Aussie Ash Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 2002 one of the first films shot digitally Star Wars "Attack of the Clones" was recorded to 3:1:1 1440x1080 HDCAM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 how does it stack up today? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronFilm Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 25 minutes ago, jonpais said: how does it stack up today? Decide yourself? Shot with a Sony CineAlta HDW-F900, which has 3x CCD chips of 1920x1080 (one for each of RGB). https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/633399-REG/Sony_HDWF900RPAC1D_HDW_F900R_CineAlta_24P_HDCAM.html Very weirdly enough, you can still buy it??? (well, the "R" version, which is very similar) For a sweet $80K Or you could just buy it secondhand, right now for around $1K or $2K for the body: https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=sony f900r&rt=nc&LH_ItemCondition=4&_trksid=p2045573.m1684 The non-R original version you might even find for sub $1K Lots and lots of films have been shot on it (for instance "Quantum of Solace" had part of it shot on a Sony HDW-F900R, and that film came out in 2008. Or "Four Lions" which came out in 2010): https://shotonwhat.com/cameras/sony-hdw-f900-camera Some other discussions on it: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?330231-Sony-hdw-f900-Today http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?7478-How-does-RED-One-compare-with-Sony-HDW-F900 https://www.redsharknews.com/technology/item/2990-how-george-lucas-pioneered-the-use-of-digital-video-in-feature-films-with-the-sony-hdw-f900 kidzrevil and Aussie Ash 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 Well damn ! Still gorgeous ! Really thought george lucas would be shooting with some huge 8k custom made camera or somethin @IronFilm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webrunner5 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 That was my dream camera to have at the time. There was a rental house that had 3 of them near where I lived. I got to hold one once LoL. I couldn't hardly justify a weeks rental on one by the time you added a HD B4 lens, extra batteries, tripod base plate, charger, insurance, on and on... It adds up Fast, Yikes. 11 minutes ago, kidzrevil said: Well damn ! Still gorgeous ! Really thought george lucas would be shooting with some huge 8k custom made camera or somethin @IronFilm The first 4k camera was a Dalsa Origin camera and it came out in 2003. Rented for $3000.00 a DAY!! I have never seen one in person. Dalsa made Sensors for Medium Format cameras then. https://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search;_ylt=A0LEVrgy1oFaukwAXwMPxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTEyNGozbWZ1BGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQjQxMjNfMQRzZWMDc2M-?p=dalsa+origin+camera&fr=yhs-iba-1&hspart=iba&hsimp=yhs-1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 @webrunner5 3K A DAY ?! HOLY SHIT How do you think they got such a low res camera to look so good ? This looks incredible even by today's standards. That THX certification is no joke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webrunner5 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, kidzrevil said: @webrunner5 3K A DAY ?! HOLY SHIT How do you think they got such a low res camera to look so good ? This looks incredible even by today's standards. That THX certification is no joke I am surprised how you can get 1080p to look good enough on a Movie Theater screen. I mean 1080p only has to be 2 MP. And with the 3 2/3" CCD's in it I bet that was all it is. I think a Sony PMW F3 was only like 3.2 MP. But it had big Pixels for low light. I think my Panny AF100A was like 6 MP. Way more than you need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronChicago Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 I would bet there's not a single frame in Episode II that is completely practical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webrunner5 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 28 minutes ago, AaronChicago said: I would bet there's not a single frame in Episode II that is completely practical. Meaning the plot sucked?? I have never seen that episode. Mark Romero 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronChicago Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 The plot is good. I love the story of the prequels, but the execution wasn’t very good. I think Lucasfilm took note of the over CGI’d production backlash and went back to practical sets in the Force Awakens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 Funny the way people are surprised with such 8-bit news... LOL (Quoted yesterday from another thread with two years and a half BTW) Well done, mate! :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juxx989 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 Internet is a funny place started here and @webrunner5 was talking about the Dalsa Origin... So I do som quick research Seems the Tim Burton/Johnny Depp Alice in wonderland was shot on it. Then some how I came across this... This really raised my eyebrows as I used to work in at a Local CBS News station in the late 90's and from time to time the old timers would talk about the legend Christine Chubbuck This happend a year before I was born... Just thought this maybe interesting to any former news jockeys . The Full Movie is on Netflix (as of 2/12/18) I put it on my watch list. It got a 7+ on IMDB and now to bring it back to topic in someway shape or form it was shot on a Alexa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronFilm Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 10 hours ago, kidzrevil said: Well damn ! Still gorgeous ! Really thought george lucas would be shooting with some huge 8k custom made camera or somethin @IronFilm Not in early 2000's!! Heck, not even today in 2018 do many big blockbuster hollywood films use 8K at all 10 hours ago, kidzrevil said: How do you think they got such a low res camera to look so good ? This looks incredible even by today's standards. Great lighting / art direction / framing / camera movement / etc 10 hours ago, kidzrevil said: @webrunner5 3K A DAY ?! HOLY SHIT Doesn't surprise me, as a top end cinema camera package (with lenses etc) could reach a similar kind of figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkabi Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Now..... For the big question: Is 4:2:0 better than 3:1:1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 3 hours ago, mkabi said: Now..... For the big question: Is 4:2:0 better than 3:1:1? Apparently the same --- 25% of the color information available*. But I don't take those numbers as accurate: 3:1:1 is a middle way towards the 4:2:2 from 40% ratio instead. HDCAM 3:1:1 format is actually 75% from horizontally 1920 pixels (so 1440) and a third chroma sampled (480 for a quarter of 1920), but it is full vertical resolution (1080) rather than a half for 4:2:0 on chroma side, even though with chroma subsampling going with half from full horizontal HD (aka 1920), so here you have for your maths now ;-) In a line? :D Take a look on this article by Barry Green: http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/colorspace/ * https://wolfcrow.com/blog/chroma-subsampling-numbers-explained/ https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/chroma-subsampling Aussie Ash 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Ash Posted February 14, 2018 Author Share Posted February 14, 2018 Here is a pdf on the next generation HDCAM SR used by James Cameron "Aliens of the Deep"(2005) and the next Star Wars " Revenge of the Sith"(2005). The SR gave a step forward with 10 bit 4:2:2. see page 26 http://www.visualsfrance.com/menus/download/Visual_Showreel_Sony F23.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 I stand corrected for 66,6% if we'd take the native HDCAM 1440x1080 resolution (using non-square pixels with 4:3 storage aspect ratio, reason why there's the same 16:9 display aspect ratio) and my calculation is correct: Y' 1440x1080 = 1,555,200 Cb 480x1080 = 518,400 Cr 480x1080 = 518,400 1,555,200 / 1,036,800 I bet for some reason Sony wanted to beat the competitor Panasonic used to implement 4:2:2 in their alternative DVCPRO HD system based on 1280x1080 anyways. What do I know though?! ; ) Maybe that 1920 quarter -- that is, 1440 / 3 = 480 (without mention some sources mention some other 640 value as a third of full HD/1920 for HDCAM chroma subsampling), may convert all the math in some other numbers... :D But in one line, better than 4:2:0 indeed. 2 hours ago, Emanuel said: Apparently the same --- 25% of the color information available*. But I don't take those numbers as accurate: 3:1:1 is a middle way towards the 4:2:2 from 40% ratio instead. HDCAM 3:1:1 format is (...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Part II still on topic to @mkabi People tend to misshape 4:2:0 in a intuitive reading from there. Adam Wilt gives a fair explanation on it: https://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-tech.html#colorSampling So, actually what do we mainly have here? Color is sampled at half in both ways (horizontal & vertical). And on 3:1:1? 3:1:1 is a third (1440 / 3 = 480) but keeps the full vertical resolution as much as: 4:1:1 where only a quarter and horizontally the chroma is subsampled; and 4:2:2 for the double half of that quarter above-mentioned in the previous line instead, that is, in a half of the horizontal resolution. So, we still have a midway from 4:2:0 (25%) to 4.2:2 (50%) -- color information in parenthesis for half of that value now without parenthesis: 33% to my math; but don't forget, like Italians say, math is not opinion ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.