Challenge to Zacuto...

[steve weiss]

It's amazing that we have 18 pages of dialogue here before anyone has seen the test or I've even started my documentary. We are talking about one camera vs. another. I hate to tell you that the differences are so slight at this point that all of this talk is kind of irrelevant. Yes, there are differences but it's not huge and I think most of your won't be able to guess which camera is which. That's going to be the fun part. At a certain point, we are picking hairs, does it really matter at that point? The more interesting part is seeing how they went about shooting and lighting it and what the cheaper cameras need to do to try to catch up (I'm not saying they can) in this extremely challenging scene, even for film. At some points we are walking up to 2 feet from the screen to see the differences. Hey guys,
Jim and other manufactures have given you what you've been asking for. You got your tool and it rocks, your EPIC, Alexa, whatever. Sorry to say it's all in your hands, lets see what you can do with it.

 

[Bruce Allen]

As of this second there are several 4k theaters in every state in the USA except for: North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming.

On the coasts there's what I would call a good number of 4k equipped theaters.

Calibrated properly? Eg like you are in a grading suite? With actual 4K ability to playback a 4K file? Worldwide?

Not this year. 2013 hopefully.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Paul Schneider]

The 4K question is not a singular company decision. It's an industry inclusive one. Red driving the bus on the bleeding edge is lovely, but a couple of theaters and films do not make a movement make.

Computer power and workflows are not even close to the place they need to be to make 4K a viable option. 4K post can be maddening...even insane with existing technology. Its not about simply an accelarated NLE. Cutting is easy. It's color, keying, compositing, storage, archiving and compression technologies. These all need to be moving at a fluid and near real time pace to call it the norm. Red Rocket is wonderful (two is better), but its not even close to enough...the rest of the world needs to step it up and at a price the masses (or at least the semi masses can afford). SSD's (or faster) storage needs to be huge and cheaper than water.

As I write this I am waiting on a render with 4K files on a very fast workstation. If I'm lucky this single shot will finish in the next 4 hours. Thats just not the type of workflow that will define a movement.
It also won't be defining my creativity, because I'd rather be out shooting more, and more, and more ideas than sitting and letting them go to waste while I stress about renders and how they will look in 10 years.

Creativity makes the content. Little else matters, even years later. MASH was awesome then and is awesome now. Cheers? Sienfeld? Funny to this day. I'm impressed that RED as a company has taken a progressive stance towards the future, but the single-minded finger pointing isn't healthy.

Red. Your clients are by and large not working, finishing and delivering entirely in 4K. They are acquiring in 4-5K and immediately moving to something smaller. This is the reality today. Tomorrow might be better.

Lead folks into the promised land, don't just declare that it exists and that if you aren't there already you're worthy of ridicule.

The product is superb, but the attitude is rather disheartening.

 

[Paul Schneider]

This is how this thread reads to me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L8U5tKTTWo

Classic!
And ironically...in SD ;-)

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Reduser isn't helpful to the kinds of producers and facilities who don't already know that it exists. Sending them here will just confirm what they already think: Red is hard to use, and has a complicated workflow.

RedUser is only barely helpful to the people that do frequent RedUser already, thanks to the very low signal to noise ratio (which, incidentally, has gone down a lot after Nov 3, 2011). I've been following Red since Jim started talking about it on DVXuser years ago, I own an Epic-X now, and I still have low confidence in the workflow I use, even though I'm getting good results.

In the end, I think the RDC camera/company is doing about as well as it should be, given the camera and workflow Jim wants to build (super-configurable, RAW-only, community-support via RedUser).

This is as good as it gets when there's this many ways to screw things up, or more positively, ways to get things right.

So, no solutions from me, but I don't think we can complain when people choose other systems for ease of use reasons. Of all the reasons not to use Red, that's the one IMO that has the most legitimacy.

Most producers don't want a camera they have to have a great deal of education to use correctly and get good results from, and no amount of specs talk on RedUser about, e.g. resolution, is going to convince them they do.

I'm mostly talking about producers or other decision makers who have to weigh the information they are receiving from DPs, vendors, etc. and making technical, artistic, and financial decisions. I can't say what project it is, but there's one of these conversations going on right now about which camera to use and which workflow to use on set and in post. Major feature film. The discussions are very interesting. There are some holes in the discussion. I'm trying to help fill some of those holes by providing facts, information that is relevant for their comparisons. A little information can go a long way.

Reduser is a great community, especially for owners of the cameras. But many industry people for one reason or another have decided to not visit this site, at least not on a regular basis. So they sometimes miss official announcements from RED or hear them via a third party. If there was a wealth of information at Red.com they would probably head there first. And Red has started to do that. They have been adding videos, and posting some docs up there too. I think that is a good thing. More of that will be very beneficial to the industry I think.

 

[Zeb B]

@Steve - to your point:
To a large extent people reside here to reconfirm their beliefs - much like Sunday Church where the goal is rarely to learn about the similarities between the Bible and the Koran. Too often when there is a post that doesn't conform with the reality that is desired it gets blasted by many RU's and/or shut down. Shame really since that pushes away the industry wise since they have no use for arrogance, abuse or censorship. The downside to unrestrained fanboyism is intolerance which breeds insular ignorance.

I always appreciate your posts since they are thoughtful, based in hard gained experience while being relevant in today's brutal real world.

 

[steve weiss]

Steve.. the thing I challenge is whether what you shoot today has any merit going forward. TV shows that were shot SD back in the day never had an HD release. I wonder what they would do now. "Welcome Back Kotter" comes to mind. If all your work will only be shown in 2012... maybe you are right. But that doesn't sound like a professional piece of work to me.

Zacuto can shoot any test they want for whatever goal they set. We have said that we make professional cameras. So for us to participate in a test that doesn't address the current and future of image capture just doesn't make sense to us.

The whole message of the Reduser party, sponsored and presented by LightIron, was to make the case that 4K is now. To then ignore that message doesn't feel right for our company.

Jim

Dear Jim,
I think we agree on everything we discussed, except the 4K theatrical presentation in 2012, it's cool (we can't agree on everything) but still I'd like to invite you to come to SkyWalker Ranch with some of us on Monday and watch the screening. I unfortunately don't know how to work your site or I would have sent you a private message. The Stag theater at SkyWalker is amazing, it's huge, not sure how big the screen is, but it big; Unfortunately 2K is the only option, they don't have a 4K projector at SkyWalker but I think it would be enjoyable for you to see it and I'd love to meet you in person. Ryan Walters who shot the RED for Bruce's test will be there and so will some notable DP's and friends. Please come. Send me an email at steve@zacuto.com and let me know if you can make it. Best, steve

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

... without a 4K test there is no interest on our part. Do Indie filmmakers ever hope that their films will be shown on the big screen? If so, and since 4K delivery is here, why would you not want to include this in your tests? Are we just talking about You Tube delivery?

Jim

Was that the speech you gave to Ridley Scott when he told you he was doing Prometheus in 2k? Personally I think this '4k or death' attitude hurts RED more than helps it. The Epic is a fantastic 2k camera (and essentially every single RED film has been viewed by 99.9% of viewers in 2k). I see people *dismiss* red cameras because they think "I don't need 4k so why use a RED?" You shouldn't be reinforcing that view (or erroneously trying to persuade someone that their TVC should be distributed in 4k even though no ads in history have gone on air in 4k. You should be saying "I appreciate your opinion, but here is why 1080p acquisition isn't enough even if you distribute through traditional channels."

RED should of course push the envelope for distribution and workflow as they have but you're alienating a lot of people who need a 4k gateway drug. Don't fight them on 4k vs 2k. We deliver 2k/1080p or less 100% of the time. But we prefer Epic. I can run down the list of why it saves time and money. If I am making the decision I choose epic because you can shoot uncompressed 5k but finish in 1080p.

If I had the option between two cameras and the only advantage of Epic was that I could finish in 4k I wouldn't care in the slightest. There is a reason thousands of DPs and Producers and Directors choose RED: It's smaller, lighter, lets you reframe for a 1080p deliverable, it shoots uncompressed, it shoots 4:4:4 to memory cards, it has HDRx, it looks really damn good... The list can go on and on. Delivering ultimatums that one feature is all that matters while the biggest movies of the year aren't even utilizing it and 99% of your customers don't need, creates the false impression that there are no other reasons to shoot Epic except for 4k deliverables.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

Passive agressive commentary on forums is not how two prominent and successful industry leaders should air their laundry.

I don't see any passive-aggressive commentary from either Jim or Steve. Where is it? The only thing you could accuse Steve Weiss of is that he's talking about things which have nothing to do with camera shoot-outs - even though he's still right about most of those things (e.g. poor picture is worse than poor sound - old news, but true). I enjoyed reading Steve's posts.

The product is superb, but the attitude is rather disheartening.

I don't see any negative attitude from Jim. He is plainly spoken. Perhaps you confuse this with a bad attitude. ;-)

Delivering ultimatums that one feature is all that matters while the biggest movies of the year aren't even utilizing it and 99% of your customers don't need, creates the false impression that there are no other reasons to shoot Epic except for 4k deliverables.

That's a damned good point. And I'd say that RED cameras are indeed the best 2K cameras around as far as I can see.

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

Was that the speech you gave to Ridley Scott when he told you he was doing Prometheus in 2k?

+1 !

 

[Sergio Perez]

I fully understand Red's position on this. 4k is obviously where things are heading, Red has been advocating 4k for more than 4 years, the workflow has matured for 4k, so there's no reason whatsoever that in a camera shootout, where every camera needs to be shown performing their best, that a 4k segment isn't included. This doesn't devalue the Epic's performance in other key areas and no one seems to be questioning this because it is a given that the Epic is a top of the foodchain cinema camera. The thing is it feels like comparing a Beta SP camera with an HDCam One but limiting the output to sd. Imagine Zacuto did an all Mini DV 1/3 prosumer cameras shootout and then added a Panasonic HPX 250 but limited its output to SD resolution, ending with a " all cameras perform very close to each other, you'll be in good shape if you buy any of these" kind of conclusion...

 

[shashbugu]

I fully understand Red's position on this. 4k is obviously where things are heading, Red has been advocating 4k for more than 4 years, the workflow has matured for 4k, so there's no reason whatsoever that in a camera shootout, where every camera needs to be shown performing their best, that a 4k segment isn't included. This doesn't devalue the Epic's performance in other key areas and no one seems to be questioning this because it is a given that the Epic is a top of the foodchain cinema camera. The thing is it feels like comparing a Beta SP camera with an HDCam One but limiting the output to sd. Imagine Zacuto did an all Mini DV 1/3 prosumer cameras shootout and then added a Panasonic HPX 250 but limited its output to SD resolution, ending with a " all cameras perform very close to each other, you'll be in good shape if you buy any of these" kind of conclusion...

My views exactly.

 

[James Kirst]

I was just wandering the streets of Downtown LA shooting the May Day protests, errrr, motorcycle porn....in 5K 48fps.

I went a little nuts with redcine-x...

I guess my point is now that I have access to 5K I will use it pretty much all the time, why wouldn't I want to push my EPIC to it's limits?

 

[Jiri Bakala]

It's amazing that we have 18 pages of dialogue here before anyone has seen the test or I've even started my documentary. We are talking about one camera vs. another. I hate to tell you that the differences are so slight at this point that all of this talk is kind of irrelevant. Yes, there are differences but it's not huge and I think most of your won't be able to guess which camera is which. That's going to be the fun part. At a certain point, we are picking hairs, does it really matter at that point? The more interesting part is seeing how they went about shooting and lighting it and what the cheaper cameras need to do to try to catch up (I'm not saying they can) in this extremely challenging scene, even for film. At some points we are walking up to 2 feet from the screen to see the differences. Hey guys,
Jim and other manufactures have given you what you've been asking for. You got your tool and it rocks, your EPIC, Alexa, whatever. Sorry to say it's all in your hands, lets see what you can do with it.

Well put.

 

[Shawn Nelson]

Ryan E. Walters, the DP who operated the Epic in the Zacuto shootout, just posted a blog posting about what he did. Seems very thorough, worth a read. Especially given the amount of emotions put into what did or didn't happen at this test.

http://thetown-crier.blogspot.com/2012/04/zacuto-shoot-out-2012-master.html

I have nothing in this debate other than that Jim, Red and Ryan Walters are all my friends (gently stepping away...now)

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I don't see any passive-aggressive commentary from either Jim or Steve. Where is it?

I would say implying that if you aren't finishing in 4k you are a youtube cat-video maker isn't just passive aggressive it's just plain vanilla insulting. And it's apparently directed at pretty much all of RED's customers, myself included which isn't terribly appreciated.

EDIT: Although ironically YouTube is the only widespread distribution medium I know of for 4k content.

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

I hate to tell you that the differences are so slight at this point that all of this talk is kind of irrelevant. Yes, there are differences but it's not huge and I think most of your won't be able to guess which camera is which. That's going to be the fun part. At a certain point, we are picking hairs, does it really matter at that point?

so camera shoot-outs are basically irrelevant...agreed.

we were all shot out of a cannon, powered by RED, from the frustration of trickleware to a world where we live in an embarrassment of riches.

really, shoot-outs mean nothing. camera tests are really valuable for making determinations of the right tool for a particular job.

if all images are equal or even nearly equal, then I'll stick with RED because:

free product upgrades, future-proofed footage, price point, camera size, REDCODE/RAW, I can directly talk to the CEO and the president of the company - as well as my fave customer service guy and assorted knowledgeable geeks for help, interchangeable mount system, 120 fps @5K, knowing that the horse I backed is committed to putting its best foot forward with each product release/death to trickleware...

did I miss anything?

given all that, I don't really need a shoot-out. interesting back-and-forth though....and if David Mullen says that shoot-outs are great for all the data points we gather, well, heck, bring it on.

the more shoot-outs, the merrier....

the world can use all the testosterone-laced shoot-outs with good food, 4K displays, and beautifully lit footage we can get!

 

[Zeb B]

. . . Unfortunately 2K is the only option, they don't have a 4K projector at SkyWalker . . .

nice touch

 

[Keith Walters]

Steve.. the thing I challenge is whether what you shoot today has any merit going forward. TV shows that were shot SD back in the day never had an HD release. I wonder what they would do now. "Welcome Back Kotter" comes to mind.

Jim

The standout example for me was always "Barney Miller" vs "Taxi".
Broadly similar ensemble comedies, made at the same time, with pretty much equal production values and writing, targeted at much the same Yuppie Prime Time Audiences.
"Barney Miller" was shot with studio cameras on 2" videotape, "Taxi" was on film.
Like so many sitcoms of that era shot on film, re-framed and cleaned up a bit, Taxi scrubs up as no-questions-asked HD.
Barney Miller just looks sad, even compared to later generation SD.
You should have 50" screens continuously showing both shows, side by side.


You could also compare "Hogan's Heroes" shot (very expensively at the time) in color, and "McHale's Navy" thriftily shot in Black and white. Which one got all the re-runs...

 

[Mike Halper]

Jim,
I would agree with you that 4K cameras are here (and there are benefits for some, not everyone to using them), again, right camera for right job. My only issue is that 4K theaters are not here. Statistics prove it and at NAB I believe only Canon had 4K projection and it cost them a $250K rental for 2 projectors from what I heard. Sure I might be able to find a 4K theater to screen in LA but no way can I find one in all of the countries I'm screening in, probably not one. Again my issue is that I don't want to misrepresent the public on what they will be seeing. In 2012 they will for the most part be watching 2K. In the history of cinema for all practical purposes there has really only been one 4K movie released. So the theaters that do have 4K are only playing 2K in them because 4K films are very scarce in 2012.

If things change in the future, which they may or may not, because many theaters have already bought 2K and I don't see them shelling our more cake to upgrade their 2K to 4K when I don't see it selling them more tickets, we'll have to see. The theater business is a business and not a great one. BTW, in my film you will see a screening of average theater goers watching the shootout to see if they even notice the difference between the iPhone 4s or the F65, Alexa or RED. That is after all who we make these projects for, NO?

Now I have a challenge for you. I bet that in our 2K screening that you would not be able to pick your camera out between the Alexa & F65 and maybe some of the others. I've watched this thing a hundred times and all of us in the color timing room are like "which camera is this" Rodney was doing it, Bruce was doing it, I was, the higher end cameras all look very similar even when shot with different DP's and lighting schemes. It's very hard to tell the difference (we are splitting hairs), which is good news for you because your price point is the best. Now it all boils down to creature comforts, design, use, workflow, speed and preference. Again there is tons of business for everyone and an ass for every saddle. Signing off, Steve

Someone correct me if I'm wrong (as I only say this because I've read it in a few places), but aren't there many theaters with 4K projectors and they only run them at 2K because most movies at the moment are delivered at 2K? So all it would take is for studios to start delivering more movies at 4K?

I must say what you've stated here is the kind of non-forward thinking that slows the advancement of cinema technology. I would say pretty much everyone primarily thinks of these Zacuto tests as camera comparison tests. Maybe you didn't intend this one to be that way, but that's how it's looked at and what is expected. These tests aren't really for an average movie going audience, because they don't even care about camera tests. Those that care are filmmakers, DP's, etc. and they all deserve to see an accurate test that really lets them see the true capabilities and differences between the cameras, and that is only possible by projecting at the best possible quality.

You can't properly compare the capability of cameras if you don't compare the best from each. Would you put cheap tires on a Porsche 911 because it's racing against a Honda Accord? Absolutely not, as that would be absurd. So why would you project footage from a 4K camera at 1080p or 2K and call it proper comparison? The reason you're getting DP's and audiences saying they can't tell the difference is because you've essentially crippled the 4K (actually 5K) camera. I bet if you projected at 4K then even the average movie going audience would see the difference, just like they can see the difference between SD and HD.

Anything that we as filmmakers and cinematographers shoot today could surely be projected at 2K today or even a month from now, but later this year or next year we'll probably see 4K in a lot more theaters, especially now that there's more 4K cameras on the market, more 4K workflows, and the workflows are even easier than before. And now we can even have 4K projection in homes for only $10k (thank you Red!) (I know it's not meant for homes, but could be used for it still). Widespread 4K projection is inevitable and is around the corner. Movies take 6 months to 3 years to complete. It's very possible that someone who starts shooting a movie today won't finish it and have it distributed until sometime next year when we could easily see a lot more 4K projection happening. I'm sure that filmmaker, producer, DP, would like to make the best educated decision of the camera to shoot with, and to do that a proper test with 4K projection is the best way... not just 2K.