Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: RED CAMERAS "as good as film?"

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » RED CAMERAS "as good as film?" (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: RED CAMERAS "as good as film?"

Cameron Glendinning
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 845
From: West Ryde, Sydney, NSW Australia
Registered: Dec 2005

posted 09-28-2008 06:14 PM

Over the last few weeks I have seen some camera tests shot at Fox Studios. I even went and watched some of the "Bank Job" which is a feature film shot with this new 4k digital technology. All the footage had been transfered to 35mm film for projection.

Needless to say the on screen results looked impressive and quite film like to me. Anyone else impressed with this new technology?

| IP: Logged

Greg Anderson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 766
From: Ogden Valley, Utah
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-28-2008 07:19 PM

At NAB in April I saw footage from Soderbergh's movies The Argentine and Guerrilla. Both were shot with the Red camera. One of them (I forget which) was shot using anamorphic lenses... which must have given a final, corrected aspect radio of, what, 32:9? Anyway, they were going to crop it off to 2.35:1 in the end. But the point was that he was trying to mimick the look of older war movies shot with anamorphic lenses. And it worked very well.

What I saw was projected digitally. It looked great.

I don't know how long this thread can remain on topic but I'll just say that the phrase "as good as film" is probably going to get us into trouble. I don't know that digital needs to look "like film" although, to my eyes, it does. For me, the bottom line is that digital is different but it still looks great. And Red is already developing their 5K camera.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 09-28-2008 07:43 PM

They probably aren't quite as good as film just based on exposure tolerances alone, but DAMN Red has a really nice camera for only 3 grand. Freakin' unbelievable.

| IP: Logged

Greg Anderson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 766
From: Ogden Valley, Utah
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-28-2008 09:23 PM

You can deck these things out to look an awful lot like film cameras and you can spend an awful lot more than the base price. National Lampoon did a feature here last month with a three-camera package.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 09-28-2008 10:30 PM

I saw that test a week ago and projected via the new Christie M projector at the correct color temp and light level. IMHO the Red Camera actually did look better than film in many aspects... especially at bringing out details in the dark areas and there was no "Kodak Blue" in the dark areas at all. Hair had much more detail to it as well. Now I don't always believe tests like this unless they are done by some neutral entity, or in other words I can't say the filmed parts were done to the best of film's ability. For what its worth a couple of off screen pics...

Mark

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 09-28-2008 10:33 PM

quote: Joe Redifer
Red has a really nice camera for only 3 grand. Freakin' unbelievable.

I've been watching this since Red One was still a rumor. It's designed specifically for Digital Cinema.

"Scarlet" is due out next year, base price $3,000. [thumbsup]

(The Red One body is something like $12,000.)

| IP: Logged

Mike Olpin
Chop Chop!

Posts: 1852
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 09-28-2008 10:39 PM

The thing to keep in mind is that it is not all about resolution. It's about dynamic range. Film has a great deal of headroom in terms of color, whereas electronic (digital) imaging does not. This makes a difference with color correction. The raw footage shot on film can look pretty bad, and yet still be color corrected to look great. In digital, the color correction possibilities are much more limited.

The key for the RED camera is the price point. It's set at a level where independent film makers can at the very least rent the equipment at an affordable rate.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 09-29-2008 12:16 AM

quote: Greg Anderson
You can deck these things out to look an awful lot like film cameras

No kidding... colored tape makes ANY camera look professional!

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
IMHO the Red Camera actually did look better than film in many aspects.

Who was running this demo? Was it.... RED? Also digital pictures of projected screens don't show much.

quote: Tim Reed
"Scarlet" is due out next year, base price $3,000.

Ahhhh, so it is the Scarlet. I was looking at that camera and thinking "No, it can't be this one. It must be one called "Zit Bleed Red".

quote: Mike Olpin
The thing to keep in mind is that it is not all about resolution. It's about dynamic range. Film has a great deal of headroom in terms of color, whereas electronic (digital) imaging does not.

Agreed, which is the basis of my very first comment in this thread. I really, really, really hate images that are blown out where all of the highlights are clipped or the blacks crushed.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 09-29-2008 12:58 AM

quote: Joe Redifer
I really, really, really hate images that are blown out where all of the highlights are clipped or the blacks crushed.

You and me both! I've noticed an increasing trend in portrait photography to clip the highs and yet these photographers still label themselves as "professionals". [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99

posted 09-29-2008 08:17 AM

The camera that was going to be the Scarlet isn't going into production after all, mostly because of the appearance of the Nikon D90 and the Canon 5D Mk 2. Although Red Digital isn't saying much, the rumor is that the whole Scarlet concept has been dropped in favor of something more a response to those cameras, one with interchangeable lenses, which the original Scarlet didn't have. They are also bringing out a 5K camera, the Epic, whose sensor can be retrofitted into the Red One.

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 09-29-2008 09:57 AM

The new design is still making its debut at NAB 2009, and still going to be called Scarlet.

| IP: Logged

Michael Barry
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 584
From: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-29-2008 10:07 AM

...but, will it still meet that promised $3000 price point?

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 09-29-2008 10:11 AM

The Canon 5D Mark II has some exciting possibilities, but I have a feeling the camera will be pretty limited as far as video use is concerned. Reportedly the camera has HDMI and USB connections. Hopefully that might enable some direct-to-disc recording rather than having to rely totally on a flash card within the camera.

Good quality D-SLR camera lenses are relatively expensive, but not as expensive as lens packages for motion picture film cameras or broadcast quality video cameras (at least not in the most commonly used lens lengths). Obviously the line separating D-SLR still cameras and video cameras is going to get further blurred or completely eliminated. A relatively affordable camera that can work fully as a D-SLR and semi-professional quality video camera and use Canon or Nikon D-SLR lenses would be a pretty attractive product.

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 09-29-2008 12:59 PM

quote: Michael Barry
will it still meet that promised $3000 price point?

Since that was one of its main selling points, I would think they'd keep it in that range.

quote: Bobby Henderson
The Canon 5D Mark II has some exciting possibilities, but I have a feeling the camera will be pretty limited as far as video use

I don't think a DSLR had anything to do with the re-purposing of Scarlet; no one's going to be shooting DC or HDTV content with a Canon still camera (some animation, possibly).

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 09-29-2008 02:37 PM

Of course not. Professional video projects will still demand fully dedicated video cameras to get the work done.

But it does represent an obvious shift in the direction of product development. Ultimately what happens with the Canon EOS 5D Mark II and other D-SLRs incorporating video capabilities is that in the long run consumers will have one device to do both video and still photography and get great results doing each. Right now no such product exists -at least not anything credible. Currently you have video cameras that do a terrible job taking still photos and various still cameras that do a crappy job handling video.

D-SLR lens systems have a great product range. Lenses on most consumer priced video cameras are not very good at all. The Red camera and several other D-cinema video cameras are able to use 35mm film camera lens systems. With D-SLR cameras growing in popularity, it only seems logical to develop a device that can use those kinds of interchangeable D-SLR lenses to do both video and still photography very well.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.