RUST & BONE: Notes On How It Was Shot on Epic, ASC Mag

[Nick Morrison]

I posted this last night, but it's easily lost in a massive thread. I think all this valuable info is easier appreciated posted by itself. Enjoy.


The following notes are from this December's article on Rust and Bone, the acclaimed French film lensed by Stephane Fontaine, on Epic with Cooke S4 primes and an Optimo zoom.

Thought it would be useful to share some of his Epic workflow, settings, and approach.


On Why He Chose Epic:

"I shot a lot of tests; we compared the Epic, the Alexa, the Canon 5D & 7D, and Kodak 5219 and 5213. I was really happy with the Epic. There's a lot to say about Epic vs. the Alexa. I feel that there is more detail with the Epic, sometimes too much, and the bokeh's are much rounder. Also the Epic is very light and compact. I didn't want to shoot handheld with the weight and bulk of an Alexa and a Codex recorder. In addition, the Epic gave us the ability to quickly go from 24fps to 300fps with the same camera body; that was a big advantage."

We usually hear all the reasons Alexa is "better". Nice to see the other side of the argument. Epic's smaller size, higher resolution and detail, and more FPS.


On the Format and Compression He Used (5K @ 5:1):

"We captured in 5K, cropping a 2:40:1 window out of the 1:90:1 frame. We tested different compressions at 5K, and my eye wasn't able to see the difference between 3:1 and 5:1, but we started to see a bit of difference at 6:1. So we shot 5K with 5:1 compression except for the 300-fps shots, which are 2K with 6:1 compression. They have an interesting texture "

So his 5:1 analysis and decision matches Ridley's on Prometheus (though they at times used 3:1 on very busy shots, with heavy water or vegetation).

Interesting to see them shoot 2K 300fps, and have no problems with these shots making it into theaters. I know there are discussions on RUSER that 2K out of the Epic "isn't good enough", so it's heartening to see a major DP and production not give a fuck and think it's perfectly good to use. Nice to know. Encouraging.


On Epic's Larger Sensor Size:

QUESTION: There are many moments with reduced depth of field, like the shots of Stephanie in her hospital bed.

"That's a choice of mise-en-scene that was reinforced by the Epic 5K mode. In that mode, the sensor is much larger than S35mm. A 40mm lens with the Epic is [in 5K mode] is about the same as a 35mm lens in Super 35 "

Interesting to hear them talk about the shallower depth of field on Epic. You don't hear that so often. He also mentions the "rounder bokeh" previously, presumably for the same reasons.


On How He Rated the Camera (at ISO 800):

"I set it at ISO 800 and worked with my light meter as I would with film. That way, I could shoot very quickly. When you're working on a stage and you have time, you can consult the waveform monitor and have a video village of calibrated monitors, but when you are on a set with a handheld camera and shooting with our a rehearsal, which often happens with Jacques (his director), you take a quick reading and you go!"

I guess we can add him as an 800 member in the 320 vs 800 debate. Love how he barely checks his waveform! I have to assume he's checking the traffic lights though...


On What LUT he used (Red Gamma 2):

"We used the Red Gamma 2 display LUT for the monitor image. It has reinforced blacks, but it's still low contrast"

Interesting to hear how he seems to like the lower contrast of RG2 (compared to the higher saturation of Red Gamma 3 that everyone now seems to like).



On Epic RAW vs Alexa Pro Res:

"I have shot commercials with the Alexa in ProRes. You turn on the monitor, and everyone's happy. You feel like you're watching TV. There's a kind of ease to it; there is already a result that is satisfactory. That worries me. I think the Epic is a camera that's more orientated toward postproduction. Of course, each film is a different case. You can also shoot Alexa in ArriRaw with a digital imaging technician."

I think his comment about Epic being a camera for postproduction is very prescient. It's true that the RED RAW workflow is more time consuming, but geared for those who want the options in post. That's the trade off.


On Projecting in 2K vs 4K:

QUESTION: You finished the film at 4K resolution. Why did you project 2K at Cannes?

"The 4K image was too defined, too digital, too hard; there were too many things in it. The 2K seemed true."

For those of you who say RED "has no soul" then maybe you've found your answer. Project in 2K.

 

[Harry Lipnick]

Fascinating. Thanks Nick. I'll have to read the whole article this weekend.

-Harry

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Stephane Fontaine: "The 4K image was too defined, too digital, too hard; there were too many things in it. The 2K seemed true."

These types of comments strike me as similar to ones aimed at the 48fps HFR Hobbit showings - too real, too defined. While valid in terms of the individual's personal experience, I still feel its more about expectation violation than anything else. If I could somehow expose a group of subjects to nothing but HFR material for an extended period of time then show them 24/25/30 fps versions of similar material what would their reaction be? If you showed them nothing but 4K for a year then went back to 2K/1080 would they notice? If so would they care much?

The human visual system and information processing triage in the brain comprise a highly complex distillery for motion imagery. Pre-existing expectations and built schema provide comparators that establish reference points which we attempt to use "on the fly" to keep up with the stream of images coming at us. Over the years we become ever more sophisticated in managing this process and ever more reliant on our constructs. It is my thesis that like a jury pool that reads the newspaper, the audience is tainted by their past viewing experiences and cannot be impartial.

Stephane, Quentin and others may have very particular goals in how they wish to portray images on screen that are at odds with 4K/HFR presentations, fair enough, Black Swan looked gorgeous in 16mm. That said, I think its important to withhold judgement on 4K and/or HFR until we have enough content and exhibition instances to acclimate viewers.

Cheers - #19

 

[Nick Morrison]

Stephane Fontaine: "The 4K image was too defined, too digital, too hard; there were too many things in it. The 2K seemed true."

These types of comments strike me as similar to ones aimed at the 48fps HFR Hobbit showings - too real, too defined. While valid in terms of the individual's personal experience, I still feel its more about expectation violation than anything else. If I could somehow expose a group of subjects to nothing but HFR material for an extended period of time then show them 24/25/30 fps versions of similar material what would their reaction be? If you showed them nothing but 4K for a year then went back to 2K/1080 would they notice? If so would they care much?

The human visual system and information processing triage in the brain comprise a highly complex distillery for motion imagery. Pre-existing expectations and built schema provide comparators that establish reference points which we attempt to use "on the fly" to keep up with the stream of images coming at us. Over the years we become ever more sophisticated in managing this process and ever more reliant on our constructs. It is my thesis that like a jury pool that reads the newspaper, the audience is tainted by their past viewing experiences and cannot be impartial.

Stephane, Quentin and others may have very particular goals in how they wish to portray images on screen that are at odds with 4K/HFR presentations, fair enough, Black Swan looked gorgeous in 16mm. That said, I think its important to withhold judgement on 4K and/or HFR until we have enough content and exhibition instances to acclimate viewers.

Cheers - #19

Fair point. I think we have a real battle of old vs new. Although Fontaine is shooting on Epic, so clearly some of his approach is "New School", however his taste seems also quite traditional/classic too.

 

[Quentin Devillers]

Thanks for sharing this !
Very interesting !
I would have liked to know more about the decision to over-exposed lots of scene... that was disturbing me on some shots...

 

[Nick Morrison]

Thanks for sharing this !
Very interesting !
I would have liked to know more about the decision to over-exposed lots of scene... that was disturbing me on some shots...

Hey Quentin, thanks! See this part of the article:

On How He Rated the Camera (at ISO 800):

"I set it at ISO 800 and worked with my light meter as I would with film. That way, I could shoot very quickly. When you're working on a stage and you have time, you can consult the waveform monitor and have a video village of calibrated monitors, but when you are on a set with a handheld camera and shooting with our a rehearsal, which often happens with Jacques (his director), you take a quick reading and you go!"

He seems to have just rated the camera at 800 and gone run n' gun. I get the sense he wasn't checking the waveforms that much. I wonder if those over exposed shots were intentional...or a by-product of a fast schedule and loose approach. You win some, you lose some. I'm looking forward to seeing the movie myself. It's supposed to be beautiful...

 

[Quentin Devillers]

It's a beautiful movie indeed ! But for me, not the best one of J. Audiard... but it's off topic ,-)
Yes I read this part but I was hoping that was intentional because of my respect for S. Fontaine !
Thanks !

 

[Dominik Muench]

"I shot a lot of tests; we compared the Epic, the Alexa, the Canon 5D & 7D, and Kodak 5219 and 5213..."

Can I ask why anyone shooting a production of that magnitude would seriously consider the Canon 5/7D and test them amongst cameras like the Epic & Alexa or even 35mm ? I'm not trying to spark another camera controversy I'm really wondering why these two cameras could possibly be an option when you have the chance to shoot Epic or Alexa or even 35mm. Surely with productions of that budget and especially the postproduction and grading workflow one would go straight to the more advance camera systems ? What advantage could the 5D have over the Alexa or Epic apart from size and weight ?

 

[Vadim Bobkovsky]

"The 4K image was too defined, too digital, too hard; there were too many things in it. The 2K seemed true."

Seeing Samsara (which was shot in 70mm) projected in 4K and The Master shot and projected in 70mm not one poor soul complained about it looking harsh or too defined. It really looks like (yeah I know, sacrelige) 5K from Red or 4K from F65, but with larger frame size, filmic texture and gorgeous colors. It's fluid and beautiful. I don't even know what are they talking about, first digital was bad, because it's lowres, then it's suddenly toomuchres? What?

 

[David Mullen ASC]

You have to understand that such a statement isn't applicable to all movies ever made, but only to that particular production. What seems too hard, harsh and defined for one project may be just right for the next. It's all about feeling and taste, which is why it's an art. While Gordon Willis wasn't much of a user of diffusion filters, when he shot "The Godfather" he also didn't want a clean saturated, slick studio look either... he said something along the lines that a period setting shouldn't look like some snapshot that just came back from the Fotomat, it needed to have some texture. There are no rules either, but I can imagine when doing "Rust and Bone" the cinematographer wanted a certain feeling to the images that wasn't necessarily hyper-real and sharp. You can think of preferring 2K projection in this case as choosing a softer lens.

 

[Mark K.]

The trailer for this is absolutely gorgeous, can't wait to see it.

 

[Nick Morrison]

You have to understand that such a statement isn't applicable to all movies ever made, but only to that particular production. What seems too hard, harsh and defined for one project may be just right for the next. It's all about feeling and taste, which is why it's an art. While Gordon Willis wasn't much of a user of diffusion filters, when he shot "The Godfather" he also didn't want a clean saturated, slick studio look either... he said something along the lines that a period setting shouldn't look like some snapshot that just came back from the Fotomat, it needed to have some texture. There are no rules either, but I can imagine when doing "Rust and Bone" the cinematographer wanted a certain feeling to the images that wasn't necessarily hyper-real and sharp. You can think of preferring 2K projection in this case as choosing a softer lens.

As we've come to expect from you Mr.Mullen, you've given a thoughtful, wonderful answer. Thanks for chiming in. And thanks for giving credence to the notion of a "softer lens" (it's ok to be soft!!!).

Happy Holidays and Merry Xmas!

 

[Jagger Christian]

Thanks for sharing!!!

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Hitting the 4K target

Hitting the 4K target

It's common to have a "hero" deliverable, like a 2K DCP and other secondary deliverables like a 1080P rec 709 version for home video.

Creation of the secondary deliverables can be pretty simple. Applying a LUT to convert the color space (P3 to rec 709) and adjust the gamma (2.6 to 2.2) plus a slight letterbox to go from 1.89:1 to 1.78:1 aspect ratio can be done via a template or node. To get the best results a colorist will go through and tweak scene by scene in a "trim pass". Beyond that there are levels of sharpening, re-framing to avoid letter boxing, extra care in compressing busy scenes, etc. These days re-formatted versions for mobile devices, H.264 encodes from the master rather than re-compresses from the MPEG-2 iteration, etc are becoming more common as revenue streams beyond theatrical and traditional home video releases make up a bigger part of the pie.

In the case of 4K DCPs, or .RED encodes for Odemax, we have a new set of parameters that must be honored to most faithfully exhibit the creators intent. In the case of Rust & Bone it might have made sense to include the digital equivalent of a diffusion filter on the 4K version. If you're thinking it might be easier to just not make a 4K DCP to begin with, that's true - but - I'd much rather be able to hold more detail in some scenes and smooth others to suit the story and support the photography than just knock it all down.

Perhaps more critically, I would rather exercise control at the deliverables creation stage than trust that I can consistently predict how the exhibition metrics will affect viewer perception, especially with the number of new platforms emerging these days.

Cheers - #19

 

[Nick Morrison]

Perhaps more critically, I would rather exercise control at the deliverables creation stage than trust that I can consistently predict how the exhibition metrics will affect viewer perception, especially with the number of new platforms emerging these days.

Cheers - #19

Blair, fascinating read. Thanks for sharing.

More specifically to your last point here, when you say "exercise control at the deliverables creation stage", do you mean as you're shooting? IE getting whatever look you desire IN-CAMERA. So its present in the 4K MASTER and all iterations after? So..ie...if the intent is to have a slightly softer look, then try and make sure the 4K master has that by SHOOTING "soft" with diffusion, soft lighting, etc?

In the particular case of RUST & BONE, I think the DP was so under pressure timewise, and the work-flow was so loose, that he seems to have intended a lot of the "look" to be manufactured in post. He clearly has a distaste for going for whatever look is baked in on set (ala his Alexa workflows).

Anyway. Great addition to the thread. Love your take on the post deliverables. You obviously know this world so well.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Mr. Softie

Mr. Softie

I am a 4K wonk and for 99% of projects I would shoot for a well defined 4K image with light diffusion where appropriate. You can always soften more in post, but you can't put acutance back - kind of like not over cooking a steak.

One part of this equation that I think many people miss is the impact of the OLPF (optical low pass filter) in front of the sensor. To avoid aliasing, color moire and other artifacts most Bayer CFAs have a least some roll off of high frequency detail in the optical path that is restored in processing. There is a lot of heavy algorithm math going on that only folks like the estimable Mr. Nattress fully grasp, but the important point is that "sharpness" is less "baked in" than one might imagine.

IAC, there are, as the saying goes, many paths to the kingdom. If you like shooting Super Baltars or putting Glimmer Glass in front of all but the widest shots to get the look you want that's your prerogative. All I'm saying is that shooting MPs clean at T4 does not mean you can't end up with a smooth and creamy image in a 4K DCP. Thanks to Graeme's aversion to aliasing the "native" sharpness of RED's imaging pipeline does not have a harsh character. In fact, when I want a super crispy look, I start by upping the sharpness in the decode.

Cheers - #19

 

[Nick Morrison]

I am a 4K wonk and for 99% of projects I would shoot for a well defined 4K image with light diffusion where appropriate. You can always soften more in post, but you can't put acutance back - kind of like not over cooking a steak.

One part of this equation that I think many people miss is the impact of the OLPF (optical low pass filter) in front of the sensor. To avoid aliasing, color moire and other artifacts most Bayer CFAs have a least some roll off of high frequency detail in the optical path that is restored in processing. There is a lot of heavy algorithm math going on that only folks like the estimable Mr. Nattress fully grasp, but the important point is that "sharpness" is less "baked in" than one might imagine.

IAC, there are, as the saying goes, many paths to the kingdom. If you like shooting Super Baltars or putting Glimmer Glass in front of all but the widest shots to get the look you want that's your prerogative. All I'm saying is that shooting MPs clean at T4 does not mean you can't end up with a smooth and creamy image in a 4K DCP. Thanks to Graeme's aversion to aliasing the "native" sharpness of RED's imaging pipeline does not have a harsh character. In fact, when I want a super crispy look, I start by upping the sharpness in the decode.

Cheers - #19

I guess by your workflow, smoothness can be added in post. But in my line of biz, generally doc work, it needs to be all done in camera. There's no budget for that kind of post-smoothening. But nice to know it's possible!!

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I guess by your workflow, smoothness can be added in post. But in my line of biz, generally doc work, it needs to be all done in camera. There's no budget for that kind of post-smoothening. But nice to know it's possible!!

Even for doc work (unless you're baking out to an external recorder from the monitor tap) you still go thorough RCX-P where you can adjust the sharpness on a slider prior to decode. NO extra budget required ;-)

Cheers - #19

 

[Bob Gundu]

I just got back from seeing this film... My God, please see this film. Looked amazing. And purely as a film, wow.... still speechless

FX are top notch.
http://www.deathfall.com/forums/content.php?8234-Mikros-Image-and-Rust-Bone

 

[Julio Quintana]

I just got back from seeing this film... My God, please see this film. Looked amazing. And purely as a film, wow.... still speechless

FX are top notch.
http://www.deathfall.com/forums/content.php?8234-Mikros-Image-and-Rust-Bone

Agreed. The raw, visceral cinematography is a wonderful break from the ultra slick Epic movies coming out recently (The Hobbit, Oz, 42, etc.)

Definitely a must see.