RED EPIC

[Arben]

Dear Roger Deakins,

What are your thoughts on the Red Epic camera with it's 5K resolution, 13.5 stops of dynamic range and ISO that goes to 2000, do you think this high sensitivity would decrease the use of super speed lenses?

[Roger]

Again, to talk of 5K resolution is somewhat misleading. Even if the camera were a true 5K and a true 2000 ASA that does not negate the reason why a cinematographer uses super speed lenses any more than it negates a use for artificial light. The speed of a stock, chip or a lens may be advantageous but it is not the be all and end all of a cinematographer's craft.
A lens that can open to an aperture of 1.4 and provide a sharp image at that aperture will, most often, provide an even higher degree of image resolution at 2.0 and higher again at 2.8. The fact that a lens will open to a 1.4 does not necessarily mean that the cinematographer will use it wide open although doing so may produce a 'look' that suits a particular shot, scene or film.

[MarcVanOsdale]

How many promises will RED have to break before everyone realizes that it's the biggest scam on the market?

[Roger]

The Arri specs on the Alexa seem totally honest and accurate. I was testing the camera yesterday and I found it the first (and right now the only) digital camera to produce an image with the resolution and range as one captured on film.

[eng-shen]

wow, could tht be the end of film then.....?

[MarcVanOsdale]

That's exciting to hear that you were happy with the Alexa, Roger. Were you impressed enough to consider shooting your next film with it, or will it take another generation before it exceeds shooting Super 35?

Do you think shooting digitally will change the pace that you move on set, or have you been disciplined to the process of reloading 1000 ft. magazines?

I'm not sure about how the field of view on the Alexa chip differs from a 35mm frame, but would shooting on the Alexa effect your preference for the 32mm or 40mm for certain shots if their perspective were a little bit different on a digital chip?

Thanks!

Marc Van Osdale

[Arben]

How many promises will RED have to break before everyone realizes that it's the biggest scam on the market?

I wouldn't say that Red One Company has scam the market especially if you consider the names that choose their film to be shot with the Red camera: Peter Jackson, Steven Soderbergh, David Fincher, Allen & Albert Hughes, Lars Von Trier, Alex Proyas, Doug Liman and more to come. That I believe says a lot. Now I am really glad that Roger tested the Alexa, I would like also to test the Red One and especially Epic when it comes out. I wonder what images would he take out of those camera. He is by all means the best cinematographer out there.

[MarcVanOsdale]

I don't know how you can validate the credentials of a piece of equipment based upon the people that have used it in the past. I could easily list off several big name Directors and Cinematographers that wouldn't be caught dead using a Red Camera. I think it would be more worthwhile to discuss the images that we have seen on the big screen.

If you would actually like to discuss the facts of the Red One, it's a 3.2K camera claiming to produce a 4K image, It claims to offer over 11 stops of dynamic range when it in fact offers only 8. 3.2K and 8 stops are impressive enough in their own right, but when you consider what sacrifices that the camera makes, it's easy to see why the camera is inferior to the professional digital cinematography cameras.

Despite Red's superior marketing and online promotion, the best engineers and technicians in the digital world still work for Sony. Red hasn't some how made a superior system that can process that much more information than any other camera, it simply skips important steps in capturing an image so that it can put a big 5K on their website.

I can't see how you can take a company like Red seriously when they claim to soon be coming out with a camera with a 168mm wide sensor capable of capturing resolutions at 28,000 by 9000 pixels.

[Subhadip]

Marc, I don't think RED have ever claimed their images resolve to 4K. Yes, the sensor is 4+K, and the images recorded are 4K, or even 4.5K. Just like your tiny pen cameras claim to record 1080p, when it is barely SD upresed. Similarly, the HDSLR cameras do 720p at best, but it is always advertised as 1080p. There's nothing inaccurate about that. It IS recording a 4K image. Much like the Alexa is recording a 2.8K image. Few camera companies advertise their actual resolved resolution - this is normally tested by users - and RED is one of the few such companies.

Right from the start they have told us that at best, Debayer resolves 80% of the details. We have been made aware that 4.5K resolves to 3.7K; 4K to 3.2K. And we also know that 5K from the Epic will resolve to around 4K. Much like Alexa's 2.8K image will resolve to about 2K. It is a general rule of Bayer mask sensors.

As for the dynamic range, clearly you are talking about their original Mysterium sensor. I can't say I was impressed with the original RED One. But the new Mysterium-X is quite incredible. They advertise 13.5 stops, and that is exactly what you can get with the right post processing. However, a 13.5 stop is likely to be a low contrast, and a less than pleasing image. If you are looking for high contrast images, you will likely get about 11 usable stops. But that is not to say that it doesn't do 13.5 stops - clearly it does under the right circumstances.

Also, Marc, what you are stating is your opinions expressed as facts. You are clearly not allowing enough respect to fellow professionals like David Fincher, Lars Von Trier or the thousands who have used RED. Just because the RED is not right for you, for whatever reason, doesn't make it a "scam". There are enough artists who have embraced RED and never looked back since. It's not because they are fools picking an "inferior technology". I can assure you that Fincher chose M-X after rigorous testing because it was the best camera for his film. A camera is a personal choice - I think you should respect the choice of those who love RED's images.

Finally, I am not so sure the Alexa image can hold up to 35mm film or RED at 4K projections. At 2K, sure, I totally expect Alexa to produce remarkable images. Regardless, Alexa looks like a splendid camera, and am looking forward to more reviews and opinion. As an Arri fan, it is exciting to have the Arri name on the very latest technology!

[MarcVanOsdale]

I'm not really interested in debating the numbers of Red with you here, I'd much rather hear what Roger's thoughts were about the Alexa.

I'll just say that I have yet to see anything on the screen or heard any legitimate acclaim about how these Red features appeared at the AMC, certainly nothing that would validate all of the acclaim that has come from this camera, and simply listing off several big name directors won't change any of that. It's exciting that chips and resolutions are getting so good, but considering the number of delays and empty prototypes that have come from Red in the past year, I'm not convinced that the company will last long enough to complete all of these projections that you are making.

I think that it's an interesting to think that we could have 8K televisions in or homes in 10 years, but quite presumptuous to claim that the 1080P images captured by Alexa will look like VHS compared to the Red. Fortunately, there is a little more to digital photography than a big K.

[Subhadip]

While the thread is titled "RED EPIC", I agree, let's just wait for Roger's opinion on the Alexa as that is our only common interest. There's no point in discussion if you have no interest in either considering an alternative opinion or explaining your own, so let's just agree to disagree. Needless to say, I heavily disagree with you on most counts. None of what I said was based on presumptions, but objective visual observation and testing.

[Roger]

I get very confused and, frankly, irritated by all the pronouncements about 'K', bit depth, latitude etc.. In the past it was often stated to me by visual effects supervisors that there was no noticeable difference between a 2K scan and a 4K scan of the same negative. Does film really have a dynamic range of more than 13 stops? What film stock would that be and under what conditions? I don't see it.
In the final analysis you can only judge picture quality by eye and make a personal decision as to what you like and what you don't like. Perhaps some people really can not see a difference between a 2K scan and a 4K scan of the same negative and I am sure some people really do prefer the look of an image produced by the Red Camera to one shot on film. The choice of a camera system is no different than the choice of a lens set, a camera position or where to put a lamp.
The downside to any digital camera right now lies, for me at least, in it's viewing system. I am probably 'old fashioned' in this respect but I want to see the image that is in front of me, the way light falls on a face and it's true colour, not the degraded image provided by electronic viewfinders regardless of their manufacturer. I have no interest in standing by a high res. monitor at a distance from the action. But that's me!

[Peter Matthes]

Have you had a chance to use the current Red EVF?

If so, what did you think of it?

Do you think that Red should have explored the ability to have an optical viewfinder in the Epic, the way that Arriflex has in the Alexa line of cameras?

[Roger]

When I talked to the people at Red they would not entertain the idea of an optical finder. They were very dismissive and told me it was just not necessary. I imagine they have had enough experience of shooting films to be able to say this!

[Marco]

The people at Red are more listening to some kind of amateurish filmmaker instead of listening to real cinematographers as well as directors.

I think, it is because of their reduser.net. Red shows some kind of product and everybody freaks out, whether this is good or bad, so they think that everything is great, what they do.