Imax Epic

[Dominic Jones]

No worries mate, I know the feeling!

I agree it would be great to have both, but I imagine the thought from Red was that with an already very large line of brains some consolidation was in order.

For my money, a better compromise (although this would increase the cost of the brain significantly, I would think) would be a 6x7 brain, from which you could then extract 6x6, 6x45, IMAX, 65mm, etc, etc...

Still, I think that images from the 645 brain will be pretty awesome printed to IMAX - hopefully it won't be too long until we get to see for ourselves!

Cheers,
Dom.

 

[Tom Lowe]

The 645 is pegged at 50fps at 9K. If you want 100fps -- which to me, is a good number -- then you have to drop down to 6K. But guess what? The FF35 Epic also shoots 6K @ 100fps. Maybe it makes more sense to shoot IMAX material on the FF35 Epic at 3:2 6K? It's enough resolution to do a nice 4K master. Because of the megapixel wars among DSLR manufacturers, FF35 glass just keeps getting better and better.

Right now there are no projectors being used above 4K. Maybe if IMAX does 8K projectors for their big theaters, it would make sense for Jim to look at building a more direct equivalent of the 15-perf neg at like 12K resolution, with 10K overcranking at 60fps+.

 

[Michael Neborak]

I tend to view high framerates and high resolution as two totally separate things that have completely different purposes in filming... which is why I am so interested in the ff35 scarlet because I will be filming movies, not scientific documentaries... more than likely 99% of my movies are shot at 24fps so why spend the money on a camera that only offers higher framerates? This is why I love red... they give plenty of options...

Anyway, at a certain point, theres a limit to how much resolution you really need... if you say you want high resolution to shoot and then supersample to increase dr and remove noise then do it with a 28k camera at 24fps... but if you want to do that at 100fps, you can do it at 6k without supersampling and only have to focus more on the setup of your shots (lighting, framing, etc)... I mean, 28k can be used for a lot of large billboards for example, but thats really only one frame right? So I think Red offers options for just about every type of practical application of video... Truly amazing...

 

[Ace]

The interesting thing we start to discover as we venture into the brave new world of high FPS projected in realtime is that 'resoloution' becomes something which takes on a chrono-lineer value as well as a pixel value. So in effect, if you are seeing 4K projected at 180fps your eyes and brain will be recieving greater percieved image detail than say 6K at 30FPS (if we were observing a moving or rotating subject).

 

[Frank Cueto]

Well, now we are getting into defining resolution in a four dimensional approach?!

This forum sure is OUT THERE! ;-)

-Frank Cueto

 

[Eren Ozkural]

Arent there a few people out there that claim 48fps projection is the way forward especially vis a vis 3D?

I'm sure there's a whole heap of technical reasons why that format would be superior but it would kind of diminish a part of the magic of film for me. Watching 3D already feels different than enjoying a normal film...more dreamlike. And those 60,120hz TV's are apalling. I shudder eveytime I walk by an electronics stor showing the Dark Knight or Clone Wars on their 120hz TV's...

 

[Tom Lowe]

Look at it this way, too. If Epic 645 can shoot IMAX, you could set up IMAX films way more easily. The cost savings of shooting on a digital Red camera vs 15-perf IMAX film has got to be astronomical.

I know there are some IMAX filmmakers who post here. I would love to hear their thoughts on the cost and logistical savings, and what types of new IMAX movies this might open up.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Look at it this way, too. If Epic 645 can shoot IMAX, you could set up IMAX films way more easily. The cost savings of shooting on a digital Red camera vs 15-perf IMAX film has got to be astronomical.

I know there are some IMAX filmmakers who post here. I would love to hear their thoughts on the cost and logistical savings, and what types of new IMAX movies this might open up.

The 645 is pegged at 50fps at 9K. If you want 100fps -- which to me, is a good number -- then you have to drop down to 6K. But guess what? The FF35 Epic also shoots 6K @ 100fps. Maybe it makes more sense to shoot IMAX material on the FF35 Epic at 3:2 6K? It's enough resolution to do a nice 4K master. Because of the megapixel wars among DSLR manufacturers, FF35 glass just keeps getting better and better.

Right now there are no projectors being used above 4K. Maybe if IMAX does 8K projectors for their big theaters, it would make sense for Jim to look at building a more direct equivalent of the 15-perf neg at like 12K resolution, with 10K overcranking at 60fps+.

Tom: this is my whole interest in 645 - resolution that is truly near that of the imax film - not blown up 1080P or even 4k/3.2K. Most Imax type stuff is documentary/nature, and trekking through the mountains, backwoods, or underwater with an Epic 645 really isn't much more difficult than the regular epics or a lot of prosumer video cameras.

I see the first stage as doing a filmout print from the digital source for Imax theatres, but eventually, with an abundance of 9K production (or your next gen 12K), we may see an Imax sized screen with something like 8K digital projectors in regular multiplexes.

As far as lenses, there are enough 645 lenses around to cover hundreds of 9K REDs and it should be easy for somebody like Zeiss to start making their contax 645 lenses again.

I vote for RED to let Birger handle the Canon/Nikon lenses and concentrate on PL for S35/FF35 and something like a Contax 645 AF mount, Hasselblad, or similar so there is a way to use the Epic 645 with existing lenses as soon as it is released.

In fact since Epic FF35 is only marginally better than s35 it makes some sense to me to make the S35 epic first and skip to the 9K 645 second and do FF35 third. Particularly for stills 645 for landscapes and fashion seems like an easier niche to compete in at these high prices, than the FF35 market which is inundated with products at high volume low prices.

 

[Tom Lowe]

In fact since Epic FF35 is only marginally better than s35 it makes some sense to me to make the S35 epic first and skip to the 9K 645 second and do FF35 third. Particularly for stills 645 for landscapes and fashion seems like an easier niche to compete in at these high prices, than the FF35 market which is inundated with products at high volume low prices.

They should just do both at the same time. I personally know a lot of people who are drooling over FF35, especially myself. :coolgleamA: And it should be more than just marginally better in terms of IMAX. The increased DR, ASA, and the 3:2 sensor on FF35 will be huge.

 

[Andrew Walker]

They should just do both at the same time. I personally know a lot of people who are drooling over FF35, especially myself. :coolgleamA: And it should be more than just marginally better in terms of IMAX. The increased DR, ASA, and the 3:2 sensor on FF35 will be huge.

The FF35 Epic will be huge. But the 645 Epic would be more versatile as in having that close to IMAX sensor in it and the ability to shoot in 6K windowed on a 9K sensor. Of course I'm not sure it would be worth it unless you are going to be shooting IMAX films day in and day out. Still the 645 would be an awesome camera to have.

 

[Michael Hastings]

I agree they should do both at the same time - if they can.

I just meant that since it is the new sensor and presumably somewhat new brain, a lot of the development is the same but it probably is more likely that concentrating on one or the other would mean a month or two earlier for one and 3 to 4 between. If that is the case it might make sense both technologically as well as marketing wise to do the big leap first. As Andrew says, you can window the 6k and use your full frame lenses too, but you can't get the 9K out of the FF35. And I think dumb mounts should be fairly easy on Epic so not much difference there.

But i might be in Sanjin mode here, i.e. "I think this is the smartest thing for RED to do (because it's what I want!)

Just teasin' you Sanjin. (Sanjin has been pushing for R1/MysteriumX upgrades and extended delays for Epic. One has to think that this might be influenced by the fact that he voided his warranty and Epic-X trade-in rights by putting on the IMS mount.) BTW If it made any difference I'd vote for a one time "sanjin" exemption since he did it pretty early on and may not have realized the potential problem.

BTW this picture shows why I want an Epic 9K. That's an imax underwater housing. The Epic 645 will work in a housing about 2/3ds the size of the R1 housing in my avatar.

 

[Joel Kaye]

BTW If it made any difference I'd vote for a one time "sanjin" exemption since he did it pretty early on and may not have realized the potential problem.

And he'll make another 5,000 posts about how great EPIC is. He's crazy, but I'd like to see him get the trade in too. :emote_hippie:

I'll rent the 645 when I get hired for that project. Or buy it with someone else's budget. EPIC-X should keep me going for a long time.

 

[Tom Lowe]

I think the FF35 is the more realistic, mainstream thing to push. 5D2 has shown how much enthusiasm "Vista Vision" sensors can cause. But as you say, we all have our own personal reasons for these things, so none of use are neutral!

I think both FF35 and 645 will work for IMAX. Obviously, 645 will be better, and might literally, physically replace existing 15-perf cameras.

Which brings me to a different subject. In some ways, it will almost be sad to see 15-perf film go away. As Michael's photo so perfectly illustrates, it's sort of like the Mt Everest of cinematography, just to be able to say you have shot on it!

 

[Michael Hastings]

I think the FF35 is the more realistic, mainstream thing to push. 5D2 has shown how much enthusiasm "Vista Vision" sensors can cause. But as you say, we all have our own personal reasons for these things, so none of use are neutral!
.... In some ways, it will almost be sad to see 15-perf film go away. As Michael's photo so perfectly illustrates, it's sort of like the Mt Everest of cinematography, just to be able to say you have shot on it!

Interesting you say that about the Mt. Everest of cine. Howard Hall mentions that despite despite the massive effort it takes he likes to do it specifically because of the challenge.

As far as FF, the 5d was the first Canon vDSLR and the first 1080p vDSLR (Nikon had brought out 720P) and I think would have been nearly as successful - for the video oriented people - if it had been APS-C. Obviously for the still people it was the fact that it combined full frame and the same 21MP resolution as the $7K EOS-1Ds Mark III for only $2600. When you put all of those factors together it was a marketing "perfect storm". Going forward I think the 7D with its lower price will do about as well and if someone picks the 5d for its full frame sensor it will be for stills capabilities and probably not for the "vistavision" movie aspect.

As far as 645 first, I'm just being a little contrarian. I think RED would gain more in terms of being way out front with the 645. At $38K or whatever I don't think Epic FF is going to grab many still photographers that can get the same resolution for $2600 even if the video mode isn't great.

But medium format guys are already used to paying $30K to $40K for digital backs so $48K or so for epic 645 isn't much of a stretch. And really most video/cine guys that can afford $38K can afford $48K. They either have it or it is a $1000 a month lease payment instead of $800.

And $15K (with modules) for an FF scarlet probably doesn't change that equation much.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Even setting aside the 5D2's 1080p video, people like myself who have had a chance to shoot 5.6K RAW timelapse sequences on full-frame 35mm "Vista Vision" also have a huge appreciation for the format in general, as well as the FF35 lenses.

I think developing both simultaneously makes the most sense. Maybe on Red D Day, only a week away, we will learn more about all of this.

 

[Andrew Walker]

Even setting aside the 5D2's 1080p video, people like myself who have had a chance to shoot 5.6K RAW timelapse sequences on full-frame 35mm "Vista Vision" also have a huge appreciation for the format in general, as well as the FF35 lenses.

I think developing both simultaneously makes the most sense. Maybe on Red D Day, only a week away, we will learn more about all of this.

Yes, shooting timelapse in FF35 RAW is amazing. Also to see your lenses in their true focal lengths is cool as well. I just want to start bringing back the 3:2 ratio. I hate cropping to 16x9.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Yes, shooting timelapse in FF35 RAW is amazing. Also to see your lenses in their true focal lengths is cool as well. I just want to start bringing back the 3:2 ratio. I hate cropping to 16x9.

Cropping 3:2 is painful, even to 16:9. When you have to crop it to 2.40, it's armageddon.

 

[Ace]

Maybe on Red D Day, only a week away, we will learn more about all of this.

Someone needs to invent a time machine.. And fast!

 

[Tom Lowe]

Seriously.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Someone needs to invent a time machine.. And fast!

Can you think of a company that could pull it off...:biggrin5: