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 :)

My first RED shoot...

Goes to show what can be squeezed out of this baby in the hands of an Artist...Bravo!
 
Anders Holck said:
I was DP and Steadicam op and we mainly shot 3k 53 fps on a LWZ-1 Lightweight T2.6 zoom. Generally a very good experience:biggrin: but of course Redcine wants 200 hrs to convert the footage :blink:
Click to expand...

First of all, I do not see the wow! in any of these. Are you saying these photos are better than photos from other video cameras?
But they are definitely not better than 35 mm film, in my opinion.

You bought a 4K camera, but shot 3K to reduce processing time, and now you have to process the footage 200 hrs.? (that is 10 days!!)
I would choose the dailies in 35 mm film world. In a studio, you can shoot during day and watch the footage in the evening.
Ah! the good old days.
 
Great work Anders. I've always paid attention to your posts - very informative. It's great to know you're an accomplished artist as well.

By the way, is it just me or have other people learned to blow past chukt's posts :).

Nick Shields (real name)
 
chuckt said:
First of all, I do not see the wow! in any of these. Are you saying these photos are better than photos from other video cameras?
But they are definitely not better than 35 mm film, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

The above posts are acknowledgement and appreciation of Anders posted shots. There is nothing on this thread comparing these shots to 35mm shots.
 
chuckt said:
First of all, I do not see the wow! in any of these.
Click to expand...

Im sorry to hear that. But thanks for the critique, it's always nice to get feedback, even if it's a negative one. What should I improve to get your wow?

chuckt said:
Are you saying these photos are better than photos from other video cameras?
Click to expand...

No, I didn't write anything like that. I can't say if the photos themselves look better than all the 2/3" HD cameras that I've used, but I really like the organic look of the original files before they were downscaled, and using any 2/3" with a Pro35 was out of the question.

chuckt said:
But they are definitely not better than 35 mm film, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't know. The budget is below $24000 so 35mm wasn't really an option.

chuckt said:
You bought a 4K camera, but shot 3K to reduce processing time, and now you have to process the footage 200 hrs.? (that is 10 days!!)
Click to expand...

I only chose 3k to gain access to the 53fps framerate. I shot 4k on everything that didn't need above 30 fps

chuckt said:
I would choose the dailies in 35 mm film world. In a studio, you can shoot during day and watch the footage in the evening.
Click to expand...

I viewed dailies in realtime from the camera on a 17" display at lunch and every day after we wrapped. Can't be much faster or effortless than that.
I also spot checked all shots in redcine on my laptop to inspect critical focus at 1:1. This is also really nice :-)
I also made a personal copy of the "negative" onto a portable drive.

chuckt said:
Ah! The good old days.
Click to expand...
Ah! And the future might be even better.
 
at what point does Chuckt just get banned? I used to think it was the fan boys giving him a hard time, but he's just a jerk.

I think the pics are pretty, regardless
 
Holy shit. That's the best way I can express myself after seeing these.
 
Anders Holck said:
Im sorry to hear that. But thanks for the critique, it's always nice to get feedback, even if it's a negative one. What should I improve to get your wow?
Click to expand...

Anders, I was only looking at the resolution of the posted pictures. I was not criticizing your abilities as a DP/Director.
I was shocked at the 200 hr. processing time just to view the reels.

Movies are always about story telling. If the story is told right, the technical details do not matter as much.
I would imagine you have done a fantastic job of telling the story.
You definitely need commendation for making a movie for $24 K with all that specialty lighting.
(Blairwitch Project cost $35 K and made $248 Million.) Good Luck with your Project.

Could you have shot the whole movie in 24 Frames per second x 4K resolution ?
Also, in the second photo, is the light supposed to be from a natural source (eg. moon/sun) or from artificial source(s) ?
 
chuckt said:
I was shocked at the 200 hr. processing time just to view the reels.
Click to expand...

You know enough to know that's not really typical of the workflow... Anders pointed out that it has to go to a PPC Mac, so the images have to be rendered - no options for proxies there. Not unreasonable in the situation. I'm sure there are analogies to 35mm processing and telecine times required to make 35mm editable.

What's more, nothing is really going to change with 35mm, but RED workflow will improve a lot.

As for the better than other video comment? It certainly looked better than pretty much any video camera footage I've seen... But of course we're also only looking at rough output, scaled down, and not with anything to compare it to.
 
Beautiful work, Anders. The lighting has a haunting and lyrical quality. I'd love to see the finished piece. Barring that, some clips would be nice so we can get the full effect of your camerawork.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top