HUGE-SYSTEMS 1.5GB/s(!)

"Sorry to travle offtopic but:
After making the last 2 Starwars (children) flicks - how can anyone say that George Lucas is about image quality?
Good enough for George Lucas doesn't mean anything after what he did to the original flicks.."

I do not think it is offtopic when we talking about picture quality. As for Mr Lucas qualities as a director...well that is a diffrent story. And offtopic. ;)

I was thinking more of FX when I mentioned George Lucas. He could easily have shoot in 35mm (or 65mm for that matter), money is no objective in his case. But he chose to make the films digitally. A brave choise in my point of view. 99.99% seems to been have shoot against green screen...a LOT of keying that is. The first two (of the new ones) were shoot with the F900 in HDCAM, i.e 3:1:1, the last one (ROTS), was shoot with the F950 HDCAM SR, i.e 4:4:4. The first two looks like crap but the FX in ROTS looks MUCH better. At least imho. :)
So yes, I also wants the 4:4:4 option before only available to Hollywood and Lucas Films LTD. :)

BTW the only SW film that I like is "The Empire Strikes Back" because Irwin Kershner has directed it. Also beautiful lit and shoot.
And for what George Lucas did to the original movies...(*insert foul languages here*)! ;)

Regards
Hans
 
"
" I myself do not expect the quality of a HDC-950F from the RED..."

I expect it to exceed it.... Seriously. No reason why it shouldn't."

The only reason would be the difference in price...USD100.000 vs USD17.500.
But can that kind of quality be delivered for 17.500...WOW is all I can say.
:)
In that case Sony can take down the sign off their broadcast branch!
The rest of them also for that matter.
Whats next? The "RED 2" makes Panavision and ARRI go out of business?
Let´s hope so! :)
Hm...no point in buying shares in Kodak I think... ;)

Regards
Hans
 
Hans Nystroem said:
The first two (of the new ones) were shoot with the F900 in HDCAM, i.e 3:1:1, the last one (ROTS), was shoot with the F950 HDCAM SR, i.e 4:4:4. The first two looks like crap but the FX in ROTS looks MUCH better. At least imho. :)
So yes, I also wants the 4:4:4 option before only available to Hollywood and Lucas Films LTD. :)
Click to expand...
Well, if Episode I looked like crap, it wasn't because of the f900, because it was shot on film. Episode II was shot on an f900, and Episode III was on the f950.

I, for one, thought that all three looked ok. I wouldn't mind having a Cinealta in my arsenal.
 
I stand corrected. :)

You are right EP1 was shoot on film. And it was EP2 that looked like crap.
(I had to view them once again just to be sure)
Well perhaps not like crap, but compared to the others it doesn´t look as good anyway.

And I would not mind "even" a Varicam so...You are right there also. :)

Regards
Hans
 
Sorry about that, Hans... I just realized my post came across as very rude and elitist. I didn't mean it to sound like that. My apologies.

And, yes, Episode I looked like crap in large part due to Jar Jar. What were they thinking? :furious3: :crybaby:
 
Last edited:
"Sorry about that, Hans... I just realized my post came across as very rude and elitist. I didn't mean it to sound like that. My apologies."

Nah, I didnt take it that way. No need to apologies. :)

"And, yes, Episode I looked like crap in large part due to Jar Jar. What were they thinking?"

They had a...what is the expression? Brainfart?
 
"Anyways.. G-tech has a pretty new quad interface drive out, i really like E-SATA and hope it catches on... Red will have a E-SATA port as well."

Excellent with multiple choices when it comes to ports out. :)
But I am suspicious about the 85MB/s claim...it is a single disk inside a enclosure right?
I do not think there is a single disk that can perfom that kind of data rate?
Perhaps a very fast (15000RPM) SCSI-drive...
Am I wrong?

Please advise.

Regards
 
Wow! I like that cover...completely stupid...but I feel the urge to have one! :)

I seems like SATA is closing the gap to SCSI. At least when it comes to performance. Thats good news! :)
 
Yeah.. imaging having 8 of those in a Raid 0 Array.. wowzers.

SATA kinda killed SCSI a few years ago.. and as SATA improves it will further seperate the aging SCSI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top