digital 2-perf?

[Rex Yau]

I thought there were a spot for features suggestion on the form, but I guess I was wrong... Well, maybe the RED Team will spot this if it has not already been discussed.

I just had this idea today, thinking what if us Scarlet owner can get a firmware upgrade that will a 2-perf frame at 5k without look around? My idea is instead of just dropping a frame guide, it's actually disable the unuse area of the sensor, much like shooting 4K with 5K look around turned off, so we can get a wider frame with a 5K FoV. With some pixels disabled on the unused sensor area, will the processor be able to catch up on a higher horizontal capture?

That way, we don't "wasted" the additional sensor in post if we decided to frame 2-perf anamorphic with black bars dropping for letter box.

I know, I am never a huge fan to do post crop. I love to shoot true to the format, but most of the time, I can't afford to rent a full set of Hawk... or LOMO as a matter of fact. And I can only convince so many people to shoot with my 1.5x scope on flat glass. So, by having a "digital" 2-perf, I guess I am staying more true to the acquisition format.

Just a thought.

 

[Marc Wielage]

I know, I am never a huge fan to do post crop.

I can think of about 200 major Hollywood films shot in the last 5-6 years that did re-frame and re-compose the image as required, and in some cases, it saved having to reshoot. I also know of some situations where (through no fault of the operator) there was a little vertical "shake" in the camera, and because they shot full-ap, we had the ability to pin the image after the fact, precisely steadying the shot in post.

To me, the flexibility of reframing overrides any "purist" belief that the area outside the image area is wasted. I have no problem with those who are willing to have an iron-clad commitment to something like framing, but in the real world, you wind up realizing months later that a story point is lost because the top of the character's head was slightly cut off, or (with a commercial) the client wants to pan left a little or show a little more at the bottom. You're screwed if 100% of the visible picture area is all you have.

I haven't done a feature transfer in 15 years where we haven't done some repos at some point. I recall one particular project where I lost count after 600 repos (a first feature by a new DP, longtime camera operator). If it saves 5 minutes on the set, it makes total sense to fix it in post.

 

[Mike P.]

You're talking about an ANA mode? That is currently only available in Epic (~3240x2700). Technically, it's the same amount of pixels per frame as 4k 16:9... We want it, but don't think RED are willing to waste the resources on it (especially when itll be kicked to the curb once Dragon drops).

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I think he is talking about a recording format that only records a 2.40 : 1 spherical image area, not the ANA format which records a 1.20 : 1 area that has a 2X optical squeeze.

I did four features in 2.40 anamorphic 35mm and didn't need to do much, if any, reframing. However, when shooting on a Red camera, I usually record 2:1 spherical for a 2.40 feature -- if anything, it makes the inevitable 16:9 full-frame HD version for TV easier to pull than if I had only recorded a 2.40 image. However, I don't see a problem with shooting in a 2.40 format, it's been done for 60 years now! This "need" for reframing is a modern phenomenon simply because it is possible -- and easy -- when it wasn't really possible without an image-degrading optical blow-up, it wasn't done that often and somehow great movies were made, warts and all. It's great that today with D.I.'s and digital cinematography that an image can be reframed in an emergency or for a storytelling reason, but it's also a tool that can be abused by people who can't make up their mind or don't respect the art of composition. I'd rather err on the side of getting it right in camera rather than leave things open-ended -- there is a point where more options is not necessarily a good thing for art.

 

[Jonas Rejman]

Amen.

 

[Mike P.]

Yeah, 4.5k on Scarlet would be nice. Again, 4480x1920 = 8.85mp per frame, which is exactly what 4096x2160 is (maxes at 30fps on Scarlet.) 5k WS (5120x2160) would be over 11mp per frame, which is a lot more than the ~9mp that 4k 1.9:1 or 4.5k 2.4:1, so I don't think that would be possible/feasible. That said, I seem to recall Jarred or someone saying that it's not as simple as saying 'only read/record these pixels', and my point about RED not having resources to waste on Scarlet-X (which could be all but left to the wayside come Dragon time) is the same, whether you're talking about 4.5kWS or 5kANA on Scarlet.

A shame, too, as I think the vast majority of Scarlet users would give up reframe-ability to shoot 4.5k when aiming for a 2.4:1 finish...

 

[Marc Wielage]

It's great that today with D.I.'s and digital cinematography that an image can be reframed in an emergency or for a storytelling reason, but it's also a tool that can be abused by people who can't make up their mind or don't respect the art of composition.

I agree totally, David... but unfortunately those are the new rules of post, at least for features. It's not my decision to make.

 

[Rex Yau]

I think he is talking about a recording format that only records a 2.40 : 1 spherical image area, not the ANA format which records a 1.20 : 1 area that has a 2X optical squeeze. [...] It's great that today with D.I.'s and digital cinematography that an image can be reframed in an emergency or for a storytelling reason, but it's also a tool that can be abused by people who can't make up their mind or don't respect the art of composition. I'd rather err on the side of getting it right in camera rather than leave things open-ended -- there is a point where more options is not necessarily a good thing for art.

Yes David, this is exactly what I meant, instead of leaving wasted room on the frame to crop/center-crop/re-frame, just turn off those pixels out side of the 2.40:1 frame and preserve processor power so it can power the chip to 5KWS. I often prefer to shoot with a scope or just shoot true to the format without leaving excuse to re-frame in post. Like you had mentioned, it is a convenience, but it is often abused and take the craft out of the art.