RED "weapon" 8K footage

[Nikkor]

details: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?141427-FORGED-Shot-on-RED-Weapon-8K

[Dan Wake]

 does usually people who edit 8K raw footage use file proxy? I mean is file proxy the standard of the industry or they have NASA computers to edit in real time?

 

thx

 

p.s. do you believe 8k will be a standard for home video movies and cinema? in which year?

 

[Nikkor]

31 minutes ago, Dan Wake said:

 does usually people who edit 8K raw footage use file proxy? I mean is file proxy the standard of the industry or they have NASA computers to edit in real time?

 

thx

 

p.s. do you believe 8k will be a standard for home video movies and cinema? in which year?

 

I have no idea, but when editing you can tell premiere to sample 1/4,etc... so it's not that bad.

8K won't be needed anytime soon for anything, I would even say nobody needs 8K screens for movie consumption.

But 8K downsampled to 4K is interesting because of the bayer array.

[Jimmy]

Looks beautiful... Colour, contrast, detail, DR and general IQ all have a touch of magic. Really like it.

The IMAX shooters are gonna love it!

[DPStewart]

Un-foogin-believable.

The rendering of the smoke was like nothing I've seen before - looked like it was going to come right out of my screen.

This 8k thing is a whole new world for Documentaries, educational, and other types of super-realism stuff.

But I'm becoming more convinced than ever that 4k is the cutoff for "Movies". It's just too sharp and it starts hurting the feel of the experience instead of helping.
In fact the 2.8k Alexa or even the 2.5k Blackmagic Cinema Camera are about all I'd want to deal with if the intention is something that "looks like a movie".

But it's interesting - we now have cameras so advanced that they are creating new genres. That's fantastic.
And the ability of 5k, 6k, and 8k to convey a realistic experience is a gift to Humanity. As a teaching and world-sharing tool there has never been anything like it before. 

There is very much a parallel in Music recording. - Audio technology has advanced just like video technology has, but when the audio you want to make is MUSIC then the new advanced tech sounds 'worse' and everybody reaches for "tube this" and "tube that" and "tube emulators"... all that DEGRADES the audio - but it does it in a very specific way that just so happens to sound "better" to most people in the context of songs. 
So "movie" cameras will be the ones that render a technically less advanced image - but one that is far more suited to the particular application of creating a "movie".

Interesting times.

[Mattias Burling]

1 hour ago, DPStewart said:

But I'm becoming more convinced than ever that 4k is the cutoff for "Movies". It's just too sharp and it starts hurting the feel of the experience instead of helping.
In fact the 2.8k Alexa or even the 2.5k Blackmagic Cinema Camera are about all I'd want to deal with if the intention is something that "looks like a movie".
 

I think its a bit of a generation thing.

A guy I have working with me is 10 years younger than me (im 33).
Both me and him are movie fans, we both saw H8 in 70mm.
Both of us use analog film for our stills. I use medium format and he shoots large format and is getting into wet prints.
We share similar tastes in other vintage stuff, we like the same movies, video games, etc.

But we differ on one subject. He loves the look of Loord of the rings, CGI, 48fps, sharp sharp images etc.
I like practical effects, film, 24p etc.

And when we argue about it, its clear to me that we simply don't see the same thing. When I point at the bear in the new dicaprio movie and say "look how fake" he just scratches his head. He has no idea what Im on about.
When I used Jurassic Park as an example of practical vs cgi, he thinks they look equally good.

He is simply used to it. That's what movies have looked like all his life. He doesn't remember the pre digital era.
Another example is dubbing. When Im in Germany I think, "how can they watch this, I mean its so badly done its comical?".
Then I ask a german friend, "What do you mean, its in perfect synk and the voice matches spot on, no one could ever tell the difference".
They are used to it.

Ok, totally off topic from the Weapon. But a thought

On topic,
It looked stellar but Im not blown away. URSA 4.6k, Dragon, Weapon, Tomato, Tomaato.

 

[agolex]

6 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

I think its a bit of a generation thing.

 

Wait a few more generations and lots of crafty stuff will be gone, just because the competence to judge its quality is gone. For instance I believe that Mad Max Fury Road is at the the apex of cinematic achievements. Sure the equipment, workflows and everything will get "better", but I believe that there won't be people like George Miller and John Seale around to bring into life such ambitious feats. Thankfully no one will have to complain about it cuz they think everything is just fine. :D

[Xavier Plagaro Mussard]

13 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

And when we argue about it, its clear to me that we simply don't see the same thing.

 

What you see is the same, it's your brains which process it totally different!

[Mattias Burling]

29 minutes ago, Xavier Plágaro Mussard said:

What you see is the same, it's your brains which process it totally different!

I thought that goes without saying.

[graphicnatured]

At my brother's house earlier in the year we watched Paddington with his family on his 70-something inch TV with 240Hz. A movie I'd seen many times with mine on my 60Hz. We all know where this is going ... I almost couldn't watch it. When I said, "lower that Hz rate to something that looks acceptable to the eyes and not craze-balls they all looked at me bewildered. Kind of similar in a way to this discussion.

Mattias, you're rated at "666" in this forum BTW.

[Mattias Burling]

2 minutes ago, graphicnatured said:

Mattias, you're rated at "666" in this forum BTW.

Spooky

[Goose]

Got to say this looks fantastic, amazing detail, contrast, colour (skin tones) and really well shot!

[AaronChicago]

6 hours ago, DPStewart said:

Un-foogin-believable.

The rendering of the smoke was like nothing I've seen before - looked like it was going to come right out of my screen.

This 8k thing is a whole new world for Documentaries, educational, and other types of super-realism stuff.

But I'm becoming more convinced than ever that 4k is the cutoff for "Movies". It's just too sharp and it starts hurting the feel of the experience instead of helping.
In fact the 2.8k Alexa or even the 2.5k Blackmagic Cinema Camera are about all I'd want to deal with if the intention is something that "looks like a movie".

But it's interesting - we now have cameras so advanced that they are creating new genres. That's fantastic.
And the ability of 5k, 6k, and 8k to convey a realistic experience is a gift to Humanity. As a teaching and world-sharing tool there has never been anything like it before. 

There is very much a parallel in Music recording. - Audio technology has advanced just like video technology has, but when the audio you want to make is MUSIC then the new advanced tech sounds 'worse' and everybody reaches for "tube this" and "tube that" and "tube emulators"... all that DEGRADES the audio - but it does it in a very specific way that just so happens to sound "better" to most people in the context of songs. 
So "movie" cameras will be the ones that render a technically less advanced image - but one that is far more suited to the particular application of creating a "movie".

Interesting times.

I agree as of February 2016. I'm starting to wonder though. Guardians Of The Galaxy 2 is shooting with the Weapon, and I know alot of big budget movies will follow suit. I think in a few years the hyper-realistic look will be accepted and requested. Of course there will be alot of people who are nostalgic and want the old film look. Most likely myself included. Curious to see what the "standard" will be in 2020.

[odie]

5 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

I think its a bit of a generation thing.

A guy I have working with me is 10 years younger than me (im 33).
Both me and him are movie fans, we both saw H8 in 70mm.
Both of us use analog film for our stills. I use medium format and he shoots large format and is getting into wet prints.
We share similar tastes in other vintage stuff, we like the same movies, video games, etc.

But we differ on one subject. He loves the look of Loord of the rings, CGI, 48fps, sharp sharp images etc.
I like practical effects, film, 24p etc.

And when we argue about it, its clear to me that we simply don't see the same thing. When I point at the bear in the new dicaprio movie and say "look how fake" he just scratches his head. He has no idea what Im on about.
When I used Jurassic Park as an example of practical vs cgi, he thinks they look equally good.

He is simply used to it. That's what movies have looked like all his life. He doesn't remember the pre digital era.
Another example is dubbing. When Im in Germany I think, "how can they watch this, I mean its so badly done its comical?".
Then I ask a german friend, "What do you mean, its in perfect synk and the voice matches spot on, no one could ever tell the difference".
They are used to it.

Ok, totally off topic from the Weapon. But a thought

On topic,
It looked stellar but Im not blown away. URSA 4.6k, Dragon, Weapon, Tomato, Tomaato.

 

I'm about ten years younger than you...yet I see exactly what you see...arri sr 2 (perfect cam)

[Mattias Burling]

19 minutes ago, odie said:

I'm about ten years younger than you...yet I see exactly what you see...arri sr 2 (perfect cam)

The force is strong with this one.

[richg101]

Though the whole marketing seems to be focusing on the fact that its 8k.  to those who look at it properly it's all about the fact that it's a scaled up dragon sensor.  so all the magic from the 6k dragon, but with much more sensor area meaning the larger format look is possible.  a 35mm f1.4 lens can be used to get the same fov as a 25mm f1.4 lens, with the associated advantages such as better lens performance, shallower dof when needed etc.  

 

It's not that the 8k is making this stunningly clean image 'pop' it's the fact that the camera was being shot with the forefront of full frame glass (otus) - using longer focal lengths than would be used if it were the 6k dragon sensor.  there are no s35mm lenses that can be used wide open at f1.4 and deliver such optical resolution and that separation between in and out of focus areas we see here.  

 

I'm certain that if Sony made a pro version of the a7s, with 4;4:4 or proper xavc intra onto cfast2 keeping the 4k res, and you shot with otus lenses the image would have the same perceived resolution.    I see the power of a full frame sensor and superb optics outputting raw as the big thing here.  not that it's 8k.  I expect if that sensor were 2k it would still look as good. 

[Nikkor]

13 minutes ago, richg101 said:

I'm certain that if Sony made a pro version of the a7s, with 4;4:4 or proper xavc intra onto cfast2 keeping the 4k res, and you shot with otus lenses the image would have the same perceived resolution.    I see the power of a full frame sensor and superb optics outputting raw as the big thing here.  not that it's 8k.  I expect if that sensor were 2k it would still look as good. 

And @Brian Caldwell made a speedbooster for it, I keep insisting

[Ian Edward Weir]

He used some Cine housed Zeiss Otus Primes, which is what really makes the images special. Lovely work on this!

[Dan Wake]

do you see this kibd of flikering at this point of the video?  it's over the frame of the table

(if you press play you will redirected to that point in the timeline).

 

how is this effect called? is it the youtube compression? or  flikering/moirè?

is it common?

thx

[Nikkor]

2 hours ago, Ian Edward Weir said:

He used some Cine housed Zeiss Otus Primes, which is what really makes the images special. Lovely work on this!

Quote

 

"Lenses. Heh, when I picked up Jarred's camera I thought immediately about which glass I was going to use. I ended up slapping all sorts of lenses on the camera that evening during prep. I went rogue and went with EF glass. Mostly Zeiss Otus and a few Milvus shots in there. The Otus primes look fantastic on this camera FYI. I also used 30-40 year old Olympus OM lenses I had Duclos Lenses Cine-Mod which have a bit of history in the world of VistaVision filming. The major macro shots for instance were the Olys. There was a 200mm f/2.8 Canon prime used as well. Overall I shot mostly at f/2, though there's a fair amount of f/1.4 and f/2.8 in there with a couple f/5 shots. I had the camera in very precarious situations. Literally on a grinder belt or having 2000 degree bits of steel being shot on the camera. As you can see from some of the images I used the Bright Tangerine Misfit Atom with optical clear filters to protect the lens and camera. Though I can't say the optical clear filters survived. They were pitted with metal bits as was my skin."