Werner Herzog Reviews the F35. Red One MX, and Digital Bolex 16

i'm regrading as we speak - you are right - it was a little wacky - trying a different film print emulation

here it is again regraded

https://vimeo.com/128483083

made it even better for the digital bolex - I cracked the code!
 
Last edited:
You should cut that first shot out. It makes the F35 initial impression look like SD because the focus was off.
 
I thought that was a fresnel spotted in with some diffusion? looking again that does look like an oval mask?


Broatch Berry

Venice CA
 
Write me down on the list of those who prefer MX over Dragon.

The RED ONE MX can produce great results. At the price they go for today they can be a great tool for indie filmmakers.

But compared to the F35 it doesn't really offer anything, unless you really, really want to be able to say you shoot 4K, even though it isn't.

The F35 is just a much better camera, in design, operation, use, build and image quality. Considering a F35 set up doesn't cost much more and taking into account all the RED ONE problems with booting, heat and all the other known issues and the general RED workflow which I'm not a fan of at all, the F35 is a no-brainer for those who have to choose one from the two. For those who can both, like Ed, the RED ONE MX can be pure fun.
 
They are lazy person secondary color correction. Too lazy to key skin tone. The red has its own style. I do not dislike it. It has less noise than f35 and more inherient tperceived sharpness To me. At least it resolves more lines on my test charts. i like the red one mx. I dont like the epic or dragon or weapons look though. That taylor switft music video had weird motion for the overcranked stuff and just a weird look in general. How it renders faces. Dont know if its the lenses or shooting in 6k mode but something is off.

I shot 24 fps off f35 to dpx files 12 bit via odyssey 7q. Each camera was 24p
 
A couple of graded D16 frames from Suzy's Ginsburg interview.

17538294303_a208b5112a_o.jpg


18155346012_5718e3dfa0_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
Hunter Hampton said:
^ You might want to dial back the clarity and noise suppression as its causing artifacts. Mind sharing a cDNG?
Click to expand...

Actually this was done in Resolve with Neat Video noise reduction. It is 2.5 stops under exposed under available light conditions. The Midtone detail in Resolve raw menu is dialed back a bit. Sharpening was done in NV. I left some edginess and noise in the grade that shows up more in the JPEG than it does in Resolve, but when exported to a compressed video codec it tends to get smoothed over. The first stage video export was to uncompressed 4:2:2. MOV. 800Mbps. Here is a link to an XAVC200 10 bit 4:2:2 200Mbps sample of the same grade in the jpeg. This is a 4:1 compression of the uncompressed version. It amazes me how much gets lost even in a high end compressed codec. Subtle shading and textures get flattened, like going to MP3 from a SACD audio file. I hate compression. VLC in its default settings shows a gamma and color shift with this file. The wall paper is textured and that shows where it catches light. https://www.dropbox.com/s/bofg376f89y2qp8/Max XAVC 200 sample.mxf?dl=0
I'm still playing with this one a lot. Applying the slightest Gaussian blur eliminates the artifacts but keeps the overall apparent texture and sharpness.

Here is a sample DNG: https://www.dropbox.com/s/at51i4na5y51vsb/D16-20150501-0006-0000001.dng?dl=0
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top