Have a look at this everyone
http://vimeo.com/24636714
- the Red Epic can shoot with 19 stops of lattitude - it does this in HDRx mode where it captures two data streams at the same time - one for highs and one for lows - you then mix them to taste in post. Pretty amazing methinks.
So what have we got left in film that video hasn't (apart from coolness) -- gamma and motion blur??
Scot
Video finally surpasses film's dynamic range?
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
-
Scotness
- Senior member
- Posts: 2630
- Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2003 8:58 pm
- Location: Sunny Queensland, Australia!
- Contact:
Video finally surpasses film's dynamic range?
Read my science fiction novel The Forest of Life at https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01D38AV4K
-
kuparikettu
- Posts: 173
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 9:54 am
- Real name: Heikki Repo
- Location: Cold North. Tampere / Finland
- Contact:
Re: Video finally surpasses film's dynamic range?
As HDRx has to mix two images with different lighting settings, it doesn't really work perfectly with every shot. Think about water, for example: different shutter speeds means that those two will look somewhat different. How visible it is in the mix -- I don't know -- but that's something to keep in mind.
Anyway, biggest thing for film for me is still how simple it is: no menus, no constant fiddling with some electronic things, no fear of blue screen of death. Camera is only a box with a lens. Which also means that the imagery and latitude produced by Red Epic is available to those who cannot afford to own Epic. Well, if you rent your equipment then it isn't as big thing. But if you shoot occasionally and want to own your gear, film gives the chance to get great images. (And if you are renting, you'll get better deals for film equipment as everyone is renting out the latest digital toys!)
Hopefully I'm not burned for saying this, but --- truth to be told --- I'm happy that digital is getting better. After all, it means that if at some point color negative film becomes unavailable, we won't at least be stuck with bad looking video....
Anyway, biggest thing for film for me is still how simple it is: no menus, no constant fiddling with some electronic things, no fear of blue screen of death. Camera is only a box with a lens. Which also means that the imagery and latitude produced by Red Epic is available to those who cannot afford to own Epic. Well, if you rent your equipment then it isn't as big thing. But if you shoot occasionally and want to own your gear, film gives the chance to get great images. (And if you are renting, you'll get better deals for film equipment as everyone is renting out the latest digital toys!)
Hopefully I'm not burned for saying this, but --- truth to be told --- I'm happy that digital is getting better. After all, it means that if at some point color negative film becomes unavailable, we won't at least be stuck with bad looking video....
-
Will2
- Senior member
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:18 am
- Real name: Will Montgomery
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
Re: Video finally surpasses film's dynamic range?
In the high-end, with 35mm, it is still easier to get a good looking image with film than with video. Mainly because of lighting and I would argue that the telecine stage usually involves a talented colorist whereas in video, often color is done by the editor now. But that will change and it will simply become more practical to shoot on an Epic or Alexa soon.
In the low-end, Regular 8mm and Super 8mm still give you a look and feel due to their imperfections that are unique. Maybe plugins are getting close but the real thing is the real thing there.
What's interesting is the middle ground; 16mm and Super 16mm. If you compare them to DSLRs then of course you have more color information in film but more noise/grain. I've seen some amazing DSLR work and some really crappy DSLR work so it comes back to the talent making the film. We're seeing 16mm cameras come down in price like a stone because no one is renting them.
In the low-end, Regular 8mm and Super 8mm still give you a look and feel due to their imperfections that are unique. Maybe plugins are getting close but the real thing is the real thing there.
What's interesting is the middle ground; 16mm and Super 16mm. If you compare them to DSLRs then of course you have more color information in film but more noise/grain. I've seen some amazing DSLR work and some really crappy DSLR work so it comes back to the talent making the film. We're seeing 16mm cameras come down in price like a stone because no one is renting them.