RED Komodo to start limited shipping soon for $6k
- Thread starter ahalpert
- Start date
G
Guest
Guest
100%
G
Guest
Guest
I think it goes:
Helium is half a stop better than Komodo or the same
Gemini is half a stop better than the Helium
Monstro is half a stop better than Gemini
Gemini is a stop more sensitive in LL mode
So the Komodo could be up to a stop and a half behind the Monstro? From what I've seen, the Komodo does a really good job keeping up though. it has the better shadow and more uniform colours in the noise, which helps. They did a nice job with extending the highlights, and cleaning up the shadow performance and CMOS smear... however, the mids look a touch off to me. Totally a small gripe and easy to grade around perhaps. All of the RED cameras with "very soft roll-off" engaged feel a little bit that way. Just a trade off of not having enough DR to really extend out those highlights, and ends up effecting the mids, as no one wants to see noise in a promo video.
That said, by the time any of the cameras have noise that looks objectionable, really none of them are going to look all that great. I think the Helium and the Gemini get a little flack in the "comments section" for color drift in the shadows, but you have to push the camera two stops or more to get that, and I just don't know many DP's that "F" things up that bad.
I recently got my hands on some Monstro footage, and I have to say, that is one nice sensor. Totally get the hype.
Run&Gun
Veteran
1) I think part of it is some of the users that have hold of the camera, now, as opposed to the very early versions that were in... let's just say probably more capable hands.
2) I think there are certain characteristics that are inherent to cameras that post and operator skill aren't going to really have any bearing on, like motion cadence/rendering. But a grade can help it look more like "film" and another grade can make it look like "video" and that could have a psychological effect that may effect how you perceive the footage(and maybe by extension the motion cadence). But I still think certain cameras render "filmic motion" cadence better than others.
" I think there are certain characteristics that are inherent to cameras that post and operator skill aren't going to really have any bearing on, like motion cadence/rendering. But a grade can help it look more like "film" and another grade can make it look like "video" and that could have a psychological effect that may effect how you perceive the footage(and maybe by extension the motion cadence). But I still think certain cameras render "filmic motion" cadence better than others.
I think that's a good point. Would you say rolling shutter speed/global shutter has a bearing on that or is there something else going on in the complicated pipeline that is a modern video camera?
I think that's a good point. Would you say rolling shutter speed/global shutter has a bearing on that or is there something else going on in the complicated pipeline that is a modern video camera?
Run&Gun
Veteran
Good question. I think it’s complicated. I have both global and rolling shutter cameras with CCD and CMOS sensors (obviously the CCD’s are “global” by their nature and I have a global CMOS with my F55). I’ve seen pretty much all of them exhibit great “filmic/24p” motion, as well as kind of look like “video” while shooting 24(23.98). One of the first times I noticed/experienced 24 taking on a “video” motion rendering was with my original VariCam when I started using KinoFlos.
I also remember when some of the daytime studio talk shows started doing a “24P look”. There was a huge disconnect there for me, because the motion was not 60, but they were still shooting with the cameras painted for a “video” look and it was studio lighting, so NONE of it looked right(could have also just been someone slapping a 24P or 30P look on it in post).
And don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with “60 frame video”. 24P doesn’t belong everywhere. I don’t want the evening news, live sports or the like in 24. Just like I don’t want movies or other certain types of content to look like the evening news.
Pat Forestell
New member
Red Komodo frame rate editing
Red Komodo frame rate editing
Wouldn't motion action video look more natural if editing timeline (29.97) shot at 29.97 in camera ?
Rather than shooting at higher frame (Komodo 40fps) rate and dropping 40 fps frames down on timeline to mimic
say, 29.97 ?
For example, My old JVC LS300 shoots at 29.97 and I edit on a 29.97 timeline. So would there be
resultant video motion artifacts if I shoot at 40fps and drop that 40fps down to 29.97 ?
Thanks,
Patrick
Red Komodo frame rate editing
Wouldn't motion action video look more natural if editing timeline (29.97) shot at 29.97 in camera ?
Rather than shooting at higher frame (Komodo 40fps) rate and dropping 40 fps frames down on timeline to mimic
say, 29.97 ?
For example, My old JVC LS300 shoots at 29.97 and I edit on a 29.97 timeline. So would there be
resultant video motion artifacts if I shoot at 40fps and drop that 40fps down to 29.97 ?
Thanks,
Patrick
One of course should shoot primary video footage at the project frame rate you will deliver as the end result. Other frame rates are for intentional effects like slo mo or undercranking. But in the online digital delivery world that is all becoming a part of the range of aesthetic choices, not something that is dictated by a broadcaster.
Global or rolling, how an electronic shutter is tuned has much to do with ultimate motion quality. The global shutter on my Bolex is very carefully tuned to a sine wave like readout curve that mimics a film camera shutter which produces a lovely motion cadence. A global shutter with instant on, instant off square wave readout doesn't produce the same quality. But the differences are subtle.
Engineers have a lot more latitude to fine tune shutter performance on CCD's since they are analog devices with all timing, amplification, and digital conversion occurring in electronics external to the sensor itself. CMOS shutter performance is baked into the chip design with more restricted tuning options.
Last edited:
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I totally agree. There are certain cameras that seem to render motion weirdly or have a more video-like quality to the image motion, even in 23.98. I've noticed this on Sonys in the past, although I didn't particularly notice it on the FX9. I did see it on the A7 SIII footage I shot though.
I don't see it on my Canons or the Fujis. Something to do with cadence and how it interacts with the sharpness and detail perhaps? You'd think that the manufacturers would have standardized all of this by now but it seems that they have not.
For obvious reasons, we almost always live stream in 29.97 and I have become used to the look and it now look's fairly "normal" to me, whereas a year ago, when I was almost exclusively shooting 23.98, 29.97 looked very "video"-ish to me, but for live streaming, it's a nice melding of the
motion signature of 23.98 and the immediacy of 60p. We never live stream in 60p, there just doesn't seem to be a reason to.