Thoughts after seeing CHE

[BradWright]

While I second the use of scopes, I have to mention there is no low end clipping. Your image just get's buried in noise eventually. Even the question when it is buried – i.e. unusable – is a matter of taste to some degree.

Regards,

Uli

If you have a range of 12 bits from the sensor and 18 bits of lights in a scene, 6 bits will not get recorded. The iris, shutter, etc. allow you to select which part of the 18 bits to record. Protecting highlights will clip shaddows. Protecting shaddows will clip highlights. Because the sensor records light linearly, highs and lows do get clipped off at the point they fall outside the 12 bit range.

 

[Roberto B]

nintendo? :tongue:
I suppose you mean Nuendo... :wink:

ehehehehe..

 

[Tom Lowe]

I'm getting the impression that shooting with just sunlight is discouraged and that reflectors and/or lighting will be required during all daylight shooting?

Well I think that yes, you would want to use silks, reflectors, etc - anything to tame the natural light.

"That's why I only shoot during magic hours and at night with digital. You will never, ever catch me shooting during the middle the day if there is any way I can avoid it. Digital looks like crap and blows out too easily."

I thought the ND filters would take care of this problem? You seem to reject digital altogether during the day (50% of the time?) The camera must be better than THAT!?

Don't listen to me! I reject daylight shooting out of personal, aesthetic reasons, but there are plenty of shots you can get during the day. Shots in a forest can be very nice if the light is dappled gently, and like I said earlier, if you sort of aim down rather than up.

Would the reflections in the water be beyond the abilities of the camera? That's where my decision is going to come down to. I need extensive lakes, and some light forest at the shore. It's not jungle, and I don't mind using reflectors and possibly lighting to get it right. I just want to know that the camera is up to the job of simply filming daylight hours at a lake.........?

Just use pola filters and shoot carefully. Probably with RED you will want to budget a bit more time, so you can be picky about the light you are using? I would not be afraid to use Red, I would just try to work hard to expose your shots properly and to take advantage of the best light you can get.

 

[Matt Uhry]

I was at the same screening as Matt and can second everything he has written.

....It's a bit of a shame that the first high-profile movie entirely shot on Red does not always show the camera in its best light.

This is my point. Whether it was SS's artistic genius, early cameras, or a misunderstanding of how to expose digital - it does not matter to me or this discussion.

What worries me is the impending tidal wave dynamic range FUD Red Users are going to suffer through when "Guerilla" comes out.

Thanks very much for those that congratulated me on my work on "Los Bastardos". I'm now safely back in LA after a run in with the notorious Jose Cuervo at the Moriela Film Festival party last night.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

 

[I Bloom]

This is my point. Whether it was SS's artistic genius, early cameras, or a misunderstanding of how to expose digital - it does not matter to me or this discussion.

What worries me is the impending tidal wave dynamic range FUD Red Users are going to suffer through when "Guerilla" comes out.

Thanks very much for those that congratulated me on my work on "Los Bastardos". I'm now safely back in LA after a run in with the notorious Jose Cuervo at the Moriela Film Festival party last night.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

Hey Matt,

Where can I see your movie stateside? East coast?

Cheers,

Ian Bloom

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

If you have a range of 12 bits from the sensor and 18 bits of lights in a scene, 6 bits will not get recorded. The iris, shutter, etc. allow you to select which part of the 18 bits to record. Protecting highlights will clip shaddows. Protecting shaddows will clip highlights. Because the sensor records light linearly, highs and lows do get clipped off at the point they fall outside the 12 bit range.

Sort of true. After it's gone through an ADC it's clipped. Before it hits the ADC there is theoretically more dynamic range. The determination that a sensor is "12 bit" is somewhat a black art. The first bit determination is always the hardest. While a 48th of a second sampling might not create a statistical variation from a 48th of a second one stop darker if you were to roll for a full second you might find the average is slightly different. Then again you might have a difficult time deciding if that deviation of average was chance or actual minute sensitivity difference.

The parent post seemed to be making this observation that the noisefloor isn't a flat line.

 

[Jason Sinclair]

"Time is a great storyteller" -Swedish proverb

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

The funniest thing is that no any critic text of CHE (positive or negative)

wrote something about a bad look, clipped highlights or "video-ish" picture in the movie.

Also I've got impression that some the REDuser reviewers from Cannes

even expressed that they could feel bigger or better cinematographers then SS .

Somebody who likes so much J.M.W Turner's paintings for sure doesn't like so much Pablo Picasso's paintings

because Pablo was to much "clipping" colors and even destroying human faces, animal or natural look .

And we will see tonight what SS will get in Cannes.

In an interview with French daily Le Monde,

Penn (President of the jury Sean PENN, Director, Actor) said Cannes should do

"the complete opposite to the Oscars",

which reward the

"consummate art of manipulation and good marketing".

LINK>>>

Also hope that some members of RED Team are there.

 

[josh]

And we will see tonight what SS will get in Cannes.

well, after the... let's say numerous "mixed reviews"-- just to be kind -- that Che received, certainly not the Palme d'or, like you were so sure of.

In an interview with French daily Le Monde,

Penn (President of the jury Sean PENN, Director, Actor) said Cannes should do

"the complete opposite to the Oscars",

which reward the

"consummate art of manipulation and good marketing".

I giggle at the hypocrisy of Sean Penn which embraced in such full force the art of manipulation and good marketing last year, when he plunged into the Oscar race for In To the Wild.

 

[Jan Reiff]

award for CHE in cannes

award for CHE in cannes

de toro has won in cannes.

congrats for the team, the first red movie with a big award.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

well, after the... let's say numerous "mixed reviews"-- just to be kind -- that Che received, certainly not the Palme d'or, like you were so sure of.





I giggle at the hypocrisy of Sean Penn which embraced in such full force the art of manipulation and good marketing last year, when he plunged into the Oscar race for In To the Wild.

I let more deep analysis about all in Cannes after getting more info through time.

 

[josh]

Good for Del Toro. (seems a slap to SS though)

I'd be curious to see this movie. Although I don't think I will have a chance, since every studio passed on it. No US distribution yet. Wild Bunch was really surprised, they were expecting to sell it immediately.

On second thought, I don't want to watch it. I'll rather wait for The Informant to see a RED movie well shot.

I heard people were dozing at the screening and some left after the first one.

 

[Dale Launer]

It's a nice idea, but no producer in America, including Steven Soderbergh, knows how to break even, much less make money, on 7 figure features.

Presales. Some movies are in the black before shooting. I belive Steven's movie FULL FRONTAL was in profits before it was released.

For starters, a "great screenplay" is the absolute worst place to begin, because if you've found a script that the funders, the producers and everyone in the production office loves, then it's a movie that the public has already seen dozens of times before. Best run for cover.

A "great screenplay" is the absolute worse place to begin? You mean you should start with a bad screenplay?

Wow. What lengths some people go to be provocative.

 

[Jason Sinclair]

(best read with the voice of French artsy farty film critic)
Perhaps Soderbergh was expressing the parallels between, the struggle against Cuban imperialism by Che Guevara, and his own struggles against Hollywood studio imperialism. By using methods that go against well tested studio formulas that have evolved into predictable and plastic plot lines and imaging structures, Soderburgh slaps convention in the face.



he he he... critics and the crap that comes form their mouths but i must admit it was fun getting into character.

 

[jpp]

A "great screenplay" is the absolute worse place to begin? You mean you should start with a bad screenplay?

Wow. What lengths some people go to be provocative.

I was trying to make the case that "great screenplay" is a meaningless term in this business. "Great" according to whom? The writer? The producers? The financiers? The star? The bond company? Even assuming all these people have the skills to assess screenplays in the light of their own particular interests (which is clearly not the case, given the failure rate), can we really expect them to agree on what a great screenplay is, when those interests and capabilities are so different?

Or try it another way. Is a "great screenplay" a script with firm roots in older narrative traditions, with intelligent material, skillful plotting, good dialog and strong visual realization - the sort of thing a writer would enjoy reading? Or is it material which would be ridiculous in a novel or on stage, and which is executed without much in the way of traditional craftsmanship, but which might have strong mass-market appeal? Or is a "great screenplay" whatever made money last year?

We could argue these questions forever, but that's my point. Script assessment, in an absolute sense, appears to have little or nothing to do with why films get made, and enthusiasm for a script among producers and financiers is a better indicator of the presence of Hollywood formula than quality.

It's a little embarrassing recommending my own posts, but if you go back and read the thread, I don't think the claim was all that preposterous. And since you're a writer, I would guess you've experienced more than a little frustration with suits and stars and directors who think they know what a great screenplay is and how to write one, but that you don't(?)

 

[Joel Kaye]

We could argue these questions forever

True enough. But for the record, American Beauty was a script that everyone loved, Spielberg approved with no changes (and the original version has Spacey's character actually sleeping with the girl). A lot of directors wanted that one and it ended up being great. A lot of scripts seem to rise above the crowd.

But yes, interpreting a script is very subjective. Studios generally pass on movies that are difficult to market to a wide audience for this exact reason. At least if the movie has a hook and a target it'll make money even if the execution isn't perfect.

One of the promises of RED is we can go make our own scripts on a lower budget, market it alternatively and see if we can teach them a thing or two. Or find out they are smarter than we thought.

Che sounds difficult to market in America to me. Is it really worth throwing 20 million in P&A behind in addition to the asking price? Maybe. Maybe not. Internationally it should be fine and has already sold in many markets. But this is a pretty fine example of the stranglehold a very few companies have on American theatrical distribution.

 

[jpp]

But for the record, American Beauty was a script that everyone loved, Spielberg approved with no changes (and the original version has Spacey's character actually sleeping with the girl). A lot of directors wanted that one and it ended up being great. A lot of scripts seem to rise above the crowd.

We've already hit a wall! Nobody asked me, or is likely to, but not "everyone" thinks American Beauty was a great screenplay. It may be the Hollywood version of a high-brow movie, or what Hollywood considers an art film, but any script that has a middle-aged man finding fulfillment in a burger joint (working at minimum wage?) could only come out of a poolside culture. And that's hardly the only lounge chair crime of the material. Don't get me started.... By the way, the plastic bag was stolen from either Jem Cohen or Nathaniel Dorsky.

Studios generally pass on movies that are difficult to market to a wide audience for this exact reason.

Could we amend that to read "movies that they think are difficult to market"? The studios are wrong all the time.

One of the promises of RED is we can go make our own scripts on a lower budget, market it alternatively and see if we can teach them a thing or two. .

I've never seen the logic of this claim, but no sense in restarting this debate, for the nth time. This isn't to say that what Red is doing isn't grand, because it is (grand).

 

[Jason Sinclair]

beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[James T Mather]

beauty is in the eye of the beer-holder

 

[Jason Sinclair]

Those goggles will make a bad script look good. What about the cocaine versions?