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 :)

Just watched first part of zacuto shootout....

M Most said:
The pilot of Detroit 187 was finished twice. The original pilot finish was graded by me, directly from the original files. Although Jimmy Muro (the orignal pilot DP) was not available, I'm familiar enough with his work to know where he would want it, and we went for a very rich look. The director and myself also went for a somewhat "stylized" look for the squad room scenes that was also very rich, with a lot of character. When the show was picked up to series, a different DP was hired and the visual scheme of the show re-thought. It was decided to shoot the series primarily with Panasonic Varicam 3700 cameras, and to emphasize a "faux documentary" kind of look and feel. Once the reshoots were completed, the pilot was refinished and re-graded, and the look of the 3700's was the guiding visual force. The Red footage was made to look more like the Panasonic rather than the other way around. So the look of what ultimately aired was a deliberate decision on the part of the producers, not a grading decision made by some incompetent colorist. It's not always about making a specific camera look good. It's about telling stories, and it's about continuity in that storytelling. When a decision is made to change the visual direction for a series, the pilot is usually refinished to reflect the new creative intent. Colorists don't make those decisions, and neither do cinematographers. Producers do, and the job of everyone else on the team is to properly execute those decisions. That's what Larry Field did when he re-graded the 187 pilot to reflect the intended feel of the series.

One shouldn't make accusatory comments when one doesn't know the real story. Production isn't always perfect, and post isn't always incompetent. Creative changes happen on many pilots and it often affects the ultimate look of the series. Nobody is out to ruin the look of any show, and in general, colorists working on network level television series are highly skilled, very responsive to creative decisions, and quite capable of getting the most out of any camera's footage. To occupy a seat as a colorist on those shows takes a lot of experience and talent, especially when you consider that there are probably less than 30 people who together turn out the grading work on about 95% of the shows you see on both broadcast and cable networks. That's a pretty exclusive group. I would strongly suggest that you give them the benefit of a doubt when you see something you feel has been done "poorly," because although that's not impossible, it's rarely the case.
Click to expand...
First off.. public apology.. I was not in the loop or decision making chair on final look on this show... .. second... sent detailed PM to you..
 
Tom Gleeson said:
Wow what is it with this thread that people get so heated? I don't believe that middle aged slightly overweight with a few gray hair industry pros were angry at the quality of the "cheap" cameras.
Click to expand...

Hey stop talking about me Tom! i wasn't angry at all! ;-)
 
Pax said:
Terrible test- they changed lighting during each test? They graded them all differently? The test shot is not synced either.

For what it's worth, I took the master MP4 and lined up each first frames of the test in AE and
rendered out animation 2560x1440 (3 rows of 3 columns) (jpeg compression by imgur.com):


gallery: http://imgur.com/a/cbzxY/all

full res frames:

http://i.imgur.com/atEMI.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/mwE0u.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/oKdn4.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/EyVXC.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/d4Lja.jpg
Click to expand...

Pax,

Thanks so much for the summary. I hope someone can chime in and explain the rationale behind these grades. B/c except for maybe "B," they look nonsensical, IMHO.
 
Despite the somewhat portentous tone, I quite enjoyed it as a doc about cinematographers; I can listen to Haskell Wexler all day. I didn't see its use a technical camera test, but it was a fun comparison. Now, I'm off to buy a Zwinger, Z-finder and a Zamerican...
 
Camera F is F65 or Alexa
 
Last edited:
It sure doesn't seem like those complaining about the test not being completely scientific were paying attention. The design and intent was clearly explained in the online doc part 1 video and in the prep info posted on Zacuto's site. This was a doc about the process of comparing DP/lighting/camera as a SYSTEM in approaching the challenge of the scene as presented to them. FWIW - here's Ryan's description of the methodology:

http://thetown-crier.blogspot.ca/2012/04/zacuto-shoot-out-2012-master.html#more

- Oliver
 
I'm not a troll but you compare this forum to other camera/cinematography based sites the diplomacy is non existent there seems to be an attitude of fierce defence against any other brand or model or people wanting to question or test the red, a total us vs them format which is ridiculous for a forum of supposed professionals
 
Keep in mind that this is an open forum. There are no qualifiers in place, no member approval screening. Not everyone is a pro. Not everyone has a vested interst. You can not assess the users here en massé. To do so is as ignorant as the behavior you address.

Tom Cheater said:
I'm not a troll but you compare this forum to other camera/cinematography based sites the diplomacy is non existent there seems to be an attitude of fierce defence against any other brand or model or people wanting to question or test the red, a total us vs them format which is ridiculous for a forum of supposed professionals
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Tom Cheater said:
I'm not a troll but you compare this forum to other camera/cinematography based sites the diplomacy is non existent there seems to be an attitude of fierce defence against any other brand or model or people wanting to question or test the red, a total us vs them format which is ridiculous for a forum of supposed professionals
Click to expand...

Tom, its called REDuser, not CAMERAuser.
 
Paul Schneider said:
The biggest issue I saw in the test was that HDRX wasn't implemented with the Epic. Most of the DP's/Cameras were exposed for the window exterior and then they brought up the interior darks in post. With HDRX that workflow could have been reversed and the camera would have shined.
Click to expand...

Actually, in the video Ryan Walters says he enabled HDRX. Did they end up not utilizing it in post?
 
Mike Halper said:
Actually, in the video Ryan Walters says he enabled HDRX. Did they end up not utilizing it in post?
Click to expand...

The article which Oliver Peters posted but 4 posts ago outlines the decisions behind why HDRx was not used in post, apparently he shot it to cover his bases but does not like the motion aesthetics or something and was happy with the results he got without it, the article explains it better.
 
Oliver Peters said:
It sure doesn't seem like those complaining about the test not being completely scientific were paying attention. The design and intent was clearly explained in the online doc part 1 video and in the prep info posted on Zacuto's site. This was a doc about the process of comparing DP/lighting/camera as a SYSTEM in approaching the challenge of the scene as presented to them. FWIW - here's Ryan's description of the methodology:

http://thetown-crier.blogspot.ca/2012/04/zacuto-shoot-out-2012-master.html#more

- Oliver
Click to expand...

But Oliver, the first part of the doc is about the art of cinematography. I challenge you to find evidence of anything said in the first two thirds manifested in the last. All that stood out to me was a very bright window with painted backdrop well exposed at the expense of the talent and any story that one could conjure up.
 
Does anyone now know what camera was Epic? Looking at Ryan walter blog (that he used fill lights), looks like Epic was E, and B was GH2.
 
Peter Moretti said:
But Oliver, the first part of the doc is about the art of cinematography. I challenge you to find evidence of anything said in the first two thirds manifested in the last. All that stood out to me was a very bright window with painted backdrop well exposed at the expense of the talent and any story that one could conjure up.
Click to expand...

One person's darkness is another's dramatic lighting ;-)

BTW - if I understand Ryan's blog correctly, Part 1 is presenting the empirical tests and not the camera-optimized tests. In his explanation, the lighting options were restricted on the empirical tests and grading was designed to match the "base" camera, which Logan picked to be the Alexa.

I would reserve judgement on the process or results until you see all 3 parts of Zacuto's doc.

- Oliver
 
Last edited:
Tom Cheater said:
I'm not a troll but you compare this forum to other camera/cinematography based sites the diplomacy is non existent there seems to be an attitude of fierce defence against any other brand or model or people wanting to question or test the red, a total us vs them format which is ridiculous for a forum of supposed professionals
Click to expand...

It's RED's forum. If you don't like it, go somewhere else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top