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 vs. 35mm shootout results

Hi Shawn

On that cine.com thread it was mentioned that the latitude of the camera was revealing. I have found it to be 8-9 stops, what did you guys come up with?
 
I haven't done anything with the RED footage on my end as of yet. I can ask Chuck and see what he got.

EDIT: I think the RED footage from the test is still in the RAW format )looks that way). I'm not sure but I will ask Chuck.
 
Umm, so, they did their color correction in ProRes in Final Cut, not Red Cine or Red Alert first, because their students aren't expected to have systems that can handle uncompressed 4k? Does anyone else see all the errors in this procedure?
 
Douglas Underdahl said:
Umm, so, they did their color correction in ProRes in Final Cut, not Red Cine or Red Alert first, because their students aren't expected to have systems that can handle uncompressed 4k? Does anyone else see all the errors in this procedure?
Click to expand...

Don't worry. We're working on posting more accurate results. I will one light the RED footage and then we'll post the HD version to RED RELAY. Probably around Monday/Tuesday.

My apologies for the somewhat premature posting.
 
I can't begin to enumerate the reasons why this test was completely worthless. What a waist.
 
Why the hell didn't they shoot similar focal lengths? Why did they post raw uncorrected Red files? I did a quick color correction in After Effects with the available (awful) file and red looks pretty close to the film. Of course hard to really tell because of the difference in angle and focal length.

Shish, worthless! Has anybody actually run a competent test of the differences between Red and film?

I'm not a Red fan boy, but I am certainly interested in Red and would love to see for myself the difference between Red and film As yet I haven't seen a competent test. What is so bloody hard about this?
 
camera testing methods

camera testing methods

stats79 said:
What is so bloody hard about this?
Click to expand...

If you've done any peer-reviewed camera testing, you know just how many variables there are to control. In my view, a really rigorous comparison test is something like a Ph.D. project in complexity.

What you find online is mostly what people happened to do with the gear they have, in the spare time they have to do it. Take them for what they're worth. If you find it inadequate, I believe the most useful thing to do is perform your own test to your own specifications.
 
stats79 said:
...Shish, worthless! Has anybody actually run a competent test of the differences between Red and film? ...
Click to expand...

Yes, they have. I was on a set at a major Studio last week with an A-list DP and a top-notch crew shooting comparisons of RED, Dalsa, and 35mm.

The glass was expensive, the setups were perfect, and it was as close to a "perfect" test as I have seen. Several very challenging scenes and setups designed to stress all formats.

It was a very cool day. But the best part about the day was that it had nothing to do with a "shootout" or seeing "which camera is better." I have seen so many "shootouts" and they all end up being fairly worthless, because there is always SOMETHING that can be picked apart. The setups weren't exactly the same, the cameras weren't set up right, the glass was different, the backfocus was clearly wrong, etc, etc, etc. And at the end of the day, what do they tell you? Film looks like film, the Dalsa looks like the Dalsa, and the RED looks like the RED.

Most DPs don't give a crap about MTF and Nyquist and Oversampling. They care about what it looks like. The science leads to the beauty, and the beauty is because of the science. But getting lost in the weeds arguing about geek-ery is just that - getting lost.

It was an awesome DP doing tests to see the *creative* aspects of the cameras and what they all did under different circumstances. And that was the atmosphere that everybody there was operating under. He was seeing what the different cameras did so he could make creative decisions about what cameras to use under which circumstances.

So the test told him what the RED looked like, what the Dalsa looked like, and what 35mm 4-perf looked like under those situations.

Which is exactly what he wanted.

Sorry... I have been a part of so many camera tests where people get pissed off, feelings get hurt, and ultimately serve nothing but ill will.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA
 
Ummm, like, are the test results available to the rest of us mere mortals? If not, what was the point of your post?
 
If you've done any peer-reviewed camera testing, you know just how many variables there are to control. In my view, a really rigorous comparison test is something like a Ph.D. project in complexity.
Click to expand...


How hard does it need to be? How about the same lenses, same focal length, similar grading and competent post work; show us the results. Seems fairly straight forward to me.
 
stats79 said:
How hard does it need to be? How about the same lenses, same focal length, similar grading and competent post work; show us the results. Seems fairly straight forward to me.
Click to expand...

Here are a few things you may not be thinking about...

1) Camera Setup

Who does this? A DIT? The DP? Reps from the manufacturer? How can you be sure that the "ideal" parameters are set?

2) Scene Selection

Are scenes being selected specifcally slanted towards one camera or the other or the other?

3) Delivery Mechanism

Everything has to be put on one final "neutral" format in order to compare side-by-side. Will it be video or a film-out? If a film-out, who is doing it, are they familiar with the "best" settings for each camera? If video, what DI device is doing it and how is it being ingested and processed? Who decides that - the online editor, the colorist, the facility, manufacturers' reps?

4) Accessories

Are both cameras set up ideally with appropriate accessories?

5) What is being tested?

In all seriousness - what is it *exactly* that you are looking to get out of a test? MTF? Color reproduction? Shutter response? Motion?

---------------

Some of these may seem silly to you... but I promise that they are all argued ad infinitum by the various contingencies in any "shootout." And trying to design a truly neutral test quickly becomes a quixotic quest because there is no situation where everybody agrees that everything was neutral.

Again - sorry to be emotional about this - but I have been part of so many shootouts with so many different cameras. And not a single one of them has really proved anything other than how much people can argue with each other over minutiae.

You are bashing Shawn because everything wasn't even and neutral. My point is that there is no such thing.

Lucas
 
Fact of the matter is that I would have been pretty happy with Shawn's test if they had used similar focal length, similar angle and a competent grade for the Red footage.
 
Thank you everyone for your posts. Obviously, there are some faults with the posted -

But as I've already said, I will post a properly corrected version of the RED footage by Mon/Tues.

Yes, we should have used the same lenses and everything else - if this was a comparison test. All we did was "test" the available cameras to a friend of mine who's getting ready to begin a feature. Maybe I was wrong to post this, maybe I was wrong to post under the specific title.

My bad -

But this wasn't worthless to him.
 
Don't get discouraged by criticism, Luki is right on all points but it is good to see tests.

We had test of RED and other digital cameras posted few months ago that was showing RED looking bad. Very fast, people here, realised where mistakes were made and pointed it out.

For me the real test is the one that representatives from each manufacture are present and can pick the best setup for its own camera or mutually pick the compromised setup among themselves if identical setup is required.

At the end, properly processed RED footage gives you this creamy smooth look with very good lp/mm resolving power and good DR. In digital domain it beats film hands down. Film brought via DI process to digital domain will never catch-up with RED from this point on.

5K systems will finish comparisons tests for good, because there will be nothing to compare anymore.
When did we hear about DSLR versus film test, last time?
 
It seems like a lot of these so-called tests one sees on the net re: RED vs. whatever, are shot by people who are using RED for the first time. This is not a point and shoot camera, every time we go out with RED we learn something new and take a better image. Just like anything else in life- practice makes perfect and that continues into the post workflow as well. After many months this process still continues.

So the idea that someone is going to whip out a RED for the first time over a weekend and get the best footage it's capable of producing is kinda asinine IMHO. Also a lot of these testers *want* RED to come up short because that validates their continued use of whatever current camera or technology they are comfortable with and makes them feel like they aren't missing the boat. So guess what happens....

Noah
 
Agreed Noah, just like DSLRs often a shot straight out of camera looks poor but with proper processing totally different story. BUT, I think it's one of the things putting producers/commissioners off as they are putting up sometimes big money and don't want to be using it for testing someone else's camera and/or training their operator how to get the best out of it. There is a lot to be said for a tried and tested medium, and for one that will make good pictures pretty much straight out of the box (or at least with just a few industry-standard tweaks).
Steve
 
Steve Phillipps said:
Agreed Noah, just like DSLRs often a shot straight out of camera looks poor but with proper processing totally different story. BUT, I think it's one of the things putting producers/commissioners off as they are putting up sometimes big money and don't want to be using it for testing someone else's camera and/or training their operator how to get the best out of it. There is a lot to be said for a tried and tested medium, and for one that will make good pictures pretty much straight out of the box (or at least with just a few industry-standard tweaks).
Steve
Click to expand...

Yep and that's why you hire a DIT who knows the camera well. At this point smart producers realize they need to hire the talent every bit as much as the technology if they expect the best results. As with any tool- wielded by experience RED One is quite powerful not so much in inexperienced hands... Which is to say a lot of film shooters assume they can just grab it and go do what they've been doing for years with the same assistants. Is it any wonder when they are unsatisfied with the results?

Noah
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top