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 :)

SCARLET Fixed blurry focus

Bastien Tribalat

Bastien Tribalat

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
824
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
Cannes area, France
Website
linktr.ee
Hi there,
I'm new on this site even if I'm watching RED.com since the very beginning of the adventure.
Since RED announced that SCARLET Fixed will came out, I'm a bit of excited (like a geek would have been in 1983 when Return Of The Jedi came out... Ok I would have been too !) BUT there's someting I'd like to know...

I'm a cinema student (in France) and even if next year I'll be specialized in film editing (Final Cut Pro is my soft of choice even if I can work on Avid too) I'll continue to make amateur movies (a.k.a making movies with no budget with my close friends - who are not cinema students at all !) plus I hope I will be able to upgrade myself in directing a movie. Anyway that's not really the subject here.
When I'm directing, something I'm looking to is "blurry out of focus areas". Being french dosen't help as my english is not perfect and as I don't really know how to explain this. I really love when what is out of focus is very blurry. I think we can find an exemple on some footage of the Canon 7D (as everyone plays with the focus reing on it) like this one : http://vimeo.com/6759220

So, my question is : with a SCARLET Fixed, will I be able to have that kind of effects (without going to an extreme close up !) and, eventually, how would be the DOF quality compared to the Canon 7D ? (I know that 2/3 sensors are very close to S16mm film but I can't figure it out)

PS : I won't buy a 7D anyway for shooting video (or maybe just to use it until the SCARLET is out:smile5:) since compression is a matter and since REDCODE RAW is just an amazing format I love to work with !

Thanks a lot to anyone who can answer me and excuse my bad english.
Take care.
 
Thanks for the translation and thanks for the link:thumbup:
 
Your English is actually extraordinary -- you write better than many Americans.

The term for the blur you're describing is "bokeh" -- bokeh is the blur you see in "shallow focus" images. "Deep focus" is when everything in the picture is sharp.

Although the sensor is an issue -- you're getting down to lens characteristics. Every lens model/make is different, creates different images, and has strengths and weaknesses in different conditions. One of the most important parts of cinematography is knowing when to use which lens -- this is true with both digital and film, still and motion.

So -- if your question is -- will the fixed 8x lens on the Scarlet perfectly do everything you need? Shallow focus, deep focus, wide angle, macro, telephoto? Chances are -- no. If it does -- wow -- then it will truly be "revolutionary."

The reason you're seeing all these beautiful shallow focus images coming from the video DSLR cameras is precisely because of the vast lens options. Canon EOS, for example, has over two hundred active choices spanning full frame to APS-C from different manufacturers covering almost every possible use. If you were to start using different lenses on a Panasonic HVX with a quality adapter -- you'd quickly discover the HVX becomes a different camera with each lens.

And although there's always some guy out there who jumps up and exclaims -- "They used the 7D for a TV show!" -- the truth is that the current video DSLR cameras aren't ideal for broadcast or digital cinema for a range of reasons. This may change in the next decade, or not.

So, for the 2/3" inch Scarlet, the serious question is will those five "mini PL" primes from Red, when used on the interchangeable 2/3" model -- create enough options and cover enough needs to produce professionally distributable results? Currently, only the people at Red know that answer. If it works -- it's the bargain of a lifetime -- because US $5000 for five usable professional lenses is a dream.

SO -- the answer to your question is -- probably no -- and no fixed 8x zoom lens is going to create the bokeh you see from top-of-the-line Canon prime lenses.

No one would be happier than I if I'm wrong -- but I'm probably not wrong.

Will the fixed 8x zoom lens be more versatile than the fixed lens on an HVX? We're all hoping so!

Your other option is to wait for the S35 Scarlet that I'm told, with the proper mount, can mount Nikon, Canon, or standard cinema (PL mount) lenses. This is more expensive, and will be larger than the 2/3" Scarlet.

I hope that answer helps a bit. Bon chance, mon ami! That's all the French I know -- sorry if I got it wrong.
 
The 2/3" fixed whenever is release is gonna be just fine. As all the 2/3" cameras out there are now. It will give you as much shallow DOF as you should need. Ultra shallow DOF is horrible. The fixed will give you plenty. Now the question is when in the next ten years will it be really ready to ship.
 
Getting shallow depth of field also has to do with how closed or open the lens aperture is. The more open it is the more light allowed onto the sensor which will give you a deeper focus. The more closed the aperture is the less light hitting the sensor and a more shallow depth of focus. So 2/3 or S35, the mechanics are still the same. You can still achieve the look you want if you set up your shots properly.
 
Getting shallow depth of field also has to do with how closed or open the lens aperture is. The more open it is the more light allowed onto the sensor which will give you a deeper focus. The more closed the aperture is the less light hitting the sensor and a more shallow depth of focus.
Click to expand...

It is actually the other way around. The more open the lens is the shallower the DOF. The more closed the lens is the deeper the focused area becomes.
 
Andrew G said:
Your English is actually extraordinary -- you write better than many Americans.

The term for the blur you're describing is "bokeh" -- bokeh is the blur you see in "shallow focus" images. "Deep focus" is when everything in the picture is sharp.
Click to expand...

Not to crap on your post, Andrew, just wanted to point out that bokeh is used to describe the quality, or characteristics, of the out of focus image. Bokeh is derived from Japanese to mean blur, but is used to describe the blur rather than to be synonymous with the word. Just a little nitpick.:beatdeadhorse5:
 
Thanks to everyone !

Since I want the SCARLET for my personnal use, I think I will take the package which will be worth the price.

One of my teachers said that using certain filters from Tiffen can help having a "cinematic" DOF... Is that true ?

Anyway I can't wait the SCARLET to be out, first of all because I'm a HUGE supporter of RED (I went out at a screening of District 9 just to see how the RED ONE did its job) and because I'll try to make my school buy some to teach the future student how to use it because I think it's the future for low budget and student films.

(and even if film is always great, I wan't bear anymore using Arri's SRII S16mm camera that becomes too old and have so many problems !)

Andrew : actually it is spelled "bonNE chance" BUT it's a very good start^^
 
Hi there.
Even if my initial question has been answered, I post a little picture I took with my poor Nikon D40X with a Nikkor 18-200mm AFS lens to illustrate the kind of picture I hope I'll be able to get from a fixed SCARLET.
http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs49/f/2009/224/1/e/Little_creature____by_Bast6.jpg
Shutter Speed: 1/1000 second
Aperture: F/5.6
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 400
​
 
I agree I'm really aiming at similar images. If the fixed is capable of reaching my needs I'm all for it. Although sadly I believe that for the price it's not likely. I mean hey RED is undoubtedly doing some phenomenal work regarding technological advancement but I'm not sure we can get our cake and eat it too.

I believe we'd need to spend some extra coin on the interchangeable, which will also allow for the ability, due to the increased speed of the lenses, to take in more light, therefore increasing our overall Shallow DOF, and even then due to the size of the sensor, and coupled with the operators overall target look , sadly that still may not be enough.

In comes the S35, which, with its ability not only to accept a WIDE array of lens selection, it also has the pocket Ace's: A much larger sensor, that in turn will greatly increase the DOF.

Anyway, we won't know which camera can be used for what shots until we have our first look at the images it produces. So until then my fellow film aficionados, I reserve my judgment on which camera best fits my needs. All the while stock piling my resources so that I'm prepared, no matter which direction the river turns, to be able to grab the PERFECT combination for my needs.

I suggest we all do the same:smash:

Bastien Tribalat said:
Hi there.
Even if my initial question has been answered, I post a little picture I took with my poor Nikon D40X with a Nikkor 18-200mm AFS lens to illustrate the kind of picture I hope I'll be able to get from a fixed SCARLET.
http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs49/f/2009/224/1/e/Little_creature____by_Bast6.jpg
Shutter Speed: 1/1000 second
Aperture: F/5.6
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 400
​
Click to expand...
 
http://vimeo.com/5408783
This is the trailer for a student-film of some friends of us, that we produced. We used the Si2k or it which also has a 2/3" sensor.
Ok, we used Zeiss HS Lenses, which are pretty fast, but perhaps it gives you an impression what can be done with a 2/3" camera.
The Si2k has a PL-Mount. The Zeiss HS lenses were made for 16mm so they are croped a bit cause of the 2/3. The T-Stop is 1.2 . Most of Slumdog Millionaire was shot on a Si2k ( exactly on the camera we used ;) ) and in my opinion the movie looks realy good!

P.s.: It is a first trailer that was done during post-production, so don't expect to much.
 
Last edited:
To quote an expert:
David Mullen ASC said:
Practically speaking, at the same f-stop compared to S35, 2/3" is the equivalent depth of field of stopping down by 2.5 stops -- in other words, if you shoot at f/2.0 on a 2/3" camera, it's the same depth of field as shooting at a f/4.0-f/5.6 split in S35, assuming you match field of view and distance.

Super-16/16mm has the same issue -- doesn't something shot in 16mm look "filmic"? How about a 35mm movie with a deep-focus look, like "Citizen Kane"?

Plenty of 35mm photography is shot in the middle f-stop range, especially outdoors.

It's really only in night photography where the extra depth of field of 2/3" sensors is a bit uncharacteristic of 35mm night photography, which tends to be super shallow-focus.

Now if you like the look of 35mm shot at an f/2.8-f/4 split, it's a bit harder to do that on a 2/3" camera since you'd need an f/1.4 lens -- not impossible for a single-sensor camera that can use cine lenses, but the fastest 3-CCD HD lenses made tend to be f/1.6 (like a Zeiss Digi-Prime), which is probably close enough.

Fincher's "Zodiak" and the upcoming "Benjamin Button" were shot on the Viper, which has 2/3" sensors -- they seem fairly "filmic" to me...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top