've gained over the past while (in regards to iso/rec709/proxies etc)...but with further picture improvements and consistency through the whole workflow bring it on!!!!
 
Jendra said:
It was a conversation in the kitchen of Mark's Sundance condo, with some guy I had just met named Ted...
Click to expand...

Jendra - WRONG Mark - this is Mark Pedersen - I am Mark Pederson - it's okay - you have no idea how many funny stories there are about the mistaken identities of the two Marks!!!
 
Jannard said:
I really like the way the highlights roll... nothing clipped BTW.

Jim
Click to expand...

Wow. I've looked at a lot of Red footage. I've been in its guts full time since December. All I can say is... wow. What an improvement.
 
Leica adapter???

Leica adapter???

The Third Man said:
Leica Noctilux-M 1:1.0/50mm at full aperture plus B16 and you'll get a fascinating wide open performance and amazing footage with non-available light (dark interior or night exterior shot) on RED.

No Arri/Zeiss Master Prime 50mm T 1.3 or any other fast lens could compete with that option.
Click to expand...

Leica adapter would be very nice...their APO glass is phenom.
 
Doug Underdahl already has a Leica adapter.

Doug Underdahl already has a Leica adapter.

sbove said:
Leica adapter would be very nice...their APO glass is phenom.
Click to expand...

Doug Underdahl already has a Leica adapter. Call him, his company is Long Valley equipment.
 
Jannard said:
It is an accessory shaft for my Arco dolly...

Jim

9_arco1_u.jpg
Click to expand...

get the Arri off that dolly! ;-)
 
Ahhh... much better.

And you even mounted the Epic.

Sort of overkill considering the Red One could have replaced the Arri as well. :)
 
Probably closer to scale...

9_arcoepic2.jpg
 
That's a stretch Epic! Is this the new design?
 
Yeah, WTF is that? It still says RED on the side, looks like a RED mattebox and one of the upcoming primes... One of the early EPIC concept images, maybe?

Look at all the open space on the "smart side" of that camera with that big "RED" there. Would be nice to have some controls there. :tongue:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top