House pisses me off

[Brad Webb]

But it was used - along with the 7D - full frame and intercut with Red on "Southland" on a very regular basis. And the fact that most people here didn't know that and didn't notice should say something. It probably won't, but it should.

It's one thing to intercut and use it as a "B" camera, but to rely one of these for an entire episode, when you've shot every other episode on film, I just don't get it.

Yes, there are a lot of things a DSLR can do, but there are way more things it can't do. Things that you expect a high quality camera to be able to do. When you have a limited budget, crew, and/or shooting schedule, it makes sense to step down a level in camera quality.

 

[CJ Roy]

We did this video on seven 7D's, one Red #96, a couple EX3's and a phantom. I wasn't there on the phantom/EX3 days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VhZDiG7ye0

They cleaned a lot of the 7D footage up pretty well, but having even worked on it I had a hard time telling what was what with the final.

-CJ

 

[Rick Burnett]

They give you a budget, but they don't pay to fix what they will consider your screw-ups. You pay for those kinds of situations out of your savings, and when that runs out you go bankrupt.

So wouldn't this suggest that if their budget cannot pay for the fixing required, then their business is unreasonable and you should turn away the work? I mean truthfully, if you shot the material, regardless of the technology, and even if the hardware screwed something up, it's still really your fault for not working around that limitation. It's not like it magically appears once you show them what you've been doing. And, it's also detectable with the right equipment. And if you didn't account for dealing with that problem with them, you weren't honest to begin with on setting their expectations on what you can deliver.

I really don't see the problem. If you cannot easily convince a client why shooting on the Red is such a better solution for what you want to do then honestly the disconnect is you. Your work and offerings should stand for themselves. Just because some one told them, or they heard on the internet, or they saw on TV, or they read in a blog, that this other technology is capable of doing what they want, as you know, it doesn't mean it can. This is NEVER GOING TO CHANGE. People are going to push the envelope with not as capable technologies and what have you continually. Some people just want to be the FIRST to do something cool with something that wasn't intended for said cool purpose!

And in a few months hopefully, all this will change when RED will be dominating the forums again as people put the EPIC and SCARLET cameras to every test known to the universe. And when that happens, I guarantee you without a doubt the CMOS haters will be out in storm "FILM IS THE ONLY WAY TO GO!" And then those clients will be like "Hey, you have a RED, you're hired!"

I don't even have a freaking RED camera yet and I've got people asking me to come do work for them when I get it. And they know I have a DSLR now and have no desire for me to use that with them.

 

[Brad Webb]

People are going to push the envelope with not as capable technologies and what have you continually. Some people just want to be the FIRST to do something cool with something that wasn't intended for said cool purpose!

I really hope that this isn't the reason House is doing this. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

 

[Brad Webb]

To clarify one thing:

The whole Canon paying House or the DP to use their cameras is 100% speculation on my part. I have zero factual evidence to support this claim. It is merely a theory of mine.

My evidence to support this theory is the use of only Canon SLR glass to shoot the episode of House. The twitter press conference, with what in my opinion seems like staged or answers, that mirror the answers given by Shane Hurlbut in his blog. Although in Mr. Hurlbut's blog the video is clearly stated that it was funded by Canon.
If you see a Canon commercial or two during that episode of House, add that to my evidence.

I hope I am wrong.

 

[Stephen Williams]

I hate to reveal how young I am, but I was still in Uni. Really? People said that?

Absolutely & Mini DV looks like film when projected. It's so good nobody will ever shoot film again.
Many of those same people went on to buy an HVX, their latest toy is a 5D/7D

 

[Brad Webb]

Absolutely & Mini DV looks like film when projected. It's so good nobody will ever shoot film again.
Many of those same people went on to buy an HVX, their latest toy is a 5D/7D

Hey!! I'm one of those people. Well, I was shooting on DV, then HVX, and now the 7D, but I never for a second lied to myself by saying any of them were as good as film. They were all "as good as I could afford."

Let's not forget, Red isn't as good as film either. EPIC and the Arri Alexa are the first digital cameras to actually come close to being able to do what film can do, and neither of them are actually out yet. Digital has come a long way, and it's only a matter of time before it's as good and if not better than film (unless Kodak and Fuji pull some off some magic soon).

RAW is the key. It's what gives you that flexibility that film has. I shoot my 7D like it was reversal film, because there is just not a whole lot you can do with it in post.

 

[Rick Burnett]

I really hope that this isn't the reason House is doing this. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

Actually, it is my opinion that this is the reason they used it. By going against industry standard, if you will, they have generated a HUGE amount of buzz regarding House. If they hadn't done this, we wouldn't have this many posts about it here on REDUSER! (or elsewhere all over the web). It's free advertising.

But from a gear heads point of view, maybe it was the challenge? To do something no one else has done and pull it off? Of course, only they can answer that question. I think the best thing to do is wait and see what the episode looks like.

 

[Brad Webb]

People are going to push the envelope with not as capable technologies and what have you continually. Some people just want to be the FIRST to do something cool with something that wasn't intended for said cool purpose!

Well, if this is the reason for shooting stuff then I want to be the FIRST to shoot an IMAX 3-D video for youtube!

 

[Jay Voutour]

OK sorry but this is exactly what I was talking about: "DSLRs are not so bad - I will put you in the same bag as a dinosaur-ish pathetic figure if you say different - now let me sell you something to go with your DSLR, your real problem is that you don;t yet have the course, DVD set and/or accessories I am selling."

Now that was uncalled for.

I've read through the thread, and, although a bit subtly at times, everyone has pretty much respected each others' views. Why stop now? :emote_hippie:

Sorry for going off-topic.

 

[Brad Webb]

Actually, it is my opinion that this is the reason they used it. By going against industry standard, if you will, they have generated a HUGE amount of buzz regarding House. If they hadn't done this, we wouldn't have this many posts about it here on REDUSER! (or elsewhere all over the web). It's free advertising.

But from a gear heads point of view, maybe it was the challenge? To do something no one else has done and pull it off? Of course, only they can answer that question. I think the best thing to do is wait and see what the episode looks like.

Just had a crazy idea...

What about having a House watch party/ discussion thing? Anyone in LA got a giant HD TV, or better yet a 2K projector and theater (hmm hdi?) to have a bunch of redusers to come over to watch and discuss the episode?

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

This thread reminds me a little of the discussion that took place about four years ago on CML .... all the established CML DPs were up in arms against this 'upstart' camera company touting a 4k digital cinema camera at $17,500 ....

Yes, there are some similarities.

The difference being that the camera discussed there was designed as cinema camera, with priority to picture quality, while this one discussed here is a stills camera with added feature of h.264 video, with the most issues and compromises ever.


Can you please point me to "DSLR vs. F35 tests" ? Maybe "DSLR vs. Genesis" ?

 

[JanneJansson]

I use both 7D, and 5D on RED shoots, but just as b-cameras. R1 is always main camera. But it is clearly a bonus to have extra cameras that are small and easy to rig. At the end on the day my client have got some nice red footage + some bonus shots from the the canons.

Think of it as a smörgåsbord. Use the equipment for what they are good for, and don't deny that they are good for some jobs. Red have incredible image quality and the canons are ... small, cheep and look kinda good to

I have nothing against the canons. Just don't make me use U-matic Highband again

 

[DCC Erickson]

... Don't even get me started on when I see one of these things on a big gear head. It makes no damn sense....:rant:

:smilielol5:

 

[Chris Pickle]

....

For example, we had a micro budget ($400k) indie movie come to us just before Christmas ... they wanted to shoot digital but with high production value (the star of the movie 'Isolation' is Susan Sarandon's daughter) .. the DP had shot only film and RED before but one of the Producers knew about the Canon's HD capability ... we were all for pushing the RED but we did some tests with the DP and the Director (Stephen Kay who directs 'Sons of Anarchy) and in the end, for a variety of reasons, they chose to shoot on three 7Ds ... we haven't color corrected the final movie yet but last week we did a focus group screening to check out the rough assembly .. Jeremy did a quick best light grade on the ProRes timeline and we projected the movie on our 2k DLP projector to an audience of people who didn't know anything about the movie ... I sat in the back row of our DI theater determined to watch for the technical problems of shooting in 8 bit H.264 uprezzed to ProRes422HQ (and this is the same theater where the the very first RED images were graded for IBC '06 and the first M-X graded footage was shown to a select group of ASC DPs in January '10 just before the first RED DAY at Ren Mar studios) ... I was ready to be super critical about the imagery ... however, after about five minutes I forgot about the technical stuff and concentrated on the story (they need some reshoots!) .... anyway, the point is this, RED is a much better camera technically than the HD DSLRs (by far) but at some point it doesn't matter ... its all about the story and the performance ... these HD SLR cameras are no longer a reason to shoot a bad looking movie (you can if you want to, just like you can shoot a bad looking RED movie if you really try hard) ... but if you have a compelling story with good actors and a talented DP and colorist who know how to work within the limitations of the technology, these cameras can create the 'willing suspension of disbelief' just as well as any other high end digital cinema camera....

Neil

This is an example of why I think much of the 1/3 - 2/3 chip market is going away. When they couldn't afford film or Red they went with DSLR--not a 3 chip or 2/3 cmos HD. Technically, I bet the 3 chip cameras would have a more robust signal, compression, etc, But the biggest impact that the DSLR cameras, and truly, Red as well, is the shallow DOF. It immediately makes a shot look more filmic. Before DSLR for video, most indie low budget projects would go with a Varicam, HVX, HDXLR (or whatever that HD Canon XL / GL thingy is)

I think it shows that the general, overall, broad notion of "cinema", within a shot is more important then the compression algorithm.

(when talking about "film" and not reality TV, doc work, etc)

 

[David Rasberry]

I think the overriding consideration was compact form factor in a confined space from what has been said about the episode. That and a desire to experiment. Existing 2/3" cams are bulky. 2/3" is capable of very nice shallow DOF handled properly.

 

[Peter Hodgins]

I think it shows that the general, overall, broad notion of "cinema", within a shot is more important then the compression algorithm.

The controlling factor in favour of the D5 etc. is cost. IMO.

 

[M Most]

OK. But I'd have to see those shots and what it was really used for.

Didn't you just get finished saying:

I don;t have to see any particular piece, the compression issue will be present in any footage.

It seems to me you've already made up your mind and don't want to get confused by actual results. Much like a lot of people who dismissed Red prior to actually looking at the images.

 

[Michael Hastings]

I've seen some ISO2000+ test shots comparing RED M-X to 5D2 and analogue gain is indeed a bad idea... You could really see the drop in DR caused by it on the 5D2 making for some really ugly skin colours and tones.

Graeme

Nitpicking, but you are comparing your latest $5000+ (today's price) sensor just begun selling a couple months ago in a $17,500 body, from a small, one camera company that presumably has a shorter time to market for new technology - versus the sensor in a $2600 camera that has been sold for a year and a half - (a full Moore's law cycle) from a large, presumably slower moving company, that has over 70 cameras in its current lineup alone. Hardly apples to apples and nothing from which to make even off-the-cuff scientific judgments.

EDIT: Graeme, not suggesting that you are making that sort of judgment - but it could be easily taken to that next step by others if my point isn't considered.

 

[Jay Gannon]

OK sorry but this is exactly what I was talking about: "DSLRs are not so bad - I will put you in the same bag as a dinosaur-ish pathetic figure if you say different - now let me sell you something to go with your DSLR, your real problem is that you don;t yet have the course, DVD set and/or accessories I am selling."

This is where I stop reading your posts, RawWorks is a respected facility and I'm dam sure I'm going to take their word over yours. When people like Terrence Mailik are looking into something as a B-Cam or a specific use cam then I am going to stand up and take notice. While I don't know about using it as an A-Cam I can see that the A-Minima is going to be obsolete for many very soon