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 :)

Quote from "Wanted"...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Desert Rune said:
Film has more of an emotional aesthetic RED will never duplicate.
Click to expand...
no, you are wrong, film is more threedimensional as it has several depthlayers!
 
Desert Rune said:
Film has more of an emotional aesthetic RED will never duplicate.

</ducks>
Click to expand...

I certainly get emotional when film ****s up, as it so often does, in the camera, at the lab...

But to get this back on topic - Red is better than film!!!! Everyone who uses it says so.

I'm just having fun, and reminding everybody that this thread is about a Red user saying that he found he could seamlessly intercut Red with film. It's a big wow.
 
1- Was some sort of 3D LUT applied to the Red footage? Film sort of bends colors around, which the Red doesn't/shouldn't naturally do.

2- Did they compare the suitability of Red versus film for effects work? From what I've heard, 500ASA stocks are terrible for VFX work (though I don't know if that applies to this/every stock). I would expect Red to kick some serious butt in this regard... the image is so clean.
 
It appears that because RED RAW delivers a clean, pristine, grainless image, what ever "emotional aesthetic" you care to achieve can be added in post.

And then that can be changed again in the future to achieve another look.

We are entering into a new era, thanks to you Jim.

I'm betting on an Academy Award for Technical Achievement.

aloha,

Keith
 
To those of you who, like I, never experienced and will never experience the nightmares of working with film...ain't it great to be alive while REd's in the world!!!
 
Poi Boy said:
Nonsense, film has GRAIN not emotional aesthetic.

-A
Click to expand...

GRAIN is SAD and that is an emotional aesthetic. ;-)
My Silicon Valley friends were all complaining how bad the movies looked compared to 'clean HD' on their new TVs. The aesthetic is already changing.

Grain is BAD and SAD like the old record players pops and hiss. For the high tech crowd, film is already dead. The real question is how do we compress without noise (or grain!). ;-)

I think the grainy look will leave us faster than black and white. So shoot clean clean clean... or you will not be seen!

Reminds me of the film editors who loved the feel of film. We said then, tape a piece of film to your AVID and feel it any time you like. For grainy film lovers, you might need a sand storm a la Iraq in your living room to add texture and grain to your clean ultra HD / RED images. ;-)
 
Part of the "feel" of film is that is shot at 24fps (progressive) and video was, until very recently, shot at 60i. Digital made a big step by enabling 24P the past few years.

Another reason why film "feels" right is that it is typically shot on a full frame 35mm sensor with nice shallow DOF vs. the typical video standard of 2/3" which struggles to get the same focus "feeling".

While it is true that film has grain, many DP's would love to shoot 65mm to minimize that aspect of film. RED does not sharpen the edges to find resolution... which is another 1080P trick to maintain resolution during a blow-up.

There are lots of factors why something looks good and "feels" right. Not just film grain. IMHO.

Jim
 
Let us not forget that the goal is to capture life. Film was merely a tech in the way towards thats goal. Before that was metal plates, etc. Film disrupted other tech, and now Red has surpassed that. Let's keep the main thing the main thing, and not fall in love with the means to the end.
 
Jannard said:
Part of the "feel" of film is that is shot at 24fps (progressive) and video was, until very recently, shot at 60i. Digital made a big step by enabling 24P the past few years.

Another reason why film "feels" right is that it is typically shot on a full frame 35mm sensor with nice shallow DOF vs. the typical video standard of 2/3" which struggles to get the same focus "feeling".

While it is true that film has grain, many DP's would love to shoot 65mm to minimize that aspect of film. RED does not sharpen the edges to find resolution... which is another 1080P trick to maintain resolution during a blow-up.

There are lots of factors why something looks good and "feels" right. Not just film grain. IMHO.

Jim
Click to expand...

Indeed. I believe another factor is what the brain imagines in between the frames of 24fps. In video at 60i, there is more information in a given amount of time, less "gaps", so the brain does not have to "fill in the blanks" of motion and story as much. This presents a different feeling when watching 24p vs 30p, 60i, etc.
 
There is a lot of talk about feel and frame rates but I am always amazed by how long film has lasted. It's a pretty wondrous technology.

Film has been around for about 100 years so we do have to have some respect for the technology and it's endurance. If I were to introduce any technology today and say that in 100 years it would still be a major technological standard I'm sure that I'd get pelted.

Film's time may have come but that does not mean we should not honor how well it has served us.

Let's hope that the technologies that replace film will be as enduring. Here's to RED and the long tail!

David
 
Shawn Nelson said:
Let us not forget that the goal is to capture life. Film was merely a tech in the way towards thats goal. Before that was metal plates, etc. Film disrupted other tech, and now Red has surpassed that. Let's keep the main thing the main thing, and not fall in love with the means to the end.
Click to expand...

Shawn, I 'hollywood' love most of your posts... but outside of military and practical uses of film.. it is about deceiving and creating something new like fiction writing. So called "news" or "documentaries" that by definition have a point of view like Fox news or 60 minutes, are creating a reality.

I love my cars and cameras and photoshop that allow me and other artists to express myself and influence others. WE LOVE OUR TOYS - CARS, CAMERAS, AND OTHER 'HUMANS'. ;-)

The goal in Hollywood and elseware is NOT to capture life - much like a political ad - but to express oneself, entertain people, and influence people. And like money, glamor, hollywood, and other sins... they are what we love... fast cars, cool jets, awesome cameras, and other money making toys... lets not get sacred here... RED is a God send. ;-) and Jim is our savior from $1 a foot of film.... Thank you.... or God bless for the religious folkes. ;-)
 
Lets not forget that 60p may be on the horizen (if distant) as a broadcast standard. It seems pretty important in Asia anyway where I understand they rather like it for its ultra-real effect. It would be amazing for sports/news and wildlife.
 
Jim, sometimes i think you use my nick as a motivation, i cant wait to meet up with my ex film teacher who told me "digital just simply cant match or compete with celluloid"

Too excited and wanna say :F&^%$en awesome:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top