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 :)

Phantom or Epic at 300fps

E

ed ng

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
San Francisco
Hello everyone,

If anyone has worked with the Phantom vs Epic (2k WS/RC12) and have compared footage of which one produces a cleaner image. Our environment would be a well lit, locked off shot with no green screen or comp work. We may need to greek a tag or two in post but nothing heavy. Just looking for the cleanest image, final delivery in 1080p for broadcast.

I do not know enough about the Phantom vs the Epic so any help would be grateful.

Cheers

Ed
 
I've been involved in shoots on both and they are different sorts of tools for different sorts of jobs.

Is there a specific reason the shoot is going to be at 300fps? For the sort of work where I am looking at a Phantom versus Epic 300FPS is a bit of a strange frame rate - most action that can be captured at 300fps is actually probably a bit slow at 300fps than what I'd normally actually use for playback, and everything else which requires more detail I'd normally be thinking more towards 1200 - 2000fps so would want the flexibility of the Phantom in case I got to set and found 300 wasn't slow enough.

Basically for me it'd all come down to subject matter and lighting. If you've only got the lighting for 300FPS either way, and the subject matter would never call for higher frame rates, I'd probably heavily consider go with an Epic for workflow reasons and being able to dial in higher resolutions at lower frame rates as an option (again, can't imagine many shoots where I'd stick to 300FPS throughout versus trying a take at say 150 to get highest image quality).

If there is a chance that the subject matter may move too fast or there was the lighting budget to allow the frame rate to be pushed into the higher multiples that Epic can't do I'd spring for a Phantom.

If I was looking to capture something specific that was difficult to achieve and needed lots of good slow mo playback to check shots before we moved on from a setup, I'd probably go with the Phantom because of how it's ram caching and playback system is much better designed for that sort of work.

If we were looking to capture as much as possible to have as many options in possible in post (like say for a music video) and were less concerned about instantaneous checking of playback on the slow mo side I'd probably go with Epic due to workflow reasons.

In terms of imaqe quality, there are so many factors that come into play in terms of what is in front of the camera that I can't actually imagine a scenario where IQ between the two on the same shoot would be the deciding factor.

With all that in mind - The Phantom is likely to have the cleanest image due to it being built for that sort of work with the right workflow given it's a specialty camera for slow mo work - but it'll also come down to post processing to be honest. If you aren't familiar with RAW footage from Phantom or the person who processes your Phantom Footage isn't you can introduce noise at that stage, same with R3D's and RAW - Rather than just cameras I'd be looking at the whole workflow and what will provide the most flexibility when you get to set and try to actual achieve what you had in mind before you turned up on set.
 
You can't shoot 1080p on the Epic at 300fps. 240fps max at 1080p. but after debayering it still won't be a good 1080p image.
And then there's the rolling shutter.

I tried to capture a close up of a golf drive at 300fps a couple of weeks ago. It was too slow and I got one frame of a diagonally shaped driver.
 
Thank you for the replies! We are trying to capture a few items falling from top of frame to the bottom, they would be multiple items that need at least 240fps because of the weight of the items as we can not slow down the items in a water tank or with rigging.

It does sound like the Phantom is the way to go. I do have a post house to assist with the footage.
 
ed ng said:
Thank you for the replies! We are trying to capture a few items falling from top of frame to the bottom, they would be multiple items that need at least 240fps because of the weight of the items as we can not slow down the items in a water tank or with rigging.

It does sound like the Phantom is the way to go. I do have a post house to assist with the footage.
Click to expand...

Different objects with the same mass fall at the same speed ... Do you still think you need 300fps?

-E
 
I shot this at 300fps as a test shortly after getting my Epic. The lens used was a Canon 85mm L prime. Starts at around 45 seconds if you want to skip the pre-amble.


The final shot of the large smashed flourescent and one particular shot with the bottle were slowed down by 50% using Twixtor as well.

You'll need lots of tungsten light.
 
Last edited:
What matters then is not just the frame rate, but also the field of view to capture your background and what lens you are on, because the tighter the shot the faster frame rate you will need.

Unless you have that all perfectly worked out before you do the shoot then I'd definitely prefer to have the option of the Phantom, because if you want to have the background of the shot tighter/be on a longer lens, then you'll need to up the frame rate further to compensate.
 
Which phantom? Not all are 1080p+ capable? If it is a flex, the top miro or a HD gold go with phantom (... Chances are you will go faster...)

Ps as mentioned frame size and object size should play into your thinking.. A tight frame with an object falling through from far out of frame will not look slow at 300fps
 
Paul,
gosh, bad idea with the flourescents :-(
If you break them you set free mercury and other harmful ingrediants.

Cheers, Ulf
 
Which Phantom were you thinking of? If one can score a 4k Flex you could get 300fps in 4k (up to 1000fps in 4k even). Not sure if the higher res is a determining factor for your needs. And just always keep the raws, even if you bake in on set LUTs just as sample ideas. That way your post guys never end up stuck with a baked in image.

Like stated above Epic cant do 300fps at full HD. only 240fps in 16/ 9. It can do 300fps at 2kWS bur its not a 16/9 framing therefore not full HD...

I don't mind Epic at 2k if I can expose the darks a little bright and crush them in post. There is a difference between under exposing your shadows and producing noise, and exposing shadows properly crushing them in post and then trying to denoise any noise that may arise in post when you crush. In theory this can produce much better shadows. But high speed shooting always loves light anyway, so its better to over light a bit

So I personally don't mind overcranking on Red, as long as I can properly expose the shadows to the point where no clipping happens, that and maybe do a black balance if there is time and your concerned. But again it comes downs to how res and how fast do you want it
 
Ulf Krentz said:
Paul,
gosh, bad idea with the flourescents :-(
If you break them you set free mercury and other harmful ingrediants.

Cheers, Ulf
Click to expand...
yeah, heard that a million times but the quantities are very small and I'm still alive. :-)

When I was at school, a very long time ago, we handled mercury regularly. Although like Clinton, we didn't inhale.
 
Hey Ed,

Call Jay @ Chater Camera, he's the top Phantom Tech up here and will sort you out. I'd avoid shooting 2K and below with the Epic, it's too soft IMO. One thing to note about the Phantom Flex is that it has limited exposure latitude, not what you're used to with Epic so you need to light and expose with that in mind. There's no Log gamma curve or anything like that. Chater has a 4K Flex on order, don't they if they've received it yet. But that camera will have more latitude as well as increased resolution.
 
Thanks everyone! This has proven a tad more difficult then anticipated. Prior work I have done with the Epic at 300fps were noisy and to the limit which is why I am leaning towards the Phantom but of course there is the cost factor.

I will need to sort this out quit soon! Thanks again!
 
It's really no contest. You're pushing the envelope of the Red's capabilities which certainly does not show it at its best light, while with any modern Phantom camera you're barely touching its comfortable cruising speed. While a sexy sports car is fun to drive, it certainly isn't the proper vehicle to haul lumber from Home Depot. Use the tool best suited for the job. Plenty of other situations where the EPIC is far better suited.
 
Thanks Mitch! I guess you have seen me over at Home Depot with the Ferrari hauling lumber!

I have not personally ever used a Phantom on a project so it was great to get the feedback. Looks like the Phantom will suit this project perfectly.
 
I btw really like the Area 48 soft lights for high speed, fairly cheap, low power and very bright. It's almost mandatory to bring along non-flickering lights for high speed shoots( if your outside bring reflectors ... that 1/400 to 1/4000 shutter speed is a killer ... almost any electrical flicker creates sections of darker framers if you don't have non-flicker lights).
 
Just an update, we are going with the Phantom and have readjusted to shoot 1000fps instead. Thank you Satski for introduction! We will be using flicker free HMI's but if anyone has a better lighting option please let me know! Thank you again
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top