David Battistella
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
- Messages
- 10,003
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 38
Some of you are missing the point -- I did a TV series in 1080P 4:2:2 and I wasn't allowed to shoot Log mode because the production wanted to only make straight dubs for editorial, no Log to Rec 709 step despite the fact that it would only add a few bucks to the cost of post and give me another two stops of dynamic range to work with in the final color-correction.
So with that mentality, how do you convince them to shoot 4K RAW and spend the time & money doing conversions in post to 1080P, even if it's very little time & money?
It's not a question of passing the image purity test here, we are just acknowledging that some TV productions want broadcast-ready 1080P material right out of the camera, they don't even want to wait for a real-time RED Rocket™™ conversion in post and they certainly don't want to pay for it if anyone is charging.
Yes David. This is certainly something that we have all encountered. I think JIm was very specific to mention a replacement for FILM aquisition in his initial post and i think this is an important distinction.
Is 1080 "good enough" as a replacement for FILM?
It's hard to win the "good enough" argument when the 80/20 rule is in such full force these days in production.
It seems producers are completely willing to take 80% of the quality and 20% extra savings, rather than spend the extra 20% on FULL QUALITY images and the required additional processing.
This, to me, seems like the problem you just encountered on the last production you were on where 80% is "good enough".
David