In development...

[Todd M.]

Hi,
I trust not only what digitalpraxis says, but of course also my eyes when I look at the super talking comparative tests published somewhere in this forum, comparing native s16, native 2k, native s35, native 4k. Please evrybody just look at them if you have not yet. They are quite a definitive answer.

For resolution, all digital and good HDV is comparable to a projected copy-of-the-copy (normal way of doing it, and seeing movies) 35mm: something between 700 and 800 lines.
You my not see much difference between s16 orignated material and s35 originated material just thanks to the fact that what we see is so much worse that what is lost in the process may be comparable to the difference between s16 and s35.
...
Strangely they all agree about films limit in still photography, and the domination of digital photography is accepted by everyone.. it's just in movie industry that, strangely, this old rivalry never ends. I suppose this is because people working with film do not have the proper perception of digital quality. We can undertand: a serious alternative to film was not available until last year. (still, Star wars was not perceived as soft looking if I recall well. Or... never mind. There we were: movies started to become digital)
Hey, film, DIEEEE once forever! Or revolutionize your chemicals. Mmm, please don't, we don't need more chemicals in our rivers and seas, only to get comparable results to todays' generation digital cameras.

I wholeheartedly disagree. Unless you are looking at really poorly shot and processed 35. If you look back through my posts you will see, I'm not trying to flame digital, in fact, most people I know would probably consider me a RED fanboy and I am certainly a full on tech-geek. But as someone who has worked with every major digital format and film stock, I just think it sounds silly to say that it's difficult to discern the difference between projected HDV and 35. I suggest you actually go to a post house and have them project the different formats for you rather than using some internet super-comparo to judge. Then you truly can trust your eyes.

I love this company because of the advancements they have already made and the promise of what they are working towards. In many ways digital has caught up to film, but not yet in every way and every scenario. I love RED, but if money was no object I would probably still choose 35mm film as the primary format for every film I make. Will I make that same statement a year from now... I like to think not, but whatever happens I applaud Jim and everyone else at RED for trying to change my mind and giving filmmakers a larger more advanced toolkit with which to do their work in the process.

And really... you shouldn't ever use Star Wars in an argument for digital (as apposed to film) acquisition. The technology certain wasn't ready then.

You do make a great point about how 'dirty' film production and processing is. Though I suppose most old electronics find their way to poor african nations by the ton, so maybe we just don't see the pollution. Which brings up an interesting question... recycling plans Jim?

 

[Christian Edwards]

please tell me youve considered laser measurement in side camera to relay info on screen and to metadata record possible to work in tangent with itech

 

[Michael Hastings]

You do make a great point about how 'dirty' film production and processing is. Though I suppose most old electronics find their way to poor african nations by the ton, so maybe we just don't see the pollution. Which brings up an interesting question... recycling plans Jim?

I don't have the knowledge (or the stamina) to get into the film/digital discussion. But I think we are all curious on what happens to REDONEs traded in. My guess is there are two basic options:

1) either they can resell them at a heavy discount, but a few downsides to this
a: seems like it would have to be pretty cheap as the Scarlet S35 seems superior at $7K+ so would have to be significantly less than that which would
b: lower the market value of the existing REDONEs and
c: I think one of the motivations of the trade in program is to get the 1st generation, FPGA-based systems out of circulation and replaced with 2nd gen ASIC based cameras that should ultimately be better and easier to support.

so option:

2) dismantle most of them while keeping enough bodies and parts to allow a rapid exchange program and sufficient repair parts for the future, and then resell the FPGA main circuit boards which are probably the most expensive (and generally most useful component).

Just random speculation while I take a coffee break. :biggrin:

 

[David Groundwater]

Just random speculation while I take a coffee break. :biggrin:

why don't you spend the time you spent typing this answering your emails instead mike?

ha,

david