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 :)

Challenge to Zacuto...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mike Halper said:
I must say what you've stated here is the kind of non-forward thinking that slows the advancement of cinema technology.
Click to expand...

Someone should tell George that he is slowing down the advancement of cinema technology with his archaic 2k projection system. I'm sure he'd appreciate it.
 
Jannard said:
We'd love to participate in your test. But going to a race where you have to ride the brakes isn't much fun. Here's what we suggest.

Do your 1080P or 2K finish. But also do a 4K finish. 4K is the future... and the future is now. Why not test what is... not what was. Up-rez where necessary. People need to know what to expect when 4K delivery options happen (like now). Down-rez the higher resolution cameras to 4K. Look forward. Studios are preparing to re-release old movies shot on film with 4K scans. Show what an image will look like on a 60' screen. Everyone needs to know what their original is capable of... starting with tests like these.

Pick your (Zacuto chosen) team to do the post. But also give each manufacturer their own footage to get processed under their control. That is likely to produce the best results and motivate the companies to show the best from their cameras. No excuses. For example, will RED footage be kept R3D all the way through? And if so... by whom?

How about it Zacuto? Let's do this.

Jim
Click to expand...

Resolution is only one aspect of a camera. I'm sick of hearing about 4k this and 5k that. What about dynamic range? Ergonomics? Of course an Epic will look better at 4k than the other cameras...but its so much more than that. Its like trying to compare an F1 car with production vehicles. Basing a test on resolution is simply not fair. I feel the Zacuto tests have been excellent thus far.
 
Jon Chema said:
Resolution is only one aspect of a camera. I'm sick of hearing about 4k this and 5k that. What about dynamic range? Ergonomics? Of course an Epic will look better at 4k than the other cameras...but its so much more than that. Its like trying to compare an F1 car with production vehicles. Basing a test on resolution is simply not fair. I feel the Zacuto tests have been excellent thus far.
Click to expand...

But not including resolution and detail as one of the characteristics upon which to judge cameras is not fair either. It's not like Red is the only camera that will benefit from that comparison as the Alexa is capable of greater than 2K resolution as well, as are other newer cameras recently announced. It's not like anyone is asking for a test based solely on resolution. It's being requested and challenged to include resolution along with all other facets. Resolution does make a difference.
 
I love 5K etc., but if "Lawrence of Arabia" was only available on VHS, I would still love it.
 
Jon Chema said:
Resolution is only one aspect of a camera. I'm sick of hearing about 4k this and 5k that. What about dynamic range? Ergonomics? Of course an Epic will look better at 4k than the other cameras...but its so much more than that. Its like trying to compare an F1 car with production vehicles. Basing a test on resolution is simply not fair. I feel the Zacuto tests have been excellent thus far.
Click to expand...
xx''

Last years test had its faults, as most have... Some were workflow related. This years is going to get a lot of steam for the parameters of testing which makes the results rather hard to compare.

Fun thing is that the Epic is so good in so many areas, that resolution is just an added bonus...
 
While I think the future will pretty much be resolution independent with a minimum of 1080, the test pretty much cripple anything that shoots above 2K. While I understand that is the parameter of the test, why not show them in Standard Definition and include some great SD cameras in the test if resolution is meaningless. Cripple all the cameras. Going to the car comparrison (because this is the internet) if you compare a Porsche to a Volkswagon and see how they both perform in city traffic you will get similar results. That would be fine if you are comparing it for a grocey getter. (Heck the VW would actually make a better grocery getter.)

Anyways, my last comment. You never know where your footage may end up. I once shot a SD commercial about 4 years ago, our station still did not shoot in HD. About a year later, went to our local theater, I arrived about 20 minutes early, and up pops the commercial I shot. It was in between the HD commercials and it look bad compared. So yes, your footage may end up in a 4K theater.
 
Jon Chema said:
Resolution is only one aspect of a camera. I'm sick of hearing about 4k this and 5k that. What about dynamic range? Ergonomics? Of course an Epic will look better at 4k than the other cameras...but its so much more than that. Its like trying to compare an F1 car with production vehicles. Basing a test on resolution is simply not fair. I feel the Zacuto tests have been excellent thus far.
Click to expand...

I agree. I feel like EPIC's main advantage over other cameras is resolution. Which is why if I do an FX based shoot I'll use a RED as it's a good FX camera. But the rest of the time I care about the beauty of the image and that's why I mostly use a different camera and deliver 1080 footage to clients who only want 1080. So, I think it's fair to ask Zacuto to have as one of their tests a 4k projection where the RED products can show their clear advantage in that area. But like many of the tests, they show the strengths and weaknesses in each different camera. But to just simply say "no I will not join" because not ALL the tests are geared around your camera's particular advantage is a bit extreme I think. Where RED's philosophy is 4K = Great, many don't agree. Personally in the current 1080 world, my personal philosophy is "Prettiest image" = great. In the future, if and when Jim is right and the world is 4k, the cameras with the prettiest images will certainly adapt. Jim can be happy about being right way ahead of time which is fine But right here, right now, I think join Zacuto, ask for a 4k resolution test to be fair, but don't expect ALL tests to be in 4k. Broadcast television is still 1080 so it's perfectly reasonable to do a 1080/2k test. Then the future will be the future.
 
The funny thing about this whole thread is that not a single person has seen the project yet. I suppose when Epic comes out looking great (which it will) everyone will be in "I told you so" mode. ;-)
 
I have many cameras. I love them all for different reasons. My favorite is the R1. It's a race car AND a daily driver. My others are just great all around daily drivers. Seeing my footage displayed in 4K for the first time, proved this to me.
 
Gunleik Groven said:
xx''

Last years test had its faults, as most have... Some were workflow related. This years is going to get a lot of steam for the parameters of testing which makes the results rather hard to compare.

Fun thing is that the Epic is so good in so many areas, that resolution is just an added bonus...
Click to expand...

True. No test is perfect. But honestly, I think Zacuto has dont a fantastic job. The first DSLR shootout was cool but not scientific. Their second shootout was much better- real world lighting setups, etc. I'm hoping the 3rd will be even better. However, unless one is at the actual theatre screening, its really hard to tell on a web compressed video stream....
 
Rob Macey said:
I have many cameras. I love them all for different reasons. My favorite is the R1. It's a race car AND a daily driver. My others are just great all around daily drivers. Seeing my footage displayed in 4K for the first time, proved this to me.
Click to expand...

Agreed. We must'nt forget that cameras are simply tools. You can't buy "creativity" as an option on any camera yet, and the second that option is offered we're all screwed! :)
 
Keith Walters said:
"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.
Click to expand...

That's fine for comedies but I have a couple points to disagree.

1) Seeing 4k vs 1080p is a LOT HARDER than seeing SD vs 1080p. SD is 640x480/(240 interlaced). That's about .3 megapixels per frame. HD is 2 megapixels. That's almost 7x the resolution. 4k is only 4x the resolution and HD with motion blur etc is already getting to the point where most of the image is more out of focus than the resolution of the display. At the REDUser party I asked my "Average-US-Consumer" if they thought the 4k display looked special in any way. They said no. I asked if it looked sharper than normal. They said they didn't think so.

You could probably change most TVs in a showroom to 480p and consumers would go "Oooo HD!" and by HD they mean 16:9.

2) You can't just scan the film and re-edit a lot of movies or TV shows. Almost every TV drama uses extensive set extensions now. And the only shows I've ever heard that justified the cost of re-doing VFX was Star Trek... and even then it was a long protracted battle to get the studio to decide to pay for it. If even Star Trek can't convince studios to redo FX for up-rezing then it doesn't matter if your TV show was shot on 4k the studio isn't going to pay for all the set extensions to be redone in 4k.
 
I also don't get that "futureproof to infinity and beyond" idea. We are using billions and billions to preserve old stuff in museums and archives that just a minority will ever watch or look at again. Even Hogan's Heroes will be forgotten once you old geezers sit in a wheelchair in front of the washing maschine and are just too short-sighted to even find the TV in your 10 sq m room. ;) No offence! We all will. And how many of all movies become timeless classics and thus relevant for future generations? How many TV shows? I'd rather have all that money spent to create new stuff. Or at least most of it. And I'm ok with Hogan's heroes as they are right now. In SD. In Germany at least. The station owning the rights only broadcasts in SD. *bow*
 
Steve,
The thing is I am an independent film maker in the action sports category. We run a 100 stop film tour for our movies. We rent theaters, auditoriums, nightclubs, etc to show our films in. We always bring our own projector to the venues. I am going to get on the list for a Red Ray projector. I am thankful I shot most of my film on Red in 4k and 5k. This is game changing for me. I can now shoot and display on the same level as Peter Jackson. This is now and it blows my mind. We do not have mega budgets for our projects and we can do this in 2012. I live in a 4k world right now so i would welcome the 4k test. I imagine by next year, 2013, there will be plenty of people running around with 4k projection. Exciting times. I look forward to the Red Studios test as it is more relevant to me as a lower budget independent producer than the Zacuto test. To each their own I guess.

steve weiss said:
Thou are here Jim.

I'm not sure what you are asking of me? I really don't want to embarrass anyone but I did invite every manufacturer, including you and Ted, I sent the email to you several times, I can publish it on the site here if you want, although I would never do that without your permission. In it, I told you that you may pick your own team to operate your camera. I told you that you could take the footage and post processes it anyway you want, anywhere you want. I sent the email to you several times with no reply. Where art thou Jim? Further, I sent you the same letter for the 2011 shootout, as well with no response. I "begged" you for the EPIC in 2011 which you started delivering 2 weeks after the shoot, so there were obviously cameras available. I caught a lot of flack about that from your fans/users as well because the EPIC was not included.

Frankly, I make documentaries, not propaganda films. For those that don't understand the difference, I as the filmmaker have no idea what the outcome of my film is till it's finished (unlike a Michael Moore film, where the end is determined first and the shoot is just there to prove its case). Wow, your fans/users are very beholden to you, it's almost like they would join the EPIC military and fight to the death for its honor, that's cool, no other camera company has that kind of support. That's impressive that people think so much of you and your cameras but my film was not created for RED's benefit and no other camera or community is having a conversation like this. As I've stated, you have created a wonderful camera, congratulations but to me and many of the DP's in my film and guest DP's interviewed, it's just a tool like lights and tripods. It all has to work together. I rely on my crew, much more then my gear. If I had your amazing camera and put it on a lousy tripod and all of my pans and tilts sucked, to me it wouldn't matter, the overall film would suck.

Spoiler alert, these are the kinds of comments you will hear in my film: I asked 9 ASC cinematographers, if they had to pick between shitty picture or shitty sound what would they recommend to the director if in the situation you could only have one? Every single cinematographer said shitty picture. There reason: You can tolerate shitty picture but shitty sound is intolerable. I asked a cinematographer if he would be willing to live with a take where the actor didn't hit his mark and isn't in their eye light but the performance was better then when they hit their mark and his answer was an astounding yes. This is what DP's in a collaborate effort do and I felt it was important for people to hear this as well as well as see what camera are capable of. My film is not just about cameras, I keep telling everyone that, it's about both and I felt that a lot of young filmmakers, directors, cinematographers and operators will love the opportunity to hear from people like this. Much like we have done with all of our other shows. To educate and entertain. Remember, I am also a filmmaker and this is my artistic expression. If all you want to see is a raw test, they are out there, although, I'm not sure how fair and accurate they are. My film is the hows and whys of how to make your camera look great, plus a lot more. Actually, to be honest, I'm not totally sure what my film is yet because I haven't even really started it prior to getting the comments from the screenings.

Jim, everything you asked for I did. I invited the manufacturers to participate. Canon was there, although they did not interfere with what Polly Morgan did on the C300. Sony was there, only to operate their F65 since it was only 2 weeks old. They did not help with the F3 or FS100. Panasonic recommended the shooters for their GH2 and we used them. Alexa, Nikon and RED chose not to directly participate. Every aspect of this test is conducted by Bruce Logan ASC and I've never met anyone with as much digital knowledge as him. So much so, that he didn't feel that the work flow was exactly right when he viewed the show at NAB and decided that he would not allow the 15 sold out screenings at NAB to happen. I commend him for that and gave him carte blance to do that even know I had over 150 people show up at my booth to see the show and it caused me some embarrassment and lots of money. I don't care, we wanted it right. Bruce is currently redoing the presentation to make sure it is right and fair. Over 100 people were on set during the shootout including Gary Adcock and other digital specialists to make sure we did not make any mistakes and did everything fairly.

The only issue you seem to take with my process that I have done, is the issue of a 4K projection and I've told you why it's not appropriate. This test is not here to prove that your camera looks the best in an environment that only you and your pals can really see in 2012. Again that would be propaganda and I'm making a documentary about truth in 2012. Every one knows that in 2012 4K is not here, most of the people releasing projects with your camera are releasing in 2K. I respect you, I would love to finally personally meet you, I admire you and I agree with you on all but one issue. Let's just agree to disagree on that one issue. Best regards, Steve Weiss
Click to expand...
 
So i think we all agree: Camera testing should be done across the board from sd to 4k. A cameras merit should be based on its ability to handle current and near future technologies all together in one package. It's not rocket science.
 
Here is a picture from Ansel Adams:

http://www.anseladams.com/PhotoDetails.asp?ShowDESC=N&ProductCode=1701186102

It is reproduced for the web and still looks great:

Why?

!. He knows how to use his tools

2. He started with the highest resolution available.

You don't shoot web camera for web material.

Any DOP saying, in this day and age, I only shoot HD for vimeo or TV based solely on the fact that that is the end delivery resolution, does not deserve to work in this industry. Any company trying to market the same does not deserve to be in this industry.
 
Jason Sinclair said:
Any DOP saying, in this day and age, I only shoot HD for vimeo or TV based solely on the fact that that is the end delivery resolution, does not deserve to work in this industry.
Click to expand...

Then I guess that I don't deserve to work in this industry since I shoot HD for a TV series... me and the other 99% of DP's shooting TV series right now!

So when I shot 35mm for a feature destined for a 35mm release, I didn't deserve to work in the industry either? We always have to exceed the resolution of a target release format? So nothing should ever be shown in IMAX if not shot in IMAX either, and in fact IMAX shooters should be shooting in something that is 2X or 4X the resolution of IMAX or else they don't deserve to be IMAX shooters?

You're basically saying that anyone who shoots with an Alexa doesn't deserve to be a DP.

And as for the Ansel Adams example, does that mean that Cartier-Bresson's work is less valuable artistically because he shot in 35mm instead of 8x10? Every artist has to always work at the highest resolution possible regardless of the artistic needs of the particular project?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top