Can you pull your own focus?

[Jonas Nyström]

I’ve been shooting extensively with RED ONE for almost eight months now – with a number of crew sizes, in multiple styles and genres, and with a wide array of lenses and accessories. I cast my vote along with those who voted in the category of: “If you’re experienced and alert, it’s doable most of the time”. Here’s why:

Convergence of shooting styles
With cameras like RED, there is a synthesis of shooting styles possible, and in fact being used in the real world. REDs technology is closely related to DSLR, moderately related to TV/video, and least related to film. Users of RED are now converging from all three of those backgrounds, and some people like me come from all three. With the technology being convergent, and the mix of people using RED being convergent, its no surprise that especially in non-union, mid to small crew productions, shooters with RED are free to push the camera and how they use it to modified paradigms. General categories of shooting style with RED may be traditional cine style, hybrid cine/EFP style, and EFP style. Traditional cine style will generally be using cine lenses, MB, FF, ACs, measuring tapes, hand held meters, etc. Hybrid cine/EFP style may be using various lens types (cine, 35mm still, B4), may or may not be using MB/FF/ACs, and may be using in-camera electronic aids for focus and exposure. EFP style will generally be using EFP lenses (but may also use cine, 35mm still), almost never a MB/FF/ACs. All these approaches to using RED ONE are valid, as are varying flavors and modifications between the general categories I listed. Whatever style most effectively achieves the images, and is also cost-effective (producer in me speaking now), is perfectly valid with RED.

Genres of Production and Focusing Needs
Except for some b-camera shooting, narrative cinema will almost always use a traditional crew, including an AC for pulling focus. But narrative cinema is but a narrow slice of the overall motion media production worldwide, and a commensurately narrow slice of the potential usage of RED ONE (and EPIC and Scarlet in the future). There is a vast universe of RED-capable production genres and sub-genres beyond narrative cinema. Even in narrative cinema, where shallow DOF gets a lot of press, and some newbies feel they have to use it on every shot, medium to deep DOF is used widely when shots and effectively telling the story call for it. Sidelight: a few nights ago on an HDTV movie channel I watched the multiple Oscar-winning film “The Sting” (1973 – Newman, Redford). There was not a single shallow DOF shot used in the entire movie – all DOF was medium to deep. And yet the telling of the story was very effective – witness the Oscars. Vast numbers of genres and individual productions shot on RED simply call for medium to deep DOF, and except for shallow DOF montage shots, use mostly apertures between f5.6 and F11 – where sight focusing by the shooter, using the EVF, LCD, 2x magnification, and false color, is in fact a very viable option - and in fact for many crew/genre situations may be the best focusing workflow choice.

Focusing with RED
Fact: the vast majority of productions worldwide each year are either Hybrid cine/EFP style or EFP style. Almost all of those productions are shot by sight focusers working either alone, or in medium to small non-union crews. I see some confusion on this thread about sight focusing. There are two types of focusing that fit that term: 1) An AC/focus puller, or single shooter visually estimating distance to the subject and focusing according to that estimate 2) A shooter or single operator using their eyesight to use electronic aids (EVF, LCD, or other monitor) and the focus aids (2x magnification, false color) in an electronic camera (like RED) to sight focus. Some shooters routinely use both methods of sight focusing. I am mostly a sight focuser, who works in medium to small crews, doing high profile international and national work. In almost eight months of heavy use of my RED cameras, I’ve found RED’s focus tools to be accurate and very quick and easy to use – even for very shallow DOF critical focus. Professional sight focusing with RED ONE is a reality folks. That’s not to cast doubt on others choice to go a more traditional way, with measuring tapes/lens scales/ACs, etc. If it fits their workflow and crew requirements, fine.

Reactive versus Anticipatory Focusing
Professional fast-action followers (sports, nature, etc.) who have good aptitude, who continually keep their skills sharpened, and have mastered the equipment they use, move largely from being reactive focusers, exposers, framers, and followers, to be much more anticipatory camera manipulators in near real time. In following fast action by yourself there is no time to think - you must anticipate and react very quickly to nail the shots. By the time you stop to think about a shot its already gone - along with the two or three quick shots that happened right after it. When you've shot fast moving subjects a lot which are very familiar to you, you develop a 6th sense in the back of your head about where the subject is going to move next. It has to be like automatic radar in order to have a high percentage of usable footage. Those same shooters must also have the skill sets to shoot many other styles besides action following for those projects: interviews, talent, creative b-roll with very shallow DOF, very good at hand held, etc. The challenges to shooting skills in these programs are both varied and intense.

Final Thoughts
I see the need at times, in certain genres, for the traditional film/cine style focusing methods - AC. tape measures, practiced scenes, hitting marks, etc. I'm not against that when it’s the best choice for what's being shot, and/or clients/execs are expecting to see that workflow. I have deep respect for the good DPs, cinematogaphers, and ACs I've worked with over the years who practice traditional methods. I use some of those methods myself frequently. But I don't hesitate to experiment with my shooting and incorporate sight focusing when I feel it works best for a project.

My point is to encourage people here to open their minds to maximize RED ONE's potential in terms of the diversity of ways to shoot with RED (and equipment setups) that enable acquiring good footage. The RED ONE camera combines DSLR, TV/Video and traditional film technology, so to me there is no reason we can't combine shooting techniques from all those industries when a project determines it is warranted.

Thanks Gibby, always great posts from you!!!!

 

[combatentropy]

Thank you all for your comments.

Moderator, I see that you moved my post from the RED One forum to Off Topic. Can you please at least move it to Cinematography?

 

[sbcooler]

Does the RedOne have an auto focus? If you use the auto focus, how good is it compared to someone manually doing it (focus puller)?

I've seen camera guys filming rock concerts with 2/3" chip on their shoulder on stage shooting the show...up to HD screens so the audience can see close ups...now I see them moving the focus ring a little bit here and there...they did a good job of keeping everything in focus as far as I could tell.

But of course it wasn't a 35mm RED that would be harder to focus...and maybe it was only being shown in 720p...not sure about the resolution on the video screen.

But in these live spontaneous situations where you are shooting maybe a live event...you have to take care of focus on your own or let the cam do in in auto mode.

I wonder when they shot U2 3D if they used the auto focus on the HD CAM's or was everything manually focused during each shot?

Anyone know that?

 

[Steve Gibby]

Does the RedOne have an auto focus? If you use the auto focus, how good is it compared to someone manually doing it (focus puller)?

I've seen camera guys filming rock concerts with 2/3" chip on their shoulder on stage shooting the show...up to HD screens so the audience can see close ups...now I see them moving the focus ring a little bit here and there...they did a good job of keeping everything in focus as far as I could tell.

But of course it wasn't a 35mm RED that would be harder to focus...and maybe it was only being shown in 720p...not sure about the resolution on the video screen.

But in these live spontaneous situations where you are shooting maybe a live event...you have to take care of focus on your own or let the cam do in in auto mode.

I wonder when they shot U2 3D if they used the auto focus on the HD CAM's or was everything manually focused during each shot?

Anyone know that?

No, RED ONE does not have auto-focus. Digital cinema and high-end EFP cameras don't have auto-focus. B4 2/3" HD EFP/ENG zooms have the capability of auto-iris or manual iris, but focus is manual. The guys you saw racking focus by themselves while shooting the concerts were using B4 2/3" HD EFP/ENG zooms, and racking focus manually. Experienced music, sports, and nature shooters rack their own focus regularly - even while tracking action. Is that more difficult when using RED ONE? It depends. In 2k, using the RED B4 adaptor and a B4 2/3" HD EFP/ENG zoom, and the B4 to RS232/12v cable to RED ONE, the answer is no, it's not more difficult than on a B4 2/3" camera.

In 4k on RED ONE, using 35mm cine or 35mm still lenses at apertures of f4 and wider, yes it becomes more difficult to sight focus. But I've been primarily sight focusing for about eight months now with RED ONE, using 35mm cine, 35mm still, and B4 2/3" lenses, as have many of the others I'm associated with. We don't shoot narrative cinema, but we shoot about every other genre of production you could name. The vast majority of motion media projects shot each year, excluding narrative cinema, are primarily shot at apertures of between f5.6 and f11. When shooting 4k on RED ONE, at those apertures, an experienced shooter is quite capable of sight focusing RED ONE by themselves. We also shoot creative montages and b-roll at wide open apertures - pulling our own focus.

IMO RED User is over-weighted with narrative cinema hopefuls, who generally don't know, or don't acknowledge that there is a broad spectrum of motion media genres beyond narrative cinema, most of which RED ONE can be, and has been, used for - and many of those genres enable alternative field workflows and techniques with RED ONE.

I deeply respect professionals who work in narrative cinema. Unfortunately IMO that respect isn't always sent from narrative cinema professionals outward to professionals working in the myriad of other genres of production.

 

[Ed Watkins]

IMO RED User is over-weighted with narrative cinema hopefuls, who generally don't know, or don't acknowledge that there is a broad spectrum of motion media genres beyond narrative cinema, most of which RED ONE can be, and has been, used for - and many of those genres enable alternative field workflows and techniques with RED ONE.

I deeply respect professionals who work in narrative cinema. Unfortunately IMO that respect isn't always sent from narrative cinema professionals outward to professionals working in the myriad of other genres of production.

Amen to that.

 

[sbcooler]

Gibby thanks..learning a lot from you. I should be paying you an hourly rate.

A couple more questions if you don't mind. Why wouldn't RED have auto focus. Is it just not a good way of doing things...not as accurate? I mean as an option would it take away from the camera?

Also, when you see someone shooting the rock concert on stage and again using the focus dial at the end of the camera periodically to adjust focus...are they in manual modes on exposure, white balance and shutter speed would you guess. I mean it would seem like in a live even you need to be mostly auto so you can focus on framing the shot and getting in good positions to capture an event?

Am I incorrect hear on high level professional event shooting? I'm mostly thinking of live rock shows where the band wants you to capture there show and not get in the way of the audience.

But certainly interviews after a ballgame and that kind of documentary stuff as well...filming where there is no exact script but trying to capture people in every day real life unscripted where you never know when you will get that "moment".

Thx again-

 

[Gunleik Groven]

None of the PL lenses I know of have any auto-function, so a PL cam with it does not make much sense...

My guess, is that you'd be in as manual as totally possible setup. Auto stuff gets confused. You may, too - but then we all know who's responsible... But I may be wrong.

 

[johannperry]

I’ve been shooting extensively with RED ONE for almost eight months now – with a number of crew sizes, in multiple styles and genres, and with a wide array of lenses and accessories.

Hi Gibby,
could you tell me what, if any, your experiences have been using a b4 adaptor with 2/3in HD zoom lenses.

 

[Steve Gibby]

Hi Gibby,
could you tell me what, if any, your experiences have been using a b4 adaptor with 2/3in HD zoom lenses.

Yes, today I made a long summary of my experiences with that that on another RED User thread

Link: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=12546&page=2

 

[Steve Gibby]

Gibby thanks..learning a lot from you. I should be paying you an hourly rate.

A couple more questions if you don't mind. Why wouldn't RED have auto focus. Is it just not a good way of doing things...not as accurate? I mean as an option would it take away from the camera?

Also, when you see someone shooting the rock concert on stage and again using the focus dial at the end of the camera periodically to adjust focus...are they in manual modes on exposure, white balance and shutter speed would you guess. I mean it would seem like in a live even you need to be mostly auto so you can focus on framing the shot and getting in good positions to capture an event?

Am I incorrect hear on high level professional event shooting? I'm mostly thinking of live rock shows where the band wants you to capture there show and not get in the way of the audience.

But certainly interviews after a ballgame and that kind of documentary stuff as well...filming where there is no exact script but trying to capture people in every day real life unscripted where you never know when you will get that "moment".

Thx again-

Glad to help...

This morning I also posted some answers to these questions on another RED User thread.

Link: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=12333&page=2

 

[Johan Pabon]

I've seen camera guys filming rock concerts with 2/3" chip on their shoulder on stage shooting the show...up to HD screens so the audience can see close ups...now I see them moving the focus ring a little bit here and there...they did a good job of keeping everything in focus as far as I could tell.

But of course it wasn't a 35mm RED that would be harder to focus...and maybe it was only being shown in 720p...not sure about the resolution on the video screen.

But in these live spontaneous situations where you are shooting maybe a live event...you have to take care of focus on your own or let the cam do in in auto mode.

I wonder when they shot U2 3D if they used the auto focus on the HD CAM's or was everything manually focused during each shot?

Anyone know that?

I saw U2 some weeks ago and I think they used a great deph of field there..., so they were out of risk for two reasons: another camera and smaller stops.

I would never prefer autofocus, especially not with concerts. Sometimes it can be nice to be out of focus for a liitle while, it contributes to the "live experience" and it can create more intimacy. In the past many good rockfilms have been made that way. I like those ones better than the overproduced technically perfect ones...

 

[Häakon]

While obviously it's technically possible that one could turn a focus knob while shooting a subject at the same time, I don't know why anyone would want to do it. Give yourself the freedom as an operator to concentrate on framing and blocking and capturing beautiful shots in the moment and let the ACs do the (extremely difficult) job they are hired for.

 

[Harry Clark]

Sticky question...
I think it depends on the project. Modern narrative filmmaking has become so polished and technically perfect that having larger crews with specialized crafts is a necessity. On docs, ENG and EFP shoots, the line blurs a little. Usually on a doc, content is king and it matters little if the focus buzzes here and there. The smart EFP or corporate cameraman working without an AC can set up shots that will make focusing easier. Sports and nature cameramen are usually far away from the action on a very long lens where very little adjustment is necessary. Remember, the barrel twists MORE as the subject comes closer! Live concert shoots are usually live-switched so there is a TD talking the operators through it and cutting to their camera only when it's framed up and in focus. And ENG B4 lenses have very little "throw" so that little twisting is necessary (and focus is a little less accurate technically but likely OK for the resolution)
Each situation sets a different bar and methodology for clearing it.
In the case of single-sensor 35mm sized cine cameras like Red, I have come to believe that there is little room for error in focus. The thickness of a film emulsion, however slight, seems to increase the depth of acceptable focus a bit. With a digital sensor, it's either sharp on the photosite or not (maybe it's time for a revised circle of confusion guideline for 35mm-sized digital imagers?) I would venture to say that pulling focus on the Red One is more demanding than 35mm.
Having said that, experienced doc cameramen like Gibby will likely have few troubles at the narrower apertures, even when following action. They have been doing it for years and have developed a distinctive style of shooting that lets them frame and focus at the same time. If you're shooting a narrative project, or a higher-end project like a commercial, corporate film, or a stylized doc (like Errol Morris', or my pal Jeff Feuerzeig's work) then I would say it's foolish NOT to have an AC. But then again, I'm "old-skool"...
And Gibby, speaking as someone who floats back and forth between the worlds of narrative and EFP, you indeed have my respect.
Cheers,
Harry

 

[JohnF]

Can you pull your own focus?

Yep but the wider the aperture the more difficult it becomes.
That said I was originally a 35mm stills shooter and I specialised in low light level shooting , often working at 3200ISO at f1.4 with no flash and using manual focus. Under these conditions I noticed two things.

1. That manual focus was faster than auto focus (the low contrasts involved in low-light shooting made using autofocus a noticeably slower operation)

2. That the practise of regularly shooting under these condition makes one really good at getting sharp focus quickly and improves ones ability to anticipate focus points. (the moral - practise makes perfect!)

I might be telling some how to suck eggs here but one can focus manually, even with lower resolution viewfinders by judging the point of maximum contrast (one doesn't actually need to see the detail whilst shooting only the recording medium needs to see that!). The classic example is pick a glint of light in the eyes and when that appears brightest you're in focus.
Oh and get to know your kit. Knowing where your lens is at by just putting your hand on it comes in really useful.

As Gibby has already mentioned at f4 and higher it becomes much easier. There was even an old press photographers rule of shoot at f8 if you were uncertain or that things might change in a hurry!

And I might also mention that some of the greatest narrative films ever have "soft shots" in them - some surprisingly bad at that. Look out for them...

JohnF

 

[Jorge Díaz-Amador]

I pulled focus professionally for over 10 years. Once I even did a Steadicam shot, on a 50mm lens at T1.3... no marks. I thought there was no way it would be in focus but it was. I had been pulling focus for several years at that point and I had "gotten it".

There is a reason why first camera assistants are in demand and get paid the rates they do. They have mastered the art of focus. And they still do it by looking at the focus scale on the lens, and looking at the subject with their peripheral vision.

When you are looking at the image to judge focus on a moving object you are REACTING. When you pull focus by distance estimation and looking at the scale on the lens you are ANTICIPATING, therefore leading. I've tried it both ways. When you look at the image you will always get moments of softness because that's what's telling you that you need to move the focus - reacting.

For really simple stuff you might just pull it off. OR, if you reach a level of mastery - like NFL Films shooters - you can pull your own focus on incredibly difficult shots, such as the laces on a football in flight.

Sorry guys, but the RED One is not just another HDV PHD camera (Push Here Dummy) with higher resolution. It's a very reasonably price professional DIGITAL CINEMA camera. If you want to take full advantage of it, you must learn to shoot "film style".

BTW, for circle of confusion on the RED 4k sensor, I would use 0.006 mm for the best results. It will be very restrictive, but there will be no surprises.

 

[Jason Ing]

BTW, for circle of confusion on the RED 4k sensor, I would use 0.006 mm for the best results. It will be very restrictive, but there will be no surprises.

What do you mean "use" 0.0006? How do you "use" it? What am I missing?

 

[Steve Gibby]

I pulled focus professionally for over 10 years.

So you know the background of who’s writing this post, I shot my first 35mm stills in 1968, my first film in 1974, my first video in 1978, and my first television program in 1980. I’ve worked extensively in EFP-style, cine-style, and still photo (film & DSLR) workflows. I still work in all three imaging disciplines: TV/video, film, digital stills. For specific RED ONE experience, me and my company own seven RED ONE cameras, some of which we’ve owned for eight months now. We’ve used them widely in a plethora of genres, cine-style and EFP style.

There is a reason why first camera assistants are in demand and get paid the rates they do. They have mastered the art of focus. And they still do it by looking at the focus scale on the lens, and looking at the subject with their peripheral vision.

In my Post #16 of this thread I acknowledged the need in certain workflows and genres of production for traditional film-style focusing. That said, unions, tradition, peer pressure, resistance to progression in workflow, resistance to emerging technology, bias, and elitism are also among the many reasons that traditional camera operation and focusing are still practiced widely – specifically in narrative cinema work. Having learned decades ago how to focus in that traditional manner, I have deep respect for it, which I also expressed in my Post #16 of this thread. But I also believe in maximizing each available technology that emerges – and the electronic features of RED ONE, specifically the EVF, LCD, 2x image magnification, and false color clearly enable alternate an focusing option – sight focusing. Traditional film-style crews bristle at that, but that simply doesn’t change the reality that it is being done widely with RED ONE, and will continue to be done in certain genres of production.

When you are looking at the image to judge focus on a moving object you are REACTING. When you pull focus by distance estimation and looking at the scale on the lens you are ANTICIPATING, therefore leading. I've tried it both ways. When you look at the image you will always get moments of softness because that's what's telling you that you need to move the focus - reacting.

No need for caps (shouting) and bold print. I also addressed the difference between reactive and anticipatory focusing in my Post #16. Legions of pro-level sight focusers have the aptitude and experience to sight focus while tracking fast moving objects. I’m one of them. With good aptitude and practice, our focusing becomes overwhelmingly anticipatory – focus is rarely buzzed. You might say “Yeah, but that’s with 2/3” depth of field”, but the reality is that it is also in 35mm and with S35mm imaging systems like RED ONE, huge amounts of this footage is shot at apertures between f5.6 and f11 - and medium to deep DOF is normal. Creative B-roll is also shot wide open at times – while sight focusing. Sight focusing RED ONE in 4k is a reality. Myself and many others have been doing it for over eight months now.

For really simple stuff you might just pull it off. OR, if you reach a level of mastery - like NFL Films shooters - you can pull your own focus on incredibly difficult shots, such as the laces on a football in flight.

See above. Again, I am one of those veterans who long ago reached that level of sight focusing mastery. Is this “Holy Grail of Sight Focusing” unreachable by others who have aptitude, practice their craft, have open minds to alternate focusing methods, and maximize available new technology? Absolutely not. Anyone who has those qualities and learns how, can sight focus RED ONE.

Sorry guys, but the RED One is not just another HDV PHD camera (Push Here Dummy) with higher resolution. It's a very reasonably price professional DIGITAL CINEMA camera. If you want to take full advantage of it, you must learn to shoot "film style".

RED camera owners/users, and members of RED User, come from a diverse array of backgrounds: film, TV/video, and still photography. Your “HDV PHD camera (Push Here Dummy)” comment, goes way beyond opinion, and is clearly an attempt to slander and belittle members here who come from a TV/video background – something that Jared has specifically mentioned as wouldn’t be tolerated here on RED User. Frankly I’m surprised Jared or the mods haven’t censured that particular comment. I’ve seen others here get banned for comments like that. Respect is a two way street. As someone who has deep experience in EFP-style and cine-style production, and a wide background in TV/video, film, and still photography, I give all of those disciplines my respect – as I did in my Post #16 of this thread.

RED ONE is a digital cinema camera that was also specifically designed for extensive EFP-style use – witness the inclusion of EVF, zebras, 2k, B4 adaptor made by RED specifically for use of B4 2/3” HD lenses, and a wide array of other features on the camera. RED’s own web site mentions the EFP possibilities with the camera. EFP is not just shot with B4 lenses though. In many cases cine and adapted 35mm still lenses are used in EFP production – and yet an AC is rarely used in EFP production, and operators almost always focus their cameras themselves.

It runs deeper. I was an invited attendee to the very first RED ONE camera specifications meeting, where attendees submitted their recommendations for the tech features that should be included in the camera. Believe me, the suggestions submitted that day included both cine-style and EFP-style features. In early 2006 I did the first published interview with Jim Jannard about the new RED ONE camera (Studio Monthly, March 2006). In that interview, Jim specifically addressed RED ONE’s intended EFP-style usage. Stuart English of RED comes from a deep EFP-style production background. There’s an entire “EFP/ENG with RED” forum here on RED USER – and it’s there for a reason – because RED intends their RED ONE camera to also be used also by EFP-style users – almost all of who sight focus themselves when doing their work.

If you analyze the poll at the front of this thread, currently 76.4% of voters believe ”If you’re experienced and alert, it’s do-able most of the time”. If you rollover and click the total number for that category you can see the names/handles for who voted that way. I did, I see you did, and as no surprise to me, Jim Jannard, the founder of RED also voted that way.


------------------------------------

I can appreciate that you’re enthusiastic about your work and believe strongly that the way you focus is the “right way” – and if it works for you, and for the genres you work in it is the best choice, I say fine. I span all three disciplines (film, TV/video, photo). But RED User is a board of tolerance, progression, and respect for everyone’s workflow choices – and RED ONE is a camera whose technology pedigree is closest to a DSLR, relatively like a TV/video camera, and least like a film camera – thus it should be of no surprise to anyone that alternate ways of using the camera will be widespread.

Again…respect is a two way street…

 

[Steve Gibby]

harryclark,

Thank you for the kind words...much appreciated...

Yes sir, "the best way" is only relative to the unique needs and demands of the particular task at hand. "The best way" is always dynamic, never static.

Fun time to be in this industry for sure...

 

[Finner]

I haven't voted on this because for me the answer I would choose is not listed.

Here's my thoughts on pulling focus by yourself:

Can it be done? Yes

Please note Maverick can also fly his F-14 without Goose. Most likely Maverick will end up in flames without him though.

Moral of the story if you get a good focus puller it is a good idea not to kill them like Tom Cruise did to goose.

 

[Curran Giddens]

I haven't voted on this because for me the answer I would choose is not listed.

Here's my thoughts on pulling focus by yourself:

Can it be done? Yes

Please note Maverick can also fly his F-14 without Goose. Most likely Maverick will end up in flames without him though.

Moral of the story if you get a good focus puller it is a good idea not to kill them like Tom Cruise did to goose.

Never seen anyone use Top Gun for an analogy before. I like it.

I didn't vote since my answer isn't listed either.


Can it be done?
Yes. But only on the second or third pass from my VFS MoCo rig after I've already done the camera move....