Yet another flawed test...............
Posted 15 July 2010 - 03:59 PM
Posted 15 July 2010 - 05:13 PM
A handycam shot of a monitor screen??!
Interestingly Mr Charters was an early adopter or the RED One camera.
(Or from the Jello-cam effect, possible a digital stills camera in video mode)
And then when they zoom in for a closer look, the handycam (or whatever) activates its auto-iris or AGC or whatever, and - what ho - we see the over-exposure isn't quite as bad after all.
The only valid test is what comes out the other end after your post team has done the very best they can with the raw footage. However, at least this guy has made some effort to equalize the shots as far as possible.
As far as I'm concerned, a much better test would be to set both irises wide open, and see how much ND needs to be put in the matte boxes to get a decent picture, how much shadow detail gets lost when the windows are exposed correctly and so on.
I'm sure plenty of people have already have already done such tests, but are keeping the results for their own consumption, since they see no need to expose themselves to Pro-RED flack.
I think this test is somewhat surious anyway. Obviously we all know the Alexa is going to be the better camera because its German, has a cooler name and it's well, Arri, but there's no need to rub it in quite like this, surely.
Posted 15 July 2010 - 05:53 PM
My default assumption, having used neither, is that Alexa is a nicer piece of kit. It seems its monitor output is considerably in advance of Red's, possibly because it's designed to do a much more competent onboard debayer.
But isn't this rather missing the point?
Posted 15 July 2010 - 08:15 PM
Posted 15 July 2010 - 08:46 PM
Which it is.
Posted 16 July 2010 - 08:18 PM
Having a superior monitor image does help when you have suits on the set. If it looks good to them, you don't have to make explanations they might not believe.