F900 Comparison

[PMascetta]

I am about to loose a rental to an F900. Have the comparisons between the two cameras been discussed. If so where would I find this discussion. Is it just me who feels the f900 is now outdated because of Red?

[Jason Mitchell]

I had a job that went one day on Red for location and was going one day on F900 in a studio for greenscreen. We had a three-person full-body shot that blew the budget for the lighting unless we went tungsten. Tungsten greenscreen meant F900 and not Red ...

Jason

[Steve Sanacore]

I had a job that went one day on Red for location and was going one day on F900 in a studio for greenscreen. We had a three-person full-body shot that blew the budget for the lighting unless we went tungsten. Tungsten greenscreen meant F900 and not Red ...

Jason

Why is that? Why can't a RED shoot green screen on tungsten?

[GlennChan]

In rare situations, the knee circuit on the F900 will do wacky things (colors don't look right, possible banding). Red has no knee circuit (and Redcine won't do it / you would use RGB curves). You can probably disable the knee circuit on the F900. F900 is non-RAW workflow so that stuff is burned into the footage.

This is from some footage I worked with that was dubbed from HDCAM --> DVCPRO HD --> DV50 (don't ask). Considering that, it's pretty hard to judge all the other qualities. But I have a suspicion that HDCAM compression isn't great by today's standards (keep in mind that HDCAM was developed a long time ago) based on what I've seen elsewhere (FXPHD). For normal-looking shows and reality-type shows, the footage looks fine. So does XDCAM HD, HDV, and some HDCAM stuff looks very close to film (or the other way around). Those types of shows come down mostly to lighting, DOF, etc. If you want to push the look or do VFX work, then the format and quality of the camera system absolutely makes a difference.

2- Workflow is absolutely different. Advantages and disadvantages to either depend on the situation.

[Poi Boy]

To each their own..I would much prefer Red over 900 for a tungsten green screen.
Aloha
-A

[Jeff Butcher]

I just recently shot tungsten/greenscreen on Red... no problem.

[James T Mather]

Or you could Half-blue your tungsten units and get somewhat off the tungsten register. Pull it the rest of the way in post.

[Paul Leeming]

Red is the best greenscreen camera, period. 4K, RAW info, nothing baked in. Light it correctly and you'll have the cleanest keys you've ever seen.

Plus, you can downscale back to HD later and it'll show far less jaggies than the F900....

HTH

Paul

[Harry Capota]

I did a test RED 4k with master primes vs F900R and digi primes one month ago. It was a night shooting with available night, only street tungsten lamps. I dont know if i am allowed to post samples here....;-( In case you are interested, you could write me an email....

[Gunleik Groven]

The "problem" with keying RED on tungsten is grossly overstated, But as with everything RED that is dependant on the development of the RAW files.

Have you checked my one-click tests.

RED keys better than... well most things. It can be even better at daylight, but that is not the point...

[alex trettenero]

we shot 4 days of greens screen lately.
the setup was:

arri 9.5 mm (wide) s16 lens, T 2.8
100 fps, 2k 16/9, redcode 36
tungsten lighting.

image was visibly soft.
way softer than the panasonic 500 that was doing b steady-camera shots.

softer doesn't mean bad, but the clients and the post guys i think liked the panasonic footage better. and, as the are using avids, postproduction of hours of footage was a nightmare for them.
if they don't need 100 fps again, i'm not shure they would go again with red over the panasonic...

i believe (or hope..) that the cause of the softness was largely due to the lens.
maybe 100 fps helped a little. but we tested 2k @ 25fps, and couldn't tell the difference.
also tried the ultraprime 10 mm. (35 mm.), but the image was even softer.

too bad.

[Ed Watkins]

Soft? That's odd.
I shot 2K, tungsten 100fps @ 24fps and it was as sharp as anything I've got from an F900 in the past. It was a little grainy (I shot on build 15 beta), but I believe that build 16 fixed that.

[Shane Kelly]

sounds like a backfocus issue, especially visible with those 2 wide lenses.

[christopher alley]

I'd have to echo Gunleik's sentiment, i think that while it is something you want to be aware of and plan accordingly for, the whole tungsten - greenscreen issue is overstated. Plus, blanket statements just make dealing with production companies more difficult than it already is ;)
We're on day 3 of a 4 day commercial shoot, about 70% of which has been greenscreen & tungsten. We're shooting redcode36, 4k, 16:9, 25-250hr zoom and standard primes between a t5.6 1/3 and t4 1/2 and so far all the images have looked great.
The editor is offsite, but working on the more intnse greenscreen footage today so if i hear of any issues from him I'll pass it along, but he was more than happy with day 1 footage.

have fun!
-c


-edit-
to bring it back to the red vs f900
i agree, they are different tools and depending on your application and workflow needs, one may be better than the other.
I'd love to see that test footage hideffe !

[alex trettenero]

could be backfocus, yes.
but backfocus is accurately checked every time the camera goes out.
i could also believe that heat could deform the lens mount enough to cause backfocus issues. but still... i believe that, whenever is possible, it's not a great idea to shoot green screen with such a wide angle lens.

[Michael Lindsay]

The 9.5 may need bespoke back focus adjustment (this is the case with the SI-2K)...

Was focus set by Eye or tape?

Michael

[Rob Culpepper]

we shot 4 days of greens screen lately.
the setup was:

arri 9.5 mm (wide) s16 lens, T 2.8
100 fps, 2k 16/9, redcode 36
tungsten lighting.

image was visibly soft.
way softer than the panasonic 500 that was doing b steady-camera shots.


Am I missing something? Seems like there has been a general recognition that choosing to shoot at 2k for the higher framerates will yield softer footage than shooting at 4k. That's just a tradeoff for the higher framerates, no? So to make an overall comparison of Red with another camera based on Red footage shot using the 2k mode, doesn't seem to make sense.

[Jeremy Newmark]

In regards to the first post, all I can do is give you my take on the two.

When we received our Red at the beginning of the year, we held on to our F900 until we could fully test out the camera and new workflow. Even with the older builds, it was quickly evident that the images the Red produces is vastly superior. Once we were able to completely test the Red, we quickly sold our beloved F900. Don't get me wrong the F900 is a fantastic camera and has produced some amazing footage for us over the last 5 years, but personally I feel that once you start working with these images side by side, it becomes clear that the Red One is in an entirely different league. The images are sharper, cleaner and can be stretched and pushed around so much more in post compared to HDCAM material. Even tungsten shot footage. Is it better to shoot daylight balanced? Well if it's possible yes, but people need to put this in perspective. There is definately some fear and misconception out there about using this camera with tungsten lighting. When you compare it to tungsten lit F900 footage, to my eye, Red tungsten lit footage is still far superior, especially if you are going to an 1080 finish. We just finished a 7 day tungsten lit studio shoot with 2 Reds. For the past 5 years we've done quite a few of these with the exact same set-up and shooting situation, but with F900's. All I can say is that when I look at the footage from the last five years and compare it to the footage we just shot with build 16, the difference is night and day. Everyone who has seen it, especially side by side with the F900 material is just blown away.

Now keep in mind that what camera you shoot with is one thing, but your post work-flow is another story. Red work-flow and HDCAM work-flow are very different. And there are a lot of different ways to handle your Red material. Red work-flow is not hard, it's just different. So you need to make sure that everything on the post side is in place.

If you are looking for a very educational un-biased opinion and the camera in a real working environment, then I would highly suggest you read David Mullen's two threads over in the Cinematography forum. Even if it's just for yourself and not just your clients. Mr. Mullen's contributions to this forum are true jems, we are all very fortunate to have him hanging around here.


http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=13921

and

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=17105

Just my 2 cents, I hope it can be of some help.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Hey, where's that 120fps button on the F900, I can't find it anywhere :tongue:

[Leo Ticheli]

This thread is covering ground that has been plowed long ago.

When it comes to image quality, there is no question that Red is far superior to the industry standard 2/3" HD cameras, the Sony 900 & Panasonic VariCam.

The Red footage is not only superior, it's vastly superior. Period. End of story.

For green screen, the Red superiority is equally clear, no matter what Kelvin temperature you're using.

Does this mean the Red is a better choice for all jobs? I don't think so.

Sometimes the lighter weight, longer depth of field, and more universal work flow trump the Red camera's image advantage.

Of course I would much rather shoot with the Red.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

[Stephen Pruitt]

This "RED ain't no good a greenscreen shots" garbage is just that—garbage.

My DP and I did a brutal greenscreen test several months ago with RED at MK12 (one of the country's leading post-houses. . . e.g., "Stranger than Fiction") here in Kansas City using falling sand, frizzled hair, etc. as the "torture test." The verdict: The RED created the best greenscreen shots they had ever seen. And you know what? They used tungsten lights for that test.

How good was it? Well, here's some more evidence: MK12 is currently doing some post/green/blackscreen work for the new James Bond movie. They called me on Monday to try to rent one of our two REDs for those shots. That should tell you everything you need to know.

(Unfortunately, since we're currently in the middle of our feature, "Works in Progress," and I didn't want my cameras to be subjected to the ravages of an indoor sandstorm, I had to say "no" to the opportunity.)

Stephen

[JohnLands]

Agree I shot the tests for a pretty large movie on a green screen with tungston light and at 75fps in build 12 and it was better then most things Ive seen. Before you post and do tests make sure you are using the gear right and lighting correctly. I was asked how does the RED handle a key light that is four stops over? My reply was I dont know I dont light bad.

[Michael Thornton]

For Green screen, there is no problem for us so far using tungsten.

We interlace our Kino with super green bulbs.

Keep distance between back ground and talents to control spills as for any green screen shoot.

Tek

[Philip Powell]

I've pulled many a key on the Red and footage from the F900, the F900 is noisier than a Red even at 32K. While 56K does create cleaner keys, 32 is fine, and better still than the F900.

I would use HD for jobs where workflow and turnaround was my primary concern.

[Derek Wiesehahn]

This may have been covered in another thread, but I have been wondering about using an 80C or 80D filter in tungsten situations. My general approach to the Red has been to treat it as I would a camera which shoots 250 ASA daylight balanced film stock. Anyone had good results with this, any tests?

[Harry Clark]

Yes, 80D always in tungsten. It certainly helps.
I'm doing a tungsten-lit greenscreen job today. No issues whatsoever. The IMAX thing I did back in February or March looked fantastic on the filmout. Tim Sassoon said the keying was fine.
Cheers,
Harry

[Robert Berger]

I had a job that went one day on Red for location and was going one day on F900 in a studio for greenscreen. We had a three-person full-body shot that blew the budget for the lighting unless we went tungsten. Tungsten greenscreen meant F900 and not Red ...

Jason

i did several greenscreen shots with red and with tungsten...............great without any problems

[David Wyatt]

I am about to loose a rental to an F900. Have the comparisons between the two cameras been discussed. If so where would I find this discussion. Is it just me who feels the f900 is now outdated because of Red?

It could be as simple as the company in question are all Avid-based and don't fancy the extra ball-ache compared to the F900's comparatively simple post?? Just idle speculation...but it might not necessarily be that they think the F900 creates better images than the Red...unless of course they're morons...never discount that possibility...:wink:

[Michael Thornton]

Most people who win this one has been giving the F900 away so they can get others business.

Like lights and post services.

Tek

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Why is that? Why can't a RED shoot green screen on tungsten?

It can with build 16 - I was the guinea pig for it and can report that Stuart and the guys sorted it out with some help from my log files.

I even tested it with the "rotten egg" build which was hell on earth and then immediately upgraded to the "fixed" one - no problem what so ever.

So guys when it comes to green screen - NO PROBLEM - can't speak for blue screen.

[Jason Mitchell]

Well you get busy for a while and miss reading how everyone now thinks the Red is just fine shooting greenscreen with tungsten. (Guess everyone hadn't gotten that memo ...) So to clarify ... at the time of that job, the tenor of the board on build 15 was not the case. And that particular client had just had a "not as easy as an F900" time pulling a key on Red / tungsten / green setup. The large setup cause the gaffer to call for tungsten or blow the budget. So it was real easy for the client to make that call.

But yes, I have another client that would have no problem I'm sure with it, but THAT company is not down with the aforementioned "ball ache." Shame as it's the perfect camera for them ... especially when the i/link get's linked.

So good to hear that Red on green with yellow is okay with a little blue in front. I'm glad we covered it one more time.

[mavrix]

I've had phenomenal results shooting Red with greenscreen and tungsten on commercial shoots. The VFX / editorial teams were very happy and had no problems. Also having shot with F900s for the past several years and now shooting on Red -- there is no comparison -- Red just obliterates the F900.