Rodney Charters ASC on HDSLR's, and more

It's all relative

It's all relative

Otis Grapsas said:
I don't understand how someone can think so highly of a Canon dSLR and disregard the top of the line Sony in that fashion.
Click to expand...

In addition to the skin tone rendering argument, you need to factor in the cost vs quality equation. In that MacVideo interview, Charters says "The image you get out of a $3000 camera is very close to what you get out of a $100,000 camera." He also dismisses the Sony in favor of the Alexa in the same breath ($50k-70k ish). I wouldn't say that makes him an ARRI shill, just a realist.

What is considered to be 'acceptable quality' is always relative to the cost of the system, and 'cost' is also things like size/weight/general annoyance of use. Some find the Canon's to be too annoying to use, some do not. I personally only use the DSLR's for projects that are well-matched to it's strengths, and lean on traditional camcorders or $ rentals for my other projects.
 
f64manray said:
This "guy" (Hurlbut) as you choose to refer to this man that has the right to put ASC after his name is giving Canon his input to make a camera that is even better for his uses than the 5DII, and that will ripple down to us all. He wouldn't be using this technology if it didn't perform for his clients. So, I'm not sure what your point is by trying to insult him by calling him a salesman.
Click to expand...

That's Rodney Charters on the interview according to the copy. Hurlbut is the guy who got famous when his professionalism was brutally challenged by Christian Bale on the set of some movie? Or someone with a similar name? EDIT. That's the one.
 
Last edited:
Otis Grapsas said:
That's Rodney Charters on the interview according to the copy. Hurlbut is the guy who got famous when his professionality was brutally challenged by Christian Bale on the set of some movie? Or someone with a similar name?
Click to expand...

I thought you were referring to the DP in the previous link in the thread which was Hurlbut, and that's why we need to refer to people by their given surnames instead of vague terms like "guy". :-)

I'm also not sure how Rodney Charters gets tagged with the Canon salesman label because of a 5 minute interview on the floor of a trade show. His use of them is pretty limited compared to some.


...and Christian Bale isn't in the position to challenge anyone's professionality. I mean how much brain damge did he do to himself when he starved himself below 100lbs for "The Machinist". :-)
 
f64manray said:
I thought you were referring to the DP in the previous link in the thread which was Hurlbut, and that's why we need to refer to people by their given surnames instead of vague terms like "guy". :-)

I'm also not sure how Rodney Charters gets tagged with the Canon salesman label because of a 5 minute interview on the floor of a trade show. His use of them is pretty limited compared to some.


...and Christian Bale isn't in the position to challenge anyone's professionality. I mean how much brain damge did he do to himself when he starved himself below 100lbs for "The Machinist". :-)
Click to expand...

This interview just sounds like what I would write for sales:

He compared with film and was impressed. (Seriously?)

Any guy can get a $2400 5dII, shoot video and cut it, and you are gonna say: Oh my god! This kid is a genious! This is brilliant filmmaking! (Yeah, the problem is the lack of a Canon dSLR.)

The camera image that you can get out of a $3000 Canon camera is very close to what you get from a $200,000-$300,000 motion picture camera. (No comment.)

Episode of House MD that was shot with 5d and Canon lenses. (Don't forget the Canon lenses!)

In many cases it was banned, now it's being required. Permission are being granted again, the BBC, render houses are taking them on, because they know they are acceptable now. They are being demanded. (When did that happen? National Geographic allows unlimited 5dII? Who accepts it for high quality HD?)

The clients request being shot with a 5D. The word is out that this camera gives a CEO a certain quality he can't get out of a 1/3" even a 2/3" camera. They were being shot with an F950, now they want to be shot on a 5D. (When did the typical customer get brand loyalty to Canon? If they heard they can get a kid with a 5D for virtually nothing perhaps.)

He was chatting with a guy that uses Varicam was undercut on a 45,000 job by a kid with a 5D. The client wanted that and he didn't have it. He got a 5dII kit, he wants to get up to speed etc. (A 5DII will turn you into an instant professional, you will compete with anyone, really! Poor Varicam owner without a golden 5D.)

On the first reference to camcorders with large sensors that might improve on dSLRs:

He does not trust Sony to make a camera that looks like film. The Canon does not look like video. Sony can announce whatever they want to announce (A salesman wouldn't get away with that). The F35 is huge, a gianormous(?) big pig. The picture quality is questionable. It looks like video quite frequently. The way it overexposes and burns up. (None of this is true of course. Those who can afford using a F35 do rent an F35. You can configure F35 to do anything you want, sensor imaging is excellent, the LUTs are configurable, and the format quality is world class and shines in post, it can take anything.)

------------------------------

Rodney Charters ASC CSC (still same guy) is supposed to represent professionals in the field? Any time I communicate with professionals I hear about F35, F23, HPX3700, various older 2/3" 1080p Sonys, RED in that order. The "big pig" by Sony, the Panasonics that this guy chooses to ignore, the cameras that are actually considered top quality by every single 1080p broadcaster in every single content category for unlimited program %, the cameras that are actually A cams in major productions, the same productions in which 5DII is a poor relative, occationally invited to the shoot for tests.
And what's with the attitude on the new camcorder dSLRs from Sony (or Panasonic perhaps)? Oh, Canon do not have one yet, and these cameras will probably run circles around the 5D in practicality, productivity and ease of use.
 
mjeppsen said:
In addition to the skin tone rendering argument, you need to factor in the cost vs quality equation. In that MacVideo interview, Charters says "The image you get out of a $3000 camera is very close to what you get out of a $100,000 camera." He also dismisses the Sony in favor of the Alexa in the same breath ($50k-70k ish). I wouldn't say that makes him an ARRI shill, just a realist.

What is considered to be 'acceptable quality' is always relative to the cost of the system, and 'cost' is also things like size/weight/general annoyance of use. Some find the Canon's to be too annoying to use, some do not. I personally only use the DSLR's for projects that are well-matched to it's strengths, and lean on traditional camcorders or $ rentals for my other projects.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what we have been saying for a year now. Keep the expectations on any new camera reasonable, ignore the marketing, test production and post with your own material, consider how it will affect your work, your budget, your output quality, consider the acceptability of your production/post specification, and make a choice.
 
Otis Grapsas said:
This interview just sounds like what I would write for sales:

He compared with film and was impressed. (Seriously?)

Any guy can get a $2400 5dII, shoot video and cut it, and you are gonna say: Oh my god! This kid is a genious! This is brilliant filmmaking! (Yeah, the problem is the lack of a Canon dSLR.)

The camera image that you can get out of a $3000 Canon camera is very close to what you get from a $200,000-$300,000 motion picture camera. (No comment.)

Episode of House MD that was shot with 5d and Canon lenses. (Don't forget the Canon lenses!)

In many cases it was banned, now it's being required. Permission are being granted again, the BBC, render houses are taking them on, because they know they are acceptable now. They are being demanded. (When did that happen? National Geographic allows unlimited 5dII? Who accepts it for high quality HD?)

The clients request being shot with a 5D. The word is out that this camera gives a CEO a certain quality he can't get out of a 1/3" even a 2/3" camera. They were being shot with an F950, now they want to be shot on a 5D. (When did the typical customer get brand loyalty to Canon? If they heard they can get a kid with a 5D for virtually nothing perhaps.)

He was chatting with a guy that uses Varicam was undercut on a 45,000 job by a kid with a 5D. The client wanted that and he didn't have it. He got a 5dII kit, he wants to get up to speed etc. (A 5DII will turn you into an instant professional, you will compete with anyone, really! Poor Varicam owner without a golden 5D.)

On the first reference to camcorders with large sensors that might improve on dSLRs:

He does not trust Sony to make a camera that looks like film. The Canon does not look like video. Sony can announce whatever they want to announce (A salesman wouldn't get away with that). The F35 is huge, a gianormous(?) big pig. The picture quality is questionable. It looks like video quite frequently. The way it overexposes and burns up. (None of this is true of course. Those who can afford using a F35 do rent an F35. You can configure F35 to do anything you want, sensor imaging is excellent, the LUTs are configurable, and the format quality is world class and shines in post, it can take anything.)

------------------------------

Rodney Charters ASC CSC (still same guy) is supposed to represent professionals in the field? Any time I communicate with professionals I hear about F35, F23, HPX3700, various older 2/3" 1080p Sonys, RED in that order. The "big pig" by Sony, the Panasonics that this guy chooses to ignore, the cameras that are actually considered top quality by every single 1080p broadcaster in every single content category for unlimited program %, the cameras that are actually A cams in major productions, the same productions in which 5DII is a poor relative, occationally invited to the shoot for tests.
And what's with the attitude on the new camcorder dSLRs from Sony (or Panasonic perhaps)? Oh, Canon do not have one yet, and these cameras will probably run circles around the 5D in practicality, productivity and ease of use.
Click to expand...

I think he (Charters) clearly also outlined the flaws of the 5DII in that interview, and if he was a Canon salesman, I think I would fire him because he clearly got me more hyped up on the new ARRI and his anticipation of what the new ARRI would be.

I've heard more than one pro DP slam Sony, and I think Charters is probably representative of a certain segment of some top tier DP chatter as they munch on punch and cookies at their ASC meetings.

I've also heard one Hollywood DP go on about how Hollywood bought into the Red hype at the beginning and how many hollywood producers got burned by Red and its problems one television season, and they're not going back. There seems to be some really negative chatter by some professionals about Red. I don't travel in those circles, but they don't seem to mind openly stating these things in public interviews.

...and personally, Sony would have to be the last camera on earth before I would by another product from them just because of the rotten service I've gotten form them in past on a product that they make. That rotten service has cost them thousands of dollars form me. Anything but Sony. I hope the AF100 wipes the floor with them.
 
f64manray said:
I think he (Charters) clearly also outlined the flaws of the 5DII in that interview, and if he was a Canon salesman, I think I would fire him because he clearly got me more hyped up on the new ARRI and his anticipation of what the new ARRI would be.

I've heard more than one pro DP slam Sony, and I think Charters is probably representative of a certain segment of some top tier DP chatter as they munch on punch and cookies at their ASC meetings.

I've also heard one Hollywood DP go on about how Hollywood bought into the Red hype at the beginning and how many hollywood producers got burned by Red and its problems one television season, and they're not going back. There seems to be some really negative chatter by some professionals about Red. I don't travel in those circles, but they don't seem to mind openly stating these things in public interviews.

...and personally, Sony would have to be the last camera on earth before I would by another product from them just because of the rotten service I've gotten form them in past on a product that they make. That rotten service has cost them thousands of dollars form me. Anything but Sony. I hope the AF100 wipes the floor with them.
Click to expand...

From a marketing point of view, there is nothing wrong with mentioning a product that costs 30 times more and saying good things about it. You are not competing with that. It even makes you look more objective to the customer. What do I get from this interview? That a $2300 5DII is the best money can buy below $80,000. I don't think this is true.

DPs at this level are an interesting group. I have been fortunate to talk to a few. They have an eye for detail but not the kind of detail consumers look for (noise and test charts). Their perception is usually around three things, skin tones, mid range contrast and saturation, highlight handling. As long as these things are down, they don't even care about the resolution or the artifacts. It's not even their job. Their business is exposure and skin tones. If there is a problem in post they will be notified when testing. Skin tones are good since Canon uses the same colorimetry in still mode, but I just think that Canon 5dII is poor in highlight handling and the midrange contrast is videolike. There is practically no overexposure latitude.

One mistake DPs do is to try cameras out of the box. You have to understand digital imaging in order to setup a camera correctly. It's not film. You need an engineer, especially if you are trained in film. They sometimes expect consumer or midrange cameras to look good out of the box, that will simply not happen. Consumers cameras are evaluated for noise and resolution, sometimes under gain. When was the last time a consumer camcorder test evaluated skin tones and quality of the image under clipping? The cameras are setup to perform well in noise. Good skin tones, high midrange contrast and good highlight handling all have heavy costs in noise level.

I don't like Sony myself. But it's not because they don't make good cameras. They are technically excellent, if we ignore that they have no intraframe format at the affordable models. I don't like them because the cameras are flat and boring in many things I consider important in cinematography. An HVX easily competes with any Sony in skin tones, it even looks better out of the box. The high end Panasonics are also great (2X00, 3X00). But an F23 or F35 carefully setup by a good engineer and a DP will look as good as digital gets, the imaging quality is simply astonishing.
 
I watched this Charters video twice, (thinking I had missed something) I'm not really sure what all the hoopla is about.

Did the guy say anything that was contraversial? or anything that wasn't (for the most part) common knowledge?
 
If I were going to buy a camera I would have no problems at all taking advise from either of these men, there experience speaks loudly.
 
I would rent (or borrow) the camera for a day and test, shoot and go through post. One man's good camera is another's POS. Many people love dSLRs like the 5dII but I thought it was complete junk. I couldn't do anything in post and the image and motion quality was atrocious for something that costs over $500. Heavy color aliasing and very soft motion that looked like 1/12sec when the shutter was set at 1/50sec. Similar to the HDV problem in the shutter behaviour but even worse. It had good low light but I don't expect to shoot without lights and most of it was lost because the lenses were f2.8 and I had to stop down to get usable DOF. I'm happy with the ISO300 professional camcorders at 0dB which I can use at f1.6. It had very shallow DOF but I didn't care about sacrificing motion quality and post flexibility for that. I don't even like the look, these days it's on everything everybody posts on the net. Then I calculated that it cost about 6,000 euro to complete the package with some lenses, which is what a good prosumer camera costs but it couldn't compete in many departments.
 
Kholi said:
http://www.macvideo.tv/camera-technology/interviews/index.cfm?articleId=3224564

Please, I implore you, watch and listen very intently to what this man is saying.

This is a sticky-worthy video, IMO, but I'll let the mods decide.

Topics Covered (by opinion):

-The 5D and Image Acquisition
-Benefits of the 5D in Broadcast television
-Experiences with the 5D
-The Arri Alexa (as the tipping point in Film vs Digital)
-Sony (in brief)
-BIG SCREEN PROJECTION
-How is the market changing?
-The Tools and Applications
...and more.
Click to expand...

Yes, i will listening carefully. thank you.
 
Last edited:
This thread is incredibly out of date and should not be a stickie anymore. At this point 90% of ASC members have used a Canon DSLR on a gig, and those that have not are out of date dinosaurs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top