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 :)

CHE Apple movie trailer

Sanjin Jukic

Sanjin Jukic

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
8,929
Reaction score
1
Points
36
Location
Vienna, Austria
Website
www.sanjinjukic.com
che_l200812121710.jpg


CHE Apple movie trailer
 
Yes, 100% RED. I lived in Cuba for 2 years made my 1st short there and ever since I got my RED I want to return to make another film...going to check out this film tomorrow.
 
Both parts were shot on RED prototypes and pre-release firmware builds.

Jim
 
My Red went this week for a music video in Havana, Cuba, without me... :bye2:
 
Just watched this in New York City last night at the Ziegfeld (7pm show - both parts of the film put together). Something must have been really horribly wrong with it. Some shots were very sharp, most soft. The highlights were blown out, there was no detail in many of the shadows and the strobing of the motion actually gave me a sick feeling. I'm curious about this - especially the problematic motion. It did not feel like film. I am curious what went wrong.
 
I saw it in NYC on sat night. RED is the real deal when it's all said and done. that's the simple truth... no two ways about it. But, that's not to say the strobing wasn't there. I agree. On pans there were some noticeable issues, without question. As for detail, It seemed fine to me. It was on the soft side though, but looked fantastic.

as for the movies.

the first movie was really good... pacing etc.

the second seemed like a rough cut. still interesting and the performances were top notch. i wasn't as engaged with the second part. maybe you really need to see them separately.
 
I agree with Kyle...I found the first half very engaging, more visually interesting (which I wouldn't just attribute to the backdrop shifting from "Cuba" to Bolivia...I think the first half was shot in PR)...the two parts seemed to have different visual styles, without even touching on the different narrative structures.

Visually, there were times when the footage looked fantastic, completely on par with film, while other times it did look video-ish. It seemed that Soderbergh used a lot of wide angles and deep focus, which I think contributed the video look...much less selective focus than I would have expected.

Regarding the strobing on some of the pans, I've seen this in 35mm footage, and I think it may have more to do with shutter speed and the speed of the pan than the camera itself. Also, the Ziegfeld was digital projection, and I really wonder if some of the more video-ish shots would have taken on a more traditional film look by way of a film print. I've been to plenty of digital projection presentations before, but I'm not versed in the projectors' scan rates, etc. I don't believe they employ a shutter mechanism like film projectors do, right?

Aside from the occasional video look, which I would say has more to do with the user choices (lens selection, settings, aperture) in conjunction with early firmware builds, there were only a few instances were I saw odd/noticeable clipping (a few explosions had a pinkish hugh, and one fire from the train wreck looked abnormal). On the other hand, I think it handled the skies beautifully, the many highlights very well, as well as nighttime and generally dark shots really well. I did find a lot of the Bolivia footage iffy, which could have been due to dealing with such a wide range of highlights and shadows, perhaps trying to shoot safely, especially dealing with a new technology, but I would have expected Soderbergh to do something to make the end image more appealing. Some shots looked incredible in the second half, and some didn't seem finished or graded.

All of that said, I think we'll be seeing far more examples of Red footage theatrically that will trump this showing, as this really is only the beginning. I think about the Nike Fate add from Fincher/Chivo and we have a better sense of this camera's potential. Even "Knowing," which I don't particularly look forward to narratively, has a very polished look.

Jim, you guys have really done something remarkable, which I think most people on this forum already knew...but I'm excited that many more movie-goers will soon be privy to the new 2nd coming.

Viva la revolucion!
 
agree with all the comments. to get into more detail - the boat shots in the beginning and end of the film - there was a good deal of noise in the highlights. in the opening wide shots with Che and Fidel meeting - there appeared to be vignetting. There was a lack of detail in the shadows and the highlights many times were blown out - even on main characters like Che. For instance, when some of the actors were in shadow and others were in the highlights - well it looked - frankly - sloppy.

But again the shutter just didn't feel right. This is the first time I've viewed red at a theatre on digital projection and I just don't really get it. Will it be improved when the film goes wide release? Is it a digital projection issue? With all his resources why couldn't he clean this up?
 
hmmm... I didn't notice those things. I honestly forgot that it was shot digitally very early into part one. I could only reflect after I left the theater and I was exhausted. There was a shot in Part II where the camera panned up and to the right (i think) and it looked odd. I think that was just the shutter though.

Over the 4.5 hours I can only remember 2 times where I thought something *might* be weird. That's what amazed me the most... and to think that it was digitally projected makes it even better.

A good example... I thought Miami Vice on the Viper looked terrible. Zodiac, on the other hand (to me) looked great. A lot has to do with who is behind the camera, the style, etc.
 
Let's add some context here... Soderbergh had these cameras delivered to Spain with working CF cards AT the time shooting began... in 100+ degree heat. No exposure aids, pre-release firmware build and no history with RED. All the things this board has come to figure out over the last year... was not known to anyone when SS began shooting. He really did pioneer the RED camera in the field. There are shots that are over-exposed. Some under-exposed. Many right on. But the incredible thing is that he took a prototype into the battle and started shooting, learning along the way. What he has put together from ground zero is amazing beyond description.

Look at it this way... remember how "rough" the camera was when the 1st 50 got theirs? SS starting shooting these movies 3 months before that!

Jim
 
Btw, I like "rough" shoots,

"rough" shooting,

also I'm a "rough" guy

and reality is "rough".
 
eddavid said:
good point Jim!!
Click to expand...

Adding to Jims comment...

They used the equivalent of REDCODE 22 and the sensor hadn't been tuned yet.

There were only framing guides (no meters at all).

The monitor outputs still hadn't been tuned so exposure was misleading off the monitor.

The camera ran only at 24fps.

Plus a bunch of other limitations.
 
i think the most telling sign of approval was when both parts got a huge ovation from most of the audience.

regardless of technical issues, both movies were effective on virtually every level... at the end of the day that's all that matters. i doubt many people in the audience would have known it was shot digitally. no chance.

that's huge.
 
The "guerilla" stage that the camera was in when "Che" was shot probably complements the "guerilla" concept of the film itself.

I think Soderbergh knew that and used it intentionally. :biggrin:

Ernesto Guevara didn't have exposure tools in the jungle!
 
karapetkov said:
The "guerilla" stage that the camera was in when "Che" was shot probably complements the "guerilla" concept of the film itself.

I think Soderbergh knew that and used it intentionally. :biggrin:

Ernesto Guevara didn't have exposure tools in the jungle!
Click to expand...

yep...
and the double meaning for RED revolution
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top