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 :)

RED B16 vs F23/Panavision

There is math and science and then there is art. We chose our path because we think it just looks better (to us). We like the soft hand... resolution without "sharpness". Others may disagree. That is what makes the world go 'round. I will say that now that we are here, we would not ever consider using striping... and we certainly have that option.

Jim
 
Jannard said:
There is math and science and then there is art.
Click to expand...

Good point, Jim. The number crunchers often get bogged down in...well, number crunching, instead of making beautiful images.

However, I would like to point out another and major point of differenciation between those cameras: the customer support that their manufacturers offer. Sony can crank their marketing spin up as hard as they can :bleh: , yet they are light years behind Red on this issue. Their customer relationship simply sucks. This is where F23 can not compete with Red regardless of what pixel counters may say.
 
It will be interesting to see if Panavision will keep using stripes for their future cameras even if they aren't Sony affiliated?
 
More interesting will be if Sony ever use stripes on their DSLRs?

Graeme
 
Deanan and Graeme those are both very interesting points.
 
I don't think we'd have made the points unless we thought them interesting :-) Which makes me wonder about the point I'm making now... :-)

Graeme
 
I agree very much with Jim's point about number crunching and Art.

So to the seasoned eye forgetting about the numbers for a moment how do you think Build 16's clean image would look scaled up for IMAX in 16:9 aspect ratio vs HD like in U23D.

Should Red look a little better or a lot better scaled up and projected?
 
Graeme Nattress said:
I don't think we'd have made the points unless we thought them interesting :-) Which makes me wonder about the point I'm making now... :-)

Graeme
Click to expand...

I did find your last point more interesting. :-)

Aside from which is better for acquisition dose Bayer or Striped offer any advantages over the other for blowing up footage beyond it's native resolution?

Lowry?
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I will say, however, as John Galt will probably remind me whenever I run into him next, that pixel resolution is not the same thing as sharpness. And as Graeme will also remind me, besides sharpness you have to factor in aliasing artifacts. So it's a complicated subject as to what constitutes a "better" image for large screen projection, and what artifacts one finds more objectionable than others. One might look casually at a F23 or Genesis image and feel it looks similar in "sharpness" to a RED image, but once you start looking at each channel individually, look for aliasing artifacts, look at MTF, look at edge characteristics, you may prefer aspects of one image over another for different reasons.
Click to expand...

This makes since..... but it makes it sound like they are really close in quality to the eye and not a big difference between them when projected on a large screen. Are you saying they both might look just fine and are so close to each other that it would just come down to personal creative preference for the look you like most for the given project. All science to the side for a moment.

It just seems like the RED should have a lot more to offer in it's image creatively with the type of data it records vs F23 or Genesis.
 
If we continue the comparison game, we should be talking about full frame sensors. Red, Genesis and F35. Talking about the F23 in this discussion is "mixing metaphors"... sensor size-wise.

I am also sure that Panavison would never introduce a Bayer sensor camera. After their video presentation, why would they?

Jim

Jim
 
Post 28 and 29 in this thread are what I'm really trying to answer for the moment with out getting into any camera comparisons or specs.

Just trying to get a better since in "general" from anyone as to how much better Build 16 might do when blown up and projected on a big screen vs Build 15 ?
 
Jannard said:
I am also sure that Panavison would never introduce a Bayer sensor camera. After their video presentation, why would they?
Jim
Click to expand...

to save grace?
or, to survive? :whistling:
 
cinepost35 said:
Post 28 and 29 in this thread are what I'm really trying to answer for the moment with out getting into any camera comparisons or specs.

Just trying to get a better since in "general" from anyone as to how much better Build 16 might do when blown up and projected on a big screen vs Build 15 ?
Click to expand...

I thought the improvements in Build 16 were in regards to noise and dynamic range, not resolution or sharpness. Sure, less noise is always preferable for large projection. But how can you quantify how much better? "This much" better? "One" better?

Honestly, for large screen projection, at some point you MUST shoot tests and project it yourself, you can't do it by looking at specs, and you can barely do it by asking other people. You have to see it with your own eyes and judge for yourself. Otherwise it's like trying to learn about cooking without ever tasting.

Especially if you are truly about to embark on a project intended for blow-up to IMAX.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I thought the improvements in Build 16 were in regards to noise and dynamic range, not resolution or sharpness. Sure, less noise is always preferable for large projection. But how can you quantify how much better? "This much" better? "One" better?

Honestly, for large screen projection, at some point you MUST shoot tests and project it yourself, you can't do it by looking at specs, and you can barely do it by asking other people. You have to see it with your own eyes and judge for yourself. Otherwise it's like trying to learn about cooking without ever tasting.

Especially if you are truly about to embark on a project intended for blow-up to IMAX.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your reply. I think anyone would truly do a test before they embarked on such a project.

Let me ask a different way..... Would RED RAW 4K 16:9 give you more or less data than HDSR to work with for a blow up?
 
Simply, yes.

HDSR will give you 1080P max (although I hear that you'll be able to do uncompressed 4K to SR soon - or already) from Genesis and F35. RED RAW 4K 16:9 will give you 4 times the pixels. 3.2K measured resolution.

RED RAW will give you MUCH more information to work with compared to SR.

Take a 4K R3D file. Export a TIFF at 4K and another downsampled to 1080. Take the 1080 TIFF and upsample back to 4K. Compare the original 4K TIFF and the new upsized 4K TIFF. That should show you what kind of difference you'll be looking at.

Don't forget to sharpen to taste.
 
kenn michael said:
Simply, yes.

HDSR will give you 1080P max (although I hear that you'll be able to do uncompressed 4K to SR soon - or already) from Genesis and F35. RED RAW 4K 16:9 will give you 4 times the pixels. 3.2K measured resolution.

RED RAW will give you MUCH more information to work with compared to SR.

Take a 4K R3D file. Export a TIFF at 4K and another downsampled to 1080. Take the 1080 TIFF and upsample back to 4K. Compare the original 4K TIFF and the new upsized 4K TIFF. That should show you what kind of difference you'll be looking at.

Don't forget to sharpen to taste.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your clear answer so if you will be able to do uncompressed 4K to SR soon. Would RED 4K R3D files still give you more to work with than uncompressed 4K to SR.

Sharpening to taste of coarse. :-)
 
Well, probably by the time that Sony makes a camera that will output uncompressed 4K to an SR deck, RED will have some more tricks up their sleeve. Including a 5K camera.

IMO, the only workflow that would currently give you more image information to work with is working with 4K uncompressed DPX files with a Dalsa camera. HUGE amount of data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top