Superman

yeah I agree with you Isaac.. but the rental houses love to supe up cameras and rent em out as exclusives.. Clairmont does this, panavision does this etc.. gives them an "edge" per say.
 
If I remember correctly one of the first pieces aired/released nationally that was shot on the Genesis was a segment of 24 a season or two ago. They shot one scene (in a helicopter if I remember correctly) on the genesis due to some kind of contstraints (time, room, I dunno).

All I remember is I specifically went over to my buddy's house to watch that episode in HD to see if I could tell the difference... I couldn't.
 
studio's don't want to OWN camera's .. they can buy arri's today and they don't ... Hollywood loves to RENT .. they rent whole systems for features -whatever they need - 2 cameras or 8 camera's they rent ..if something goes wrong with the camera they make a call and it is replaced within a hr in LA ... in the long run it's just easier to rent for the studio's/producers ...

so a Pan-Red, Clairmont-Red, Otto-Red IMO will happen ..they will be full system camera's ( they will have their own modified cages etc) so the camera can be used with all current gear at rental house ...

and off topic - i always thought the Genesis was a Panavision only development BUT yesterday i was reading some Panavision SEC filings and they clearly state Genisis is a joint partnership with Sony .. so i would assume that sony has a 35mm size chip TODAY.. ....
 
donatello said:
and off topic - i always thought the Genesis was a Panavision only development BUT yesterday i was reading some Panavision SEC filings and they clearly state Genisis is a joint partnership with Sony .. so i would assume that sony has a 35mm size chip TODAY.. ....
Click to expand...

IIRC the Sony element of the genesis is the SRW-1 dockable HDCAM-SR recorder. The camera head itself is Panavision

J
 
you could be right on the camera head - as i see that in 2003 they bought a company in NY that manufactured CMOS sensors...

from their march,2006 filing ...

"We believe that Arri and DALSA are both working on developing digital cameras with film-like quality with the goal of competing in the same market as Genesis ® "

"A number of these new competitors have significantly greater research and development resources and financial resources than us and we cannot assure that we will be able to effectively compete or achieve successful alliances with these companies."

"The Genesis ® system was developed by a team of Panavision and Sony engineers over four years and contains a one-inch CCD sensor"

"Although we believe that we are well positioned to capitalize on potential growth in the digital capture market, both independently and through a series of agreements with Sony......"
 
I think that the Scary Movie 4 guys didn't know what the hell they were doing with the Genesis, because there are large portions of that film that look like complete ass. In daylight, sure, it looks great, but any scene with contrast exhibits motion problems that look absolutely dreadful. It shows a lot of the same problems that I've noticed with films shot with the Sony F900, so perhaps it's an HDCam thing, not a camera issue.
 
It looks like a VHS dub to me. The skin tones are too orange, the colors too saturated, the blacks to crushed.

It's not the best quicktime to judge the look from. I'd wait for the apple trailer site to have a high quality one.



Jarred Land said:
Flyboys was shot on the Genesis as well... and it looks pretty good.

http://flyboysthemovie.com/flyboys_cannes_2.mov

albiet the trailer is interlaced for some retarded reason hence making it look like shiit.
Click to expand...
 
I saw a good chunk of stuff from Flyboys projected (on film) at panavision a few months ago, and I have to admit it looked damned good, very naturalistic, with a cooler (temperature), slightly diffused look. Reminded me a little of Gerry Fishers photography from 'Aces High'.
The Genesis is a nice machine, I used it on a Chevy spot last december, but it does weigh a ton, NOT nice for your steadicam op.

J
 
Are you sure ROTS recorded to tape? I can't back this up with absolute certainty, but I was under the impression that Lucas' crew recorded Eps II and III to hard drive, but also made tape back ups to function essentially as dailies.

Realistically, tape is the weakest link in the chain of digital production, and I don't think Lucas would rely on tape to capture his $150 million movies.
 
BenS0724 said:
Are you sure ROTS recorded to tape? I can't back this up with absolute certainty, but I was under the impression that Lucas' crew recorded Eps II and III to hard drive, but also made tape back ups to function essentially as dailies.

Realistically, tape is the weakest link in the chain of digital production, and I don't think Lucas would rely on tape to capture his $150 million movies.
Click to expand...

Yep...all to SR decks...of which there were only like 5 of at the time. Michael Mann had the other ones for collateral. And Lucas had one go down on set and was trying to get one from Mann, who pretty much said FU.

And like was said in the previous post...the SR deck oes dual streaming, so master clones (hehe clone wars...) were created right there at the same time as the masters....that alone saved Lucas big bucks because you a receive a huge insurance discount having clones.
 
Jarred Land said:
yeah I agree with you Isaac.. but the rental houses love to supe up cameras and rent em out as exclusives.. Clairmont does this, panavision does this etc.. gives them an "edge" per say.
Click to expand...

Clairmont does it because Denny and Terry are geniuses. I mean the things these guys have done to modify cameras over the last 30-40 years is amazing.

They modify the cameras to reflect what they want to use...and further improve upon a camera design.

Referring to HD...look at what they did with the F900 cameras...if I have to use a f900, I always push to prep out of clairmont for it.

Panavision...with them everything has to be proprietary...And is not always for the best. I hate half of what they did in terms of modding the f900. especially the all the damn little cables...just like their film bodies.
 
donatello said:
so a Pan-Red, Clairmont-Red, Otto-Red IMO will happen ..they will be full system camera's ( they will have their own modified cages etc) so the camera can be used with all current gear at rental house ...
.
Click to expand...

Yes it will. I am still very skeptical about RED.

But I know for a fact, straight from his mouth, that Otto placed a reservation on 8 Red cameras. Along with 10-12 on Arri D20s.

About the red...he said, if it fails...so what, 20k a camera is nothing to him :rofl:
 
got late in that thread, sorry. but still a lot to be commented..

im.thatoneguy said:
:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG) - personal note: I had a trinitron monitor for 4 years before someone told me about the lines. That was the first day I saw them. Since then they've faded back into oblivion.
Click to expand...

Thomas Mathai said:
After you know what it is, it is mostly ignored.
Click to expand...

Same on me. No need to complain about the lines ever. they are just there. A shame they are dieing.

Gordon JL said:
So why do they always shoot to tape instead of onto something like a harddrive?

..but, don't they have to digitize the film anywayif they were to shoot on film instead; for it to be edited in an NLE? The only difference I see is that shooting digital prevents them from having to digitize the footage at all; while shooting on film, they have to digitize it once -- which is what they need to do anyway for editing. ..; what's the advantage?
Click to expand...

DavidBeier said:
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).
Click to expand...

scharky said:
Actually I think it ended up costing them more to shoot on the genesis. It isn't cheap to store all that footage. ...
But again, this has to do with the DP and the director and what they want the film to look like.
Click to expand...

im.thatoneguy said:
I'm just guessing here but probably a large reason why they record to tape instead of HD is because A) they're going to backup to tape eventually anyway and B) It costs a lot less per gigabyte to record to tape.
Click to expand...

they digitize with a telecine, not a scanner. and its done realtime with less money, thats rushes or dailies. Not to mistake with a scan or a HD recording.
And some might go directly to tape because its more secure, easier to duplicate (just realtime, simple dubbing) and cheaper. Otherwise you end up with endless loads of disks. Not really non-linear or really forward-thinking, but flawless in terms of workflow.
Going home with that only one tape ? Uhm, yep! Going home with that one disk ? Uhem. Nope. Could you take that one please, along with the responsiblity ?
And editing is not done with original data anyway. Its made with proxies, downsized clips etc. So the captured data won't be of that big advantage.

BenS0724 said:
Realistically, tape is the weakest link in the chain of digital production, and I don't think Lucas would rely on tape to capture his $150 million movies.
Click to expand...

Regarding safety, tape is probably the absolute safest link. And besides he relies on HD already. So quality is not the issue, it was probably a deal. Remind the awkward comps in EpisodeI and you understand that tape or disk wasn't the issue. IMHO he should have been staying at 35, at least for the first one, but who cares...

Andrew Wharton said:
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. ...
Click to expand...

Robert Sanders said:
Exciting times.

You know digital is coming of age when Fincher and Mann are using it.
Click to expand...

Hopefully not. I didn't like that typical HDcam look you can see in some scenes of Collateral. He is a brilliant picture composer and always has superb lighting. However, a camera assistant who was obviously working on Miami Vice said they had major complaints and Michael Mann doesn't want to work with it again.
Anybody better infos ?

Graeme_Nattress said:
There's also registration issues with film that have to be dealt with when compositing. Video has zero wobble. Graeme
Click to expand...

But that does make it ugly, don't you think ?
In comp its disturbing, but in projection I like to see a little wobble. In fact I was disturbed myself when I saw EpisodeIII with that rocksteady end-credits maing it totally artificial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top