Superman

D

digitalnirvana9

Member
When we see the imagery produced by the Genesis Camera for the new Superman movie, will this image quality be roughly comparable to what the RED will be capable of when it comes out? If so, at what resolution would the RED have to be set to achieve those results...
The IMAX version of Superman will have 20 min. of 3D FX which were produced in the Postproduction Process through IMAX. Will there be a similar way that 3D images can be produced for 35 mm distribution and/or lenses developed for this purpose? Thanks, for you input
 
At least theoretically, the Red should outperform the Genesis. The Genesis after all records to HDCam SR which is a 1080 line format. Albeit 4:4:4 but still compresed and not RAW. I heard the Genesis had quite a few problems on Superman as well. Something like 30% of the film had a Green line through the image that had to be taken out in post. It wasn't visable on the onset monitors only from the actual recorded 4:4:4 image. The Genesis is a mutt, half Panavision and half Sony. I think Red will be a much more pure breed of device.
 
^
Question, why exactly do so many of these big budget HD movies choise to record to tape rather than strait to a harddrive? Revenge of the Sith also still recorded to tape. I can understand still using tapes for archival purposes and backup but I don't get with these highly digital films why they don't just record it strait to hard drive first and not have to worry about capturing (or the possibility that a dirty recording head my mess up footage).
 
Question, why would any big budget movie record to HD rather than film? I really don't see the advantages.
 
FatBird19 said:
Question, why would any big budget movie record to HD rather than film? I really don't see the advantages.
Click to expand...

Because a huge number of their shots are going to be digitally altered in some way so why not start in digital in the first place. Also means one doesn't have to worry about lab processing. Some directors also like the freedom of HD (same reason I prefer an HVX200 to 16mm film) since you can see exactly what you are getting on the monitor (theoretically) and can be more flexible in some situations.
 
Actually I think it ended up costing them more to shoot on the genesis. It isn't cheap to store all that footage.

Another reason to shoot uncompressed HD instead of film (and I know I'm gonna get slammed for this, but it's true) is that it has a different look than film. Uncompressed digital has many advantages over film in color reproduction.
But again, this has to do with the DP and the director and what they want the film to look like.
 
As was indicated before, Genesis is the somewhat compromised product from the short (and incredibly troubled) union between Sony and Panavision in the late 1990s.

The Genesis does offer some significant tools to digital filmmakers - although there appear to be a few flies in the pudding. Single-chip Super 35mm RGB imager, wireless HD mag (future generation should be solid-state) and almost infinite variable, ramp-able framerates, full compatibility with hands-down the best lenses on the planet and so forth.

That anyone, especially working professionals, should act surprised to find that an errant blank scan line in a Sony product (read: manifests in almost every lower-third of every CRT they've ever made) is laughable. Sony has sold this as a "feature" for almost twenty years now.

e
 
FatBird19 said:
Question, why would any big budget movie record to HD rather than film? I really don't see the advantages.
Click to expand...
Remember that you can also get shots on HD that you couldn't normally get on film. Michael Mann seems to love to turn up the gain until you see the city lights reflecting off the night sky. Collateral and Ali have shots like that, looks like Miami Vice has them as well.

I guess it comes down to having more options, and the Red camera should take that to a whole new level!
 
http://www.bluetights.net/video_large.php?id=9

This is a video where the director, the DP and some other members of the crew are watching and praising the footage of the Genesis. They are talking about how long it takes to handle the video when at some point the director says 'Now it looks better than film, how we make it faster than film?'. Surely they had been discussing that topic a lot previously, so this is probably their point of view. Based on that video, they choosed the Genesis over film because they preferred its look.
 
Yeah, I remember seing that a while back. I don't think people realize how long the post process is on this thing, and it is certainly not more economical nor timely than film, but they definitly chose it for a reason.
 
I'm actually working on the Superman 3D IMAX project as we speak. The resolution we're working with is 1920 x 818. The tonal range is pretty remarkable but it sure can get pretty grainy (or noisy). It's really down to the wire since the film is coming out June 30th and Brain Singer has not locked the picture down yet. And just so you know, the 3D effect is stunning!


digitalnirvana9 said:
When we see the imagery produced by the Genesis Camera for the new Superman movie, will this image quality be roughly comparable to what the RED will be capable of when it comes out? If so, at what resolution would the RED have to be set to achieve those results...
The IMAX version of Superman will have 20 min. of 3D FX which were produced in the Postproduction Process through IMAX. Will there be a similar way that 3D images can be produced for 35 mm distribution and/or lenses developed for this purpose? Thanks, for you input
Click to expand...
 
overlandfilms said:
That anyone, especially working professionals, should act surprised to find that an errant blank scan line in a Sony product (read: manifests in almost every lower-third of every CRT they've ever made) is laughable. Sony has sold this as a "feature" for almost twenty years now.
Click to expand...

Its not an errant scan line. Its the support wire for the patented Sony black mask on all Sony CRT's.
 
evinsky said:
At least theoretically, the Red should outperform the Genesis. The Genesis after all records to HDCam SR which is a 1080 line format. Albeit 4:4:4 but still compresed and not RAW. I heard the Genesis had quite a few problems on Superman as well. Something like 30% of the film had a Green line through the image that had to be taken out in post. It wasn't visable on the onset monitors only from the actual recorded 4:4:4 image. The Genesis is a mutt, half Panavision and half Sony. I think Red will be a much more pure breed of device.
Click to expand...

You are correct about the green line problems. The trouble was also it was in different places so they couldn't really use an automated procces to clean it up.
 
vinney57 said:
Its not an errant scan line. Its the support wire for the patented Sony black mask on all Sony CRT's.
Click to expand...
And there are two of them. One about one-third the way down the screen and another about two-thirds the way down.
 
bgundu said:
I'm actually working on the Superman 3D IMAX project as we speak. The resolution we're working with is 1920 x 818. The tonal range is pretty remarkable but it sure can get pretty grainy (or noisy). It's really down to the wire since the film is coming out June 30th and Brain Singer has not locked the picture down yet. And just so you know, the 3D effect is stunning!
Click to expand...

I've worked with Greg MacGillivray shooting the Hands Across America in IMAX but never 3D....Could the IMAX process for 3D be used for 35mm or is it a totally proprietary thing?
It must be exciting working on such a cutting edge project.
Congratulations!....Norman
 
bgundu said:
You are correct about the green line problems. The trouble was also it was in different places so they couldn't really use an automated procces to clean it up.
Click to expand...

ah.. so the line actually was random, i thought it was at a constant fixed line so it was just loosing one line, but if it kept jumping around that would be a pain in the ass. We had that happen a few times but doing a blackbalance when we saw it seemed to solve it.
 
Ouch

Ouch

One thing is for sure, I would not have wanted to be in the room when those green lines were discoverd..

Bryan: Cool, I think we need to move Brandon's close up to...Ummm just push in on... wait....what the hell is that?

DP: What?

Bryan (standing up, shaking finger at screen) THAT!!

DP: Oh ****.. What is that?

Bryan: That's my question, get your own!

DP: Bob! Call Pana now and get our rep over here.

Bryan: There's ANOTHER ONE..

DP: Where? Oh yeah.. Looks like a green line..

Bryan: Yeah..

DP: That's not good.

Bryan: Ya THINK!?!?

DP: (Sigh) great.

Bryan: Look down.. Oh my god.. Can we get rid of it. Better yet, can we get rid of you?!

DP: ME?! I didn't put it there!

Bryan: You're the director of photography right?!

DP: (Knowing he's being walked into a trap) Yeah

Bryan: So this is your photography, direct that **** off the screen!!

DP; BOB!!!!!


hehehe Funny to me.. I was not there

Jay
 
The differences come down to what the filmmakers want, just in my opinion. You see collateral, which was mainly shot with the Viper, and its transfer to 35 in the theaters gave it a grainy, washed-out look, and a representative trademark of some of Michael Mann's previous urban dramas. Then you see Superman (I guess I'm referring to the trailers) and read up on talk that filmmakers prefer HD to film because it is so much cleaner than film. That said, HD is literally tackling the professional community with different purposes, different uses.

Does anyone know of other projects (movies, commercials, music videos?) that have also been shot with the Genesis?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top