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 :)

Camera testing and comparisons

Status
Not open for further replies.
Roberto Lequeux said:
Why not let them create their own deliverables?
Click to expand...

Because then it's not a deliverable. The whole idea of a deliverable tends to be to deliver the project in the final format needed to make distribution copies, color-corrected, etc. Now for archive reasons, a feature distributor may want all picture elements including R3D files, etc. just as a TV broadcaster may want a 1080P 4:4:4 Log master as well as the 4:2:2 Rec.709 master.

But to deliver R3D files to them and tell them to finish it themselves is basically not delivering a finished project. Plus it may not be color-corrected to the look you want.
 
That is what I was saying. Don't deliver it, let them create it. It is the only way to judge a camera that only provides negatives after all. But I understand that Geoff wants to include a broader audience.
 
Curran Giddens said:
Good idea. Nobody will be able to complain if you post both.
Click to expand...

I'll second this comment. It gives those who are just browsing something to look at and get an approximate idea.

Those who are interested/capable can easily download a frame and pull it up in RC-X to see what is really there and what can be done with it. Easy.
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
That is what I was saying. Don't deliver it, let them create it. It is the only way to judge a camera that only provides negatives after all. But I understand that Geoff wants to include a broader audience.
Click to expand...

Actually, I disagree....

RLF is pretty much and so often used for that exact purpose ("Just run it out as RLF/RedColor2) and is the baseline result for the MX.

And that's pretty much the purpose of that setting: Lert it fit with existing color workflows without too much voodoo involved.

And that's all good!

as it is cineon, RedApproved and actually pretty good, it gives a good baseline comparison to other cineon recording cams (Like Alexa and F35...)

RedColor2 is also good for comparative workflows.

BTW, I'd have prefered to have RAW file, too, but if I had to choose, I'd have taken the redlogfilm/redcolor2 DPXs any day.

Yes, I know that the EXR files keep a lot mre of the info...
Either way, one have to choose a baseline...
 
Jannard said:
Recap.

EPIC and Scarlet are coming.

EPICs and RED ONE MX are being used on:

The Hobbit- 3D EPIC
Spiderman- 3D EPIC
Contagion- RED ONE MX & EPIC
Girl With the Dragon Tattoo- RED ONE MX & EPIC

Underworld 4- 3D EPIC
Ridley Scott Un-named- 3D EPIC
Jack the Giant Killer- 3D EPIC
Un-named biggie #1 (another huge budget studio movie) announced soon- 3D EPIC
Un-named biggie #2 (another big budget studio movie) announced soon- 3D EPIC
Un-named biggie #3 (another big budget studio movie) announced soon- 3D EPIC

Jim
Click to expand...

RED cameras shoot RAW (REDCODE RAW) and in that case if you want to use with any comparison camera test it should include that native format.

Otherwise it could start again a sort of manipulation as we had already that situation from RED early days.

But RED took over this situation very fast and easy just because of its massive acceptance at the market from RED users.
 
R3D's are fantastic. There is no denying it. RAW imaging and nondestructive decision making is clearly the future.

However, we do not currently edit in RAW. We do not deliver in RAW, we do not distribute in RAW. Eventually the image will become something else.
 
OK, this is what I'm doing.......

RED MX files covering a range of 14 stops will be exported in the 2 formats approved by JJ and also a r3d version

Canon files will be DPX 10 bit converted in Framecycler

Alexa Files will be DPX log 10 bit converted from Pro Res 422 in Framecycler

HPX3000 will be whatever I can convert the bloody things in to!!

I may include an alternative version of the Alexa files.

This will not be up on Cinematography.net for a week or so, it's a lot of work, oh and some of the suggestions, like going to a post house, get real! unless you want to send me bags of cash and if so I'd like a very big bag of cash so that I can fly toi LA and include Epic and Alexa RAW!!
 
Thank you Geoff. Looking forward to seeing this.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Geoff, thanks for taking the time to do these tests.

As you know, it is hard to do a test like this with all of the variables. The more you can provide within reason the easier it is to compare. For example, providing the R3D will allow people to see for themselves how you arrived at the DPX output, if they are so inclined. Ideally, this would be the case for all the cameras, but as you said there is only so much time and bandwith. And RAW was not available on Alexa when you did the test. So, given that scenario, you are putting out what was available at the time. Hopefully everyone will keep it in context and not jump all over you.

It will be interesting to see the results. Again, thanks for doing this test and thank you for the objective approach you have been taking here and at CML. Hopefully everyone will take your lead and be openminded when it comes to the wide pallete of imaging tools available to us today.
 
And I have a pretty good hunch as to the result of the results - I don't envy Geoff his task - but he's the man for the job.

Curious - Gunleik, what is your hunch? c'mon now, we'll keep it strictly in the Gunleik's hunch category, and promise to behave like calm and mature gentlemen - right, fellas? ( :
 
Bill Anderson said:
And I have a pretty good hunch as to the result of the results - I don't envy Geoff his task - but he's the man for the job.

Curious - Gunleik, what is your hunch? c'mon now, we'll keep it strictly in the Gunleik's hunch category, and promise to behave like calm and mature gentlemen - right, fellas? ( :
Click to expand...

I am a sisssy! :-))

I spent a couple of months comparing cameras.
And I ended up knowing a lot more about them.... Makes sense, doesn't it?

And I am still happily here advocating the M Red One...

I have no belief in gentlemanship. That's why I have thus so far decided against publishing. It sort of comes down to what is most important to you and your productions.

Somethings are measurable, like resolution and DR and where that DR falls as to light intensity. Others are less measurable, like total value for production with a given featureset.

I CAN say that by now I expect a lot less from the 3000 than I initially would have done back in august-10, though...
But that won't keep many happy, I guess.

Hafta remember that Geoff carries a lot more weight than I do.
I would just make noice.
He will give you info.

That's a fair assesment, isn't it?
 
The thing to remember is that any test, even if perfectly executed (and they rarely can be) is just a snapshot in time, which is why more tests are done later, and again later, which is another reason to not get too bent out of shape about the results, they are temporary and ephemeral. But sometimes they do get camera manufacturers to address weakness that have been revealed, even if the weakness is in the post side of things, not the camera itself.

I also believe that tests that don't produce optimal results because the camera or image processing was not done optimally are still informative, because that's life -- in the real world, cameras are not always shot in optimal ways. As long as the mistakes are documented. Any test, even the bad ones, are informative in some way or another, you just have to place the proper value on things that you've learned and maintain some perspective. And do your own testing.
 
geoffboyle said:
...
Alexa Files will be DPX log 10 bit converted from Pro Res 422 in Framecycler
...
Click to expand...

Why not converted from ProRes 4:4:4:4, since that's the highest quality the camera can currently record to?
 
Thanks G, I hope I didn't sound too flippant, I was genuinely curious because I know you have a bit of experience with said cameras, and you're a very fair and level headed guy. And I don't mean to distract us from what Geoff is doing.
I'm sure you, and others, will have the opportunity to comment on how Geoff's test results jive with your own experiences. That'll be interesting.
 
LOL...

(After editing away a long post...)

Bill:
I look foreward to Geoff's conclusions as much as the next man.

I would be surprised if his side-by side conclusions would differ a lot from mine.

G
 
geoffboyle said:
OK, this is what I'm doing.......

This will not be up on Cinematography.net for a week or so, it's a lot of work, oh and some of the suggestions, like going to a post house, get real! unless you want to send me bags of cash and if so I'd like a very big bag of cash so that I can fly toi LA and include Epic and Alexa RAW!!
Click to expand...

I fedexed a big bag of cash this morning. It is in a tsa approved case so you can carry it on the plane to LA. Good Luck!

Peter
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top