Kevin Cannon
Forum Replies Created
-
I think you’re looking at a lot of cameras that are very different. If having shallow focus is a priority, a camera like the Sony F-800 has a smaller sensor and therefore isn’t as good for that. It would be a better camera for instances where shallow focus is a problem, not a good thing.
The RED popular because it has a 35mm sized sensor so you get shallow focus, and gives you enough resolution for TV and film prints. And it’s cheaper than competing cameras, so lots of projects have started using it.
The Alexa is expensive because it also has a 35mm sized sensor, and it gives you enough resolution for TV and film prints. But compared to the RED, it does higher-quality image processing in the camera, is more light-sensitive, has other good professional features.
Digital SLRs have the 35mm sized sensor, but are usually thought to have too much compression and visual artifacts for TV and film work, and not much exposure range. A lot of the data that the sensor is capable of is compressed because the camera doesn’t process and write the data quickly enough. That said, people have succeeded in using them in feature films and high-budget TV shows.
You just have to balance price vs. quality, and really know what the issues are with each camera to shoot them best.
-
Yup, they need to update that website…
I think Panavision hates to be in the position where there’s a problem with a camera, and they can’t make it right. I gather there were too many of their clients having issues in the field, and “don’t blame us, we didn’t design the thing,” isn’t an acceptable answer.
Abel Cinetech in LA and Fletcher Chicago have them for rent though. And Clairmont has the Weisscam HS-2 which is a neat camera itself…
But the RED, Weisscam, and Phantom are the only 120-300fps (and above) HD cameras I can think of…
KC
-
The “background blur” you are looking for is inherent in cameras that have a larger sensor. Usually this is compared to the size of the aperture on a 35mm or Super 35mm film camera.
The least expensive cameras that have this feature are Digital SLRs like the Canon 5D Mark II (which has an especially large sensor) and the 7D. These cameras also have the advantage of using cheap interchangeable lenses with which you can play with aperture, focal length and focus. And they shoot in HD, but they need to do a significant amount of compression to write the data fast enough…
So a digital SLR would meet all your requirements except shooting 120fps which as Todd pointed out isn’t a feature on any cameras in that price range (that I know of).
And a side note for Todd, sometime in the last year Panavision sent all their Phantoms back to Vision Research, saying thanks but no thanks!
-
Out the front, warranty intact for the cost of an extra side door:
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/277/1940#1940
-
I like the idea of the tripod and dolly constraints. Perhaps an user-adjustable function that smooths out the pan and tilt would allow it to better emulate an adjustable fluid-head tripod. Being able to lock specific axis of rotation would simulate a geared head tripod…
Similarly, smoothing out translation, pan, tiit and roll at the same time could emulate stedicam. If the dolly constraint works vertically as well as along the ground, you’ve got a good crane…
-
It should handle the speed changes from the EDL, but it will not create interpolated frames. So a 200% speed shot would be rendered exactly as you would expect (dropping every other frame) but a 110% shot would create a situation where it drops frames unevenly and creates a jitter.
Also, FCP (maybe Avid?) allows for reversing a shot with a -100% speed setting, but the EDL will not allow for an out point that starts before an in point, so that gets uncomfortable. I didn’t spend much time investigating, because it was easy to flip it after rendering…
KC
-
It seems like the workflow you’ve designed is what would be necessary to go from an Avid offline edit to color correction in Apple color (where the relinking to r3d must be done in Final Cut).
Better to just take those EDLs straight into Resolve which (if everything is organized correctly with reel #s and intact file names) will allow you to conform using r3d media and skip several of those steps. Perhaps somebody else can chime in with a way to use the conform AAF feature in this case…
Also, I’ve had mixed results with clipfinder, going straight to Resolve will avoid that.
Going from resolve to FCP, you could render in “target” mode to get a single ProRes QT for each reel (with record timecode) or in “source” mode to create one QTs per shot (with the source timecode, also with the benefit of allowing handles, which can could be useful if your work in FCP will include speed changes or the like).
KC
-
It is – I had no problems with it recognizing the resolution and PAR and scale it into my timeline resolution (2K) just fine. In terms of real-time performance, I think it is about as heavy as 4K RED – I was not using a RED Rocket.
KC
-
This PDF has the data rates that Caldigit uses for it’s products. The third column I think is what you’re looking for.
It doesn’t have R3D, but disk read/write speed isn’t usually the problem there, and it doesn’t have 4K.
Both AJA and Blackmagic have free software data rate calculators also.
-
Hi Chris:
Sounds like the problem I had, supposedly a soon-to-be-fixed bug. Temporary solution in this thread:
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/277/1944#1944