Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

"Knowing" trailer...

cws said:
ah, yup... I'm here.
Our "workflow" is defined to match image data across 2 facilities on 2 sides of "the pond", which is about all I can say at the moment, apart from the footage looks great and the fx are coming together nicely.


Chris
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris!!
 
Wow

Always end up getting into trailers the first time so have to admit I had to watch it again a few times on mute to really appreciate the quality of RED, can't wait to see this projected.

Guess not noticing any difference on the first go could definitely be classed as a compliment.

Oh and that rain stuff looks kick ass.

Well done RED
 
Benni Diez said:
That would indeed be interesting. I understand it's an independent film. Much less budget than Proyas' last ones. So is it all 4k throughout? I imagine it's a lot cheaper to go 2k and blow it up in the end.
Click to expand...
:whistling: sorry, wouldn't be fair to go into that at this stage of the process.

But that leads to a question... why "blow it up at the end" if you're going 2k? The key difference between 2k output and 4k output is the size of the laser spot when it writes back to film (usually 12 micron v 6 micron) plus any effect of the medium you record to and whether it adds much grain structure, flare, etc etc.
Most records (via say Arrilaser) benefit very little from going to 4k out from a 2k scan or format size. You can get into splitting hairs with sharpening a 4k image v sharpening a 2k image and such, but there's usually not a marked increase in perceived quality.
Where 4k (output) is a huge benefit (for 2k projects) is tail titles (rollers) if the type is extremely fine, so then its worth resizing any underlying footage and applying the type at 4k res.

Chris

(G'day Ryan!)
 
cws said:
:
Where 4k is a huge benefit (for 2k projects) is tail titles (rollers) if the type is extremely fine, so then its worth resizing any underlying footage and applying the type at 4k res.
Click to expand...

That is an excellent tip. Thanks.

John
 
Reading between the lines of CWS's excellent post tells me they're finishing it in 2K. Which makes sense considering 2K is today's current "standard". 4K finishes seem to really be exclusive to the HUGE blockbusters like Spiderman and Batman. And like CWS said, the perceived difference is negligible (for filmouts anyway). I would like to see a 2K and 4K "digital" projection comparison.
 
cws said:
why "blow it up at the end" if you're going 2k?
Click to expand...

Well I thought since more and more cinemas are going fully digital and 4k projection being the standard many are going for, it would make sense to get the most out of the picture.
But I totally agree that for a film-out it won't make a big difference.
 
Benni Diez said:
Well I thought since more and more cinemas are going fully digital and 4k projection being the standard many are going for...
Click to expand...
I'd have to start digging through the stats on digital projectors to find anywhere near an accurate answer, but from what I've been reading the vast majority of digital theatres in place are 2k 2048x1080 pixels, not 4k projectors. In some of the Asian countries (I think India is an example) the resolution for digital projection in theatres is even less than 2k as a standard, and its referred to as E-Cinema, rather than D-Cinema.
4k (or greater) is a goal for many areas of our industry, but application of that resolution through an entire pipe is, well, still a pipe-dream for many...

Cheers
Chris
 
primo=panavision ; optimo=Angenieux

primo=panavision ; optimo=Angenieux

RyanKunkleman said:
no cooke primes and angenieux zooms
Click to expand...


Ok it's more clear for me: you shot with Angenieux zooms. Thank you for the answer.

PS: When you said first you shot with primo zoom, it mean Panavision :wacko: Angenieux make the optimo
 
I guess the verdict will be when we can see this on a digital projector. I saw quite a lot of noise and artifacts in the 1080p of this. Especially the scene with Nic and his son in the house (the reverse shot of the boy)... but I reckon that's the quicktime... right?

Looks like a cool film and I cant wait to see it. And anyway if these early films are looking as good as this with these new builds and new chips coming it's all coming up Red anyway.
 
el_stupido said:
I saw quite a lot of noise and artifacts in the 1080p of this. Especially the scene with Nic and his son in the house (the reverse shot of the boy)... but I reckon that's the quicktime... right?
Click to expand...

No, that is pre-Build 16 noise in the blue channel. Of course the quicktime compression adds to that but you are also going to see this when projected.

The good news is that after the current Build 16 this kind of noise is gone.
 
Hello..
which shots in the trailer are actually shot with the RED? or was the entire film done on RED?
 
Wow.. this trailer looks a lot sharper than anything my RED has ever produced.. then again i cant afford RED lenses.. just Nikon. However, my Nikon lens seems a lot sharper on my 10 megapixels Nikon camera better than the 4K RED.. confusing.. just doesnt make sense to me. gotta start saving for RED lenses I guess ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top