Some new footage to play with

[Häakon]

Hey all,

I always enjoy seeing new clips people have shot with their RED, so I thought I'd add to the pool and post some footage I shot this weekend. This is just some basic test stuff and I know it's a little crude around the edges so please be gentle. The clips were brought directly into Final Cut straight from the camera (no grading, REDAlert!/REDCine), but I still think they hold up really well. Both scenes were shot at ASA500 and I think they're remarkably clean.

The first clip was shot with a Zeiss 85mm standard speed lens; second clip with the RED 18-50 zoom. Any other questions, please feel free to ask!

Enjoy!

(Please download to your machine instead of streaming - thanks!)

http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0079/films/moments.mov

[Gbabymogul]

Is this a short film ? Looks good, what lights did you use ? Any opinions on focus would also be cool.

Are all your tests this fancy (j/k) :biggrin:
Good to have some new footy to look at.
:beer:

[MikeHedge]

yay!!! for some reason it says that Quicktime doesn't recognize the file time.... weird... I will try downloading again... can't wait to see it...

[brandon herman]

gorgeous footage! great work!

[Tim Lüdin]

Great Footage. Some of the best footage ever posted on REDuser. Kepp posting.

What do you think about the 18-50mm. How are the mechanics?
Breathing etc.. How was focusing with it?

Cheers
Tim

[Kenn Michael]

fantastic. thanks for sharing.

[Häakon]

Is this a short film ? Looks good, what lights did you use ? Any opinions on focus would also be cool.

Are all your tests this fancy (j/k) :biggrin:
Good to have some new footy to look at.
:beer:
No short. :-) Just grabbed a few friends and a kid down the street and attempted to take some pretty pictures with the camera. I shot everything (there are some other scenes, too) with my RED, an HDX900, and 35mm film to see where RED really does stand. My goal was kinda just to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the tools in relation to each other and in situations where I'd actually use them so I can use them most effectively. Res charts and the like are cool for the pixel peepers and tech heads, but at this level of detail I don't think it's as important anymore. Much more crucial to me is the ergonomics of the system, how it handles color, latitude, and noise, and if I enjoy shooting with it. Cinematography should be fun, not a chore! I don't have the film back yet (still going through development and then has to be sent to telecine), but in comparison to the HDX... well, there is no comparison, really. I'll post some of that footage as soon as I can.

I have a feeling the 35mm stuff will look every bit as good as the RED, but the workflow just pales in comparison. Unless I'm unbelievably blown away by the quality of the film, you'd be hard pressed to get me to voluntarily shoot it for any of my personal projects anymore. Loading mags, making sure nothing gets flashed, sticking to one ISO rating until you roll out, not being able to review a shot instantly, having to drive all over to get it processed and into a computer to do something with it... forget about it. I know that technology has spoiled me, but really... that's a completely archaic workflow that is going to be phased out sooner than later. And I won't even get into the cost differential...

As far as lights, I didn't have anything crazy... just one 2K, one 1K, and two tweenies at my disposal. I think I ended up using three lights in each setup.

Focus is of paramount importance, and even these clips show it. I had my usual AC pull for me on the bedroom shot (which is tack sharp the whole way through), but he couldn't stay for the couple scene, so I had a friend who had never pulled focus before "attempt" it. Let's just say it took a few takes. :) Because I was shooting on a curved dolly and the focal plane was constantly changing, it was frustratingly difficult for him. I was shooting wide open on an 85mm lens, too, so that didn't help. It would have been fine for my AC who has experience, but it does drive the point home that you need to be careful about your choices, know your limitations, and get someone qualified to do the job. If you're shooting outside on a sunny day with minimal NDs, you probably won't have many problems. If you're trying to set up a complicated moving shot at the long end of a lens at a large aperture, you better be busting out the measuring tape. I don't know what else to say, really - the process is identical to shooting 35mm film - but those who are coming from the 1/3" chip world will be in for a shock if they haven't had any experience with it previously.

Thanks to everyone for the kind words... even though it wasn't for any huge production, it still feels good to know that people are appreciating the effort.

[Häakon]

Great Footage. Some of the best footage ever posted on REDuser. Kepp posting.
That's extremely kind of you, thanks. Now I feel stupid for being lazy and not finding a sharper take of the girl. :bleh:


What do you think about the 18-50mm. How are the mechanics?
Breathing etc.. How was focusing with it?
Honestly, I love it. I wasn't expecting to... in fact, I wasn't even planning on buying it. After they canned the 18-85mm zoom, I started looking around for some superspeeds or the like to try to get a better setup going. But I wanted to have glass for the camera from day one and the price was good, so I just went for it. And actually, I've put several different lenses on the camera now and think the RED is the sharpest of the bunch. I'm sure there's something better out there, but it probably costs ten times as much and won't make a catastrophically huge difference when all is said and done.

It does breath, if ever slightly, but it's not too offputting. I had a standard ENG lens on the HDX and in comparison it literally looks as if you are zooming from one end of the range to the other when you pull focus. No kidding, I had to check at one point that I was turning the right ring because the image size was changing so much. I think the RED lens will be acceptable for most people and productions, but if you need something that's completely transparent, you can always rent an expensive prime.

Mechanics are good if not a little bit tight... it will probably loosen up over time. I used a mechanical follow focus on these shots as my BFD motor wasn't ready yet (it just arrived here yesterday), but that part worked flawlessly. Barrel measurements were accurate and as the second clip shows, we were able to keep pristine focus on the boy throughout the dolly move. It's optically very nice, too... I have yet to see any bad chromatic aberration, whereas the ENG lens has purple fringing all over the edge of the picture frame on the OTS shot. I also think the 18-50 looks sharper and cleaner than some of the older, "workhorse" lenses which were designed and coated for film applications.

I really have very few complaints about the RED system and none of them have to do with the image. I think the minor problems I have been experiencing with my rig will be resolved when my body is swapped with the newer "X" version.

[Kenn Michael]

Thanks for the details!!!! Your thoughts on the 18-50 are well timed as I'm finalizing my choices for my system.

Did you use the 2K proxy for this output in FCP or the 1K? No grading? It looks amazing straight from the camera.

Very inspiring! :)

[Häakon]

Did you use the 2K proxy for this output in FCP or the 1K? No grading? It looks amazing straight from the camera.

Very inspiring! :)
Believe it or not, that's from the 1K. I only had a Macbook to edit the footage on, and I couldn't stand watching the 2K footage skip about in FCP, so I just grabbed the 1K and said forget it. I could have reconnected the clips to the higher res versions after the fact, of course, and this won't be a problem on a system with a little more horsepower, but I think there's something to be said for such great quality coming from an image 1/16th the size of the original! Wait until you see the side-by-side results!

I think it looks amazing straight from the camera, too. Truth be told, I've been having some difficulties with both RED Alert! and REDCINE, so I just bypassed them entirely and threw the clips directly into Final Cut. I choose colors and light a scene the old fashioned way - get things on set to look the way I want them to in the final version (I'm not a color timer specialist) - but that being said, I usually have to touch up little things here and there in post. With RED, I get much more consistent results right away. That's both helpful and liberating. The waveform is very, very useful, too; I didn't even so much as adjust a curve or level afterward - just chopped up the clips and hit render.

[Jon Atack]

Thank you, Haakon, I appreciate your footage and Red Zoom evaluation.

The RED Zoom looks just fine in that bedroom scene to me.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts about the 35mm version in comparison.

Jon

[dvpixl]

I'm floored... and the wine glass is dirty....

[Tim Lüdin]

Thanks very much Häakon for the info about the 18-50mm.
It's good to know that the lens delivers.

What's the widest lens you are shooting with?
Did you ever shoot with a 12mm, and if so, what mattebox did you use?

I'm still thinking about my lens set and the right MB.
The MB-20 would be the best way to go?!

Cheers
Tim

[Álex Montoya]

The footage is gorgeous, the bokeh is amazing. It's a bit rosy though, so I couldn't resist giving it a CC shot.

Sorry for adding some grain. The image was too clean for me!

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/1434_1196945317.jpg

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/1434_1196946284.jpg

[ChrisLyon]

oMghhh...

I used to watch Dawson's Creek back in the day and this totally brought me back there. Powerful stuff to me.

You seem to know already what the ups and downs to these shots are so I'll leave it at that. Great stuff.

I like the grain to your CC, concrete. It helps give the image some tangibility. Takes the hard edge off. I still don't think some of us are used to viewing such sharp images yet.

[jaadgy akanni]

... and how smooth and beautiful is that bokeh behind the guy, wow!
Thanks Haakon

[Jim Arthurs]

Very nice... just moved to the top of the handful of RED clips I'll show to people to promote what the camera can do... in the hands of someone who can light!

I believe this is your first shared footage from RED? This is what I've wanted to see from day one.

... You're treating this camera like the legend of the Khukuri swords... don't re-sheath it unless you draw blood... Hak, you're drawing blood.

P.S. I like it clean and smooth... grain is for only for end display mediums, IMO.

[Jim Arthurs]

... and how smooth and beautiful is that bokeh behind the guy, wow!
Thanks Haakon

Jaadgy, isn't "...How Smooth and Beautiful is That Bokeh?" the national anthem of some small country in Eastern Europe?

Er, maybe not... carry on...

[jbeale]

These are absolutely pretty pictures- it gives the rest of us something to aim for!

The only question I have has nothing to do with the camera, just the H.264 codec or maybe just my screen- on the fades to black, I get progressively worse posterization; anyone else see this? I know I should only expect 8 bit dynamic range for online video, but during the fade-out it looks like less than that. Maybe my monitor black level is just set too high.

[Ben Feuer]

Most rewarding post I've read in over a week -

Thanks for the footage and the impressions, Haakon.

[Claus Mueller]

For all with small bandwidth a flash h.264 version:

http://www.hd4.tv/red/mirror.html

[jbeale]

The first clip was shot with a Zeiss 85mm standard speed lens; second clip with the RED 18-50 zoom. Any other questions, please feel free to ask! www.showchoir.com/reduser/h264clip.mov

Hi Häakon,
Is it ok to mirror this footage? I have a small collection of Red footage; yours is so good I'd like to either mirror it or link to your page, if that's ok with you.
-John

http://www.bealecorner.org/red

[Ivan Egorov]

my take
http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/3537_1196975498.jpg

[Casey Green]

Nice work, Häakon. It's refreshing to feel some emotion from the example footage being shot. Keep it up.

[Häakon]

I'm floored... and the wine glass is dirty....
Haha, I know... those wine "glasses" were $2 plastic cups I bought from a grocery store about 5 minutes before we started shooting. They looked cool in the plastic wrap on the shelf, but I didn't have the opportunity to shine a 1K through them before testing. My bad.


What's the widest lens you are shooting with?
Did you ever shoot with a 12mm, and if so, what mattebox did you use?

I'm still thinking about my lens set and the right MB.
The MB-20 would be the best way to go?!
On RED, the widest I've gone is 18mm with the RED zoom. It's pretty wide, and doesn't have a lot of distortion. It definitely shouts "wide angle," but it has good uses. I'm pretty sure the dolly shot in the bedroom scene was at 18mm or awfully close.


The footage is gorgeous, the bokeh is amazing. It's a bit rosy though, so I couldn't resist giving it a CC shot.

Sorry for adding some grain. The image was too clean for me!
Coloring is a really interesting thing and highly personal, I've found. For instance, your grade of the boy on the bed looks pleasant, but I intentionally shot it cool because I think it has a much more isolated, nighttime feel. That being said, the problem with digital stuff is that it looks 500 different ways on 500 different monitors. Throw in gamma/codec errors and it's enough to drive a DP crazy. Sometimes I really feel like it's a crapshoot at best. But I do appreciate the comments and suggestions.

It's funny, I also shoot a lot of stills and many times I will add grain/grungy textures in post to add to the attitude of a photograph. It can really be used effectively to enhance an image. But in most cases, for me anyway, I find that the dancing movement of noise in a motion picture really distracts me and removes me from a story. It does have its uses, and it's just purely my own opinion, but much more often than not I like my films to be clean and pristine. I really do think that much of it is psychological; as a new generation grows up watching beautiful, noise-free pictures, my gut feeling is that they will look back at the grain of film and find it to be quite dirty and aged looking. It will be interesting to see how that manifests itself.


I used to watch Dawson's Creek back in the day and this totally brought me back there. Powerful stuff to me.
Hehe, thanks... maybe I should have used that "I don't wanna wait" song instead? :)


I believe this is your first shared footage from RED? This is what I've wanted to see from day one.
Thanks, Jim. Yeah, this is essentially the first thing I've posted. I've been doing a lot of corporate/industrial stuff lately (not my cup of tea, but pays the bills) and the client usually keeps all the footage before I can copy any of it for myself. It's boring stuff anyway. I really want to get to shooting another feature, but am just trying to find a script that really moves me. There will be more, I promise. :-)


The only question I have has nothing to do with the camera, just the H.264 codec or maybe just my screen- on the fades to black, I get progressively worse posterization; anyone else see this
I know exactly what you're talking about (I always notice it on the fade up of the very first image) and the banding is due completely to the codec and compression. I will post some higher res/better compressed clips later tonight that will hopefully rectify the problem.


Hi Häakon,
Is it ok to mirror this footage? I have a small collection of Red footage; yours is so good I'd like to either mirror it or link to your page, if that's ok with you.
I am more than happy to share... feel free to post away!

[Clayton Harper]

I think these are my favorite red clips so far.

Nice one!

[jbeale]

I put this clip at the top of my collection, it's a gem!

http://www.bealecorner.org/red/index.html

[Andrew Brinkhaus]

Haakon, watching these clips, I was instantly sucked in. I felt like I was watching a feature, I didn't want it to end!

Gorgeous footage. Great lighting for such a small setup, and I love that bokeh (like everyone else) from the first shot.

Congrats!

[jaadgy akanni]

The footage is gorgeous, the bokeh is amazing. It's a bit rosy though, so I couldn't resist giving it a CC shot.


Concrete, you need HVX200 detox therapy to wean you from the green...lol

[C.H.Haskell]

Woah...well done Haakon! Have not seen any RED footage in quite some time and this always makes the waiting a bit less painful. Really liked the way the 1st clip looked, very rich...vibrant and excellent camera movement, you are obviously are a pro. I love that this "just a test, couple of lights and some friends" still manages to look like a multimillion dollar shoot. This kind of minimal scenario is what I will be relying on for some of my productions that need to be relatively low profile.

Thanks for sharing!

Best

[Häakon]

Just a note when watching the H264 clips... make SURE you have the "Use High Quality Video" and "Enable Final Cut Studio Color Compatibility" options checked before you view the footage... the gamma and sharpness is totally wrong without this and that's probably why someone saw some unwanted noise and/or artifacts in the shot.

I'm uploading a 2K version of the bedroom scene now, but it is going to take a little while to get online.

[jbeale]

Just FWIW, I can see no noise (either "mosquito noise" or grainy type) anywhere in the entire clip. I've watched it six or seven times now, both QT Player and VLC and I have the black level high enough to expose anything in the blacks. The only artifact I see is posterization / contouring on the fade in/out, which of course is the H.264 codec.

I'm using Win2k/SP2 with an old-school CRT monitor. My visual acuity is reasonably good, and I've seen my share of DV and HDV and MPEG artifacts in the last 9 years of editing. I'm guessing there is some hardware or software difference that causes some noise for some people that I'm not seeing here.

[Paul Hazlett]

allright, if that first scene doesn't have a De Beers diamonds are forever look
I dont know what does.

well done sir!!

[ChrisLyon]

No, Haakon...

You should have used the Dawson and Joey Theme #2 (http://www.perennialmedia.com/outgoing/dawsonjoey.mp3). Sorry. Geek alert.

And, as always, the clip is on RedRelay:
http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0079/

[Häakon]

Here's the 2K clip... please remember to download and not stream:

http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0079/films/2Kclip.mov

I'm trying to get a side-by-side video of the HDX footage next to the RED, but because the pixel aspect ratios of the footage are different from each other I'm having difficulties. Stay tuned.

[jbeale]

If anyone is interested in banding problems on various displays, I made a quick test video in H.264 MP4 format. It is at the bottom of this page:
http://www.bealecorner.org/red/test-patterns/

On my desktop (CRT), VLC shows very minimal banding. QT Player shows more banding than VLC does and Nero Showtime is the worst, with the most banding.

On my 17" laptop (LCD) the banding is pretty horrible in all players.

[luis bustamante]

Haakon, watching these clips, I was instantly sucked in. I felt like I was watching a feature, I didn't want it to end!

Gorgeous footage. Great lighting for such a small setup, and I love that bokeh (like everyone else) from the first shot.

Congrats!

yes, I showed it my girl and she felt the same, she was left wanting to see more (it helped that she loves that song).

This one is by far the best clip so far IMHO.

Thanks for posting!

[pc2099]

Any chance of uploding some sample R3D files? Im sure Im not alone in wanting to play with anything raw from this shoot to grade properly. Go on, break the mold and give the people what they really want!

[Walter R]

Hi Haakon,

Thanks for sharing your great footage and giving us all the details on lighting, etc. Very helpful.

I think I remember you once commenting about 2K not being up to 4K in terms of quality - which of course we would expect if we're trying to cut between them. But I'm wondering if you have any thoughts about 2K vs. the HDX footage or even vs. footage from a Sony F900.

Do you think shooting 2K will hold up for HD deliverables to Discovery, PBS, etc.?

I know 4K will be the right choice for most things, but for faster moving work without an AC I'd rather have sharp 2K than soft 4K if 2K will hold up.

Thanks again for sharing your footage and impressions of the camera.

Walter

[planet e]

wow, how'd you get that little guy to cry like that? not bad for "the kid down the street." props to your actors for a fantastic impromptu job...

thanks for sharing this. your feedback and your footage certainly seal the deal for me.

walter asks some important questions, though, that are relevant to my own work environment, and i'd love to hear your answers, if you have time....

[Emanuel A.]

Congrats Häak! Actually, I'd like to follow up but I am on the road. Is there anyone who may post some grabs?

Thanks!

E. :-)

[jbeale]

Congrats Is there anyone who may post some grabs?

Here is a 2k still grab from the H.264 file. There is fine-grained noise in the darker OOF background (probably amplified by H264 compression) but really none that I can see in the foreground on the boy's face, which is clear and natural looking beyond anything I'd expect from film. I'd think that the background noise could be removed with something like Neat Video, if desired.

http://www.bealecorner.org/red/Haakon-2k-a.jpg

[A. Bastaki]

drooling at the first scene...
________
Premacy and mazda5 (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Mazda_Premacy_and_Mazda5)

[Häakon]

I think I remember you once commenting about 2K not being up to 4K in terms of quality - which of course we would expect if we're trying to cut between them. But I'm wondering if you have any thoughts about 2K vs. the HDX footage or even vs. footage from a Sony F900.
That's an interesting question and something I didn't/haven't tested, so I don't have a definitive answer for you yet. Most people use the 2K because there's no other way to overcrank - but that's windowed 2K, not scaled. It is my feeling that the scaled image will look far superior to the windowed (and allow us to keep the 35mm qualities of the sensor we enjoy so much!), so I have been doing very little 2K windowed work. I would be more than happy to roll a little 2K/24p for you however to see quality differences - I just would have to get the HDX back to do a direct comparison as it's not my camera and not currently in my possession. That being said, even a simple 2K windowed vs. 4K RED test would be good to see how the footage holds up. Surprisingly, I don't think anyone has done that yet.


wow, how'd you get that little guy to cry like that? not bad for "the kid down the street." props to your actors for a fantastic impromptu job...
Ah, the magic of a squirt bottle. :tongue: The rain outside is fake, too - I just had someone outside spraying the window pane as we shot. It's subtle and no one probably even noticed it, but it adds a lot to the scene for me and there are some very faint reflections of the rain dripping down the wall behind him that I really like. They're just small details I wanted to include to make the shot feel more real, more forlorn, and more personal.

I suppose I shouldn't be ruining the "grand experience" for everyone, but then again I kinda feel like it's good to get some insight and learn too. And hell, even Hitchcock used chocolate syrup in his bloody scenes... whatever works, right? I kinda feel like the filmmakers who never reveal anything about the way they shoot as if they have some secret formula that they have to protect don't do a service to anyone. If you have skill and ability, you will always be wanting to push yourself further to come up with great material regardless of how much of your technique you share. After all, we all learn from and are influenced by others regardless of who we are or how long we've been doing this, so it's just a part of the process for me. Don't feel hesitant to ask about anything - either on the technical side or the creative side - and I'll do my best to answer. If I don't have the answer, I will do my best to get it for you.


Any chance of uploding some sample R3D files? Im sure Im not alone in wanting to play with anything raw from this shoot to grade properly. Go on, break the mold and give the people what they really want!
I honestly don't have a problem with this, other than the fact that the R3D files are quite large and completely uncut - which means unnecessary (and crappy) footage will come along for the ride. I think there are some shorter takes that I might be able to use, though... I'll see what I can get for you.


Congrats Häak! Actually, I'd like to follow up but I am on the road. Is there anyone who may post some grabs?
Give me a little bit and I will post some 4K tiffs and jpgs for everyone to use. My big problem right now is that when I color-correct something in REDAlert! it looks completely different when I take the footage into another program like Final Cut. Even the remade quicktime reference files look totally different in the standard Quicktime player than they do in the REDAlert! application. Unfortunately, since REDAlert! is the only way I can get a 4K still from the R3D files (REDCINE refuses to work on my computers), there is a conflict. I will keep working at it though and get you something as soon as I can!

Thanks again to everyone who has had very nice things to say about the footage... I really appreciate it. I would be happy to keep sharing even if you didn't like my work, but this definitely makes the process more fun and enjoyable. :turned:

[pc2099]

Haakon,

Point taken about the R3D files but still for me im happy to download 4gig even if only a fraction of it is usable. But thats just me and end of the day Id be more than happy with anything 'R3D' you manage to make available.

On that note its one of the things Im still trying to get my head around in terms of workflow. So say you have a series of continuous takes which ends up being all in 1 4+ gig 2k R3D file. Is there no way to 'cut down; the R3D file to get the take you want and still keep it in Red Raw format?

Doesn’t FCP allow editing of native R3D files?

[Häakon]

Haakon,

Point taken about the R3D files but still for me im happy to download 4gig even if only a fraction of it is usable. But thats just me and end of the day Id be more than happy with anything 'R3D' you manage to make available.
Oh, I know you wouldn't mind unusable footage... I just don't want to be spreading crappy footage around the internet with my name on it. :tongue: But I am sure that I can find something for you; of greater challenge is the web space because I know my server doesn't have multiple gigs free on it. If someone wants to provide a place I can upload an .R3D file for use, I'd be more than happy to do so.


On that note its one of the things Im still trying to get my head around in terms of workflow. So say you have a series of continuous takes which ends up being all in 1 4+ gig 2k R3D file. Is there no way to 'cut down; the R3D file to get the take you want and still keep it in Red Raw format?

Doesn’t FCP allow editing of native R3D files?
Every time you hit 'start' and 'stop' on the camera, it creates a new .R3D file. So in theory, you shouldn't have multiple takes in one file unless you didn't stop rolling in between. Also, it should be noted that .R3D files conform to FAT32 standards, so no clip will be longer than 2GB. If a take (clip) runs longer than 2GB, a new .R3D file will be created and the footage spans the multiple clips (this is similar to how P2 works).

I'm not sure of a way to split .R3D files natively without recompressing, but that doesn't mean it's not possible. Currently, FCP6 can read but not write REDCODE, so you can drag a clip into the timeline without the need to render, but you can't make cuts, fades, or the like without recompression/rendering to a different format/codec. It's possible Scratch may have the ability to do this, but I'm not aware of the procedure at this time.

There is some benefit to this, however, as you're never damaging your original "negative," and there is a lot to be said for keeping your pristine original intact. I'm not sure I would want to start messing with .R3D files in that manner.

[ChrisLyon]

of greater challenge is the web space because I know my server doesn't have multiple gigs free on it. If someone wants to provide a place I can upload an .R3D file for use, I'd be more than happy to do so.

Ahem... Look in the signature. ;)

I can give you a username and password and you can upload straight to my server.

[planet e]

Ah, the magic of a squirt bottle. :tongue:

hey, i'll take all the tips and secrets i can. i don't shoot features, mostly nature and outdoors (bear and fox will probably not appreciate the squirt bottle... )...also some commercial and event (triathlon bikers a little more appreciative of water bottles than bears....)

maybe the feature bug will bite now that the tools are near my grasp. dunno about all those people, though, that might just ruin it for me...but feel free to keep pulling back the curtain, always appreciated!

more footy, if you have time, please and thank you.

[A. Bastaki]

Red can be very grainy.
1. The second scene has a lot of dirty filthy grain... thats unusable to me.
2. The first scene... at asa 500.. it feels grainless... astounding... i only noticed some on the ladies' neck.. in the shadows.. but still very filmic.

It's weird.
________
Arizona medical marijuana dispensary (http://arizona.dispensaries.org/)

[Häakon]

Red can be very grainy.
1. The second scene has a lot of dirty filthy grain... thats unusable to me.
2. The first scene... at asa 500.. it feels grainless... astounding... i only noticed some on the ladies' neck.. in the shadows.. but still very filmic.

It's weird.
Hi Akube,

Just out of curiosity, did you follow the tips I outlined in this post (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=117959&postcount=31)? If you don't have Final Cut Studio installed on your system at all or if you haven't checked the appropriate boxes in your Quicktime player preferences, the gamma on the H264 clips will not be correct, and this will greatly affect the visibility of noise in the picture. Also, it's odd because both clips were shot at ASA500, neither was color corrected in any way in post, and both had sufficient exposure so they should exhibit similar amounts of noise. I am not saying that RED is noise free - it's not - but the noise which is there is very fine (small) and pretty unobtrusive. I can't speak for everyone, but I certainly don't feel the second scene is "unusable."

[Häakon]

By popular demand, here is a 4K tiff (http://www.showchoir.com/reduser/moments_man_4K.tif), a 1080 jpg (http://www.showchoir.com/reduser/moments_man_1080.jpg), and a 720 jpg (http://www.showchoir.com/reduser/moments_man_720.jpg).

Besides providing smaller downloads and easier viewing, the smaller jpgs also help to illustrate the point I've been trying to make about the power of oversampling. Keep in mind the jpgs are both HD resolution - and they look far better than any competing camera I've seen...

[pc2099]

Hi Haakon,

Sorry to say that I too see the 2k file to be very noisy which Im sure has to do with QuickTime on my PC and possibly the H264 codec as well.

I did set QuickTime to use best quality but still it looks bad and obviously I can’t install FCP. This is where Id really love to get some raw footage - even 4 seconds of the bedroom scene so I can see it without the QuickTime failings and compression degradation.

Did you have any luck taking Chris up on his offer to host some R3D stuff?

PS Tryign to play the 2k file with VLC on my laptop appears to make it way better noise wise however it stutters so badly I cant be entirly sure. Stupid QT!

[Häakon]

I think you need to have FCS2 installed in order to select the "Final Cut Studio Color Compatibility" option, which is just a fancy way of saying "fix my gamma, please." Without it, noise is dramatically increased.

How does the 1080 jpg look to you (it's similar in size to the 2K clip)?

I will get at least one R3D file uploaded soon; I am just going to be rather busy over the next couple of days. Hang in there!

[pc2099]

The 1080 looks near flawless, so Im sure its just a QT issue. No wories on the R3D, more than happy to wait.

Thanks for all your efforts.

[Jim Arthurs]

...on the perception of noise in general... I wonder if the FCP plugin is doing the same thing that RED ALERT! is doing in regards to the proxies at 2K... where 2K at render time is not a super high quality downsample from 4K, just a quick half-rez extraction. I remember very early RED QT 2K footage had the illusion of more noise that was actually there because of this. A smoother image came from the actual downsample from 4K when making image sequences vrs making QTs.

Just brainstorming....

Outside of controlled green screen work I don't have any RED noise concerns, and even in that situation all you have to do is look at, say, a viper grab or even a 500T or 800T film scan and compare the noise in the blue channel to put things back in perspective.

[Emanuel A.]

Here is a 2k still grab from the H.264 file. There is fine-grained noise in the darker OOF background (probably amplified by H264 compression) but really none that I can see in the foreground on the boy's face, which is clear and natural looking beyond anything I'd expect from film. I'd think that the background noise could be removed with something like Neat Video, if desired.

http://www.bealecorner.org/red/Haakon-2k-a.jpg


By popular demand, here is a 4K tiff (http://www.showchoir.com/reduser/moments_man_4K.tif), a 1080 jpg (http://www.showchoir.com/reduser/moments_man_1080.jpg), and a 720 jpg (http://www.showchoir.com/reduser/moments_man_720.jpg).

Besides providing smaller downloads and easier viewing, the smaller jpgs also help to illustrate the point I've been trying to make about the power of oversampling. Keep in mind the jpgs are both HD resolution - and they look far better than any competing camera I've seen...

Thank you guys. Much appeciated. And congrats again Häak! Great DoP job!! Your work doesn't owe nothing to the best Hollywood cinematographers.

[Caesar]

The footage is gorgeous, the bokeh is amazing. It's a bit rosy though, so I couldn't resist giving it a CC shot.

Sorry for adding some grain. The image was too clean for me!

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/1434_1196945317.jpg

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/1434_1196946284.jpg

Can you enlighten on the lenses used per each of these pics here posted? Aperture, shutter speed, etc. Thks.

[ChrisLyon]

They were posted in the first post on the thread if I'm not mistaken.

[SIRAJ KUMKHE]

Hey all,

I always enjoy seeing new clips people have shot with their RED


i enjoy with you clip .. its very promissing

[Häakon]

Here's a new greenscreen clip:

http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0079/films/greenh264.mov

This is in H264 so the codec and compression will make keying more difficult, but I will upload a 4K tiff momentarily...

[jaadgy akanni]

nice, Haakon. Given that there's a considerable out-of-focus(bokeh) area that begins right behind the talent, I'm curious to see how you're gonna replace the green and make it look natural.

[Häakon]

nice, Haakon. Given that there's a considerable out-of-focus(bokeh) area that begins right behind the talent, I'm curious to see how you're gonna replace the green and make it look natural.
No biggie, that's for the post guys to figure out. :bleh:

Just kidding. :-) It actually keys out very nicely... I've already done some tests using keylight in After Effects and have gotten very good results. It knows to look for out of focus edges and take that into account. I'm trying to get a 4K image up for other people to try and do their own takes on keying/coloring the footage; I'm just having to move it between multiple computers and each system has different software on it. Check back tonight; hopefully I'll be able to get something up for everyone.

[Grant Carden]

A little to much grain...sorry about that. This is how I would correct it...

http://www.cardenfilms.com/moments_man_10802.jpg

[Rick Darge]

Wow, that grain texture looks like a canvas

[Grant Carden]

Yea sorry, I over did it a little bit...

[Häakon]

Cool colors, Grant! I like my images to be as clean as possible myself, but I like the hues you chose... the colors really pop. The skintones feel a little green to me (I feel they need a tad more red), but overall it's a really striking palette. It's so interesting to see people take your footage and put their own spin on it!

[Denis Buhot]

Hello, some clip, indeed !! I am moving to red pretty soon, for wildlife shooting purpose. You point out the sharp focus issue, and give a useful warning. I constantly use big or very big lenses, such as 600mm or more, and sensor was 1/2 or 2/3 inch, and have no experience of the 35mm format/nor specific DOF. No run and gun shooting, however, and I use a steady sachtler tripod. But NO WAY I can use someone pulling focus alongside of myself in a hide. To your opinion, shall I be that far off my marks when focussing ? Thanks for an answer, regards

[Phil D]

Hi Haakon,

Its really great to see what Red can do in the hands of a pro. Its also really encouraging to know that these shots are straight from the camera, with little post. Thanks for sharing these tests with us.

I just ordered my Red last week, so I'm already looking forward to the second half of 2008 with bated breath!

I did notice one strange artifact when looking at your 1k footage. Its as the camera pans across the woman and her fingers pass over the out of focus lights. There appears to be some edge issue, a black line, looks almost as she is superimposed. (See the attached thumbnail)

http://www.reduser.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2392&stc=1&d=1199126178

This is a Jpeg, of a screen grab, of a compressed QT image so its going to look rough, but I was wondering if it is as noticeable in your original footage?

Could it be a Quicktime compression artifact? Just curious.

Thanks again for the sweet footage.

Phil

[Häakon]

To your opinion, shall I be that far off my marks when focussing ? Thanks for an answer, regards
Hi Buhot,

Well, one thing must be understood - this isn't your dad's autofocus handycam! You have to set focus yourself and you have to pull it if it changes. On a 600mm lens, you're shrinking that DOF even more substantially, which is going to increase the difficulty. The ace in your pocket, however, is that if you are shooting wildlife, you're probably doing it outdoors in the middle of the day - and even with a mild ND, you're going to have to close that iris way down. If you're shooting around the f/8 - f/11 range, you're not only maximizing sharpness but you're increasing your DOF. This may help to compensate.

I'm a narrative guy - most of the stuff I shoot is well thought-out, planned, and rehearsed. And yes, there is a huge difference between RED and an HVX, especially when it comes to focus. But I think in your situation, if your subject is standing still (or even moving parallel to you), if you can use a pretty tight iris, and you're on a tripod, you should be fine. Distance to subject also determines focal area and it sounds like you'll be pretty far away (another thing which will help you). You just have to look at the eagle footage that Jim posted to realize that it's entirely possible to use the camera on your own - he shot that himself and it looks fantastic.

The shot of the couple at the table I posted at the beginning of the thread is an entirely different environment; I was on a constantly moving dolly on an 85mm lens only about 1m from my subjects and shooting at an f/2. That's a recipe for disaster unless you have a really good focus puller (I didn't; that shot took us over 20 takes!). So you just have to analyze your situation and set yourself up for the best chance of success. But the long-winded answer is that I think you'll be just fine given the type of material you are shooting - just know that you're going to have to pay close attention to it at all times and modify the variables so that you have the upper hand. With RED's fantastic resolution, I think it's one of the best choices for shooting landscapes and wildlife out there!

[Häakon]

Hi Haakon,

Its really great to see what Red can do in the hands of a pro. Its also really encouraging to know that these shots are straight from the camera, with little post. Thanks for sharing these tests with us.

I just ordered my Red last week, so I'm already looking forward to the second half of 2008 with bated breath!

I did notice one strange artifact when looking at your 1k footage. Its as the camera pans across the woman and her fingers pass over the out of focus lights. There appears to be some edge issue, a black line, looks almost as she is superimposed. (See the attached thumbnail)

http://www.reduser.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2392&stc=1&d=1199126178

This is a Jpeg, of a screen grab, of a compressed QT image so its going to look rough, but I was wondering if it is as noticeable in your original footage?

Could it be a Quicktime compression artifact? Just curious.

Thanks again for the sweet footage.

Phil
Hi Phil,

Thanks for your very nice comments. I have some even cooler side-by-side 35mm tests I am dying to share, but don't have access right now to the computer with the footage! There is more to come!

As far as that interesting halo effect, it wasn't overtly apparent to me before and it's entirely possible that it is a result of something in the postproduction chain - recompression especially. What I can do is go back to the original R3D and pull a TIFF to see if it's there. Sometimes these little oddities manifest themselves - and I don't think RED is by any means perfect - but I do think it's the best digital offering out there and they are working hard to constantly improve it. Remember also that this is an original camera, probably shooting on build 7 or 8, and they have already made significant improvements since then. Or it could just be a weird artifact of the RED. :-) I'll get back to you when I know more.

Häakon

[Phil D]

Hi Haakon,

Yeah I just read on another thread about the update/improvements to the censor in the new firmware build.

To me, it does look like a post artifact of some sort. I noticed that your "Moments" clip is 23.98 and not true 24 fps, so maybe this could have something to do with it? It could also be the result of down rezing to 8 bit. Both the background and the finger are out of focus, so their outlines are spread and the compression might have a hard time resolving which is which!?

I'm just speculating of course, my knowledge of these things is very finite.

[Andrew M.]

Häakon Cilp ‘Moments 2k Clip’ on http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0079/

Excellent light, I like the highlights on his hair, also the side light coming over his shoulders.
The play between perfectly crisp and clear face and film like grain of the background, how did you do it!!

Now aside of all above, I see QT speed recorded for 100MB/sec that my computer still eats it smooth and clean but how did you get this sharp and detailed face and hair?!

I have hard time to believe that it comes from RED #79

Did you upgrade the firmware/hardware to current improvements?
What lenses did you use in this shoot?
What software did you use for post?

This beats hands down the best film masters, and now if this would be the film it will take 3 copies before public could see it. Here if anything this clip is only 2K, does it look better in 4K pixel per pixel? Could you post there R3D file of this clip even if you have to cut it down in length by half, please.
I just have hard time to believe that this is from RED #79

Andrew

[Häakon]

To me, it does look like a post artifact of some sort. I noticed that your "Moments" clip is 23.98 and not true 24 fps, so maybe this could have something to do with it?
It's actually not a post artifact - it's in the .r3D file itself. Curiously, though, I got a similar result on the film negative so I guess it is just a property of the lens and the way the light wrapped around the hand. I don't find it too distracting; I think it's just more of a weird circumstance that manifested itself under these specific conditions. I haven't seen it show up in other places, at any rate.

Also, I shot the project at 23.98 - not 24.00, so there wouldn't be any weird conversion taking place in post.


Häakon Cilp ‘Moments 2k Clip’ on http://www.redrelay.net/owners/0079/

Excellent light, I like the highlights on his hair, also the side light coming over his shoulders.
The play between perfectly crisp and clear face and film like grain of the background, how did you do it!!

Now aside of all above, I see QT speed recorded for 100MB/sec that my computer still eats it smooth and clean but how did you get this sharp and detailed face and hair?!

I have hard time to believe that it comes from RED #79

Did you upgrade the firmware/hardware to current improvements?
What lenses did you use in this shoot?
What software did you use for post?

This beats hands down the best film masters, and now if this would be the film it will take 3 copies before public could see it. Here if anything this clip is only 2K, does it look better in 4K pixel per pixel? Could you post there R3D file of this clip even if you have to cut it down in length by half, please.
I just have hard time to believe that this is from RED #79

Andrew
Hi Andrew,

Thanks for the compliments. I assure you that I shot the clip with RED #79 - using build 9, no less - and there was no trickery involved. :-) I very much think that the footage from RED holds itself up to film without question. It's a lot more of a joy to shoot, too, in my opinion.

The lens used on the boy in the room was the RED 18-50mm zoom; no fancy primes or expensive optics used at all. Also, that clip is from the 2K quicktime proxy brought right into FCP and exported as an h264 file - it's not even from a 4K DPX sequence or with any color correction. Pretty amazing, huh? The RED is just that good.

I will try to post the .R3D file tomorrow when I have access to it; it's rather large but you will see firsthand that the footage was shot completely with RED and that the claims are really as good as everyone has said. That's also an "original" (non-X) camera with an early firmware build; they've only gotten better from there.

Thanks for your question, if you still want some more information please don't hesitate to ask.

Häakon

[Phil D]

Hi Haakon,

Thanks for investigating. I have been looking at other footage on this forum that had similarities to your shot and have not found it present in any of them. Which is great. I guess it was just one of those strange anomalies.

It did bother me either, was just nit-picking.

[Andrew M.]

Unbelievable!!, I looked on another 2K clip called 2k_pageant.mov posted on our forum here and boy o boy is so soft. Same shot (face and shoulders) newer camera same 2K output file.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7681

I agree with Phil 100% “It’s really great to see what Red can do in the hands of a pro.””
Maybe if he would use higher bitrate to produce the QT file it will come out sharper.
For the quality demo posts I think using 50 or 100Mbits/sec is a must.