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 :)

Why is RED often just a B camera in Hollywood?

I know a production company that produces hallmark movies, owns a RED ONE, that they're not shooting on. Simply because, all the director's they hire are old school and want to shoot film. Even the newer directors are given the option of shooting film or RED ONE. I love the RED and have shot a movie on it myself, but if given the option to shoot film, I'd take film in a heartbeat.

Some people aren't willing to change, rightly so, if they've done it one way for 20+ years and it's worked, why would they?
 
Sergei said:
Genesis, F-35, D-21,.. have a sensor of about 4K.
The difference to Red is that they process the image in camera to HD or 2K
while with Red the processing happens in post.
Click to expand...

D 21 is sub 3k and both Genesis and F35 only output to 1920x1080. I'll add Phantom and f23. All of these cameras have considerably higher data rate and far less compression so I was really just curious as to what sub 3k cameras has he used to qualify such a blanket statement.
 
JNFilms said:
I know a production company that produces hallmark movies, owns a RED ONE, that they're not shooting on. Simply because, all the director's they hire are old school and want to shoot film. Even the newer directors are given the option of shooting film or RED ONE. I love the RED and have shot a movie on it myself, but if given the option to shoot film, I'd take film in a heartbeat.

Some people aren't willing to change, rightly so, if they've done it one way for 20+ years and it's worked, why would they?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't chalk it up to old habit. I've been shooting film for over 25 years and I'll dump it in a heartbeat for anything that delivers a better image. Nobody gets nostalgic about mag changes, 10 minute mags, waiting on dailies, and expense. I just think the old schoolers don't get caught up in hype.
 
Tim Naylor said:
D 21 is sub 3k and both Genesis and F35 only output to 1920x1080. I'll add f23. All of these cameras have considerably higher data rate and far less compression so I was really just curious as to what sub 3k cameras has he used to qualify such a blanket statement. Personally I think an HPX 3000 at 100mb intra 1080 yields better color depth than RED.
Click to expand...

Tim, how are you processing the Red footage? What color space, gamma space, etc? I like the 3000, but I'm not sure about this comparison. I do know that a lot of Red footage that gets posted on the net has been either processed poorly, or has been given a look for creative purposes. You can pull beautiful color from the Red. Just need to shoot it correctly and process it correctly.
 
I've been shooting it fine. Clients love the results (all broadcast work - no blow up work yet). I've no problem making great looking images. I usually shoot for a fat waveform, daylight when possible and know what to preserve and what to let go. IR's have helped me alot. I love the camera and look forward to improvements - in the right direction.

I would like to see less obsession about 5k and beyond and more focus from RED on delivering a fuller color gamut, higher ASA, less noise, etc. And I truly believe that spreading the signal too thin is the root of it. If they haven't mastered 4k why even get me excited about 5k plus?

That said, I think I'll go out and shoot around the neighborhood tomorrow. I wouldn't be saying that if I had a 35 camera.
 
less noise
Click to expand...
That's what the specs for Scarlet + Epic are saying. Higher dynamic range / less signal-to-noise ratio / less noise is essentially the same thing.

They're on it. ;) IMO that's more exciting than higher resolution. (Because more pixels means more rendering, which is so boring...)

2- I'm not sure about the fuller color gamut... I don't believe the camera is really a limitation there.

For broadcast anyways, you're limited to Rec. 709 or SMPTE C or EBU color gamut. (And uh... this is something that we don't do right. Almost all of the time, professional broadcast equipment pretends that these gamuts are the same thing or ignores their differences. This happens in HD<-->SD cross-conversions... they aren't entirely color accurate according to the numbers.)
 
Tim Naylor said:
That's good news. If they keep the rez down and the bit rate higher that should translate into better color space. Hope and pray.
Click to expand...

Well, the goal with the 5K is that it translates into a truer 4K. As post technology catches up over the next couple of years, 4K finishing will become more of a reality, and more of the norm. Sony is pushing more 4K projectors into theaters and eventually we'll see more correlation between shooting at 4K and distributing in 4K. As that 5K image will resolve closer to 4K, with greater dynamic range and less noise, we should see some really great Red footage hitting the theaters.
 
Ben Button was shot on viper for one reason only. fincher likes digital and has been using the viper for his last few projects. he's comfortable with it , he knows how to work with its strengths and weaknesses. its not because it was any better or worse than the red. its just comfort level. its the reason so many people are resistant to change. they want to work with something they know well. creative people are notorious for not wanting to change their working methods or tools unless they are forced to and nobody is going to force a director like fincher to use anything he doesnt want to. he'll probably eventually come around to using RED. maybe he won't be able to get the viper on a commercial shoot and will use a red instead
 
Greater than the sum of its parts

Greater than the sum of its parts

The Hollywood "sheen" that is so beloved is the result of an intricate collaborative process that reflects the high level of craft attained by many departments. The craftspeople at the higher levels know how their contribution to the final product is affected by the properties of 35mm negative film shot using top quality cine lenses from Cooke, Zeiss, Angie, etc.

Fincher's "home team" and many other top craftspeople understand the nuances of the Viper, Genesis and other D-cinema cameras as evidenced by the look of Ben Button/Zodiac, etc. IMHO the elephant in the room at this point is the slow pace of adaptation in post production.

I agree that DR, noise issues and compression artifacting eclipse resolution as keys to the next jump in image quality. However, I wouldn't get hung up on the move to 5K or 6K acquisition as pointless or counter-productive, even if DI is ultimately done at 2K. Why? The power of oversampling in digital imaging, particularly with Bayer pattern sensor processing, should not be underestimated.

It is argued that one of the reasons that film appears to have more resolution than digital, even after a 2K DI, is the ever changing distribution of grain structure from frame to frame combined with persistence of vision. It will be interesting to see if next generation de-mosaicing algorithms try to take advantage of the larger data set provided by higher resolution sensors by mimicing temporal randomness.
 
Bing Bailey said:
Ben Button was shot on viper for one reason only. fincher likes digital and has been using the viper for his last few projects. he's comfortable with it , he knows how to work with its strengths and weaknesses. its not because it was any better or worse than the red. its just comfort level. its the reason so many people are resistant to change. they want to work with something they know well. creative people are notorious for not wanting to change their working methods or tools unless they are forced to and nobody is going to force a director like fincher to use anything he doesnt want to. he'll probably eventually come around to using RED. maybe he won't be able to get the viper on a commercial shoot and will use a red instead
Click to expand...

He has the resources to test and work with any camera system he wants. The fact that he took on what was then a new system is contrary behavior to someone resistant to change and comfortable with the status quo. I believe he's with it because it's the best camera for his needs. If something better for him was out there he'd be all over it. Also, the Viper's acquisition matches DPX specs far better than RED. This is vital for DI / film out.
 
You guys are all too funny...

When "Buttons" started in production, all we had was "Frankie". The RED ONE wasn't released until almost a year later. I know because I personally showed Frankie to DF.

Compression is not our Achilles' heel, it is one of our best strengths. After a side by side shootout with Don Burgess at the helm, the RED ONE was chosen over film to shoot the VERY large budget "Book of Eli", which began shooting this week. They didn't ask for less compression.

Read Alex Proyas' comments about RED here. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39986

Watch the "Knowing" trailer.

The Viper does not have more DNR than the RED ONE. It does, however, have less resolution any way you cut it. Maybe someone should ask David Fincher which he would choose today? I don't know the answer, but let's also not assume that you do. I do know that he shot a Nike commercial on RED a few months ago.

The only valid comment I have read here, IMHO, is that we are new. There was a tremendous resistance to shoot RED on a major production (except for a brave few) for that reason. And that reason was valid early as we cut our teeth on firmware and hardware improvements. But those concerns seem to be over. When you consider how much has been shot on RED in the 1st year and 4 months since deliveries began, it is pretty amazing. And we never had one call from Proyas, Soderbergh, Peter Jackson, the Hughes brothers or any other director or DP of a major production asking for a higher data rate. That only gets spoken of here. Professionals are getting the most out of the RED ONE with no complaints. Instead of asking for less compression, the real question you should be asking is... "how are they doing it?".

Jim
 
Jannard said:
You guys are all too funny...

When "Buttons" started in production, all we had was "Frankie". The RED ONE wasn't released until almost a year later. I know because I personally showed Frankie to DF.

Compression is not our Achilles' heel, it is one of our best strengths. After a side by side shootout with Don Burgess at the helm, the RED ONE was chosen over film to shoot the VERY large budget "Book of Eli", which began shooting this week. They didn't ask for less compression.

Read Alex Proyas' comments about RED here. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39986

Watch the "Knowing" trailer.

The Viper does not have more DNR than the RED ONE. It does, however, have less resolution any way you cut it. Maybe someone should ask David Fincher which he would choose today? I don't know the answer, but let's also not assume that you do. I do know that he shot a Nike commercial on RED a few months ago.

The only valid comment, IMHO, is that we are new. There was a tremendous resistance to shoot RED on a major production for that reason (except for a brave few). And that reason was valid early as we cut our teeth on firmware and hardware improvements. But those concerns seem to be over. When you consider how much has been shot on RED in the 1st year and 4 months since deliveries began, it is pretty amazing. And we never had one call from Proyas, Soderbergh, Peter Jackson, the Hughes brothers or any other director or DP of a major production asking for a higher data rate. That only gets spoken of here. Professionals are getting the most out of the RED ONE with no complaints. Instead of asking for less compression, the real question you should be asking is... "how are they doing it?".

Jim
Click to expand...

<Clapping> <Clapping>

Exactly. This is the reason i'm looking forward to the fixed lens Scarlet. Give me a chance to learn, experiment and hone my skills.

Just keep working on those cameras Jim. Anyone that's complaining will still be complaining five years down the road anyway.

-Brian
 
Jannard said:
You guys are all too funny...

When "Buttons" started in production, all we had was "Frankie". The RED ONE wasn't released until almost a year later. I know because I personally showed Frankie to DF.

Compression is not our Achilles' heel, it is one of our best strengths. After a side by side shootout with Don Burgess at the helm, the RED ONE was chosen over film to shoot the VERY large budget "Book of Eli", which began shooting this week. They didn't ask for less compression.

Read Alex Proyas' comments about RED here. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39986

Watch the "Knowing" trailer.

The Viper does not have more DNR than the RED ONE. It does, however, have less resolution any way you cut it. Maybe someone should ask David Fincher which he would choose today? I don't know the answer, but let's also not assume that you do. I do know that he shot a Nike commercial on RED a few months ago.

The only valid comment I have read here, IMHO, is that we are new. There was a tremendous resistance to shoot RED on a major production (except for a brave few) for that reason. And that reason was valid early as we cut our teeth on firmware and hardware improvements. But those concerns seem to be over. When you consider how much has been shot on RED in the 1st year and 4 months since deliveries began, it is pretty amazing. And we never had one call from Proyas, Soderbergh, Peter Jackson, the Hughes brothers or any other director or DP of a major production asking for a higher data rate. That only gets spoken of here. Professionals are getting the most out of the RED ONE with no complaints. Instead of asking for less compression, the real question you should be asking is... "how are they doing it?".

Jim
Click to expand...

Jim, the reason I asked if people have seen Red projected or seen in a Scratch suite is that I feel a lot of people are seeing Red footage downsampled, possibly poorly processed, etc. Having seen Che projected in 2K, as well as the booth demo at NAB, the FCP Supermeet projection, 2K projection at WGBH's theatre, and of course 4K projection of Crossing The Line I feel that even right now, despite all the advances you guys are making, it holds up really well. But it can also look really bad in the hands of people that don't know what they're doing or have poor viewing conditions. As I said, when exposed properly and processed properly, Red looks great and that's why the people you have mentioned are loving the camera. They have seen it at its best.

Now, before I might be accused of kissing Jim's ass, a quick search may discover that I was one of the ones who complained about compression artifacts early on. Maybe there were some, or maybe I didn't know what the hell I was doing. Bottom line is, I have seen what this camera can do and even in this first generation, it can be stunning. It will be even better in the next generation.

That's not to say everyone has to be 100% satisfied with the images. This is all subjective of course. :biggrin:
 
Another important Benjamin Button point:

Most of the vipers were used for motion capture. Not Image capture. I believe many shots had 3 vipers on motion capture duty. The quality of the frame was irrellevant. What they needed were: Global Shutter and a nice clean image. If it were between RED and Viper for motion capture I would personally still choose the uncompressed viper today. The tracking and VFX work done in Benjamin Button was phenomenal and I imagine they wanted as good of plates as possible. 3-4k would be less important in such a case.

Also. We can mostly stop asking for less compression since RED has delivered. With REDCODE 30. ;) Ask and ye' shall receive. The REDCode we see today isn't the REDCode of 15 months ago when it was a point of contention. It's come a long way. The best way now to reduce compression artifacts is to keep your image noise free. That's REDCode's Achille's heel even if REDCode isn't REDOne's Achille's heel. Then again that's the achille's heel of all compression schemes. Macroblocking is always most offensive in noisy shadows.
 
No macroblocks in REDCODE though, Gavin. You're right that REDCODE has been vastly improved over time though.

Graeme
 
Button

Button

I just wanted to clear something up:

The Vipers are not personally owned by David Fincher. He rents the Vipers, S.Two, Digiprimes, etc from The Camera House. Who also rent Reds.

Plus Claudio Miranda (the DP of Button) has mastered how to expose the Viper, putting flesh tones, barely visible shadow and bright highlights exactly where he wants them. This takes time and experimentation with any camera.

Commercials are a great place for experimentation, features not so much. The Viper/S.Two workflow was tested on some Heineken spots with Brad Pitt before being used on Zodiac. The recent RED Nike commercial was another test (looked incredible BTW, best RED footage I have yet seen).

The reason the Red or Viper or F23 or Film stuff from Fincher looks so good is mostly due to talented people working on the crew, composing the lighting & contrast ratio just so, framing, moving the camera, production design, editing, post, and (a big one) the mastering, the de-noising, the re-graining, etc.

Randy Wedick
Tech
Band Pro
 
Some of Ben Button was actually shot on a Sony F23 according to this month's issue of HDVideoPro. They actually switched from the Viper to the F23 midway after they ran into some problems with the Viper.
 
randywedick said:
The reason the Red or Viper or F23 or Film stuff from Fincher looks so good is mostly due to talented people working on the crew, composing the lighting & contrast ratio just so, framing, moving the camera, production design, editing, post, and (a big one) the mastering, the de-noising, the re-graining, etc.

Randy Wedick
Tech
Band Pro
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly with this Randy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top