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 :)

House pisses me off

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rob Ruffo said:
They're pretty slack on the EX1 20% rule. Lots of shows on these networks are 100%. Less slack on the hpx500/2000 because 1080i does not look Ok on progressive monitors. Use a nanoflash (and/or make a great show) and you get zero discussion/arguments with Ex1/3.
Click to expand...

Rob, is very well known that the networks do not follow their own rules. But my point with this list is to see what will be the slot for this DSLR within a few months, from the POV of the tech department of a TV network.
Ang guys, we are talking about technical issues here not about art or storytelling. Please keep the feet on the ground.
 
Trust me Rob, when a producer asks me to shoot RED and then comes back a few days later and says they want to do 5D it pisses me off too for financial reasons. But as for House, I I'm intrigued to see the episode.
 
I always think it's rather silly to see a 5D or 7D completely rigged up like it was a Panavision 35mm camera. If you've got the budget and crew to afford all that gear to surround the camera, why the hell are you trying save money on the camera body?

I totally get using a DSLR to put the camera in places you could never put a RED or 35mm, but when you add all that stuff on it, you lose that mobility and you are saying, I'm fine with aliasing, crap dynamic range, line skipping, and recording to h.264. Don't even get me started on when I see one of these things on a big gear head. It makes no damn sense.

I have a 7D, I love it. I'm shooting some of the best looking stuff I've ever shot with it. It's a hell of a lot better than my HVX, which was better than my DVX. I just don't understand why you would choose to shoot on such an inferior format for National Broadcast TV. It doesn't make any sense other than Canon throwing a ton of money at FOX to do this.

Of course, they are still going to put that expensive glass on the 5D. I highly doubt you'll see the day when Tamron pays some DP to shoot an entire episode with their lenses. :rant:
 
Brad Webb said:
I always think it's rather silly to see a 5D or 7D completely rigged up like it was a Panavision 35mm camera. If you've got the budget and crew to afford all that gear to surround the camera, why the hell are you trying save money on the camera body?

I totally get using a DSLR to put the camera in places you could never put a RED or 35mm, but when you add all that stuff on it, you lose that mobility...
Click to expand...

Why do you assume they rigged it that way? Have you seen any production stills, or were you there, that you know that to be the case?
 
M Most said:
Why do you assume they rigged it that way? Have you seen any production stills, or were you there, that you know that to be the case?
Click to expand...

He's not talking about House, just generally. If you can afford tens of thousands of dollars worth of camera accessories (which negate the advantage of a smaller setup), then why not spend a little on renting a better camera like a RED ONE.
 
M Most said:
Why do you assume they rigged it that way? Have you seen any production stills, or were you there, that you know that to be the case?
Click to expand...

I have not seen how House is using it, but I have seen this done quite a few times on commercials and other films. It is these instances I was referring to. I only assume House will do the same for a majority of their shots as well. I'm sure they will do some shots that they couldn't do with the 35mm cameras they had been using. However, I highly doubt they are reinventing the whole way they shoot the show. It's not like this episode is going to be shot like Crank.
 
Well all in all you have to realize that the media (the very thing that we do) has a way of shaping trends, and what people would "consider important or necessary."

i.e. (ipod / Flat screens etc... half of the consumer products that aren't even necessary
people flock to because that's what's been shown on the tube or thru viral videos...

I can say that this VSLR's are a big talk and there's a lot of hype surrounding them, and there's a good chance he wants to use it for just that. I read that he claims it will be better suited for those tight shots and the bokeh is insane... http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/09/house-season-finale-filmed-entirely-with-canon-5d-mark-ii/

What I never understood is why soo many are caught up in the bokeh and the blur when a movie entirely like that can be distracting (no full focus everything shallow) I think the right balance is the best way, but all in all I'm sure his reasons are just hyped ones.
 
Last edited:
BTW one of the newest episodes of House has at least half a minute of some kind of video footage, plenty of aliasing....
 
Rob Ruffo said:
Also, don't kid yourself. Cinematography is a technical craft, and tool choice is an important part of that.
Click to expand...

Like for example this great video shot on the 7D http://vimeo.com/7199178 that looks alot better than a lot of things I've seen shot on Red because of the aesthetics of the person wielding the camera. Line skipping, slow shutter and all. And what a great tool choice to go out in the woods with a lightweight camera and pull off a lot of shots really quickly and in a casual way. Imagine shooting this one on a Red One.

So yeah, I say bravo House for experimenting and trying something different, I wonder how it changed their shooting style, whether they could work faster or move the camera quickly. I wonder if they thought the 5D was difficult to light for and to determine a good exposure. I wonder if they felt the trade off in image quality from film or whatever format they were previously shooting was worth it.

I sure as hell am not angry and nor do I feel threatened just because someone could afford to shoot a better format and chose not to for other reasons. They should shoot some house on Super8 maybe. That'd actually be pretty great.

IBloom
 
I Bloom said:
Like for example this great video shot on the 7D http://vimeo.com/7199178 that looks alot better than a lot of things I've seen shot on Red because of the aesthetics of the person wielding the camera. Line skipping, slow shutter and all. And what a great tool choice to go out in the woods with a lightweight camera and pull off a lot of shots really quickly and in a casual way. Imagine shooting this one on a Red One.

So yeah, I say bravo House for experimenting and trying something different, I wonder how it changed their shooting style, whether they could work faster or move the camera quickly. I wonder if they thought the 5D was difficult to light for and to determine a good exposure. I wonder if they felt the trade off in image quality from film or whatever format they were previously shooting was worth it.

I sure as hell am not angry and nor do I feel threatened just because someone could afford to shoot a better format and chose not to for other reasons. They should shoot some house on Super8 maybe. That'd actually be pretty great.

IBloom
Click to expand...

You are exactly the kind of person who misinforms my clients. I'm sure something can look fine on Vimeo, which is a roughly 600p (at best) medium. Cable TV is another medium. Is is effectively 1080p, delivered via 1080i field pairs- and lots of people now have 1080p at home. That same Vimeo video would look no better on cable, whereas a true 1080p image would look much, much better. Also, cable TV compression is very very aggressive and 5D footage looks far worse on it than on Vimeo, as 5D footage does not compress well, due to aliasing (not just moire, but aliasing that causes false motion which the compressor does not know what to do with.
 
Christian Munoz D said:
Rob, is very well known that the networks do not follow their own rules. But my point with this list is to see what will be the slot for this DSLR within a few months, from the POV of the tech department of a TV network.
Ang guys, we are talking about technical issues here not about art or storytelling. Please keep the feet on the ground.
Click to expand...

Sorry I just wanted to add what I had learned from experience. I meant no disrespect. DSLRs are explicitly excluded (no real exceptions) from most networks, including Discovery, Nat Geo and the BBC. You might get away with 10% if the content is REALLY good, but they will use this icky-point to negotiate your selling price down, down enough that you could have bought many Red kits with the difference.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
You are exactly the kind of person who misinforms my clients. I'm sure something can look fine on Vimeo, which is a roughly 600p (at best) medium. Cable TV is another medium. Is is effectively 1080p, delivered via 1080i field pairs- and lots of people now have 1080p at home. That same Vimeo video would look no better on cable, whereas a true 1080p image would look much, much better. Also, cable TV compression is very very aggressive and 5D footage looks far worse on it than on Vimeo, as 5D footage does not compress well, due to aliasing (not just moire, but aliasing that causes false motion which the compressor does not know what to do with.
Click to expand...

No, you clearly don't know me at all. I didn't say 5D footage looks good blown up or that the 5D compares favorably to higher-end cameras on overall image quality. I know that it doesn't, that's why I own a Red.

I said it is an understandable trade off of the underlying format for other important factors and the decision to experiment by shooting a network TV show on the 5D, is one that I respect rather than fear.

IBloom
 
To me, this just reeks of Canon paying to have this happen. Especially when I found out they shot the entire episode with Canon still lenses (seriously WTF why would you do that to your AC's?). It's like a big commercial for Canon. I'm sure the news of this sold a few thousand 5D's. Some of the answers given in that twitter interview feel very staged and PR to me. http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/09/...on-5d-mark-ii/ Of course having it done over twitter also feels like a publicity stunt, where you can have Canon advisers coaching all the answers.

The answers sound an awful lot like Shane Hurlbut's answers on his blog about the making of "The Last three Minutes" (which I think is pretty good BTW) http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2010/04/07/the-last-3-minutes-canon-5d-24p-firmware-shines/ At least with this you know it is sponsored by Canon.
 
Last edited:
Rob Ruffo said:
... DSLRs are explicitly excluded (no real exceptions) from most networks, including Discovery, Nat Geo and the BBC...
Click to expand...

Main reason why alot of music videos have gone the DSLR route.
Since MTV and VH-1 hardly show any music videos anyway..most band''s
videos will not be broadcast and will live on the internet where the
720P thereabouts resolution of these cameras is adequate.
 
Brad Webb said:
I have not seen how House is using it, but I have seen this done quite a few times on commercials and other films. It is these instances I was referring to. I only assume House will do the same for a majority of their shots as well. I'm sure they will do some shots that they couldn't do with the 35mm cameras they had been using. However, I highly doubt they are reinventing the whole way they shoot the show. It's not like this episode is going to be shot like Crank.
Click to expand...

Crank made sense for the story too. The camera choice became a tonally appropriate "filter" with it's nervous moves and clipped whites making everything look like a bad coke high.

I was at University when the Net bubble broke. I remember my marketing prof (I have a double major, film + marketing) telling us how the net was going to create endless growth, how this time there was going to be no down cycle and blah blah blah. I strongly disagreed, and of course he and the whole class told me 'how can you disagree when everybody is saying this?' I think you get my point.

There is a herd mentality here. The perception is that the cool groovy kids shoot on DSLRs, and so those with a need to appear young and groovy shoot with DSLRs. Personally I could care less how groovy people think I am as long as my work is good and does what it needs to do for the people who pay me and there is mutual respect. I also have never been much of a herd man.

I want to be super clear that I am not hating on people with no money or who are working in war zones and have no choice but to use a DSLRs. Hats off to them regardless of which cam they chose. My whole thread is about those who DO have money compromising image quality by choice, because they want to do what's "in" and because they have been brainwashed by the herd mentality driven by the three groups I mentioned.

It is patently ridiculous to shoot a PL mount lens (at least 20K for even the cheapest set) when you could shoot a Red with good SLR lenses and the whole kit, rented or bought, would cost less. Hell, I'd much rather pull focus off the lens barrel and use a plank of plywood instead of rails and shoot with Red, because in that case I'd at least get some good images I could use in 1080p.
 
I've heard canon cannot talk about the House episode yet because production is very angry about all the problems and fixes they had to do in post because of shooting with the camera.

Aliasing and missed focus would be the main problems?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top