-
RED 8k camera, a sign of things to come from apple?
-
[Andrew Kimery] “On a related note, the new movie “6 Below” which was shot, cut, and finished in 6k for the Barco Escape format (basically three movie screens in a wrap-around format w/11.1 sound)”
Last year I worked on a similar concept with that ratio for an installation in a former penitentiary chapel turned into a museum. Everything was done in a 6k timeline then split into three projectors doing the same wrap around by projecting onto the walls of a rectangular room. People in the room are pretty close to the walls and there were so many speakers that I modified the Fairlight’s 22.2 surround format. We had speakers on three levels so sound could be placed above, under seats and below in some old cells, plus some specials in the pulpit and old organ. Footage for this was all shot 6k RED as there was a lot of green screen and compositing in AE for this long letterbox.
https://www.roarfilm.com.au/projects/pandemonium/.
-
[Walter Soyka] “Look at the “ratio of screen width to distance.” We have audience sitting 30′ from a 200′ screen. Very different from normal viewing conditions.”
With all due respect, though, these are one-off, special venue situations. I don’t think you can or should extrapolate those needs to the industry at large. Remember, too, that much of the tech industry pushing for higher resolution is also pushing for higher frame rates. Another (if not more) contentious issue.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
That used to be total rubbish….until lytro….!
Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk -
[Tom Sefton] “The quest for bigger and more in terms of film, went from 8mm to 65mm and is doing the same in digital.”
The difference is the step up in film from 35 to 65mm is vastly more expensive. That’s another reason why it is inevitable with digital acquisition. Shotting 8k is affordable and technically achievable largely using the same facilities and post equipment that currently do 4k and HD. I potentially can do 8k now with my computer setup using proxy workflows and switching to 8k for final renders if I add one new graphics card to my existing PC.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “1. Supernatural isn’t just for girls, Bill. ???? All previous seasons are on Netflix so if you are needing a show to check out I strongly recommend it. First couple of seasons are monster-of-the-week/episodic, but later seasons are more serialized (though still with stand alone episodes mixed in).”
+1 for Supernatural, my wife and I have been fans of the show from season 1. It’s campy, heartfelt and awesome. ☺
Shawn
-
[Oliver Peters] “With all due respect, though, these are one-off, special venue situations. I don’t think you can or should extrapolate those needs to the industry at large. Remember, too, that much of the tech industry pushing for higher resolution is also pushing for higher frame rates. Another (if not more) contentious issue.”
For sure! I’m just happy to see higher-resolution happen because it suits my work so well. As you might imagine, I’m also a fan of HFR, no matter how many people hated The Hobbit. It’s very important for immersion.
Speaking of immersion, high-res, HFR video is important for 360. When you’re projecting a video onto a sphere, those extra pixels make a difference.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Tom Sefton] “but if a 35mm print is scanned the resulting image at a similar density would be around 6K in horizontal resolution”
Again, that’s not a universally accepted figure. There is plenty of research that comes up with numbers that range from 2K to 6K, depending on grain size and whether you are talking in the absolute or after the frame has been exposed in a motion camera (lower).
[Tom Sefton] “My point is that if the 1 or 2k digital print has always been good enough then why would anyone ever film at higher than that if the human eye can’t see a difference in quality in the projected print. “
There are plenty of DPs who don’t.
[Tom Sefton] “Many directors still want to use this format and even higher (Nolan with Dunkirk, Tarantino with hateful eight).”
Not the norm.
[Tom Sefton] “and is doing the same in digital.”
I don’t deny that, but you do get to a point of diminishing returns.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Honestly, if you really value the ultimate in resolution, never shoot with any compressed format, including any ProRes flavor.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
When lucasfilm started their pioneering work in the first steps of computer graphics and digital video, the accepted resolution that they wanted to hit to match a 35mm film print was roughly a minimum of 4000 by 2000 pixels. (Droidmaker is a hell of a book)
35mm film does at the very least equate to more than 2K in horizontal resolution. Although 65mm is in the minority, 35mm has and always will be the standard for film. My point still remains – if 16 or super 16 had been adequate, why did DPs push to 35 and beyond.
The new arri 65 is stunning. The epic monstro is beautiful. Change is good! It keeps everyone busy!
Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk -
[Shawn Miller] “+1 for Supernatural, my wife and I have been fans of the show from season 1. It’s campy, heartfelt and awesome. ☺”
It’s just a fun show. Some seasons were kinda… rough, but overall it’s been a surprisingly good ride considering all the years that it’s been on.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up