I would show them that^
Measured resolution will of course be less.
BTW, I saw some strongly filtered Epic visuals the other day and it was a very interesting combination of resolution and softness, no doubt because of the high MTF of the REDs are low and medium frequencies and how that interacts with the filtration. I should really make time to plot some MTF curves and see what is going on.
I'm not wading into an Epic/Alexa debate, as it is simply horses for courses..... But that list doesn't paint a very full picture, in my opinion (pitting HDRx against native DR, for instance).
For every camera there is the appropriate job to use it on. The goal of the Epic is that it's appropriate in a vast number of jobs by virtue of it's image quality, size, weight, fps, etc. etc.
I just see that list appear every time there is a "versus" debate and it is set up in a way to deliberately make Epic come out on top... Makes me roll my eyes.
This is Reduser Jay. The name alone says it all. Biased? Of course. It would be weird if it wasn't. Red employees and enthusiasts cheering Red? Why not?
A wealth of knowledge and information, thanks to everyone. I feel that going into this discussion I'm much more prepared to try and "sell" my desire to shoot Epic, but at the same time not force them into it. I think I'll stress the larger frame size to be able to push in on shots, the 5K resolution for the theatrical versions, and the b-roll (small crew) aspects.
As far as workflow goes, in the past he's done edits "in house" before final color correction and delivery. Will transcoding to an Avid friendly format out of RCX be anything more then the time needed to do the transcoding (no Red Rocket)? BTW, we don't shoot all that much footage. After which, will he be able to work with all the footage as he has when shooting Alexa. Sorry for my post ignorance.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|