Any further personal attacks will bring out this guy.
Guys its just a test. The RED Epic is awesome do not worry. At the other end of the platform the GH2 performs admirably well for such a small device (and v cheap) together with the all Intra Quantum settings of mine. Buy one as a second/third unit - or recommend to small budget filmmakers - its not an enemy of RED!
Its no surprise that Zacuto chose to include the GH2 in their test - its way better than 5DmkII/III/7D.
What this test just proves once again is how good the filmmaking is in the eye of the maker/beholder, lenses and grading.
I love RED but I love the GH2 too...
My 2 cents (well, 2 pennies - I am a Brit!) is simple - there's a place for all.
However, like there is a strong RED 'voice' there's also a very strong 'GH2 is better than anything' voice that shouts loudly over the internet - and it's this FUD that distracts everyone. I wonder how many people have actually used a RED for an extended period? (ie not getting one for a day, but understanding it as a tool, as the same user would with their other camera).
Having used a lot of cameras over many years, I love the GH1/GH2 (only use with PL lenses - which is a style choice) and I love the Epic. The thing is, coming off a fair bit of usage recently, the Epic has a lot of things that really shine and it's a lot like working on film. DR is the true separation point for me (plus RAW workflow in post).
B cam for GH2 (although, oddly, I do prefer the GH1 image - maybe I'm weird!)... Bcam for the upcoming BMC too... and it's great that all this choice is out there now. Epic is your A camera... or GH2 if that's your personal choice... or if it's a choice dictated by budget, whatever you can rent!
Really, it's all down to perspective on these things - and the Zacuto tests add to this. There isn't a definitive answer.
If you'e an aspiring filmmaker and your take-away of these tests gives you confidence that the super cheap GH2 will give you quality that'll be acceptable, that's great (although, I presume the Zacuto test was done with PL glass on the GH2 - so maybe that puts the purchase price up a little :) I'd have loved something like this to do work on in the 80's (LOL).
On the other-hand, would you want to risk a mid-range to high-end budget on a DSLR... (any DSLR)... well, that's your choice and that of the Agency/clients etc.
When all is said and done, it's about money and your comfort in spending it (and recouping it). I'll be upgrading my EVF to OLED - and that upgrade costs more than a GH2... but the comparision is onerous, as it all depends what you need and what arena you're playing in and what your requirements are.
I could be wrong about this but I thought the originator of this entire project stated that he was making a FILM. It appears to be a kind of Doco accounting of camera culture, so it seems fair to remind everyone that it is a documentary first, and a "test" or "Shootout" second. I could be completely wrong about this so correct me if I am.
If the goal of the project has always been the making of a film then any outcome is immediately suspect, regardless of genre. That is not to say that there was ANY conspiracy to manipulate the findings at the outset, but as film makers we understand that the story lies in the hands of the film makers and they have complete control of how it is ultimately presented and therefore (to some lesser degree) how it is perceived.
Also, it seems to me that to have a successful film one needs conflict, right? The Zacuto people needn't create that did they? There is enough naturally occurring drama and acrimony in the subject matter that all they needed to do was capture, structure and shape it then drum up enough controversy to give it self-promotion.
They seem to have found excellent subject matter for a successful low budget film. Good for them on that score. From what I'm hearing I am a wee skeptical about how they went about it. I'm not even sure I am willing to patronize the film in order to form any opinion about it at all, but I will admit that my curiosity is up.
So after all of the "high profile" movies released that have been shot on RED cameras there are some of you that are worried about a camera test done by a camera support / accessory company? Who cares? Why the personal attacks?
It's obvious by now after watching some of these films (as some looked far better than others) that the RED Epic can shine, so who cares about one little test? The bottom line is that this just goes back to the old saying - "talent over technology", except in this case it could be said that the talent behind the camera was there but the technology matters in the sense that some camera workflows require more finesse and that the RED Epic may not be a shoot and finish camera, it needs some proper care during "exposing" of the final digital negative so to speak.
However, to say that they did this on purpose and to read the attack army at work here in the forums is what makes many people not want to play in the RED sandbox. If I were working at RED I'd want to find out why the camera did not look as good as it should have (other than sabotage), I'd want to make sure we as a company were giving all of our users the right information and education to use the cameras correctly, from set to post. I'd stop wasting time in the vast forums of hate and put the time and resources into education.
If you believe that the test was well intended and fair (as I and many others, including David Mullen do) then ask yourself, why was the RED Epic not as easy to make look good as the Alexa and how do we address that.
I love the idea of wide dynamic range. HDRx. But with proper lighting, its less important. In the end those blacks will be crushed and what is the true dynamic range of an LCD TV or digital projector?
I was there. I attended the screening at the Skywalker ranch as a guest of Canon. And my intention is to not attack anyone. But this was my impression. I was joined by senior ASC cameramen both of whom were ex presidents of the ASC. If anyone who calls themselves a cinematographer considers this absurd exercise in stupidity a test they truly don't have a clue. The test was absurd. It was unprofessional, the set was from Happy Days, the music droned, and everything looked quite bad. The iPhone was looking as good as the F65. Where I was sitting all three of the ASC cinematographers, which included Richard Crudo, ASC, Daryn Okada, ASC, and myself, Francis Kenny, ASC all thought the Epic looked the best. And even that had been murdered. But seriously, you can not call this "thing" a test. However noble the cause, or whatever the hidden goal, of which none of us could figure out the point of taking a 5K camera, shooting it at a high compression ration, not knowing what algorithm was used to process the footage, then down rez'd to 2K, all of which will be shown on YouTube, how much more absurdity can there be? What we saw was an exercise on how someone could degrade an image to the point of getting a beautiful cameras like the Epic, Alexa, or Sony and get it to look like an iPhone. And we all know that watching something on YouTube is a wonderful judge of resolution. Come one people, either see the king has no clothes on or chose a different profession. This was worse than driving with the brakes on. The only test I saw was a test of my patience and how long we could keep from laughing. If someone truly believes there was science happening I suggest they seriously chose another profession as quickly as possible.
By the way, a test is when things are done scientifically. Where each camera is shot and processed with the oversight and control of the manufacture. And each camera is allowed to be used to the best of its ability. This was Alice in Wonderland taking place at Skywalker. Sorry, but unfortunately that's what happened. I hope people don't take this stupidity seriously and they question what they are looking at. I apologize if I'm hurting anyone's feelings but I have to be honest about what we saw at Skywalker. What it proved was that it's easy to screw things up to the point of making everything look terrible. If you like what you see and believe it to be a test then I suggest you shoot your next project using your iPhone. Good luck.
I recall the first time I saw project Greenlight. I arrived at my set where I was shooting the next day and told my assistant that I had seen a brilliant show called Project Greenlight and it had to have been written by Christopher Guest or Michael McCean, the people from Spinal Tap because it was so funny and those guys know how to write brilliant comedy. The assistant then told me with a very straight face that the show was not comedy but serious. My face dropped. I thought, could people be that dumb? Only in the movie business.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|