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 :)

EPIC, DR, HDR and stuff...

David Rasberry said:
Fixing bad footy in post may save some piker's butt at times, but it won't make him an artist. Capturing the best possible image is still a matter of art, science, and skill regardless of how capable the instrument is.
Click to expand...

To be fair, creating an image in post is just as much a matter of art, science and skill. With the digital age, it can be argued that Photography is becoming as much part of Production as Post-Production.

But I suppose you mean cases where the imagemaker is just lazy in capture, hoping whatever he finds can be fixed in post. That is wrong. No amount of DR, resolution and other numbers can make up for poor composition and framing and to some extent, lighting.
 
Steve Dent said:
Where 16 and 32 do get used almost exclusively now is on the digital and animation side. Animation is normally rendered 32 float, and the pipeline stays 32 as long as possible. 32-bit EXR is a common format for Maya or Max, or Nuke, for instance.
Click to expand...

Almost everything even in FX and animation is 16 bit. 32bit is only used for positional XYZ passes and normals.
 
Maybe I should have avoided the word "save", since everyone is hung up on it, despite my scenario not being one where you were saved in post, but one where you were able to capture something you otherwise wouldn't have been able to - and one where you made sure on-set that you really could capture it before you moved ahead... so not "saving", but "enabling". Enabling one to capture something natural, as opposed to artificially attempting to re-create it with wider contrast.

Sometimes, seldom, nature gives you exactly what you need or better, when you need it, where you need it. And if you can't recognize beautiful lighting, then you are not a DP either. :)

A lot of us post with the assumption that everyone understands one always goes in with an incredibly deep concept of what you are shooting that day. You know what the goal is, what helps it, what hurts it, what to punctuate, where you are shooting, a very good idea of you blocking, your in-camera look, your cut, what it will look like... the movie, only in your head. You know you need to know exactly what you want, and you also know you need to be flexible. And if you don't fulfill both of those requirements you already failed at achieving the greatest manifestation of the material.

Sometimes, if you get reeealy lucky, nature throws something at you that blows your mind, and fits without upsetting the balance!

What I said was that a 16-bit camera can "save" you from not having the opportunity to capture that event. But I bet that if I said "enabling" you to capture it, then I might have saved myself from having to post several times after the fact to make certain that I am not confused with the Russian-Roulette-filmaker so many are bringing up here... even if it was not directed at me, cuz I am just too sensitive to let it go. Kan't help it! ;)
 
Álex Montoya said:
If you don't want a naturalistic look, you'll still have to light. If you're shooting in a stage, you'll still have to light.

That said, it's also very clear that the DP will have to learn to 'light' more with just available sources by moving them or choosing the best possible angle given the location.
Click to expand...

Even when going for a naturalistic look you still have to light- it may not involve actual lamps, maybe just bounces, diffusion, etc- but there is still lighting going on. This is especially true if filming a scene over one day but the scene takes place on screen for 2 minutes. Controlling and shaping the light so it looks the same through out the shoot is essential. :)
 
Ryan E. Walters said:
Even when going for a naturalistic look you still have to light- it may not involve actual lamps, maybe just bounces, diffusion, etc- but there is still lighting going on. This is especially true if filming a scene over one day but the scene takes place on screen for 2 minutes. Controlling and shaping the light so it looks the same through out the shoot is essential. :)
Click to expand...

Amen to that, man. Gripped on a feature doing a "naturalistic" look, and we were all definitely very busy. Everyone's work paid off, though, when people at a test screening asked the DP how he made it look so good without lighting it. Kinda bittersweet.
 
I actually was thinking more about an insert, which is exactly the place where you wish you won't have to spend too much schedule.

You are allays likely tweak and augment, unless you are Malick. But if you came across something that falls thin on the charts, but you want to take advantage of it, then bit-depth can help you do so and save you from having to use up 5 times more schedule trying to re-create something artificially because now that can be captured, and you're done with the hand grabbing the keys.

Yes, sometimes it will not look rich no matter the bit-depth, and you will light that insert. Yes, you might find something beautiful that is close "enough" to work, only it happens to be a shot you plan on holding long, and a plot point. Yes, sometimes you need to control everything for other reasons anyways. Yes, there are people that abuse the "fix it in post" thing... No, that is not what I am talking about.

I am getting tired here...
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
I actually was thinking more about an insert, which is exactly the place where you wish you won't have to spend too much schedule.

You are allays likely tweak and augment, unless you are Malick. But if you came across something that falls thin on the charts, but you want to take advantage of it, then bit-depth can help you do so and save you from having to use up 5 times more schedule trying to re-create something artificially because now that can be captured, and you're done with the hand grabbing the keys.

Yes, sometimes it will not look rich no matter the bit-depth, and you will light the insert. Sometimes you'll find something beautiful, and it might be close enough to work, only if weren't a long shot and the kiss between the leads. Yes, sometimes you need to control everything anyways. Yes, there are people that abuse the "fix it in post" thing... No, that is not what I am talking about.

I am getting tired here...
Click to expand...

So you're saying I don't need to use lights or anything with Epic just fix it in post and it will look perfect:tongue_smilie:
 
Brian Petrie said:
So you're saying I don't need to use lights or anything with Epic just fix it in post and it will look perfect:tongue_smilie:
Click to expand...

This is an automated out of office response. I committed suicide and won't be returning, until I come back to haunt you... forevaahhhhhh!! :biggrin5:

Sincerely,
Wile Coyote
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Almost everything even in FX and animation is 16 bit. 32bit is only used for positional XYZ passes and normals.
Click to expand...

No we use 32 bit quite a bit for the beauty renders as well and whenever we can. Different pipelines = different rendering, but 32 bits come free of cost (other than harddrive space) and give you a lot more play.


Though, a 16 bit half-float is usually more than enough.
 
Erwin Vanderhoydonks said:
OK, 4K is the future. But what about Scarlet 3K ? Will there be a resolution (bigger sensor) upgrade before the release ?
Click to expand...

Emanuel A. said:
After the 2/3" release, I believe: Scarlet S35.
Click to expand...

Sorry if I was not clear on this one :embarassed:. I know that S35 will follow after the release of the 2/3". But I was thinking of a replacement for the 2/3". Make it a little bigger (+- 0.06") but same pixelsize, so it fits 4.5K but keep the size under the S35.
But this is just me dreaming... but this can always change
 
3k resolution I feel is about the maximum practical for a 16mm/2/3" sized sensor. At that resolution it is going to be limited more by optics than anything else. Super 16mm size at 12.75mm wide instead of 10.1 would be nice, but to make use of it your lens choices would be more expensive and more limited. It could however get us to a 4xHD resolution. at the same pixel size. 3840 x 2150
 
Jim,
I'm interested in your pact with the devil -- obviously you have a special arrangement that allows you to tap into technology that could only be described as "wicked cool" and unavailable to those who haven't conferred with the Dark One. How about a RED flying car? Or RED pocket desalinator, or -- dare I say it: RED Nuclear Fusion!

RED - where innovative is easy, impossible takes a little longer.
 
I find it interesting that it has been suggested that the role of a DP on set might diminish with a better camera. I am not convinced that this will be the case. Epic is a superb raw capture camera, with wonderful sensitivity, and dynamic range.

However this doesn't mean that the need for lighting control, composition, timing, movement etc is diminished. I do understand that epic's phenomenal raw capture ability vastly improves post work flow. However the role of a DP is much more than just controlling lighting ratios. Actually a lot more than just lighting for that matter!

I don't think the need for excellent lighting will go away. It is wonderful that we have a very high res, and very sensitive sensor, with greater dynamic range. This means that for many situations the wattage of light used can be less. However lighting is about a lot more than ratios and quantity. It is about direction, fall-off, quality, color, tone, timing, continuity, etc. For beautiful images the need to control the light does not change. Not to speak of helping to bring to life an image from concept to reality, which will lift the story, or message, to a new level. And all the other aspects which are not lighting related.
 
Actually, 16 bit will lobotomize everyone. The next iteration of hardware will render the entire world of cinema into a lazy bunch of has-beens. There will be no more decent films made, everyone will take the easiest route possible, art will die out, family life will deteriorate, morality will give way to every known vice, and the four horsemen will surely make their entrance. Jim, shut her down, the writing is on the wall: 10 bit purgatory is better than 16 bit hell.
 
Please make an indestructible camera...4K resolution has proved to be useful to very few, while 1080P Pro Res seems to be king right now.

We want a solid camera, not more resolution at this point.
 
Jamie Metzger said:
Please make an indestructible camera...4K resolution has proved to be useful to very few, while 1080P Pro Res seems to be king right now.

We want a solid camera, not more resolution at this point.
Click to expand...

Uhm, I'm not detecting irony, or sarcasm, or even humor: you are joking, right?
 
Bill Anderson said:
Uhm, I'm not detecting irony, or sarcasm, or even humor: you are joking, right?
Click to expand...

I hope he's joking... 4K is great, 5K will be even better. Nothing is indestructible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top