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 :)

Question for Jim about Line-Skipping

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hrvoje,

PD-150 was my first love, and still is the camera I have had the most good moments with...

(Yes, I owned a couple of the susequent cameras before the RED as well, but (luckily in hinsight) I didn't manage to raise money for the Varicam... -:)
 
I too was lucky not to get enough money for a Varicam!

Graeme
 
That makes three of us. :smilielol5:
 
Tom, I still maintain that the indie cinema market that you're talking about, that's propped up Canon's profits doesn't really exist. Canon's camera division profits come primarily from it's compact cameras. Even within the DSLR division the primary profit engines are the Kiss/Rebel line. The 5DII although undoubtedly a success is not a high volume seller in comparison, and once you start figuring in the significantly smaller number of cameras purchased specifically for motion imaging, it become inconsequential. The real value to Canon, and the reason that they even added 24P and manual controls is PR. They know a good PR angle when they see it and having Hollywood use their cameras is a great marketing angle. The Canon Rep. I worked with on "House" told me this much.

I think that video in DSLRs is now a necessity, and just like the still only DSLRs of the early 2000s they will need some time to mature before the video capabilities are up to our expectations. This progression is going to happen according to Moore's law as sensor tech and processor speeds become capable of the task. Probably the biggest hurdle will be workflow, once these cameras are cable of full res RAW at 24fps you'll need a different RAW converter (Or something like ACR) for every camera out there and forget real time! Honestly, Jim is right, if you want a purpose built cinema camera with an S35 sensor and high quality codec, Scarlet is about the only option on the foreseeable horizon.
 
I'm very happy to have bought one of the very first VariCams and subsequent models; they have, and continue to serve me very well.

As far as I know it was the only HD camera shooting from 1 to 60fps for quite a while, it made very pretty pictures, still does, and is operator-friendly and dead-solid reliable.

I might add that I was served well by Bolex, Arri, HL79, Sony, and a couple of others. They each had their place in their own time.

I like my Red too and will upgrade to Epic, but I don't see the joy of bashing every other camera.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo
 
Leo's right. Bashing the 720p varicam is easy, but missing the point. The varicam camera is still, incredibly, the A camera for most Nat Geo and Discovery shoots, and for those networks, yes, 720 means HD (and in the US, Nat Geo even broadcasts in 720).

So now, assuming that those great networks are not run by absolute imbeciles (they're not), the logical question is: why do they still go with the tape based Varicam???? The answer is reliability and workflow. Planet Earth and Discovery's 'Life' were both captured primarily with that relic of a camera (with a serious relic of a codec).
 
Samual Murman said:
LThe varicam camera is still, incredibly, the A camera for most Nat Geo and Discovery shoots, and for those networks, yes, 720 means HD (and in the US, Nat Geo even broadcasts in 720).
Click to expand...

As does every network - including cable - owned by Disney/ABC or Fox. That would include Fox Broadcast, every Fox Sports regional network, FX, Fox Movie Channel, Fox News, Fox Business Channel, ABC, all flavors of ESPN, ABC Family, all flavors of the Disney Channel, and probably a few I'm not recalling at the moment. To imply that 720p is not HD is to redefine the term, something that certainly seems to be common around here, but is false nonetheless.
 
Of course, 720p DVCproHD is only 75% the resolution of 720p. At least it didn't line skip though!

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
I too was lucky not to get enough money for a Varicam!

Graeme
Click to expand...

Then again, at least to my knowledge, you never made a living as a shooter, especially as a shooter of video documentaries, interviews, travel shows, nature shows, or any of a number of other things the Varicam was especially well suited for. And if you did, and happened to own a Varicam for those projects, it likely would have easily paid for itself, just as it did for most of the people who did own them - many of whom still do. And still use them.

It's one thing to smugly claim that everything that came before the last 3 years was a complete technical travesty and a waste of time and money. It's another thing to actually be realistic and understand that even though today's tech might be superior, it doesn't mean that what was used before was useless, especially in the context of what else was available at the time. And it doesn't mean that innovation started with the Red One.
 
M Most said:
Then again, at least to my knowledge, you never made a living as a shooter, especially as a shooter of video documentaries, interviews, travel shows, nature shows, or any of a number of other things the Varicam was especially well suited for. And if you did, and happened to own a Varicam for those projects, it likely would have easily paid for itself, just as it did for most of the people who did own them - many of whom still do. And still use them.

It's one thing to smugly claim that everything that came before the last 3 years was a complete technical travesty and a waste of time and money. It's another thing to actually be realistic and understand that even though today's tech might be superior, it doesn't mean that what was used before was useless, especially in the context of what else was available at the time. And it doesn't mean that innovation started with the Red One.
Click to expand...

And I said all that - really? Or are you just reading things into my words?

Graeme
 
Tom Lowe said:
Does this mean the sensor is the toughest nut to crack at the moment?
Click to expand...

Yes. Bandwidth and de-mosaic processing aside, most sensors used in DSLRs are only capable of reading out every single pixel at a 10-15 fps. If you want faster readouts, you have to window, line-skip, or bin.

Jeff Kilgroe said:
IMO, the Sony NEX-VG10 is a better buy than the AF100.
Click to expand...

It is a good option, provided all you ever want to shoot is 30p.
 
Seems like most of the people commenting are just saying they are happy they never were able to afford it (the Varicam) as they may have regretted it once other options were available (considering they were stretching their budget to be able to afford one in the first place).

To me it is just us being stuck between worlds as the new technology for digital movie production is moving along at such a rapid pace.

And as some have pointed out other at the time had the money and purchased one as it was within their budget and have more than likely made their money back fairly quickly on projects. Nothing wrong with either route to me, one way you bought what you needed at the time being a working professional, while others could and did wait as it was not necessary to their jobs and are now happy they didn't as it would have been a rather big hit for them.

have a good one
 
I think if Mike and Graeme fought Graeme would end up in interlaced Sephia and Mike in monochrome .3gp.
 
Evin Grant said:
Tom, I still maintain that the indie cinema market that you're talking about, that's propped up Canon's profits doesn't really exist. Canon's camera division profits come primarily from it's compact cameras. Even within the DSLR division the primary profit engines are the Kiss/Rebel line. The 5DII although undoubtedly a success is not a high volume seller in comparison, and once you start figuring in the significantly smaller number of cameras purchased specifically for motion imaging, it become inconsequential.
Click to expand...

http://www.1001noisycameras.com/201...sited-real-story-canon-falls-off-a-cliff.html

Granted, this only shows the Japanese DSLR market, but Nikon takes the lead. Nikon D90 = 13% market share (1 in 8 DSLRs)
Canon 5DMKII comes in at #13 on the chart at a measly 1.8% although the only full frame camera in the top 20.

http://bcnranking.jp/news/1007/100708_17586.html
 
M Most said:
Then again, at least to my knowledge, you never made a living as a shooter, especially as a shooter of video documentaries, interviews, travel shows, nature shows, or any of a number of other things the Varicam was especially well suited for. And if you did, and happened to own a Varicam for those projects, it likely would have easily paid for itself, just as it did for most of the people who did own them - many of whom still do. And still use them.

It's one thing to smugly claim that everything that came before the last 3 years was a complete technical travesty and a waste of time and money. It's another thing to actually be realistic and understand that even though today's tech might be superior, it doesn't mean that what was used before was useless, especially in the context of what else was available at the time. And it doesn't mean that innovation started with the Red One.
Click to expand...

Mike... I did make a living as a shooter and I do own a Varicam (I still have it). It is one of the reasons I decided to start RED.

Film set the standard for almost a century. Digital entered existence as a vastly inferior film alternative. So stating that is just stating the obvious.

35mm film was released on the big screen and on television at low quality. It was also able to be re-released on HD (720P), then BluRay 1080P. It can, and will, be released again on 4K. The same cannot be said of the early digital formats. Pretty easy stuff to understand.

Mike... I like you, but you won't win many arguments by misquoting Graeme.

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top