Wed Mar 24 22:25:07 GMT 2004
----- Original Message -----
From: "tom rovak" <trovak at swellinc.com>
To: "Harding, Rick" <Rick.Harding at am.sony.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: [tig] HDnet
> I have done these comparisons also, but not using a true RGB HD camera
> as the HD CAM SR. I would love to do this test. I would love to see the
> dynamic range of the SR in RGB HD.
> As I have stated, I am not stuck in the "Old School" as many people in the
> Film vs. HD debate have been. But in my experience as a colorist, color
> correcting both 35mm OCN, and HD originated material, I have stated what I
> have experienced.
> As far as Mark's viewer's opinions meaning more to him than what I and
> people in our industry say, I fully agree he would be "playing a fools
> if he did not listen to them.
> However, when my clients ask my opinion as to what to originate on, I put
> personal opinion aside and show them facts, and let them decide.
> I would like to give both you and Mark the same oppurtunity.
> Let me see your images.
> Tom Rovak - Sr. Colorist
> Swell Pictures, Inc.
> 455 North Cityfront Plaza Drive
> Chicago, Illinois 60611
> trovak at swellinc.com
> tomrovak at ameritech.net
> (312)464-8000 Swell
> (312)464-8020 Fax
> (815)690-8323 Cell
> (815)464-0169 Home/Fax
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Harding, Rick" <Rick.Harding at am.sony.com>
> To: "tom rovak" <trovak at swellinc.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 3:06 PM
> Subject: RE: Fw: [tig] HDnet
> > The world is changing Tom.
> > Mark is basically saying that subjective opinion need not be qualified.
> > he's right. Everything we do is ultimately for commercial purpose and
> > Mark's seat, his viewers opinions mean more to him than that of industry
> > professionals.
> > With regard to the merits of HDTV acquisition, common industry
> > are now coming into question. Recently, Sony supported test shoots for
> > major motion picture productions (MPAA studios) using our RGB HDCF950
> > and HDCAM SR recorders. This is full bandwidth RGB HD (1.6 Gbps)
> > 440 Mbps, compressed 4:1. These images were taken back to film and
> > with original 35mm shot on 5218 and 5279. In the first test case the RGB
> > image were scanned to film, cropped for 2.35, answer printed and
> > a 2.35 answer print from the super 35mm OCN. The images from the RGB
> > acquisition were markedly better. The production company is dropping
> > and going with RGB.
> > The second test involved green screen foregrounds shot in 35mm and RGB
> > well as non green screen shots. The OCN of the green screen shots were
> > scanned in 2K and composited in an IQ to digital back plates. The RGB
> > screen shots (same scenes) were also composited in the IQ and both were
> > taken back to film in an Arri film scanner in 1.85 aspect ratio. When
> > compared, the RGB composite images were significantly better than the
> > composited film originated material. The RGB scenes not composited,
> > looked better than the film originated material. This was true with both
> > OCN answer prints and the IN answer prints. The production company is
> > with RGB.
> > I know its hard to believe, I wouldn't have believed it either, after 25
> > years in the film industry, if I hadn't seen it for myself. These tests
> > raise a lot of questions that I'm sure will be answered along the way,
> > bottom line, the proof is in the pudding. There is still a lot to
> > Rick Harding
> > Sony
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tom rovak [mailto:trovak at swellinc.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 11:43 AM
> > To: tig
> > Subject: Fw: Fw: [tig] HDnet
> > thanks to Hans Lehman for supporting the TIG.
> > --
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mark cuban" <mark.cuban at dallasmavs.com>
> > To: "tom rovak" <trovak at swellinc.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 1:35 PM
> > Subject: Re: Fw: [tig] HDnet
> > > I have seen what comes out of a telecine. I know that hdcam and d5
> > > capture have compression built in
> > >
> > > The point is that the comparison by viewers is from watching content
> > > that has been encoded down to atsc for broadcast , which is what is
> > > aired .
> > >
> > > NO ONE sees uncompressed content except in a back office. So trying
> > > use uncompressed anything as a basis for anything where tv viewers are
> > > concerned is a fools game.
> > >
> > > Face the fact that right now 100 pct of hdtv viewers that we have
> > > to and polled prefer same content shot in hd over film
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 10:45am, tom rovak wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: tom rovak
> > > > To: tig at tig.colorist.org
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 9:43 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [tig] HDnet
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > > Maybe you can explain what you ment by "As I said, I know film has
> > > > resolution, but encoded atsc versions of mpeg2 , ecoded down from
> > > > telecine output doesn't get
> > > > it done with viewers when compared to comparable content shot in
> > > >
> > > > If you are implying that as the film is scanned by the, lets say
> > > > Thomson Spirit Datacine, that it is mpeg2 encoded, I believe YOU
> > > > bit of technical education before YOU say anything.
> > > > From what I hear in your statements, is that you think all material
> > > > shot on film goes straight to DVD. This is simply not at all true.
> > > > film material gets transfered in either 2k or 4k data and post work
> > > > getting done in 2k (totaly uncompressed), or to an HD tape (either
> > > > HDcam, or Panasonic D5 HD), or Standard Definition Digital Betacam.
> > > > images coming from the telecine are NOT compressed at all.
> > > > I think someone from Thomson, or Cintel would love to educate you on
> > > > how a "telecine" works.
> > > > By the way if you are objecting to mpeg2 compression, I suggest you
> > > > evaluate most of the HD originated material. When you learn what
> > > > of compression is used to record HD images, you might be a little
> > > > shocked.
> > > > If you would truly like to see an HD video, compared to 35mm film
> > > > comparison, I can arrange it for you.
> > > > I have done this comparison for many different people, and
> > > > organizations. All the results we got were completely opposite what
> > > > are saying.
> > > > I would like to see the proof of your statements.
> > > > I am prepared to prove my point.
> > > > Are You?
> > > >
> > > > Tom Rovak - Sr. Colorist
> > > > Swell Pictures, Inc.
> > > > 455 North Cityfront Plaza Drive
> > > > Chicago, Illinois 60611
> > > > trovak at swellinc.com
> > > > tomrovak at ameritech.net
> > > > (312)464-8000 Swell
> > > > (312)464-8020 Fax
> > > > (815)690-8323 Cell
> > > > (815)464-0169 Home/Fax
> > > m
> > >
> > --
> > Help wanted ads are welcome here on the main TIG; blatant advertising
> > or marketing is not but can be sent to tig-announce at tig.colorist.org.
> > For contributions see http://tig.colorist.org the "make a donation"
> > at the bottom, thank you!.
More information about the Tig