Red One, Canon 7D, 5D intercut reel...

[Duke]

This teaser was posted on Reduser.net. Supposedly a bigger one is being produced.

I thought it was interesting.
http://hdirawworks.com/page2/files/page2-1001-pop.html

There are some pictures there too.
http://hdirawworks.com/index.html

It proves nothing, but... It does show that 7D, 5D and Red footage can be intercut.

Here's what I think and might be a key to figuring out which image is which:

a) The Red One is a 320 ISO camera. Because its RAW a lot can be done to compensate for low light, but its still a 320 ISO camera. The 7D and 5D can knock its socks off in really low light. This was all low light.

b) The RAW Red One footage takes some skill to color correct properly, otherwise it can look washed out.

c) The Canon footage tends to be contrasty, with the 5D having the most contrast.

d) The Canon footage looks better in the organic shapes.

e) The early 7D tests seem to indicate 8.5 stops so the dynamic range is really close to the Red's, which is somewhere between 8-11 depending on who is doing the testing. (11 was Reds own test not independant.) Many people say the Red is 9 stops. But then the higher ISO's in the Canons blow the Red out of the water.

I'd like to see the large size version when it comes out. Laugh if you read the comments on Reduser.net since their complaints had little to do with reality and more to do with defending the Red. At that resolution and light level you can't see if there is aliasing. LOL The large view will tell us.

Its not the camera I thought I was originally buying, but its looking to me like the 7D has its own little niche of excellence.

[antman]

Is this going to change before you start production ? Or are you still going to use the xha1 and hv20?

[1]

Interesting clip, Duke.

Once more, it goes to show that we don't have the ability to show off what these cams can do, especially when they get into RED resolutions.

He made this clip with three great cams, and uploads at 640x360...why? Because they either can't afford to host it in higher rez, or their host
can't handle the load, or they know most won't be able to watch it.

It took me about 5 minutes to download the file, after extracting the source location from the raw HTML page.....the file wouldn't play otherwise.

All these great cams are FANTASTIC for our own immediate circle's use; we can show it on our fancy Plasma and flat-screen LED TVs, but
unfortunately we can't share with the world, as no one else can watch it in anything bigger than 340x240 resolution....

EVERYTHING has changed in regards to acquisition; not much has changed in 10 years in regards to delivery though...

[Duke]

Really Mal? I think playing it on blu-ray and an HD TV is a huge improvement. You could put the same thing on a projector and play it in a small theater. Actually I've seen that done many times in LA. (But I understand your frustration at the download.)


Is this going to change before you start production ? Or are you still going to use the xha1 and hv20?

My thoughts at this time, on my productions, are to use the 7D for those shots where the DOF or low light are important as opposed to the A1 with Brevis. This is where the 7D excells.

For motion I'll use the A1 with no brevis, because 3 CCD cameras handle motion better.

Before my general plan included the HV20 almost exclusively on my 2 story crane. However, recently shot the opening footage of someone else's feature with an HVX200 with letus on the crane and had no issues with it other than buying more counterweights. Those shots through the leaves looked great!

Now I'm not going to worry about using the A1 or 7D up there. I have a LANC and remote pan head which is sweet.

[tiny]

EVERYTHING has changed in regards to acquisition; not much has changed in 10 years in regards to delivery though...

Dramatic much?

I think you must have not been here on the internet in the late 90's and early 2000's, because while true HD streaming isn't feasible yet, even non HD youtube is a massive improvement over just a few short years ago. Yeah we have a ways to go, but it isn't nearly as bleak as the picture you paint.

[zenio]

Those shots with man on the street are so overexposed its not even funny , i would fire DP responsible for this.It looks so bad,it needs to be reshot.

[Halsu]

a) The Red One is a 320 ISO camera. Because its RAW a lot can be done to compensate for low light, but its still a 320 ISO camera. The 7D and 5D can knock its socks off in really low light. This was all low light.

Nope, it's not. It's an ISO-agnostic camera.

The camera itself doesn't really have an ISO in the traditional sense. Exposing it for lower ISO gives less noise but highlights clip sooner. Exposing for higher ISO gives more highlight protection but has more noise.

ISO 320 is just a starting point, which gives a good balance between highlight protection (i recall 4 stops above reference grey) and shadow noise, and works in most cases - but other than than being a good middle-of-the-road setting that works in many cases it has no special meaning.

[1]

...even non HD youtube is a massive improvement over just a few short years ago.

Not at all.

My uploaded clips vary not from 2000, and most Youtube stuff is on par, or worse in pic quality than what I uploaded then.

[Duke]

Nope, it's not. It's an ISO-agnostic camera.

The camera itself doesn't really have an ISO in the traditional sense. Exposing it for lower ISO gives less noise but highlights clip sooner. Exposing for higher ISO gives more highlight protection but has more noise.

ISO 320 is just a starting point, which gives a good balance between highlight protection (i recall 4 stops above reference grey) and shadow noise, and works in most cases - but other than than being a good middle-of-the-road setting that works in many cases it has no special meaning.

Since I don't have a Red I only know what guys who use a Red say, like Erik said here:
http://hv20.com/showpost.php?p=132585&postcount=220

"Just for the record: you can indeed under-expose the RED by a stop or two with virtually no penalty (the sensor is native 320 ISO, but 500 ISO shows almost no increase in noise), but over-exposure is still to be avoided as on most digital cams: Rec.709 and REDspace both have a half-stop or so of "headroom" built in so when you see a "traffic light" indicating a channel is clipped, you can quickly switch to "camera RAW" and make sure you aren't really clipping — if so, you'll want to stop down and/or add NDs for best results."

Or this from Reduser.net:
The Red has a native ISO 320 sensitivity that will determine how fast these photosites react to light, and when you underexpose the sensor (i.e. rate it at a higher native ISO) you send less signal to your A/D converter and your lower midtones and shadows fall into the noise floor somewhat, and to bring them out you have to raise the electronic gain, i.e. apply an iso 'curve', which increases noise as you stretch the sensor away from it's native response.

I'm like Will Rodgers "I only know what I read in the papers."

[1]

Really Mal? I think playing it on blu-ray and an HD TV is a huge improvement.

Aye, agreed...BUT:

Like here in Beijing, they are selling HD TVs like crazy....unfortunately almost no one feeds it more than crappy SD.

No one I know has a BluRay player, and that includes the States.

I delivered my first HD "Industrial" project a few years back....it's still shown at trade shows in SD......go figure... :(

[Duke]

Like here in Beijing, they are selling HD TVs like crazy....unfortunately almost no one feeds it more than crappy SD.
No one I know has a BluRay player, and that includes the States.

I have a blu-ray burner, but only rarely plug it into the HD TV, and then its usually just to watch my own stuff. I don't think the rest of that change over will occur until the big producers quit charging twice as much for a BR disk as an overpriced DVD.

Lets face it a DVD only costs about 50 cents to make and they are still trying to charge $10-$20 for it. No wonder pirating is so widespread. I see the $5 bins at walmart are regularly pawed through.

I think their model is to make a DVD the price of 2-3 theater tickets. Where does that leave a BR? When they charge the price of 4-8 theater tickets people think "Why bother."

After all, as we always say, the story is more important than the resolution. Up scaled DVDs don't look that much worse than blu-ray. With an entrancing story you don't even notice. I don't buy BD, but if they dropped the price I would.

[Ian-T]

I don't buy BD, but if they dropped the price I would.I with you on that one.

[I C]

I've got a PS3 and a collection of BDs. IF you're videophiles, you're missing out by watching DVDs.

Cheaper BDs would certainly be nice, though!