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 :)

Format thought...

Jannard

Jannard

Red Leader
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
8,248
Reaction score
7
Points
0
When referencing how footage was shot, how about this?

RED ONE, 4K, 24fps (with a Cooke 50mm S4).
EPIC-X, 5K, 24fps (with a 35mm RPP).
EPIC-M, 6K, 24fps (with a 100mm RPP).
Scarlet 2/3 3K, 100fps (with an 8mm MRP- miniRED Prime).
Scarlet-F, 3K, 24fps.
EPIC-645... etc.

Those that care... not too many of us really... get all the info they need to complete the puzzle. Then we don't have to name each format (x35). The camera/resolution combo tells you what it is.

Seems to me that we do this now... it is just assumed that it was shot on a RED ONE so you don't have to say it.

Acquisition formats only matter to shooters. Output formats matter to everyone.

Just a thought.

Jim
 
Exactly what I send to post in an .rtf file.
More options is a good thing...we're looking forward to that Jim!
 
Would it help to include RC28 or RC36 in the string so that file size can be easily determined?

-michael zaletel
(shooter)
 
huh?.....
i don't get it ...
do get 2/3 , 35m ( movie cam), S35 , full frame 35mm/vistavision ...

does this suppose to mean Reds with those lens have the same field of view?
 
Hi Jim,

I think the issue is that instead of having a concrete, fixed area to work with - say a 35mm film frame or a 30x15mm sensor area - different aspect ratios now have different image circles. So whereas if we knew the image circle that covered the entire sensor... say the 16:9 area on the RED ONE, we know that all formats under that are covered. 2:1, 2.4:1... doesn't matter, they're just crops of the full sensor. If no one format uses the entire usable area of the sensor in Scarlet/Epic, however, then each format has its own image circle with different needs. So whereas one lens might cover 16:9 in the Epic, it may not cover 2:1. It gets confusing when you can't just say "get a lens that covers full frame and you're good to go," like on a still camera. Saying "get a lens that covers x35" means... well, what does that even mean? 2.1 on a s35 Epic? 16:9 on a s35 Scarlet? It would just be nice to reference the formats by their maximum image circles so we know which glass may or may not work with the different format options we have available to us. Thanks!
 
Just a thought, and I know what Jannard posted makes total sense, but wouldn't it be nice to have a letter abbreviation for the Scarlet 2/3 and Epic 645?

Like, there's the RED ONE (or 1), Epic X, Epic M, and Scarlet F. Say it out loud it sounds great, but saying something like scarlet 2/3 (or scarlet two thirds) or Epic 645 (or epic six forty five or six hundred forty five) is just a mouthful.

Not that it matters, but something that bugs me personally...

I know, i'm probably crazy :)
 
its a modular camera. But in my mind RED makes 4 cameras.

RED ONE
Scarlet FIXED
Scarlet
Epic

Scarlett and Epic look the same, but each have "Brains" (housed sensors) that record in a variety of format sizes and speeds. lets call them Semi-pro and pro.

1. RED ONE - Mysterium X sensor
2. SCARLET - FIXED(Were it me, I'd call this Scorpion... or a separate name)
3. SCARLET (Indie filmmaker dream camera, with some bursts of pro)
4. EPIC (A professional digital film camera with cutting edge tech, sensors, industry leading frame rates, dynamic range, etc)

These 4 Cameras have:

MANY BRAINS

SCARLET BRAINS (Kick ass New Sensors)
S2/3 (Fixed)
S2/3 Interchangeable lenses (why 2/3 here? just curious? what will people buy these?)
SS35 (most serious indies will order this if cant afford EPIC frame rates
SX35 (why when spending this, would someone not just go epic?) FF35mm

Its your company. and Im just one customer. But Im going

1. 4 FIXED LENS 2/3 SCARLET'S
2. 2 SCALET S35 w RPP
3. 4 EPIC's with multiple brains. (all eventually as they are released)
a. RPP's
b.
c. Zooms
EPIC BRAINS (faster frame rates, more dynamic range)
ES35
EX35 (FF35mm)
EX645
EX617

Infinite possibilities, sometimes leads to mass confusion... am I close here?
 
Häakon said:
Hi Jim,

It would just be nice to reference the formats by their maximum image circles so we know which glass may or may not work with the different format options we have available to us. Thanks!
Click to expand...

Makes the most sense.:thumbsup:
 
Häakon said:
Hi Jim,

I think the issue is that instead of having a concrete, fixed area to work with - say a 35mm film frame or a 30x15mm sensor area - different aspect ratios now have different image circles. So whereas if we knew the image circle that covered the entire sensor... say the 16:9 area on the RED ONE, we know that all formats under that are covered. 2:1, 2.4:1... doesn't matter, they're just crops of the full sensor. If no one format uses the entire usable area of the sensor in Scarlet/Epic, however, then each format has its own image circle with different needs. So whereas one lens might cover 16:9 in the Epic, it may not cover 2:1. It gets confusing when you can't just say "get a lens that covers full frame and you're good to go," like on a still camera. Saying "get a lens that covers x35" means... well, what does that even mean? 2.1 on a s35 Epic? 16:9 on a s35 Scarlet? It would just be nice to reference the formats by their maximum image circles so we know which glass may or may not work with the different format options we have available to us. Thanks!
Click to expand...

That's what I suggested too.:)

http://reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=413220&postcount=99
 
In my humble opinion that won't really help the problem that originally started this discussion, which was people not realizing that '5K' and the like don't tell you anything about physical sensor size or shape and starting to say things like "does this lens cover 5K" a lot. Not that I have a better idea.

That said though it's a good idea for identifying footage/shoot types, people ought to use it on their slates!
 
I've been trying to wait until the dust settles on this whole thing. But I think the way it was before with the whole 5K 16:9, 2:1, 6K 4:3, 16:9, 2:1 should be fine. The only people that need to know what's going on with the sensor are the DP's and the DIT's. They can just dumb it down for anyone that doesn't know and asks. "Yes on this sensor the RPP's will cover 5K." "No, the RPP won't cover 5K on this sensor but we can get 4.7K." The effects houses that need to know this info can talk to the VFX Super that will talk to the DIT or DP or both. Its all about communication, which happened to be the most bitching I heard when the Red One first came out. People would complain that they would have to talk to the VFX houses, where before they didn't have to.
 
Alright... then Id love a few shots from

Scarlet 2/3 3K, 100fps (with an 8mm MRP- miniRED Prime)
 
Lee Saxon said:
In my humble opinion that won't really help the problem that originally started this discussion, which was people not realizing that '5K' and the like don't tell you anything about physical sensor size or shape and starting to say things like "does this lens cover 5K" a lot.
Click to expand...
No one should be referencing sensor area by the number of pixels, ever. There is a point to saying the camera shoots "5K," just as there is a point to saying a DSLR has a 12MP chip. It gives you an idea of the resolution you're working with, and it's a nice comparison to the "720" or "1080" cameras that people are familiar with. 4K meant you got ~4,000 lines of horizontal resolution, which is a good indicator of the kind of detailed images you can get from the camera. But I don't know when "4K" started being interchangeable with "s35mm" or being referred to as a spacial format. It's not. (I'm not saying you ever did this... I'm just baffled as to why that's even up for discussion!). :)
 
I believe the relationship between film & 4K is from the Film scanners, they can scan up to 4K on many telecine machines now.

The Thompson Spirit can be purchased in 2K or 4K etc.

Dave
 
the latest film scanners go up to 8k , they scanned the 65mm special effects for blade runner blu ray at 8k , baraka was 8k too. a star is born is being restored with a 6k scan by warners
 
I think the idea behind naming a format beyond manufacturer and model name is to create an easily communicable standard that would be understood by producers, cinematographers, labs, fx houses, etc. Accross the world and be valid for the next 50 years (ok, maybe 5-10), not just 6 months.
As a Cinematographer, I'd rather focus my energies on telling the story visually than fretting over wheter I've communicated my shooting format down the postproduction path correctly. Yes, part of our job is technical but I try to keep the technical part the smaller part and defining a standard would help in that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top