I wouldn't say that WSJ is the final authority on all things technical, but they do follow markets. Sounds like they think 3D has become a dead end as it did a couple times already, and 4k will go the same way unless there are cheap HDTVs in 4k.
Results 41 to 50 of 61
08-17-2012 09:15 PM
10-31-2012 05:39 PM
I still think it just comes down to the project. To date the only footage I've ever delivered to any client in 1080p has been for TV commercials. Everything else has standard-definition DVD, or at most 720p for streaming web content.
If I were shooting narrative content? I'd shoot in 4K if we had the budget to cover the extra costs in post - but to be honest, with the level (and more importantly, budget) of productions I'm working on at the moment, that additional post budget would be best spent putting the money on screen - on art direction, better costuming and sets.
Beyond HD resolution just isn't all that important at this stage. Sure being able to rerelease your TV series in 4K for the market 10 years from now would be nice - but is it necessary? Unless the size of the screens we watch at home and at the cinema change dramatically in that time, it's just not going to be that big of a deal.
10-31-2012 06:14 PM
Well I really think having a camera that can shoot 4k raw and then be dumbed down to compressed codec lends itself to a wide array of projects. I shoot stuff that requires a fast turn around but I also do higher end commercials. So I would say a 4k raw camera that can also be shot in other codecs in 1080p that could potentially hold me tight for 4-5 years is a go. Of course that all depends on the price...Richard Allen Crook
Director | Cinematographer
10-31-2012 06:15 PM
Still yet to judge on the Sony's, but from past Sony experience, the picture hasn't yielded anything spectacular my way.
RED is out of the question, the picture has never done anything special for me and Canon/Panasonic... well, they aren't quite at the party yet, probably trying to be cool and be fashionably late.
4k cameras may have the resolution, but it seems they lack everything else.
So i'll be sticking with the Alexa as my 'big' purchase and that's 2.8k into Full HD right?
10-31-2012 06:17 PM
I remember every time I bought a camera thinking "this is all I will need". I'm on my 8th/9th camera now and seriously wonder if it ever will end. Manufacturers will always manage to lure us and find something that we want to own. Specs, size, price... they have many angles to "get us" with.
10-31-2012 10:06 PM
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- New England, USA
To stay on thread, I'll switch to 4K when my clients start asking for it or I have the money for a new camera and want the challenge. That's why I added the F3 to my EX-1. Nobody was complaining about the EX-1 but I knew I could get a better image from the F3 and wanted to challenge myself to make better products and learn something different. Force myself to spend more time and make it better because of it. My clients are seeing the difference but don't necessarily realize why... or care. I've gotten some jobs just because I can say F3 (or more usually, "I'm one tier above the competition's gear") but it's mostly getting a little more money using gear that requires a little more time to do it right.
I have a feeling that my next move "up" will be adding an external recorder for the extra color sampling and bits. But I tend to spend my money on lighting, support, sliders, jibs, dollies, stuff like that.Andrew Wilson