21 the movie, Panavision Genesis, panning, and what it means for Scarlet

[Eugene]

I saw a preview of 21. (It was great, but that is not the point.) If I read the credits right, it was filmed with a Genesis III. When the rest of you go see the film tell me if my eyes saw that right. The point is that the Genesis has a CCD and the Red One has a CMOS. People have been talking here about the HV20 and rolling shutters. What will Scarlet have? CCD or CMOS. It was determined that CMOS was best for One, but could CCD be best for Scarlet? Is CCD best for non tripod applications? Will I get Jello vision if I shoot fast action hand held shots with a CMOS? Will OIS take care of some of that problem?

The opening scene in 21 is a great panning shot of Jim Sturgess riding his bike across a bridge in Boston. I don't know if it was filmed from a crane or helicopter, but it was a great shot and since it was filmed on a CCD sensor, the panning looked great. The panning scenes of Vegas at night looked good too.

I don't have a $75 million budget like was used for the making of 21. I need a cheaper camera. I read about the Casio Exilim Pro EX-F1 in the April issuse of Pop Photo. It uses a CMOS. It will be interesting to see what the Red team thinks of its sensor. (I also saw the Sigma DP1 in Pop Photo, but the DP1 can't do anything much as far as video goes. Who cares if it has a DSLR sized sensor.)

Anyways, I read a little about rolling shutter on the web. I have learned a lot from you guys here on reduser and hope to learn more. Before someone here mentioned rolling shutter, I didn't even know what it was. Thanks for keeping me informed.

Ok, back to practicing counting cards. "Winner, winner, chicken dinner."

[David Mullen ASC]

Some reading on CCD vs. CMOS:
http://www.dalsa.com/markets/ccd_vs_cmos.asp

To paraphrase the article, there are pros and cons for both.

You're referring more to the type of shutter used and how it affects panning, though I don't think you should be all that worried about the rolling shutter in the RED. Besides, you can't buy a Genesis anyway...

If RED thought that the rolling shutter was so useless for motion that they decide to put a CCD inside the Scarlet, then why would they use a CMOS in the RED? Besides, there are prosumer HD cameras that use CMOS sensors too.

And there are cameras inbetween a Genesis and a Casio -- your post makes it sound like if you can't afford a Genesis, you need to be looking at the Casio or Sigma...

[KETCH ROSSi]

Don't know if you might find this useful at all Eugene, but here it is http://www.pixelink.com/support/oem/pixelink_product_documentation.htm#cameras/common_to_firewire/image_capture/rolling_shutter.htm

Ciao

[chuckt]

I saw a preview of 21. (It was great, but that is not the point.) If I read the credits right, it was filmed with a Genesis III. "

Yes. 21 was digitally made. The trailers look good.
With $75Million budget, I wonder why they went Digital.

[David Mullen ASC]

Yes. 21 was digitally made. The trailers look good.
With $75Million budget, I wonder why they went Digital.

I'd more wonder why it cost $75 million dollars... Where does this figure come from?

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

A Genesis III? what's the difference between that Genesis and any other Panavision Genesis camera?

[laguun]

Some reading on CCD vs. CMOS:
http://www.dalsa.com/markets/ccd_vs_cmos.asp

To paraphrase the article, there are pros and cons for both.

You're referring more to the type of shutter used and how it affects panning, though I don't think you should be all that worried about the rolling shutter in the RED. Besides, you can't buy a Genesis anyway...

Both systems have their advantages and shortcomings. In fact we will use our HDCAMs for several special shots side by side with the REDs.

I however think that for REDs design goals CMOS -certainly- was the best choice possible.

Also, its importnat to understand that not -all- CCDs have no shutter issues. Frame interline transfer CCDs are the best in that regard, but you wont find them on all cameras...




And there are cameras inbetween a Genesis and a Casio -- your post makes it sound like if you can't afford a Genesis, you need to be looking at the Casio or Sigma...

I personally would not be be surprised -at all- if Nikon and Casio will offer 24/25fps fullformat 35mm 4K at 2000-3000$. But thats some years from here, i would guestimate ~ 3-4 design generations. Convergence of markets is one of the laws of any media going digital, and the movie industry is no exception to this.

p.s.
this funny little 999 casio exilim highspeed DSLR looks interesting, anyone used one of these as 1080p cam?

[laguun]

Yes. 21 was digitally made. The trailers look good.
With $75Million budget, I wonder why they went Digital.

There are many much more expensive HDCAM (SR) or Genesis movies. I wont explain all the advantages a digital workflow offers.

Simply look for Bryan Singer - Superman Returns, Peter Greenaway - Nightwatching, David Fincher - Zodiac, Michael Mann - Miami Vice, Collateral, Steven Soderbergh - Guerrilla, Argentine, Sidney Lumet - Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, Anthony Hopkins - Slipstream, Andy Wachowski and Larry Wachowski - Speed Racer, Mel Gibson - Apocalypto, Francis Ford Coppola - Youth without Youth, George Lucas - Star Wars Episode II und III, Robert Altman - A Prairie Home Companion, Lee Tamahori - Next, Robert Rodriguez - Sin City, Grindhouse, Tony Scott - Déjà Vu , David Zucker - Scary Movie 4, Jean-Jacques Annaud etc - they explained why they use digital cameras and sensor instead of mechanical cameras and film for their films en detail. A-Budget, btw, allows to maximize the use of the advantages of digital cameras offer over their mechanical counterparts.

[Davide B.]

I'd more wonder why it cost $75 million dollars... Where does this figure come from?

75 Million is what wikipedia says. I haven't found that number anywhere else except Mahalo. Kevin Spacey and Lawrence Fishburne couldn't be asking for more than $10 million each, right? Then again, this is probably being made to be a big-spectacle movie with huge scenes of splendor. Maybe those (and the rights to the book) pushed it over the top.

davide

[MichaelP]

I also have doubts about that budget as well... Kevin Spacey did it as a co-production through his company; Trigger Street so he probably put his fee back into the production.

Unless the number also includes all marketing, P&A etc, then perhaps it gets closer to that number.

Michael

[Lexicon]

A Genesis III? what's the difference between that Genesis and any other Panavision Genesis camera?

AFAIK, there is no such thing. Panavision sure as heck isn't calling the Genesis cameras by that name. It's possible there is a third revision of the camera that unofficially goes by that name but I can't find any evidence that suggests that is the case. There's definitely no credit anywhere that I can find or any mention of a "Genesis III" camera anywhere else in the Interweb tubes apart from this forum thread.

[Darren Orange]

From the looks of this film it would look like this film would fit into the 30-40million range. If it is anymore than that then its being pumped up by the actors wages. Just my thoughts I could be wrong.