Just watched first part of zacuto shootout....

[Christopher Mills]

The pilot of Detroit 187 was finished twice. The original pilot finish was graded by me, directly from the original files. Although Jimmy Muro (the orignal pilot DP) was not available, I'm familiar enough with his work to know where he would want it, and we went for a very rich look. The director and myself also went for a somewhat "stylized" look for the squad room scenes that was also very rich, with a lot of character. When the show was picked up to series, a different DP was hired and the visual scheme of the show re-thought. It was decided to shoot the series primarily with Panasonic Varicam 3700 cameras, and to emphasize a "faux documentary" kind of look and feel. Once the reshoots were completed, the pilot was refinished and re-graded, and the look of the 3700's was the guiding visual force. The Red footage was made to look more like the Panasonic rather than the other way around. So the look of what ultimately aired was a deliberate decision on the part of the producers, not a grading decision made by some incompetent colorist. It's not always about making a specific camera look good. It's about telling stories, and it's about continuity in that storytelling. When a decision is made to change the visual direction for a series, the pilot is usually refinished to reflect the new creative intent. Colorists don't make those decisions, and neither do cinematographers. Producers do, and the job of everyone else on the team is to properly execute those decisions. That's what Larry Field did when he re-graded the 187 pilot to reflect the intended feel of the series.

One shouldn't make accusatory comments when one doesn't know the real story. Production isn't always perfect, and post isn't always incompetent. Creative changes happen on many pilots and it often affects the ultimate look of the series. Nobody is out to ruin the look of any show, and in general, colorists working on network level television series are highly skilled, very responsive to creative decisions, and quite capable of getting the most out of any camera's footage. To occupy a seat as a colorist on those shows takes a lot of experience and talent, especially when you consider that there are probably less than 30 people who together turn out the grading work on about 95% of the shows you see on both broadcast and cable networks. That's a pretty exclusive group. I would strongly suggest that you give them the benefit of a doubt when you see something you feel has been done "poorly," because although that's not impossible, it's rarely the case.

First off.. public apology.. I was not in the loop or decision making chair on final look on this show... .. second... sent detailed PM to you..

[Adam Eden]

Wow what is it with this thread that people get so heated? I don't believe that middle aged slightly overweight with a few gray hair industry pros were angry at the quality of the "cheap" cameras.

Hey stop talking about me Tom! i wasn't angry at all! ;-)

[Sid Idris]

You lot are truly pathetic in your sycophantic 'brand loyalty' just perpetual ignorance

Very diplomatic of you.

[Trevor Meeks]

Tom, do you have a purpose on these boards? I don't appreciate you blanket dissing this entire community. And I don't like your tone.

His tone is the same in just about every one of his posts. Useless troll.

[Peter Moretti]

Terrible test- they changed lighting during each test? They graded them all differently? The test shot is not synced either.

For what it's worth, I took the master MP4 and lined up each first frames of the test in AE and
rendered out animation 2560x1440 (3 rows of 3 columns) (jpeg compression by imgur.com):


gallery: http://imgur.com/a/cbzxY/all

full res frames:

http://i.imgur.com/atEMI.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/mwE0u.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/oKdn4.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/EyVXC.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/d4Lja.jpg

Pax,

Thanks so much for the summary. I hope someone can chime in and explain the rationale behind these grades. B/c except for maybe "B," they look nonsensical, IMHO.

[Liam Hall]

Despite the somewhat portentous tone, I quite enjoyed it as a doc about cinematographers; I can listen to Haskell Wexler all day. I didn't see its use a technical camera test, but it was a fun comparison. Now, I'm off to buy a Zwinger, Z-finder and a Zamerican...

[Rehan K]

Camera F is F65 or Alexa

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

yea i posted that d was third for me. clearly a mistake i meant to say c and h. im pretty sure d is the iphone. lol

I'm pretty sure D is the iPhone as well, it's the only one with deep depth of field on the mid close up shot at the end.

[Oliver Peters]

It sure doesn't seem like those complaining about the test not being completely scientific were paying attention. The design and intent was clearly explained in the online doc part 1 video and in the prep info posted on Zacuto's site. This was a doc about the process of comparing DP/lighting/camera as a SYSTEM in approaching the challenge of the scene as presented to them. FWIW - here's Ryan's description of the methodology:

http://thetown-crier.blogspot.ca/201...ster.html#more

- Oliver

[Tom Cheater]

I'm not a troll but you compare this forum to other camera/cinematography based sites the diplomacy is non existent there seems to be an attitude of fierce defence against any other brand or model or people wanting to question or test the red, a total us vs them format which is ridiculous for a forum of supposed professionals