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 :)

Whats the use of 4k in a budget camera?

I fear we are all pixel counting again rather than looking at how good the pictures are.
 
Dave, it's easy to count pixels so people do it. What is important is what you do with those pixels. More pixels can lead to greater resolution for sure, but they also lead to other benefits that I outline above that lead to a better image on any size or resolution display. That's the bit people often forget.

Graeme
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Keying and tracking is easier in 4k with less sub-pixel stuff going on.
Click to expand...

Yup. I didn't mention tracking earlier but I did mention keying, and obviously quicker and easier VFX is an advantage on a low budget production as well as a high budget one.

Graeme
 
Dave Blackham said:
I fear we are all pixel counting again rather than looking at how good the pictures are.
Click to expand...


We quantify alot of things... sensor size, pixels, resolution, dynamic range, colorimetry, size, weight, price and so on.
Resolution is one piece of a complex puzzle but an important piece in balance with everything else.
 
Interesting that it's the high resolution (used correctly) of the RED sensors that leads to the excellent low-aliasing performance of our cameras, but it's the high resolution of the 5D2 sensor that leads to it's poor aliasing performance. Details count.

Graeme
 
Eric Rodemann said:
Don't get me wrong. I would like to shoot a feature on a Scarlet.

But El Mariachi was shot on 16mm film. It would not be any better if shot in 4k IMO. I just watched it again a few days ago.

I'd shoot 16mm in a minute, but the budget for film, camera rental, developing and transfer adds up quick, plus you can't see what you shot till it comes back from the lab.

With a Scarlet you can shoot a bunch of El Mariachis.
Click to expand...

And it looked like it was shot on 16mm too. It is something to say for sure that Robert Rodriguez did the movie for such a low budget, and cinematic image quality didn't matter much to the story, but lets be honest, 16mm is not 4K footage. I have owned several 16mm film cameras and film isn't cheap either, and I can assure you a used Aaton a minima b roll cam is more than a RED Scarlet X and then you have to buy and process film. The quality is nothing compared to 4k so there is no real argument here.

4K beats lesser quality but I think your point is a great movie is a great movie regardless of the camera it is shot on. My point is a great movie can be even better if the right cinematic approach is taken and applied. Red Scarlet & Epic offer the best options for image quality, but of course it will not make you a great filmmaker, help your dialogue, etc. That's on you. These are tools to work with. I know with my education and experience in lighting and camera operation, metering, etc I would much rather work with new 4K image quality over 16mm film.
 
Most of my shots involve painting, and I have a very difficult time with wierd artifacts when shooting through normal DSLR's. In the following shot, it's a linen canvas, and all the curvy lines do not exist. I actually have not been able to film myself gesso'ing linen due to the wierd compression/etc artifacts. Example shot from my Canon 5d (which i still btw love):
test1080p.jpg
 
M Most said:
The reasons for that have much less to do with the camera choice than they do with other issues and creative choices. I'll leave it at that.
Click to expand...

So basiclly this season has taken a nose dive on both creative choices and story telling? :-) I really enjoy the show, but this season has been bad on so many levels.
 
Stacey Spears said:
So basiclly this season has taken a nose dive on both creative choices and story telling? :-) I really enjoy the show, but this season has been bad on so many levels.
Click to expand...

Your opinion, one you are, of course, entitled to. However, I can assure you that they do not share that opinion.
 
Marcos Montenegro said:
Eric:

Good point, we still watch old movies, right? The content is what matters the most. However, can you imagine if the original Star Wars movie was shot on a 4K format? It would have prolonged the future releases without spending the millions to digitally re-master them like they did, and it would have looked much better at 4K.

Marcos
Click to expand...

Wait.

I'm pretty sure Star Wars was shot on 35mm...so it was shot at 4K.
 
The problem is that when doing a film production it's often better to rent equipment. In that way you always get a backup if the camera doesn't work, the lenses have wrong measurements etc.
If you have your own equipment, you are stuck with what you have and what will eat away your budget more then having a broken camera with no replacement on a set where everyone's paychecks is eating your movie away? No, it's better to rent and what is better to rent then an Epic? Why do I want to rent a Scarlet when the rest of the equipment needs to be as good as with the Epic (lenses etc).

I don't see where the market really is. How many will truly work with this camera day after day for client-work? How many clients would like to pay money for someone with this camera, but not a full featured camera team, full featured camera equipment and don't even talk about the people and equipment of lightning?

Epic can be used on low budget movies as well, by rental houses, just as big productions use the same rental deal for their larger productions.
As I see it, the ones who buy the camera do it to either show off a little, they want a really good home video camera or for a professional market, they need to go away, alone or in a minor team for some nature movie, documentary etc. But how many really care about this type of quality in a documentary? Among all filmmakers, documentary filmmakers tend to be the ones most interested in the content then the imagery.

So for whom is this camera for? I thought about buying it, but $15 000 for a working camera is A LOT of money, I could pay off a large portion of my mortgage with it, not to speak of all the other equipment I would need, like good lenses, lightning etc. I would probably have to take some years to gather my equipment into a full package, but what happens then.... a new camera will certainly arrive.

...and what will I do with it? It's not like I have a film project right now that can only happen if I buy a Scarlet myself. If I arrive to the position where I'm about to start up that production I will certainly have the money to rent an Epic and a whole truck with light equipment. I already spent a lot of money into post production equipment and even there the clients are few, the post production houses is where they go to and there aren't many who look for budget post production if it isn't about they thinking I'm good at what I'm doing.

I'm trying to look at my own economy, justifying why I should buy this camera, those who don't even need to justify why, probably already own an Epic. I can see why investing in post production, both in knowledge and equipment might be a good idea. You work on it for long periods of time, it will cost a lot if you rent that kind of equipment. I will probably spend money on the Red Projector rather then a Scarlet. If i'm doing a project, let's say a short film for three days, that's $4417 for the camera equipment, including an Epic and all the best PL lenses around. But viewing and watching those 4K images will not happen if you do not have the post production capabilities for it. And you are gonna watch stuff more then you shoot.

So I'm trying to get my head around whom this camera is for. I work with a lot of high quality productions in commercial and TV and some times feature films. Even these projects doesn't pay well, will a projects that need someone to own their own camera be any type of client that have any type of money to pay at all? Will that not backfire on you who own the camera?

...or is this camera a really expensive toy for professionals? One you take out and film some cool stuff with and have fun? Or learn for that matter?

To compare it with how it was before, the notion of a 3K full featured camera for a 5K price would have really made a mess among other camera companies. That would have been a camera you can actually afford and not having to justify it. It could be unused for days and then taken out for a short project. It wouldn't demand taking a big part of your mortgage into buying camera equipment.

And what would your husband or wife say to you when you show your expensive camera... so, what will you do with it? Was it worth it? Really?
Can you really answer that question when considering all around you, home and work, your whole life and not just your interest in filmmaking?
Living is expensive, if you didn't inherit a large sum of money, I cannot see who actually could justify buying this over let's say a new electric car.

Professionals use Epic, even in low budget scenarios, they rent, they rent everything. Which professionals will use Scarlet? I wonder, if I'm not one of them, I who really match what this camera is about (sometimes lone wolf production, post production at home, "retired" still photographer, independent filmmaker etc.) who are they? And what type of work has ever really screamed for this $15 000 camera (excluding lenses).

Try to justify it with reason and not just the joy over a very good (probably superior) low priced digital cinema camera. There's a difference between liking equipment and justifying why you should pay $15 000 for it.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
The problem is that when doing a film production it's often better to rent equipment. In that way you always get a backup if the camera doesn't work, the lenses have wrong measurements etc.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That's why freelance DPs have good relationships with rental houses, even if they own their own kit. If my Scarlet fails, a replacement will be on its way to set within half an hour from one of three vendors. Also, thank you for reminding me to collimate my lenses!

Christoffer Glans said:
Why do I want to rent a Scarlet when the rest of the equipment needs to be as good as with the Epic (lenses etc). I don't see where the market really is. How many will truly work with this camera day after day for client-work? How many clients would like to pay money for someone with this camera, but not a full featured camera team, full featured camera equipment and don't even talk about the people and equipment of lightning?
Click to expand...

You'd want to rent a Scarlet over an Epic because you'd save half as much $ and you won't be using the Epic's low compression ratios anyway. Excluding artists and passionate filmmakers, the "market" is in branded content, industrial and 5-6 figure commercial production. As you pointed out, high-end narrative and commercial is Epic/Alexa territory. Owning the Scarlet is a dealbreaker for music videos, short films and commercials where my ability to bring Zeiss glass and 4K RAW to the table immediately gets us talking about concept and pre-production--5 minutes into the initial interview. And I haven't even taken delivery yet. It's sad that gear commands a premium over talent but in the lower end of the market, you have to get started somewhere.

This means that in fact, the Scarlet allows me to bring on my incredible AC and trusty gaffer, an electric and a grip, an AD, etc. I get to hire my friends because clients are getting a good deal on a camera/lens/lighting package that I worked my ass off as a lighting tech and AC to buy. I'm 22, less than a year out of school, started working at a rental house three years ago and said yes to every job that came along. Now all's left to do is name the new LLC.

Christoffer Glans said:
I would probably have to take some years to gather my equipment into a full package, but what happens then.... a new camera will certainly arrive.
Click to expand...

So don't buy it... rent for $500/weekend or less, throw an old Nikkor w/ adpater on the Canon mount and shoot your passion project the way everyone has for years, on the weekend! If you're interested in directing and post-production I'm not sure it makes sense to buy any digital cinema camera, unless of course you know it will further your business. You seem less than sure, so don't buy, rent?

Christoffer Glans said:
But viewing and watching those 4K images will not happen if you do not have the post production capabilities for it. And you are gonna watch stuff more then you shoot.
Click to expand...

Me I spend much more time shooting then watching. When the client or crew wants to watch dailies I think damn I just watched dailies all day through the viewfinder. It's always surreal seeing projects I forgot about edited into completely new beasts. Your comment just made me aware of the fact that I need to spend more time reviewing what I shoot, noticing the mistakes and appreciating the good moments.

Christoffer Glans said:
There's a difference between liking equipment and justifying why you should pay $15 000 for it.
Click to expand...

Agreed again. Which is why I spend every day setting up meetings, filling up the calendar, running a textedit file planning out how to make this little camera pay for itself.
 
The specs for intels next chip Ivy Bridge support 4k resolution even on the shitty integrated GPU models...hence I think 4k monitors are around the corner, thus needing 4k content creation (or higher then 4k content creation to compensate for lossyness in post work flow etc)... So if anything cheap 4k will become relevant very shortly, the masses will crave it. I admit currently its more for cinema then mass consumerism, but that is only because we are lacking 4k distribution, tvs, and computer monitors. Soon it'll be the minimum standard, just like HD is now. Everyone will want it when it becomes marketed for consumer home consumption, and not just cinema consumption. If I had to put my money on it I would say affordable 4k home monitors are a lot closer to dropping then many of us realize. The companies need to constantly come up with ways to sell us new screens, and the technology is finally here to allow it...so I would say 4k is closer then ever


Valery Latyshev said:
Hey guys,

I've been checking out these forums ever since i heard about scarlet project. I used to be a photog and now i find myself doing more and more video. I currently use Nikons D3s and D7k. Don't be too hard on me, its an honest question :-)

I don't see any use in 4k resolution in a (relatively speaking) budget video camera. Let me elaborate.

1. "Its great now" 99.999999% of final viewing is happening in 1080 or less afaik. Where do you need higher then 2k delivery format? In the very latest digital cinemas or imax (correct me if i missed any). All of these are high budget productions. It does not matter if the camera is 10k or 50k. Nobody is going to use scarlet instead of epic on a 50M (or 200M) budget. MAYBE as a b cam, but hostly, how many digital higher-then-2k productions do you know of??

2. "I like to be future-proof" This totally doesn't apply to big budgets, so we are talking small productions, i.e. hobby, low-bud films, music videos etc. For how many years ahead do we want to be "future-proof"? And how much money are we willing to spend on that? And how much money our clients wish to add to our paycheck for that? Its often a dead draw to try to be future-proof with any semiconductor-based technology. The only way to future-proof your work is to create a masterpiece. 2k is just fine for that. And will be for some more years to come. And in 5 years scarlet will be an old and obsolete camera anyway.

3. "Just set scarlet to 2k or downsample" And use what lenses? Or make my workflow twice harder? They can be made to work, but these are half-baked solutions.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top