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 Getting Close...

Terry VerHaar said:
The real question is whether you "get it" when it comes to the overall issues of picture quality. If the ability to create shallow DOF is the only factor on which one is to judge a picture, then your argument wins hands down. But, for me, REDCODE RAW (at several different data rates; you choose), modularity (a clear growth path, less obsolescence) , HDR (and now HDRx™™™™™™), low light capability, a more than reasonable DOF flexibility, high/variable frame rates, 3K resolution, no line skipping or binning, flexibility with lenses; these all go a lot farther in convincing me.
Click to expand...

Terry, thanks for engaging with interesting information.
The DSLR revolution has bought us a glut of DOF styled media, but basically a lot of crap. For some reason we are now celebrating the collections of 'shots' with shallow DOF and calling them films? It's BS but good marketing by the accessory companies who'll promote this and call it filmmaking.

They'll repeat the mantra story is not that important.

For me the things you mention, RAW, HDRx™™, growth paths, skipping and binning etc mean nothing to me because they mean nothing too my client. I respect them and the people behind them and glad they are there. The only 'skipping' I engage in is to the bank to deposit a clients check.

I'm glad Jannard cares, I'm glad you care about all this tech but the reality is 95% of people won't be able to tell the difference between EPIC footage and 5D footage. They will say one is better than the other based on other factors, story, emotional content, audio etc.
 
Terry VerHaar said:
I wonder how many of the shallow-DOF fans have actually faced the "other side" of shooting like this. Sometimes, when you haven't the equipment or the crew to put enough light on the set and have to open up the aperture, you end up with DOF "difficulties." And pulling focus on a jib or steadicam is not always, shall we say, all that "do-able." There are compromises in everything we do in shooting cinema. We all choose among them based on our needs and circumstances.
Click to expand...
I suppose that many here don't understand that shallow DOF is great only when it's voluntary. Focus pulling at night out on the street with a fast lens (e.g., T1.4) can be unpleasant. Early in the era of digital origination, one of the oft-cited advantages (when no sensor was bigger than 2/3-inch) was deeper DOF. Go figure. That's why I don't understand the fascination with full-frame sensors -- it's like shooting everything in VistaVision. Try doing that on a Steadicam at night.
 
Ash Worth said:
I'm glad Jannard cares, I'm glad you care about all this tech but the reality is 95% of people won't be able to tell the difference between EPIC footage and 5D footage. They will say one is better than the other based on other factors, story, emotional content, audio etc.
Click to expand...

They will on a big screen, even if they aren't "aware" of it. Guess it depends on what your project is and who your clients are, go figure.

It would seem a bit of overkill to use a Scarlet for a youtube video- then again there's that whole 4k youtube thing...
 
Lawrence Bansbach said:
Focus pulling at night out on the street with a fast lens (e.g., T1.4) can be unpleasant.
Click to expand...

The difference being... with an s35 camera, you can stop down, you have the choice. I've got no issue with 2/3", but there is no point arguing that it is an advantage with regard to focus pulling.

Shooting at night with 2/3" wide open can be unpleasant too... softer image and more noise.
 
Ash Worth said:
Terry, thanks for engaging with interesting information.
The DSLR revolution has bought us a glut of DOF styled media, but basically a lot of crap. For some reason we are now celebrating the collections of 'shots' with shallow DOF and calling them films? It's BS but good marketing by the accessory companies who'll promote this and call it filmmaking.

They'll repeat the mantra story is not that important.

For me the things you mention, RAW, HDRx™™™™™™™™, growth paths, skipping and binning etc mean nothing to me because they mean nothing too my client. I respect them and the people behind them and glad they are there. The only 'skipping' I engage in is to the bank to deposit a clients check.

I'm glad Jannard cares, I'm glad you care about all this tech but the reality is 95% of people won't be able to tell the difference between EPIC footage and 5D footage. They will say one is better than the other based on other factors, story, emotional content, audio etc.
Click to expand...

You are right. Many clients and those 95% of "people" could care less about technical issues. But I guess I naively thought they hired us because we DO know and care something about it. And because we are not ignorant in the ways that our clients might be, we can help them achieve even better results; especially "around the edges" where great is separated from just plain old "good."

I have been hanging around this forum for a couple years now and I have yet to see someone argue that "story, emotional impact..." aren't the most important aspects of good communication and, hence, good film or video. I think it is fair to say, we all agree on that. (If not, I am sure someone will be quick to correct me!) But I imagine that we are here on a forum about cameras and cinema technology, etc., to discuss those aspects of the craft that come after good story. (Again, if that is not what others think, Ill be swiftly corrected.) So, yes, clients and filmgoers alike all want good story and emotional impact. But I also think they'd like high production values and the high quality look that talented craftspeople are capable of creating with professional tools. :cheers2:
 
The more you stop down though the more light you need as well.

Honestly different camera's for different uses, If you don't like it don't comment on another camera's board, and if you do don't be an ass or do be an ass if that's who you are.

There are many factors that come into play here, and to say 2/3" is dead kill the line, it won't be what it was in 08, before anyone has seen it let alone compared it to any other cam is just plain foolish.

I find it seems people believe that if they can get red to scrap the 2/3" the S35 will be out sooner, though I doubt that, who knows maybe just the idea of it bothers them so much they have to comment that it should go away any opportunity they get the chance to, because they are really just trying to save Jim from loosing money because that is what they care about..... really why care so much, why do I care so much for them to keep it, because I'm going to buy it, and it would seem an even worse decision to scrap them now.

Call me fanboy, or call me a rational person who likes their product and is tired of people acting like irrational children when interacting with each other over the internet. (not talking to anyone or any board in particular they are everywhere)

Have a good one and please for the sake of us all, play nice.
 
Jim Retar said:
The difference being... with an s35 camera, you can stop down, you have the choice. I've got no issue with 2/3", but there is no point arguing that it is an advantage with regard to focus pulling.

Shooting at night with 2/3" wide open can be unpleasant too... softer image and more noise.
Click to expand...

I think we have already, thanks to JDavis, looked at the issue of stopping down. :laugh:

But Lawrence did specifically note the issue of being on the street at night. I think, maybe, he was implying a certain lack of light which might impact how far you can stop down before your picture starts to disappear. There are many ways to solve problems. They aren't always, depending on your own circumstances and constraints, of equal consideration.
 
Ash Worth said:
Please stop bothering then. It's not really helpful to keep reading your unquestionable praise for RED, we get it, RED is doing some amazing things. The value of a community is the discussion that arises from various points of view. At least wait to sing the praises until you actually have the camera.

You really don't get the DOF conversation do you? Just because you have it doesn't mean you use it. The value is having it so you can use it if the project requires it. A camera that gives you all these options is a valued one, perhaps it will be the Scarlett. If you are serious about shooting then I would take some time to develop your craft instead of posting these predictable posts about RED. You're not adding anything to the conversation.

It's unlikely that anyone here will have a Scarlett by this time next year.
Click to expand...

Good job Ash! Getting pretty boring read posts like Terry's, so someone had to say it...
 
J Davis said:
u shoot f4, f5.6 and storyboard so you minimize when you have to pull focus
Click to expand...

You don't storyboard documentaries, especially the run and gun type.
For general solo shooter doc production I still prefer the 16mm/2/3" sized formats over S35. Hard to storyboard an eagle diving for a fish.
 
Stephen Matthews said:
The more you stop down though the more light you need as well.
Click to expand...

but the s35 gathers far more light than the 2/3" camera, you can stop down to , say, f5.6 and get the same, if not better, light than the 2/3" at f2.8...

If you are fully open on 2/3" and it is still too dark, you have no option other than to light your scene more.

Anyway, I like both formats.. not here to argue, just playing devil's advocate.
 
David Rasberry said:
You don't storyboard documentaries, especially the run and gun type.
For general solo shooter doc production I still prefer the 16mm/2/3" sized formats over S35. Hard to storyboard an eagle diving for a fish.
Click to expand...

You are taking my words out of context.
They were in reference to Terry shooting an indie feature with non cine lenses
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top