|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Is Gone Girl a 4k DCP?
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 10-20-2014 06:07 AM
It is. At least around here, so most likely also around you.
It was actually shot in 6K using those Red Epic Dragon cameras. Looks I'm not entirely alone in this then... I never liked the looks most of the material acquired on their RED One and RED Epic cameras. I've even had the opportunity to use and experiment with their RED EPIC (the one with the Mysterium X sensor). For me, it's all just appearances but little substance, I don't know why so many directors and cinematographers fall for it. They may be capturing at >4K resolutions, but there's more to picture quality than just the amount of pixels you can produce. The RED EPIC DRAGON is quite new and not much material out there yet, but their previous models were, IMHO, all quite underwhelming in fields like contrast, sharpness and color depth.
If you've got a player that can play the REDRAY proprietary format, you can download a very high quality 4K Gone Girl trailer here. Actually, the link is a bit useless, because I don't know of any other device besides the REDRAY that will play it ![[Wink]](wink.gif) . There is also a 4K trailer on YouTube, but probably with lots of artifacts and there's also a better one in mp4 format here.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 10-20-2014 09:34 AM
This "overshooting", which is by no means a new phenomenon, offers no explanation for the soft and often somewhat dull look of many features shot on RED. Even after downsampling and cropping off the top and bottom there should be sufficient resolution left to fill a 4K scope container without any relevant loss of quality.
I didn't like the look of The Hobbit (both movies and neither in 24p or in 48p), I didn't like the look of Elysium (which I watched in 4K on a brand new Barco DP4K-32B), The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, This is the End had the looks of a bad made-for-tv movie, and I could go on for a while.
It's not that I hate RED for any reason other that I don't like the pictures they produce. I had hopes for the "DRAGON", but they haven't yet materialized.
There are many movies using RED cameras which are essentially 80%+ CGI, in those cases it's rather hard to judge the quality of the acquiring cameras, but the movies I mentioned all have a considerable amount of "non fx" footage.
quote: Mark Ogden
Because they disagree with you?
At least that's a well motivated statement...
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-20-2014 09:37 AM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
I've even had the opportunity to use and experiment with their RED EPIC (the one with the Mysterium X sensor). For me, it's all just appearances but little substance, I don't know why so many directors and cinematographers fall for it.
I'm under the impression more directors are opting for the Arri Alexa, even with its more limited 2.8K native resolution. It seems like anything shot with anamorphic lenses these days is being shot using the Alexa -that is if the movie isn't actually shot on film.
I'm really curious to see which movie productions will be first to use the new Alexa 65 camera, and see the results. The Red Epic Dragon may sport a native 6K resolution, but all those pixels are packed into a TINY Super35 sized sensor. The Alexa 65 has a sensor literally 3 times larger. It should be able to shoot digital 'scope movies with significantly better image quality. Another issue is getting that extra image quality onto d-cinema screens; 'scope is currently a travesty there, with flat being the highest resolution format.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
If you've got a player that can play the REDRAY proprietary format, you can download a very high quality 4K Gone Girl trailer here. Actually, the link is a bit useless, because I don't know of any other device besides the REDRAY that will play it.
Adobe Premiere Pro CC can edit/play Redray 6K content directly. The app can do the same with ARRIRAW data too. I don't know what other NLE video applications support Redray, but I'd be surprised if Avid, Final Cut, etc. didn't.
quote: Mark Ogden
There is a practice gaining acceptance in movie production using high-resolution digital cameras to over-frame during photography (or, to put it more exactly, shoot at a higher spatial resolution then you really need) and not settle on the final composition until post, at which time the full resolution image can be repositioned into the intended frame.
One never knows if the movie studio is going to ink a deal with IMAX so the 'scope composed movie can be opened up to 1.77:1 on those big 2K screens. Of course all the CGI animation/rendering, effects compositing and DI work would have to be completed in that taller frame as well.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
This "overshooting", which is by no means a new phenomenon, offers no explanation for the soft and often somewhat dull look of many features shot on RED.
Some of it could be the fault of the camera and its relatively tiny image sensor. I remember the HUGE jump in image quality I saw going from a tiny "cropped" sensor in a Canon Digital Rebel to a bigger full frame sensor in a 5D Mark II. Sensor size often dictates image quality in CCD-based video cameras. The tiny CCDs in consumer grade cameras capture more muddy and dull looking imagery than the much larger chips in professional grade cameras. The size of the photosites means something, both in terms of color fidelity and contrast as well as sharpness. Smaller "cropped" sensors and their smaller pixels will magnify the glass of a camera lens and make diffraction and other limitations of the lens more noticeable. This is essentially why smart phone cameras are so inferior to DSLR cameras.
Some of this also has to do with creative choices made by the director.
I generally like David Fincher's movies, but I will admit he often likes to put imagery on the screen that looks like he was shooting through a urine filled fish tank.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 10-20-2014 10:40 AM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
This "overshooting", which is by no means a new phenomenon, offers no explanation for the soft and often somewhat dull look of many features shot on RED
I'm not offering it as an explanation. I mentioned it to clarify the way the picture was shot.
The Red Dragon is a box with a sensor in it, one which is considered to be the best photographic sensor commercially available today. If you shoot the camera in RAW mode, as Fincher and his DP do, then there is essentially nothing optically, electronically or algorithmically about the camera OF AND BY ITSELF to account for the "soft picture" that you don't like about it.
So, how are the lenses? Gone Girl was shot with Leica Summilux Cine lenses. Were they up to the task of resolving 6K worth of image? Did Fincher like the look they gave? Did he, I dunno, WANT the picture to look a little soft? If he had used Cookes, or Masterprimes, would it have looked more to your liking?
What happened in the grading suite? If you shoot a RAW format of any kind, you are pretty much obliged to post sharpen. Maybe they under did it a little bit? What is the obligation of a film to be absolutely razor sharp? How do you know that the picture doesn't look EXACTLY like he wanted it?
What were your viewing conditions? I walked out of the first show I saw at a small theatre in upstate New York, because it was clear that the image was dim and out of focus. I eventually saw it on a large screen at a carefully maintained theater in New York City, and it looked fantastic. I knew going in that Fincher liked things on the dark and shadowy side, and I made allowances for that.
Why is it the camera?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-20-2014 10:41 AM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
That file isn't in the REDCODE RAW format, but in the REDRAY format. The REDRAY is their player appliance for 4K content. It's lossy compressed content using their "own proprietary" compression algorithms, so you probably need licenses to get to the specs.
I misunderstood that, assuming this Redray thing was a new version of their raw format. The Redray-based Gone Girl trailer consists of a few different folders containing XML files pointing to separate audio, video & image content. It's a little like a DVD or Blu-ray disc layout. Unfortunately there's nothing you can drag & drop into an NLE or video player. Redcine-X Pro software seems to be the only thing that can encode Redray files (using a $20 plug-in that doesn't originally come with the software).
I'm wondering how Redray compares to MPEG HEVC. HEVC looks like the foregone conclusion for 4K distribution on consumer media/devices. 1080p formats like Blu-ray have only been supporting basic 8-bit color, despite years of hype promising "deep color" discs. HEVC can at least support 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 chroma subsampling. The question is whether disc authors and consumer electronics companies will make movie discs/content and monitors that support it properly.
At any rate, I can't see anyone but Red camera users opting to buy one of those Redray media players.
quote: Mark Ogden
The Red Dragon is a box with a sensor in it, one which is considered to be the best photographic sensor commercially available today.
More than a few camera fans (Nikon fans in particularly) will quickly point out Red's Dxomark scores at least deserve an asterisk. They couldn't get access to the Red sensor's Bayer pattern data like they can with other cameras to do a complete analysis of what's happening.
quote: Mark Ogden
What is the obligation of a film to be absolutely razor sharp?
None, if you want to take an age-conscious actor's 2¢ into the equation. Smear some Vaseline™ on the front element of that lens while you're at it.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 10-20-2014 12:28 PM
quote: Mark Ogden
The Red Dragon is a box with a sensor in it, one which is considered to be the best photographic sensor commercially available today. If you shoot the camera in RAW mode, as Fincher and his DP do, then there is essentially nothing optically, electronically or algorithmically about the camera OF AND BY ITSELF to account for the "soft picture" that you don't like about it.
First off all, the same site never tested any comparable cameras of their big competition (Arri and Sony). They also mostly test still cameras, which is still another road than dedicated video or "digital film" cameras. Also, I've got my fair share of trouble with anything being called "the best", especially by a single source. Besides that, REDCODE doesn't allow direct access to Bayer data, all data you get is already preprocessed one or other way.
On another note, I've not yet seen any output of the DRAGON sensor with my own eyes (rather than processed end-products), so I never had any final judgement on that one. I've seen the output of the MYSTERIUM-X sensor though, with my own eyes and I wasn't really impressed with the picture. I also do have first hand experience with a Sony F35 and although the native resolution is just 1920x1080 (so not even 2K), I do prefer the pictures in almost every aspect. Please also notice that the Sony camera uses a CCD sensor and not a CMOS sensor. I've voiced my restraint regarding the usage of CMOS for cinematic features before.
Also, I don't know if the director in this particular picture intended the image to be soft, I wasn't there on set, I didn't speak to him, he didn't mention it in any interview I'm aware of. I've only pointed at a trend I noticed and FIRST HAND experience, although admittently with a DIFFERENT sensor, abeit from the very SAME manufacturer. I've also noticed the very same "problems" or let's call them "aspects" in other features, primarily shot on features of the same camera manufacturer.
I'm fully aware there are a whole big bunch of aspects that make up the look of the final picture and I'm making no hard claims here, I'm just sharing opinions and experience. If Fincher likes his stuff blurry as hell, that's his decision, but it somewhat defeats the purpose of shooting it in 6K and releasing it in 4K.
And yes, I like sharp pictures without noise and grain. I know that some directors might choose otherwise because they think it best fits the style of their picture. Then again, I've always seen lack of resolution, grain, noise, etc. as a limitation of technology, not something you should constantly embrace as an artistic feature.
quote: Bobby Henderson
I'm wondering how Redray compares to MPEG HEVC. HEVC looks like the foregone conclusion for 4K distribution on consumer media/devices. 1080p formats like Blu-ray have only been supporting basic 8-bit color, despite years of hype promising "deep color" discs. HEVC can at least support 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 chroma subsampling. The question is whether disc authors and consumer electronics companies will make movie discs/content and monitors that support it properly.
They claim they can do 12-bit 4:2:2 and practically no visible artifacts at a fraction of what other modern codecs would do at the same color depth and quality level.
quote: Bobby Henderson
At any rate, I can't see anyone but Red camera users opting to buy one of those Redray media players.
The thing is actually targeted more at the 4K home cinema enthusiast. Essentially what NetFlix and RedBox are doing, but then for premium quality content only.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-20-2014 03:15 PM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
They claim they can do 12-bit 4:2:2 and practically no visible artifacts at a fraction of what other modern codecs would do at the same color depth and quality level.
I'll always keep such claims in mind as being something coming from a company's publicity department until the claims can be fully verified by independent sources. I remember when the folks behind Napster repeatedly claimed a MP3 file encoded at a 128 kilobit per second bit rate passed for CD quality and it very obviously does not.
Red's video codec probably does perform amazingly well. However, the people behind HEVC/H.265 have been making bold claims about what that codec can do, such as compress video two times more efficiently than H.264.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
The thing is actually targeted more at the 4K home cinema enthusiast. Essentially what NetFlix and RedBox are doing, but then for premium quality content only.
Redbox and Netflix aren't tied to a very expensive ($1,450) hard-drive based set top box. Red supposedly has a Redray player app ready to launch in Apple's app store, but it is waiting on approval from Apple. Meanwhile Netflix, Redbox Instant and other streaming services competitors have apps on a variety of platforms (personal computers, smart phones/tablets, game consoles, smart TV sets). Netflix has a growing number of exclusives, be it original content like the House of Cards or Orange is the New Black TV series or deals it has made with networks to show other things exclusively, such as The Walking Dead.
People who stream movies care more about what movies and TV shows are available than the image quality levels of those shows. Too much of our Internet infrastructure is painfully slow. I'd be willing to be most Netflix users aren't streaming content at any better than 720p, much less do 1080p at all.
IMHO, if Red's Redray codec does noticeably outperform H.265 HEVC the company ought to do the smart thing and license it to as many partners as possible so it can be used on various content streaming platforms and cable/satellite TV broadcasting. I don't know if Red is actually trying to position Redray as something to directly challenge streaming services like Netflix. If they are doing that I don't think they're going to be successful. Too much of the public is all about the content first and quality levels a (sadly) distant second.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 10-20-2014 07:11 PM
If I remember correctly, Netflix's streaming service also started out as a (more affordable) set-top-box exclusive and was then released as an add-on/plugin/app to other platforms.
I guess RED is at least somewhat aware of the fact that they're most likely not in the race to compete with Amazon, Redbox and Netflix on sheer quantity. So that's why they targeted the niche market for high-end 4K distribution. I think they're hoping for a few distribution deals with studios. But their on-line rental service "ODEMAX" still hasn't really materialized, so you're essentially stuck with a very expensive player if you bought one, but no content. You can convert your existing 4K content though, via an additional plugin for REDCINE-X...
quote: Bobby Henderson
I'll always keep such claims in mind as being something coming from a company's publicity department until the claims can be fully verified by independent sources. I remember when the folks behind Napster repeatedly claimed a MP3 file encoded at a 128 kilobit per second bit rate passed for CD quality and it very obviously does not.
Red's video codec probably does perform amazingly well. However, the people behind HEVC/H.265 have been making bold claims about what that codec can do, such as compress video two times more efficiently than H.264.
Well, at least the HEVC/H.265 specs aren't a complete black box and there are working implementations (even in Open Source) out there for anybody to see and use. And yes, if their codec would really be the thing they claim it to be, they would probably be crazy not to license it to the world and make TONS of money in the process, or maybe I'm missing something...
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic