Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 117
  1. Collapse Details
    #21
    Default
    Hey, look at little ol' New Zealand on that map all painted red


     

  2. Collapse Details
    #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    214
    Default
    This was the TRUE demonstration of Digital Cinema in my opinion.

    The stuff look friggin' incredible. It was 35mm with no grain. Didn't feel electronic..... It felt like the next evolution of cinema imaging.

    Most definitely kick ass.


     

  3. Collapse Details
    #23
    Panamaniac
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,910
    Default
    The closeup of one of the girls looked crystal clear. However, when the camera moved into wider shots, the subjects seemed a little soft. I don't know if this is because the subjects were on the edge of the focus, or lighting issues, or whatever. I get the feeling that the Red team was trying to emphasize the DOF drop off in the background, but I'm wondering if by doing this, they didn't get the sharpest focus on the two women.
    I felt the same way, but the guy doing the presentation talked about DOF a lot and my guess is that they wanted to show that you could have a super short focused area while keeping focus on a subject that because of definition appeared cristal clear with a ton of detail. I think that what made if feel weird is that the shot where the "milk girl" comes out from inside the bus was not about the girl wrenching away below, but about her that popping her head out of the window and coming down to help or whatever. If the guys were up for the challenge of keeping focus on her as she moved through the shot it would have made much more sense. However they probably skipped that because of the difficulty of it and instead they stayed with :ANG! just burnt my dinner:: the girl that wasn't moving.

    By the way, the screen was 30ft. not the 60 footer used on previous screenings. I wish at the end of the presentation they would have blown it up to 60ft projection and only shown the 30ft they had of screen just to see how deep the detail goes.


    Sorry about the parking ticket! I parked behind the gas station accross the street and my meter ran out too but got lucky!



     

  4. Collapse Details
    #24
    Panamaniac
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,910
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by _MR_
    Hey, look at little ol' New Zealand on that map all painted red
    Hey there is at least one order from Argentina too! Hope they r not buying their storage there cause THAT is what expensive really is



     

  5. Collapse Details
    #25
    Default
    All I can say is that I brought my cinematographer who is a hardcore film guy and his main comment was "It is way too clean and their lenses are too sharp. I think it would look better with an old Cooke that's seen a bit of wear." Too clean, too sharp. Not bad.

    He clarified saying "With the three chip cameras the lenses have to be super sharp to minimize the separation issues as the light is split. All of this goes away with a single chip camera [like red] so the supersharp lenses can actually work against you." I'm not sure what he's saying, but it is still positive.

    Since we had been planning to shoot film until Red came along I asked him if he'd rather shoot film or Red. He said, "If you had it today, I'd borrow it tomorrow. Hell yeah, we have to use this, the picture looks great and we'll save so much money. Forever, with digital projects you push them stylized because they couldn't look like film--but with this it is no longer the case--you can shoot a nice, warm, romatic comedy without apology."

    There you go. One film guy converted--a couple thousand more to go!
    Thom Steinhoff
    Red One #516, Red Zoom #171


     

  6. Collapse Details
    #26
    Default
    One more thing.

    The Redcode raw footage at the end. It really wasn't shown back to back (actually I'd like to see it truely A/B'd like you can in something like compressor with a line in the middle hiding and revealing)

    ...But, to my eyes it did look visually flatter to me. Was it just me? There was a few minutes, between the normal footage and the Redcode footage with no set up at all (like, "This is Raw... This is Redcode Raw... Any Questions?" )

    When it first came up, I thought it looked flatter, then it was repeated and it looked identical. I thought that was showing uncomressed and compressed and I thought "wow, they are identical--but a bit flatter than I remembered" but then Ted said they showed the Redcode Raw twice so maybe it was really flatter than the raw stuff that was shown earlier.

    Is it me? Everything else looked jawdropping and spectacular and maybe I'm remembering this different as, with the discussion, I was preparing myself to go Redcode Raw--so I saw what I was expecting to see. Or, maybe the main footage had color correction and the raw didn't.

    Is it just me?

    Thom
    Last edited by ThomSteinhoff; 11-14-2006 at 06:02 PM.


     

  7. Collapse Details
    #27
    Senior Member Tom Lowe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    somewhere worshipping Terrence Malick
    Posts
    464
    Default
    My DP said that the REDCODE looked just "a little" less impressive, but that he wasn't told it was REDCODE until after viewing it, so he wasn't sure.


     

  8. Collapse Details
    #28
    Panamaniac
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,910
    Default
    he didn't tell us to look for it, but viewers won't be told either...



     

  9. Collapse Details
    #29
    Default
    For now, it's amazing.

    I have to keep reminding myself that we are seeing earlier test footage with this camera than we've ever seen and it will only get better.

    Also, if what I remember is true, this test footage was actually "extra compressed" compared to what we will get from the camera and what I saw still looked great--and looked like it may richen up with color adjustments, it just looked different to my eyes than the earlier footage.

    Once we get closer to delivery, I'm sure we'll get Redcode vs Raw demos to "see it like it is" with clean A/Bs indoor, outdoor, greenscreen, etc so we can start planning our workflows accordingly and determine our tolerance for "acceptable loss" vs "pursuit of perfection".

    Thom


     

  10. Collapse Details
    #30
    Red Team Graeme_Nattress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    1,135
    Default
    From my POV, I stare at REDCODE RAW images every day. Unless you take both the uncompressed and the compressed images into Photoshop and flip-flop between them and tweak the hell out of the levels, it's bloody hard to tell them apart.

    Graeme
    www.nattress.com - Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP
    www.red.com - RED - 4k Digital Cinema Camera


     

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •