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

hmmm - let's see what we can google up with this handle ( i bet he uses such a cleaver one on multiple forums:

well on creative cow he is:
http://forums.creativecow.net/profile/61086

Robert Blalack

who according to imdb does have a oscar - for star wars no less.

hmmmm.
 
So me thinking I must be missing out on some secret that would make my photography better when I used to find those little folded white tech papers in my box of 35mm roll of film was for naught?
 
lol :) Kind of like having the mask pulled of a WWF wrestler. :blink:
oops! :bleh:

link is still bad.
 
the link to creative cow always gets messed up -

simply google "film101" - you will see the creative cow link on the second page.
 
Guys I would seriously recomend deleteing anything of this guys personal info...Including his name...Its not a witch hunt.


DogDay
 
dogday said:
Guys I would seriously recomend deleteing anything of this guys personal info...Including his name...Its not a witch hunt.


DogDay
Click to expand...

I agree... he posts are valid and there is no reason to flog anyone. I have to admit that his 1st post had me bristle a bit, but I can also see where he is coming from.

All of the footage we got from SS looked terrific. But I have only seen a small part of it. I would be surprised if there are not some shots where Steven allowed the footage to blow out... his choice.

There is a difference between trolls and those that post with a point of view we don't like to hear (but may be valid). It was because of his post that got me thinking about all the clipped footage I have seen that should never have been clipped... usually in grading. That lead to my newest post in Recon.

So, thanks film101. You have opened up a door to better info and improved work.

Jm
 
The "Che" footage was clipped in some shots according others who saw the film, so film101 is not wrong. SS used the material because it fits his vision of the story regardless of the technical situation. Folks on this forum are also not wrong because they have ample evidence to prove the camera's technical prowess.

I just wish the SS footage was all technically up to par because of his standing in the pro film community, and this is one of the 1st high profile products out using RED. It would have been better if there were a few beauties before this "Che" debut. The road ahead becomes a little more difficult with this, but it will all work out in the wash!
 
No...Because there is no road ahead...This is off the beaten path, the one that makes all the difference when traveled.

If there is one word I can think of to discribe Che the Person it would be "Rugged" or "Pure" ( It is what it is ) which is as far in the other EXTREME as one can get to "Contrived" its so obvious a choice that its almost too simple and still people don`t = Get It?

Red. Che. Epic.
They are Battering Rams...They Shatter preconceptions leaving the "Shoulds" in splinters.

Its a new day.


DogDay

P.S.
Way-way off topic.
Sometimes I wonder how much of this is me and how much is the "Robusta" talking...Listen guys does anyone know about Cuban coffee? I hear its really really strong...Seriously speaking can anyone get me a bag or two, I will pay top dollar for it.
 
Jannard said:
I agree... he posts are valid and there is no reason to flog anyone. I have to admit that his 1st post had me bristle a bit, but I can also see where he is coming from.

All of the footage we got from SS looked terrific. But I have only seen a small part of it. I would be surprised if there are not some shots where Steven allowed the footage to blow out... his choice.

There is a difference between trolls and those that post with a point of view we don't like to hear (but may be valid). It was because of his post that got me thinking about all the clipped footage I have seen that should never have been clipped... usually in grading. That lead to my newest post in Recon.

So, thanks film101. You have opened up a door to better info and improved work.

Jm
Click to expand...

My only gripe with film101 is the way he entered with his post. A better approach in my opinion would have been to say he saw the film, but had a lot of questions about some of the footage he saw. If he has not used the camera himself, he could have posed some questions to the community to try to make sense of what he was seeing in that film.

Question #1. It appears that a lot of shots in Che have limited dynamic range, perhaps 5 stops. Is this a creative decision or is the camera's dynamic range less than expected? Anyone will Red experience who has seen the Che film wish to comment on this?

Question #2. What is Red's dynamic range and what is the best way to expose for the camera? I would like to understand the process a little better, and maybe point me to some examples showing this dynamic range.

Instead, there were a lot of assumptions made and a lot of judgments which reference post processed footage from 1 film, 1 DP.

Film101, if this was a legitimate attempt to raise some questions about the camera's dynamic range and it just came off the wrong way, then maybe we can start at the beginning again and discuss the issues you have with the footage, although it looks like Jim has opened up this discussion in Recon.

Hopefully you can understand where we are coming from on this. There has been a lot of misinformation spread on the internet about this camera, hence why we might get a bit defensive about this sort of stuff.
 
If the lead post in this thread was, in fact, written by Rob Blalack, I knew Rob (a few lifetimes back) as a seasoned, well-meaning, and accomplished film-maker and human being.
 
lol dogday...OFF TOPIC..."Cubita" and "Serrano" are both strong and imo delicious name brand cubana cafes, not to be confused with some miami Cubita. I got a decent stash with the rest of my cigars and rum that I reserved over the years.

BACK ON TOPIC....from my experience seeing only a large teaser at NAB, Soderbergs Che films looked incredible, not just picture quality but the photography in general (sony 4k projector)...I hope SS and associates treat this story as passionate as it looked.
 
Haskell,

I have desided that I am going to start learning Spanish seriously this summer ( I could only take the Tony Montana thing so far ) I have always thought its the most beautiful language in the world...Its Electric!

It just doesnt get any cooler or hotter...If I could speak it fluently I think I would enjoy existence much more.

About the coffee - You wanna be my dealer?

DogDay
 
Just seems like a rash posting and reaction to be making with out ever getting the camera in his own hands. Being critical is good but...cmon. When I actually had my my camera in my hands it changed my very cynical approach to RED. So much going right with this camera to it's few and vanishing shortcomings.

PS - I can make film look like shit as well.
 
The main newspaper in Finland wrote this morning an article of Che and Steven Soderbergh. Interestingly enough, in the end of the article they said: "The movie was filmed with the latest digital technology which is another reason for additional joy. ... Especially the shots taken outdoors under natural light are indeed very colorful and sharp and all motion appear very natural on the screen."

Is it in the eye of the beholder?
 
At the moment we should a bit forget on "film101 VFX Oscar winner guy"

and enjoy to watch "a sneak peak" shots from CHE

and then a RED carpet before the premiere at Cannes 2008.

LINK>>>
 
i watched the whole thing, right from the center of the theatre, i watched in salle du 60e, the projector was a kick ass digital projector (hands down) i watched kugfu panda on it.. it rocked... and it was the best digital screening ive ever seen in my life.
film101... is kinda right. but he criticised it a little too much.. using some fancy words...

Yes, the clouds were clipping and it was ugly (part 1 only) and what is strange is the fact that in part 1.. the clouds and the sea was clipping at the beginning of the film whereas the same footage shot and screened in part 2 was not clipping at all but were absolutely perfect.. ?! and yeah what was the deal with the different aspect ratios? its kinda weird.

part 2 looked much much MUCH better than part 1... part 1 kinda dissappointed me, the clouds were shit. and any major source of light in the flick looked like shit.

film101 talked about the shadows... dude... ure absolutely wrong about the shadows. it was pretttttty clear it was cc'd to look like that... you can see the difference in the different shots...

when i got out of the film... i had a dp and a director with me who didnt own a red and were like.. normal about it... they were like whats the big deal...so they asked me what did i learn.. i said i better get lots of ND grads for the sky.. some serious ND grads for the sky. but the problem yet again was with the walls in part 2... some white or light gray walls showed some clipping with lots of detail... and the funny thing with red is... i can know that cc did alot to make it look that way.. cause i know it wasnt shot like that (so clipped) .. cc'd red (the s-curve) can show the highlighted parts with this salmon color to it.. so i was like.. it wasn't cc'd properly.or that basically was the look that soderberg wanted to go with.

i mean come to think of it.. it was a 4 hour and a half movie... and this guy shot 3 movies with red the same year... i couldn't imagine the cc to be perfect... plus the new builds kick ass... theres a huge difference in image quality between builds... but red WAS there and it really looked (sometimes) stunning.

the level of detail in the rocks as del torro took cover.. it looked astounding, the shodows of leaves on the revolutionists.. looked beautiful... sometimes i wondered how much lighting was used in the film... it looked as if none were used sometimes.

but i have to say... i don't know who's fault it is that the clouds were clipping in such an ugly fashion. but the first thing im doing when i go home in 3 days is pick up my red... get a dude, have him sit beneath some clouds... and shoot, and get to see the clippings in post.

i got the impression that i got what i paid for when i got out of the movie. and im just. satisfied. i think i can do lots with red. but i still wanna prove me wrong with the white clippings.
________
JUGGALOS
 
All these discussions has just gotten my heart pounding all the more faster for the Red One, the camera named after me! Haha just kidding... Can't wait to shoot my next feature on it! Thanks for the all the opinions, even to film101's. :) Now can't wait to make a few of my own :)
By the way, HALLO to Uli Plank in Germany!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top