Current RED Scarlet can't cover Super 35 area @ 4K???

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Ok good point. I was just trying to think of a way to maximize the sensor. Maybe if you could capture a 1080 60p stream off the full sensor, that might come in handy, but otherwise you're not really gaining anything. You may get to use the full sensor, but you're losing redcode and resolution and not gaining anything when it comes to disk space conservation.

For projects that will finish 1080p anyway, then an external recorder is a good idea if storage is a concern.

A Pix 240 recording ProRes (standard) has like 1/8th the data rate of the Scarlet/Epic. It will also produce some of the best footage a lot of folks stepping up from cameras like the AF100 have ever seen.

So, yeah, a huge step down from RedCode, but a huge step up from a lot of camera systems.

Not to mention ... if you are looking for a B camera in a pinch ... there are a number of roughly S35 cameras you can stick an external recorder on and record a quality that intercuts better with Red footage.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Hi Gurus,
Is there any book/source to get a basic understanding of the technicalities of framing?

The technicalities of framing ?

I don't expect so.

Nobody works the way we are talking about here.

For the most part, you use your available lenses and frame artistically on set.

Only shots that require a ton of planning, like some VFX shots, require you to plan in this much detail.

If you do previsualization, its easier. You set up the previs system with your camera and lens set, and work stuff out.

I'd be much more concerned about creative framing than I would be about these technicalities.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

For the optically/mentally challenged, is there a calculator that would show the FOV dimensions at a certain distance with a certain xx mm lens when shooting 4K?

For example, if I'm trying to pick a lens that will give me at 10 feet, a FOV 10' wide, it would be great to be able to plug some figures into a calculator (desired distance, desired visible width), and figure out what lens in mm I'd need to buy and what the FOV height would be at that distance?

You should try Artemis Director's Viewfinder and/or ASC Toland

Both by Chemical Wedding

 

[Anthony Gratl]

As your understanding of optics is so lacking you need to ask the question if you should buy a camera at all.

Your understanding of civility is so lacking you need to ask the question about whether you should be posting on the internet.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Only shots that require a ton of planning, like some VFX shots, require you to plan in this much detail.

Not even. The Pre-Viz artist will just sit down the director or DP and frame the shot how it looks best, just like you would on set... and then let production know what they decided. I've never seen someone go: "hmmmm a 12 mm is going to be perfect." more like "Wider, closer... little tighter, little closer. Yeah I like that. What is it? 15? Great. " I've never met anyone who can perfectly visualize what framing will be like without 'playing' and responding to the scene.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Not even. The Pre-Viz artist will just sit down the director or DP and frame the shot how it looks best, just like you would on set... and then let production know what they decided.

I agree, hence my use of the word some in the post your reply to.

In fact I should have said

"Only shots that require a ton of planning, like occasional VFX shots, require you to plan in this much detail."

My point being that there are shots you must execute precisely according to a plan.

I've never seen someone go: "hmmmm a 12 mm is going to be perfect." more like "Wider, closer... little tighter, little closer. Yeah I like that. What is it? 15? Great. " I've never met anyone who can perfectly visualize what framing will be like without 'playing' and responding to the scene.

Really?

I do that all the time. I didn't think it was exceptional. I'll call for a 35, the shot will be a 35. I call for 18, the shot is an 18. I can do that fairly reliably between 9 and 135mm. I figure with a little more experience working with longer lenses I'll get it for all common focal lengths.

Now sometimes folks change their minds or fail to communicate their intent properly.

In addition when working as a boom operator, or setting lights/grip I can very precisely skirt the frame edge if I know the lens focal length. No need to see the image.

I think that's a skill you can practice over time, a lot like a 1st AC's ability to estimate distances accurately.

 

[Phil Holland]

I'll second the concept behind DPs calling for certain focal lengths. This happens all the time. Especially for prime guys. Sometimes they are even determined in Pre-Viz or boards in preproduction. Speeds up the day actually. There's always room for some "play" and camera position adjustment, but a lot of people shoot this way.

Just did a shoot on Sunday where I was using 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm exclusively for some restaurant bar interiors on wides, mediums, and close-ups and played pretty much exactly to the shot list and layout..

I'm sure it varies between cinematographers and shooting styles. This is certainly one of those "there is no right answer". Certainly some enjoy shooting with a certain lens or lenses for an entire project as well. Lens kits are often assembled based off of shot lists and desired lengths too.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I do that all the time. I didn't think it was exceptional. I'll call for a 35, the shot will be a 35. I call for 18, the shot is an 18. I can do that fairly reliably between 9 and 135mm. I figure with a little more experience working with longer lenses I'll get it for all common focal lengths.

Well I would say primes are little different. I almost exclusively shoot with primes with my still camera but I never "know" what my FOV is going to be. If someone hands you a 34 or 33 instead of a 35 would you be able to tell the difference? "Hey this isn't a 35!"

I think the number of people for any given camera that could that in the world are probably a very small number. Especially now when Alexa, RED, RED4.5k, RED5k, phantom etc all have different gate sizes.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Well I would say primes are little different. I almost exclusively shoot with primes with my still camera but I never "know" what my FOV is going to be. If someone hands you a 34 or 33 instead of a 35 would you be able to tell the difference? "Hey this isn't a 35!"

Yes, absolutely.

I should add that I usually work with some zooms in the kit ... but I still don't need to fiddle the lens much.

That said ... I'm a lot happier when I see a shot will work with one of the "classic prime" lengths, because those are the ones most firmly fixed in my head.

I tend to cheat a little favoring these lengths ... I'll usually place the camera/track after I know the lens I want.

I think the number of people for any given camera that could that in the world are probably a very small number. Especially now when Alexa, RED, RED4.5k, RED5k, phantom etc all have different gate sizes.

If it is true that it is a small number I should maybe raise my rates.

I don't believe it is as hard as you think though. Give it some practice.

I decide ahead of time the frame I want and with a long zoom up (like a kit 18-135 which I use on the 7D as a finder with R1) then I decide what the length "should be". Then I hold the camera up to my eye, and adjust it until I am happy with the frame, then I check what the lens actually reads.

Rinse. Repeat. Eventually even I can learn.

 

[James Stone]

The technicalities of framing ?

I don't expect so.

Nobody works the way we are talking about here.

For the most part, you use your available lenses and frame artistically on set.

Only shots that require a ton of planning, like some VFX shots, require you to plan in this much detail.

If you do previsualization, its easier. You set up the previs system with your camera and lens set, and work stuff out.

I'd be much more concerned about creative framing than I would be about these technicalities.

Thanks Guru, Another question...
Which lens is better Red 18-85mm or 17-50mm for the Scarlet PL mount. I know this question has been asked before in the forum but without conclusive answer. And is there a better lens which comes close to 35mm frame with the same flexibility.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Thanks Guru, Another question...
Which lens is better Red 18-85mm or 17-50mm for the Scarlet PL mount. I know this question has been asked before in the forum but without conclusive answer. And is there a better lens which comes close to 35mm frame with the same flexibility.

Ha ha ... Red makes both for a reason!

The answer ultimately depends on you and your shooting style.

The 18-85 is a more flexible lens. I can go days shooting entirely in that range of focal lengths.

Its also a much bigger and heavier lens.

The 17-50 is a bit wider, and much lighter.

If you are like me and don't tend to pick the 65 that much, then its feasible to get the 17-50 and an 85mm prime. That will keep your rig lighter, and cost about the same. Also, you'll have another stop you can open up the 85 for that extra creamy bokeh if you want it. (and I often do like to bring that on CU & XCU shots.)

The price is lens changes. Working with a zoom is much faster, especially if you are just grabbing coverage on moving shots.

For myself, I'd take the 18-85mm to start a kit.
Then I'd add a PL mount Duclos/Tokina 11-16

Then I'd add a canon mount and a 70-200 zoom.

Once I had those, I'd get the 17-50 so I could get a lightweight set up and still work fast.

Then I'd get the prime set.

My 1st AC is a small lady, so she'd probably be happier if I started building around the 17-50 & a prime because of the weight.

 

[Matthew Duclos]

Geez. It's a good thing we don't call ourselves "Duclos Cameras". Then I'd really be in trouble.

 

[Matthew Duclos]

I'm going to confuse a lot of people even more by saying that this entire discussion is moot. The example given on page 4 of this thread with the trees stating that "Neither is actually 10mm" is the reason there is so much confusion going around. If that photo was taken with a 10mm lens, then both images are EXACTLY 10 mm. Period. The sensor dimension used in my chart may very well be off. I pulled a lot of info from before the Epic camera was even released and the dimensions were mostly speculation. And another note, EVERYONE needs to stop referring to frame sizes as 4k and 5k etc. "k" is a resolution, not a dimension. In 10 years, "4k" sensors will be featured in the iPhone 9s and be a whopping 10mm diagonal.

 

[James Stone]

Thanks Guru Alex
18-85mm it shall be!

Ha ha ... Red makes both for a reason!

The answer ultimately depends on you and your shooting style.

The 18-85 is a more flexible lens. I can go days shooting entirely in that range of focal lengths.

Its also a much bigger and heavier lens.

The 17-50 is a bit wider, and much lighter.

If you are like me and don't tend to pick the 65 that much, then its feasible to get the 17-50 and an 85mm prime. That will keep your rig lighter, and cost about the same. Also, you'll have another stop you can open up the 85 for that extra creamy bokeh if you want it. (and I often do like to bring that on CU & XCU shots.)

The price is lens changes. Working with a zoom is much faster, especially if you are just grabbing coverage on moving shots.

For myself, I'd take the 18-85mm to start a kit.
Then I'd add a PL mount Duclos/Tokina 11-16

Then I'd add a canon mount and a 70-200 zoom.

Once I had those, I'd get the 17-50 so I could get a lightweight set up and still work fast.

Then I'd get the prime set.

My 1st AC is a small lady, so she'd probably be happier if I started building around the 17-50 & a prime because of the weight.

 

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

In 10 years, "4k" sensors will be featured in the iPhone 9s and be a whopping 10mm diagonal.

10 years? The current Iphone 4S has a 3.2k sensor that is ~6mm diagonal, so maybe more like 1 year

Actually REDs 4kHD format is 8.3MP whereas the 4S sensor is apparently capable of doing 8MP at 24fps in 4:3 aspect, that's only 4% away from the same number of pixels as REDs 4KHD. http://www.ovt.com/products/sensor.php?id=102

 

[Matthew Duclos]

10 years? The current Iphone 4S has a 3.2k sensor that is ~6mm diagonal, so maybe more like 1 year

I like your style, man from the future.

My point exactly... 4k is not a sensor size. It's a resolution completely and unconditionally independent of physical measurements.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I like your style, man from the future.

My point exactly... 4k is not a sensor size. It's a resolution completely and unconditionally independent of physical measurements.

Except in reference to "MX 4k". Which is a physical dimension.