NEW ADAPTER: Redrock M2 Encore

It's mostly the medium shots and medium two shots where it appears that it might be rear-screen projection or green screen. Though the gg diffusion probably has much to do with it, the lighting contributes in this way: the talent are lit differently than the back ground in those shots and usually they are brighter. So they pop out.

As Kevin said, these were just talent ID's and to spend a lot of time - crew - resources getting the background to look properly art directed and consistently lit, probably would not have paid off under a limited budget.

Overall a good job though! - I recognized a lot of the faces and that was the idea behind it. Great that you made some money off the "old" redrock and "old" Z1 :)
 
Ye after watching the footage I realize the bokeh is horrible but I understand its necessary to gain a light-efficient image.

Why dont adapter makers give us the option of choosing the GGs based on the shoot, so if theres a lack of light we can use that horrible GG, and then if theres plenty of light we can use the nice looking GG??? Does it have to be one or the other???
 
this looks nice to me, but the bokeh on the sgblade looks alot better. more creamy, and filmic. i'm even starting to see footage from the blades rr1 that looks better than the letus ex.
 
What i noticed from the beta blade, was that the bokeh was a slight improvement over the letus ex bokeh, at the loss of 1/5th of a stop of light, but the one thing that the extreme had over the blade, which from what i've seen is still true, is the sharpness and reduced CA.
 
PaPa said:
What i noticed from the beta blade, was that the bokeh was a slight improvement over the letus ex bokeh, at the loss of 1/5th of a stop of light, but the one thing that the extreme had over the blade, which from what i've seen is still true, is the sharpness and reduced CA.
Click to expand...

Papa,

How much of that is dependent upon the 35mm lens you are using, the focal length, fstop, and/or the camera? Or even, the camera operator?

I've seen those same issues of sharpness and CA with the extreme as well. Just as I've seen footage that was sharp and CA free from the blade. There are so many variables that, unless you have them side by side, all things being equal except for the adpater, it's hard to compare results.

I know you've tested the beta blade side by side with the extreme, but wasn't that before the new achromat and flip module? I would love to see those same tests with the production blade and with both RR1 and RR2 to see if there is any difference in performance.

Edit: Oops...Just realized that this is drifting off topic. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
ya, well get back on topic right after these messages :)

My tests were with the beta, correct, but i used the same lenses. I have shot under some pretty extreme lol, conditions and the CA is really hard to get on the extreme. I did shoot, however, this weekend with a subject against diffused, blow out windows, and there the CA is noticeable around the subject. Blue on one side of the head and orange on the other. But this is theo nly time i've seen it.
 
Nicky said:
Ye after watching the footage I realize the bokeh is horrible...
Click to expand...

lol - I'd be curious to know what exactly did you find "horrible" Nicky?

As I said before, this was not a shoot for nice creamy super shallow DOF - it was a very different kind of shot, and I'm sure you'll see more clips with shallower DOF that will be more to your liking.


Brian
 
Last edited:
Where is all the footage!? I'd assume that most people who ordered have had their adapters for at least a week now. I'm surprised that their isn't a before and after test out there by now. Maybe I'm just being impatient?
 
I think you're just being impatient. The lead time is currently 10 days, I've got my order confirmation, but not my shipping confirmation yet. It doesn't seem like more than a few people got theirs yet.
 
ecking said:
I think you're just being impatient. The lead time is currently 10 days, I've got my order confirmation, but not my shipping confirmation yet. It doesn't seem like more than a few people got theirs yet.
Click to expand...

you're probably right. Hopefully more footage starts showing up next week.
 
Nicky said:
Ye after watching the footage I realize the bokeh is horrible ...
Click to expand...

Okay Nicky, where is YOUR beautiful footage with perfect bokey. I would love to see some critics here pony-up as it were. So far most of the stuff I see from all but a very select few in the forum here are exterior available light beauty shots with no talent OR random shots of peoples apartment or their kids in the back yard. There is nothing wrong with that. There are some people making great looking indie features but usually they are not the ones talking about horrible bokeh. Gimme a break. The fact that one of the owners of Redrock is on this forum daily answering questions and taking this kind of criticism in stride is amazing and a testament to their to their commitment to this forum and their customers. Not to mention all the other 35mm adapter manufacturers on this forum. I applaud them all. Are any of the adapters perfect? Of course not. You want perfect bokeh? Go rent an SR3 with a set of nice primes. Oh, and the day rate (plus insurance, can't forget that) with one can of film will set you back what you can purchase an adapter for. Don't take this as some kind of rant, I'm just offering up a little perspective. 35mm adapters; they are what they are and don't pretend to be a substitute for the real thing, that being shooting film.
That's just my 2 cents.
cheers
Kevin
 
True, true Kevin. Its far harder to actually make something professionally for clients waiting in a bunch of suits than to just go out and do testing with friends/family.
If you go to some of the photographic forums like photo.net you will hear endless discussions and debates about "Bokeh". It's not really a matter of film (or RED) vs 35mm adapters.
So I'm sure even if one were to go out and shoot with an SR3 and say the Zeiss Mk. 1 primes, you may hear critiques about the Bokeh from one source or another (those darn triangular highlights!).
My point is that Bokeh as a matter of aesthetic perception is very very subjective. Though yeah, in general, 35mm adapters do funky things to out of focus areas of the frame.
 
Yeahp. Kevin, do yourself a favor and run for it while you're still sane. They'll harp over Bokeh until the cows come home, and they really don't get that if someone is paying attention to your background more than your foreground then you're doing something very very wrong.

There's no talkin' sense into them, either. If it's not cheap then it's BAD and "let's hope something cheaper can do the same thing". And if it's affordable and awesome then it's "man I dunno about this bokeh."

You have to wonder which ones actually shoot for a living. =T

Encore looks like it's got just as much a place in the 35mm Adapter world as anything else. I'm as happy to get a Unit here soon as I am for my Cinemek G35 to arrive, regardless of if I have the Letus Ultimate.

Let them stare at backgrounds and talk about diffusion... while we shoot.
 
You're overreacting, Kevin. The thread is about RR's new adapter. We want to discuss the pros and cons of it, compare it to competitor's products, find out what it's capable of, identify its strong and weak points. The opinions expressed here are not meant to be taken personally. We're talking about gear and not anyone's skills. Everyone appreciates the fact you shared your footage with them. Thanks for doing this.
BTW - I agree the DOF adapters don't pretend to be the substitute to shooting film - since they are the substitute. They're not perfect - sure. But it's all about emulating film look. Let's not pretend things are not the way they are. Isn't this your sentence?:
And the results I get with my old RR and new cinescreen fool almost anyone I show it to, since they expect that I am shooting film.
Click to expand...
 
trez said:
You're overreacting, Kevin. The thread is about RR's new adapter. We want to discuss the pros and cons of it, compare it to competitor's products, find out what it's capable of, identify its strong and weak points. The opinions expressed here are not meant to be taken personally. We're talking about gear and not anyone's skills. Everyone appreciates the fact you shared your footage with them. Thanks for doing this.
BTW - I agree the DOF adapters don't pretend to be the substitute to shooting film - since they are the substitute. They're not perfect - sure. But it's all about emulating film look. Let's not pretend things are not the way they are. Isn't this your sentence?:
Click to expand...

Yep, that's what I said. And my feelings are not hurt if someone critiques my footage. Hell, I can take it, I've been dealing with picky clients for years. I just thought the "horrible bokeh" comment was a little strong, a little ill-informed, and a little dis-respectful. Not to me but to Valente. But, I do agree that the purpose of this thread is for something other than the direction I have taken it. For that I am sorry and I will shut up.
cheers and happy shooting
K
 
kevin gallagher said:
Yep, that's what I said. And my feelings are not hurt if someone critiques my footage. Hell, I can take it, I've been dealing with picky clients for years. I just thought the "horrible bokeh" comment was a little strong, a little ill-informed, and a little dis-respectful.
Click to expand...

'horrible' was too strong - had the same feeling.

For that I am sorry and I will shut up.
Click to expand...

Just keep on posting footage, please :)

cheers
 
One of the gripes against the original M2 was that there wasn't edge to edge sharpness and there was vignetting. I didn't have those issues with my M2, but some did.

So Brian and others post M2 Encore footage that showcased the edge-to-edge and the no vignetting which is addressing most everyone's concerns... and people go, "Ahh the bokeh sucks"... "I don't like the diffusion" And honestly I have never even thought about diffusion... I had to actually look up the word to see what it meant in regards to the footage. And I've never been one to shoot charts either... I don't know... some people dig that and that's cool, but I mostly care about what the image looks like to my eyes, how it moves, how the adapter adds to the film look. I really just look through the monitor and if it looks good I hit record. The stuff I saw in the monitor looked great. RECORD.

The bokeh, or the shallow Depth of Field is very important to me. I want it really shallow for some shots. From what I shot I could still get a really shallow DOF.

As a filmmaker and as someone who's used the Encore I can tell you it performed great for me. Did great in low light which was my main concern. It did what I wanted it to and it was easy to use. You can examine still frames forever -- on all footage -- to find Camera Aberrations and talk about diffusion, but the end viewer (in other words, the people who buy the DVD's) has expressed nothing but amazement for the Encore footage. And that's what matters to me.

I understand when new gear comes out the technophiles like to break it down and find the pros and cons and that's cool, I totally get it. But I'm not a Big technophile, I just like to make narrative movies. In my opinion the M2 Encore works great for making narrative movies.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top