Zacuto Camera Test

[Graeme Nattress]

Maybe they're only comparing DOF and bokeh? And that's why they graded them all to look similarly bad?

Graeme

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Frankly, the test doesn't reveal anything about the cameras.

However, it does reveal that they didn't know what they were doing.

The list could go on, but to use just one point as an example... What's the point of color correcting with a da Vinci if you don't know how to color correct? Look at the detail of the yellow flower in the HVX200 shot versus Red AND 35mm. You're telling me that Red and 35mm can't do what the HVX200 can in not clipping out all that detail? And watch the "whites" in the highlights, bathtub and wine label... blue, green, yellow, orange... come on... please... some consistency in the neutrals please. Even if the label is a "cream" color... it should be cream in all the shots. And the SKIN COLOR... ???? Was that for the SCI-FI channel? lol!

I think they've kept it to a basic correction for a reason anything else would defy it's purpose.

I think you should take the differences as in that's what the cameras produce - everything else need to be corrected :sarcasm:

As for the noise... the problem exists in that they lit the background with blue gels etc. Now if they're clever they did that deliberately, since all cameras has noise in the blue channels, some more, some less.

If they shot this in tungsten light with blue gels on RED it is trouble - it's RED's Achilles heel.

Fredrik

 

[Mike Prevette]

The test doesn't outline if any noise reduction was done during the film transfer. My hunch is the colorist had some turned on by default without even thinking of it. The Red footage on the other hand probably got "defaulted" out of whatever processing program they were using.

 

[Jason Ing]

Good point. The title cards in the second, third, etc. series of tests seem to imply that.

But the title card of the first series of tests states they used the da Vinci, which implies to me that color grading is something to judge as well... or what would be the point of using a da Vinci and advertising its use? Not to mention that there are better setups to judge DOF. The setup here seems to be about color and dynamic range; there's flowers (vibrant colors), a model (skin tones), cool light on the left, warm light on the right, shadows on the girl and background and highlights off the glass.

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Good point. The title cards in the second, third, etc. series of tests seem to imply that.

But the title card of the first series of tests states they used the da Vinci, which implies to me that color grading is something to judge as well... or what would be the point of using a da Vinci and advertising its use? Not to mention that there are better setups to judge DOF. The setup here seems to be about color and dynamic range; there's flowers (vibrant colors), a model (skin tones), cool light on the left, warm light on the right, shadows on the girl and background and highlights off the glass.

Speed, flexibility in 2K grading???

 

[Jason Ing]

I think they've kept it to a basic correction for a reason anything else would defy it's purpose.

I think you should take the differences as in that's what the cameras produce - everything else need to be corrected :sarcasm:

Okay, so why color correct at all?

Or... if they did do just a basic correction, then do a basic white balance... make the neutrals consistent in all the shots. That would make sense and be "fair". But the neutrals are all over the place.

 

[Jason Ing]

And there are better DOF and bokeh setups, right? Put some candles or pinpoint lights in the background to see the bokeh. No?

I hit their site and all they have is the download. Did I miss a comments, opinions, summary somewhere?

EDIT: Oh, okay. I took a look at their site a little more. They're just a rental company. It seems to me that they just threw together some footage and called it a "test". There's no validity. It's really just advertisement for them... they showed it at NAB. I guess they're still trying to say their HD equipment can look just as good as 35 or Red... so please, please, still rent their equipment.

But they did a disservice to themselves, in my opinion, because the footage is just okay. They should have at least cc'd their footage to make it look better. I wouldn't want to rent their equipment if the end product looked like that.

Sort of reminds me of walking into a circuit city or best buy and the salespeople fooling around with the tv settings to make the one they want to sell look better. (Except all of the tvs are getting bad video feeds anyway! lol!)

Just go Red.

 

[Stephen Pruitt]

Geez, Essor, lighten up here.

My post was exactly appropriate for the reason expressed: If the Hollywood biggies thought that the RED was incapable of producing very high-quality footage, they wouldn't be using it for Hollywood films.

I, personally, have NEVER seen RED footage as noisy as that test. It was a mess!

This "test," or whatever it was, does not reflect the footage I've seen shot on the RED by anyone else, here or elsewhere.

Stephen

 

[Stephen Pruitt]

Geez, Essor, lighten up here.

My post was exactly appropriate for the reason expressed: If the Hollywood biggies thought that the RED was incapable of producing very high-quality footage, they wouldn't be using it for Hollywood films.

I, personally, have NEVER seen RED footage as noisy as that test. It was a mess!

This "test," or whatever it was, does not reflect the footage I've seen shot on the RED by anyone else, here or elsewhere.

Stephen

 

[Jagger Christian]

I, personally, have NEVER seen RED footage as noisy as that test. It was a mess!

This "test," or whatever it was, does not reflect the footage I've seen shot on the RED by anyone else, here or elsewhere.

Stephen

That's good to know! Thanks!

 

[Clayton Harper]

The grade, lighting and production design are all easily explained in this clip. This footage is a teaser trailer for a new adult film called: The Babysitter Gets Drunk. inch: