5D vs Red aliasing etc fun analysis PICS.....

Emanuel said:
(...) in your judgment in order to get a further (once again, further) conclusion which any honest qualified interpreter wants as the best. It should be 'qualified', first. As well, the facts. Or won't apprehend the facts when they cannot be identified. Enough said.
Click to expand...

I am not quite sure what you are attempting to say here.
 
Nothing you may interpret as an argumentum ad hominem towards you or any other innocent. :)

There are no facts, only presumptions; (so) and interpreters -- but not qualified with the best conclusion.
 
PappasArts said:
115Judith_Beheading_Holofernes_Cara.jpg



One of my most favorite painters; Caravaggio....
Click to expand...

Was this the RED or the 5D?
 
Sent a PM to Rich Darge linking this thread. Perhaps he can get this thread back on track and share his settings and findings. Better to get his take instead of making wild assumptions that he's degrading the 5D footage to make Red look better. That's not his style. Perhaps he's not as knowledgable on how to get the best from the 5D because he hasn't shot with it as much as Red, but he wouldn't purposely try and mislead anyone.
 
Isaac_Brody said:
Sent a PM to Rich Darge linking this thread. Perhaps he can get this thread back on track and share his settings and findings. Better to get his take instead of making wild assumptions that he's degrading the 5D footage to make Red look better. That's not his style.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone on this thread has suggested that Richard Darge has degraded the 5D footage to make the RED look better.
 
Lee Wilson said:
No, not really.

Before we drift into some esoteric philosophical backwater, let me just make my points once more and clearly.



1) The footage from the 5D2 in this test looks noticeably sub-standard, to the degree that renders the test meaningless.

2) The history or character of the person who produced this footage does not influence my opinion of the material I can see before me.



There ! Simple ! :)
Click to expand...

Glad you are here Lee. Your posts are clear thinking and an asset to this thread .
 
Lee Wilson said:
1) The footage from the 5D2 in this test looks noticeably sub-standard, to the degree that renders the test meaningless.

2) The history or character of the person who produced this footage does not influence my opinion of the material I can see before me.
Click to expand...

I was responding to this.

Lee Wilson said:
Yep, that looks like where the problem is, the original files from Richard Darge look very suspect, I am leaning towards the idea that the 5D2 footage has been de-interlaced (which it obviously does not need).

Whatever has happened in the workflow, I can say with some confidence that the 5D2 footage looks nothing like full resolution 5D files, and like I have previously said (and hopefully shown) that the nearest I can get to these terrible quality samples is to scale an actual 5D clip down to 50% and then back up to it's original size (throwing away 75% of the clips information).
Click to expand...

Without getting Rich's direct feedback people can only make assumptions. Hopefully Rich chimes in here to set the record straight.

Emanuel said:
Richard Darge is a decent moviemaker, not a silly fanboy. He wouldn't do nothing in order to degrade his new tool or toy.
Click to expand...

No doubt. I'm just trying to defuse some of the drama in this thread.
 
Thanks for the PM Isaac.

I am pretty busy this week but will try to get you guys the original clips showing the differences in aliasing without all that h.264 compression.

I originally shot this test with the 5D settings on STANDARD. I did not tweak any of the individual settings within that STANDARD setting so it should be all default. I also kept the 5D on Auto White Balance because at the time I was very new to the camera and really just wanted to see how it performed 'out of the box'

Actually, when doing this test, I noticed how bland the Red looked in direct comparison. I was more worried that people would be ripping apart the Red footage, rather than the 5D. Funny.

There is aliasing in the 5D as we all know but it doesn't look as bad as these examples. Once again, I'll do my best this week to try and get some examples from the original to keep this a little more objective.

Oh yea, I've enclosed an awesome picture of a square for you all in the meantime..
circle.png
 
You probably all want to know my post workflow too. So here goes.

I created a 1920x1080 29.97 progressive Apple Pro Res 422 HQ sequence in FCP 6. I dropped the original Canon 5D files onto the timeline as well as the Red 2k Proxy files. After cutting, I sent the whole sequence to COLOR and graded with the same resolution / codec. By grading, I mean I just conformed everything and changed the Red gamma settings to REDSPACE to match the look of the 5D a little better. I rendered all the clips and sent them back to FCP 6. Once in FCP, I sent out a master Pro Res HQ file in 1080P and then compressed that using Compressor and the h264 compression. Viola.
 
Lee Wilson said:
That's my opinion on the matter, there is certainly no implication here that anyone is suggesting that he is degrading the 5D footage to make Red look better.
Click to expand...

Good, just wanted to be clear about that. Back on topic.

Thanks for chiming in Rich. :)
 
rgdfilms said:
You probably all want to know my post workflow too. So here goes.

I created a 1920x1080 29.97 progressive Apple Pro Res 422 HQ sequence in FCP 6. I dropped the original Canon 5D files onto the timeline as well as the Red 2k Proxy files. .
Click to expand...

The 5D2's files are not tagged as 29.97 but rather 30fps.. Is it possible that FCP is doing some sort of automatic interpolation to make it match 29.97 and in the process screwing up the 5D2 clips?
 
booggerg2 said:
to the OP, I think it's better to have access to his own raw footage rather than pulling from compressed vimeo files off of the web for comparison purposes.. I'm too lazy to check but it wouldn't surprise me if the OP degraded Drake's 5D2 clips on purpose to create this sensational thread!
Click to expand...

Before you trash someone; maybe you should know who it is your trashing. Everyone here who knows me; , clearly is aware that I have never in all the many years being here falsified any test material. That said I'm not new to testing.

To help you with your illiteracy, I wrote at the beginning, which you must have missed:

{ It's just for fun and not an exact nor even approximate let alone perfect analytical scientifically approved by a committee of our own educated peers of unattainable stature......

It's just a fun test.. Anyhow; here it is........}

{ Files sourced from: http://vimeo.com/5160288
Courtesy by Richard Darge }


As well; I gave you the source that I got, a 475mb file you too can download into multiple windows and see the two cameras run together....

You had no right to insult me at all, nor bring suspect to the tests, when all along you could have downloaded the large file, and seen it for yourself with the above link I gave.

However these day's it easier for people to make insults rather than make constructive analysis or meaningful thoughts...


Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84
Facebook & Myspace:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
 
Last edited:
Don't sweat it Pappas. Had this fun test seen the mkii as a winner they'd be praising you. The second the mkii is flawed the it's " hur hur it only costa a nickel wut u expect mang. Ha. "

silly thread is silly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top