Passive agressive commentary on forums is not how two prominent and successful industry leaders should air their laundry.
Get on the phone and work it out like the pros you are. Maybe there can be a 4K screening somewhere?
REDUSER is an amazing resource for all kinds of valuable information. The back and forth taunting and gaming is a turnoff.
4K not doing too well so far.
4K is obviously better for post even if you don't finish 4K (which hardly anyone does). 4K footage downscaled to 2K looks better than 2K footage. You can test with your camera...Additionally... if 4K is not here, why have so many companies announced a 4K camera? We are not alone...
Although the 4K finish may not be the standard right now, it only seems right to try not to dumb down any camera in the test.
And there are other obvious uses for the extra resolution, from reframing to stabilizing.
It's fair that the difference in resolution can be appreciated on those tests, just as we can see the extra dynamic range of the Alexa or the extra sensitivity of the Canon C300.
So all the cameras seem pretty great to me and the images that come from them are equally as great. Each one may be better at some things than the others. I have this image of Zacuto from seeing them represented at previous NABs of a cheesy kind of company with scantily clad women representing their products. I'm pretty sure their stuff is ok or they would be out of business by now. It would be hard form me to lend any credence to, or take seriously, a company with this business model...
As an indie filmmaker, I think I might have some trouble finding a theater right now that will show my film in a theater at all, let alone in 4K, (which is a good news as I've already mastered it in 2K) : )
I'm sure in the next 2-3 years it will be different.
If the test is to be given any credibility, there should be similar competance around the other systems...
I would agree with you that 4K cameras are here (and there are benefits for some, not everyone to using them), again, right camera for right job. My only issue is that 4K theaters are not here. Statistics prove it and at NAB I believe only Canon had 4K projection and it cost them a $250K rental for 2 projectors from what I heard. Sure I might be able to find a 4K theater to screen in LA but no way can I find one in all of the countries I'm screening in, probably not one. Again my issue is that I don't want to misrepresent the public on what they will be seeing. In 2012 they will for the most part be watching 2K. In the history of cinema for all practical purposes there has really only been one 4K movie released. So the theaters that do have 4K are only playing 2K in them because 4K films are very scarce in 2012.
If things change in the future, which they may or may not, because many theaters have already bought 2K and I don't see them shelling our more cake to upgrade their 2K to 4K when I don't see it selling them more tickets, we'll have to see. The theater business is a business and not a great one. BTW, in my film you will see a screening of average theater goers watching the shootout to see if they even notice the difference between the iPhone 4s or the F65, Alexa or RED. That is after all who we make these projects for, NO?
Now I have a challenge for you. I bet that in our 2K screening that you would not be able to pick your camera out between the Alexa & F65 and maybe some of the others. I've watched this thing a hundred times and all of us in the color timing room are like "which camera is this" Rodney was doing it, Bruce was doing it, I was, the higher end cameras all look very similar even when shot with different DP's and lighting schemes. It's very hard to tell the difference (we are splitting hairs), which is good news for you because your price point is the best. Now it all boils down to creature comforts, design, use, workflow, speed and preference. Again there is tons of business for everyone and an ass for every saddle. Signing off, Steve
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|