<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Where&#8217;s the 5D?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 06:39:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Where are we going from here? Musing about the future of VDSLR hardware : Photocine News</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-1111</link>
		<dc:creator>Where are we going from here? Musing about the future of VDSLR hardware : Photocine News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:17:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-1111</guid>
		<description>[...] is either designed for the mounts and sensor size of the DSLR format or can be made to fit (see Shane Hurlbut&#8217;s comments about using Primo Primes with a 7D as superior to shooting with a 5D despite its smaller [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is either designed for the mounts and sensor size of the DSLR format or can be made to fit (see Shane Hurlbut&#8217;s comments about using Primo Primes with a 7D as superior to shooting with a 5D despite its smaller [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shane</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-317</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:11:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-317</guid>
		<description>Hi Jeff, I am doing a film right now for Warner Bros. that is 75% 5D and it is going to be on 300 IMAX screens across the US along with 2200 Digital theaters.  I feel that Canon will come out with a different codex, but the beauty of this camera is that it records onto a compact flash card.  The 8 BIT color space is limiting but I have been doing some amazing things with it.  It holds up very well.  I have bought 9-5D&#039;s and 2-7D&#039;s.  I have 4-1D&#039;s on order.  I am going to Croatia to lens a movie for Fox called Medieval, it is a 157 million dollar action movie and I plan on shooting a lot of the action sequences with this camera.  I feel that the BBC nixed the camera not because of its quality, but because that is does not generate timecode.  That defeats there whole post work flow. Also the post is difficult at this time, but things are a changin&#039;.  The camera is 10 times better than the EX3 if you want your HD to look like film, if you want it to look like HD then go for the EX 3. Yes, I can see the day that 35mm movie film will be shot on the 5D, I am creating the wave, I hope you are inspired to catch it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jeff, I am doing a film right now for Warner Bros. that is 75% 5D and it is going to be on 300 IMAX screens across the US along with 2200 Digital theaters.  I feel that Canon will come out with a different codex, but the beauty of this camera is that it records onto a compact flash card.  The 8 BIT color space is limiting but I have been doing some amazing things with it.  It holds up very well.  I have bought 9-5D&#8217;s and 2-7D&#8217;s.  I have 4-1D&#8217;s on order.  I am going to Croatia to lens a movie for Fox called Medieval, it is a 157 million dollar action movie and I plan on shooting a lot of the action sequences with this camera.  I feel that the BBC nixed the camera not because of its quality, but because that is does not generate timecode.  That defeats there whole post work flow. Also the post is difficult at this time, but things are a changin&#8217;.  The camera is 10 times better than the EX3 if you want your HD to look like film, if you want it to look like HD then go for the EX 3. Yes, I can see the day that 35mm movie film will be shot on the 5D, I am creating the wave, I hope you are inspired to catch it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Simmonds</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-316</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Simmonds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 23:21:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-316</guid>
		<description>Hi. I&#039;m looking at producing a adventure show for Discovery Channel. I was thinking of using the Sony EX3 camera, but am very interested in the 5D. I am aware that the BBC rejected the 5D camera, and I am interested to know your take on the 5D&#039;s &quot;broadcast quality&quot;. 

I am sorry if you have already answered this kind of question already. 

I am especially interested in questions of compression, codex and artifacts.

Do you think that the 1DS will be more acceptable to channels like the BBC than the 5D? Do you think that Canon will put out a firmware upgrade to allow recording in a different codex, something more akin to HDcam? Do you think that the Canon is comparable to, or better than the EX3 and that the BBC (and, presumably, Discovery) are unfairly dismissing the 5D?

Also, relatedly, can you see the day when you could shoot a commercial feature film that is going to go to 35mm movie film on the 5D? The Terminator promo clips, after all, only went onto the internet. Is the quality of the camera anywhere near enough to get put up onto the big screen?

Thanks for your time and help. I appreciate your work.

Jeff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi. I&#8217;m looking at producing a adventure show for Discovery Channel. I was thinking of using the Sony EX3 camera, but am very interested in the 5D. I am aware that the BBC rejected the 5D camera, and I am interested to know your take on the 5D&#8217;s &#8220;broadcast quality&#8221;. </p>
<p>I am sorry if you have already answered this kind of question already. </p>
<p>I am especially interested in questions of compression, codex and artifacts.</p>
<p>Do you think that the 1DS will be more acceptable to channels like the BBC than the 5D? Do you think that Canon will put out a firmware upgrade to allow recording in a different codex, something more akin to HDcam? Do you think that the Canon is comparable to, or better than the EX3 and that the BBC (and, presumably, Discovery) are unfairly dismissing the 5D?</p>
<p>Also, relatedly, can you see the day when you could shoot a commercial feature film that is going to go to 35mm movie film on the 5D? The Terminator promo clips, after all, only went onto the internet. Is the quality of the camera anywhere near enough to get put up onto the big screen?</p>
<p>Thanks for your time and help. I appreciate your work.</p>
<p>Jeff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shane</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-250</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 10:54:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-250</guid>
		<description>mane, thank so much, more cool footage coming your way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>mane, thank so much, more cool footage coming your way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mane</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-243</link>
		<dc:creator>mane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:37:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-243</guid>
		<description>nice work</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nice work</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shane</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-206</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 05:13:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-206</guid>
		<description>Victor and Tim I love that you went back and re-analized it.  Well if there are two people that are close, then maybe you are both visiting the set.  We will see I have my judges looking it all over tonight and will post the winner by Monday afternoon.  Thanks again for you commitment and passion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Victor and Tim I love that you went back and re-analized it.  Well if there are two people that are close, then maybe you are both visiting the set.  We will see I have my judges looking it all over tonight and will post the winner by Monday afternoon.  Thanks again for you commitment and passion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Victor</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-204</link>
		<dc:creator>Victor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 01:48:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-204</guid>
		<description>Taking another look:

00:26 It does seem to be similar to the previous. I decided 5D due to aliasing, but I&#039;m changing my mind due to similar look to the previous and lack of frame change artifacts. This clip, however, could have been slomo without a problem to avoid the artifacts. I choose to believe, though, that it&#039;s not. I also just noticed the camera&#039;s reflection may be visible in the clapper of the bell. It&#039;s too small for me to discern anything, though.
1:03 I think I see the aliasing you are referring to. That aliasing reinforces to me that it is not the 5D. If it were, there would be color aliasing there. Instead of color aliasing, though, it&#039;s just aliasing. I stick with Sony. Since I believe it&#039;s Sony, the color in the whitecaps gives hints for other clips. Several clips I&#039;ve identified as Sony have similar CA. This could be a lens-specific thing, and lenses could be swapped for all cameras involved, so this might be a red herring. Still, I&#039;m sticking to it. The Sony uses prisms to separate the color channels, right? Does that technique introduce this sort of artifact?
1:05 I&#039;m switching to Sony on this one. It took me a while to decide on whether the film grain was right. I waffled between film grain being hidden by compression artifacts in the darker colors. On second look, there are some brighter colors in the scene that still don&#039;t show the film grain I expect, so I&#039;m switching to Sony. Definitely not 5D or I&#039;d expect curved rotors.
1:10 Look at the waves through the windshield along the dashboard. They are distorted. The distortion is not from imperfections in the windshield or you&#039;d see them throughout. They&#039;re an artifact from the software changing from 30fps to 24fps, hence the camera was the 5D. I suggest the poor quality of the very dark areas inside the cockpit are from the compression algorithm and not from the camera.
1:23 On closer inspection, I&#039;ll go with Sony due to the aliasing (again not color aliasing that I would expect with the 5D).
1:49 I agree. 5D.
1:50 I missed the distortion caused by changing frame rate before but see it now (look at the nose vs. bar in windshield. So I&#039;m revising to 5D for this shot. Probably done at the same time as other cockpit clip.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Taking another look:</p>
<p>00:26 It does seem to be similar to the previous. I decided 5D due to aliasing, but I&#8217;m changing my mind due to similar look to the previous and lack of frame change artifacts. This clip, however, could have been slomo without a problem to avoid the artifacts. I choose to believe, though, that it&#8217;s not. I also just noticed the camera&#8217;s reflection may be visible in the clapper of the bell. It&#8217;s too small for me to discern anything, though.<br />
1:03 I think I see the aliasing you are referring to. That aliasing reinforces to me that it is not the 5D. If it were, there would be color aliasing there. Instead of color aliasing, though, it&#8217;s just aliasing. I stick with Sony. Since I believe it&#8217;s Sony, the color in the whitecaps gives hints for other clips. Several clips I&#8217;ve identified as Sony have similar CA. This could be a lens-specific thing, and lenses could be swapped for all cameras involved, so this might be a red herring. Still, I&#8217;m sticking to it. The Sony uses prisms to separate the color channels, right? Does that technique introduce this sort of artifact?<br />
1:05 I&#8217;m switching to Sony on this one. It took me a while to decide on whether the film grain was right. I waffled between film grain being hidden by compression artifacts in the darker colors. On second look, there are some brighter colors in the scene that still don&#8217;t show the film grain I expect, so I&#8217;m switching to Sony. Definitely not 5D or I&#8217;d expect curved rotors.<br />
1:10 Look at the waves through the windshield along the dashboard. They are distorted. The distortion is not from imperfections in the windshield or you&#8217;d see them throughout. They&#8217;re an artifact from the software changing from 30fps to 24fps, hence the camera was the 5D. I suggest the poor quality of the very dark areas inside the cockpit are from the compression algorithm and not from the camera.<br />
1:23 On closer inspection, I&#8217;ll go with Sony due to the aliasing (again not color aliasing that I would expect with the 5D).<br />
1:49 I agree. 5D.<br />
1:50 I missed the distortion caused by changing frame rate before but see it now (look at the nose vs. bar in windshield. So I&#8217;m revising to 5D for this shot. Probably done at the same time as other cockpit clip.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-203</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:48:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-203</guid>
		<description>Hey Victor, I double checked those shots.

00:26 &gt; Sticking with Arri - I see texture from the grain.
01:03 &gt; I still think 5D because of some aliasing on the boat but the Sony could have this too.
01:05 &gt; Still Sony for me. It doesn&#039;t seem like film to me and the highlights in the water look too clipped/sharp.
01:10 &gt; The cockpit is so dark, still expect more from the 5D here but could be either.
01:17-01:18 &gt; Yes should have been 01:14- 01:17. So we agree here.
01:23 - 01:24 &gt; Def not the Arri. The highlights are way to harsh and you can see the compression working over time. Still say Sony but could be the 5D.
01:49-01:50 &gt; There is what looks like lint on the image which would make you think it was film but there are some distortions on the ceiling lines that should be the 5D. So still 5D for me
01:50 &gt; Sticking with my first answer but could go either way.

If you can manage the 5D faults it can look as good or even better that the Sony, this really shows you how much this camera offers. How much more money is the Sony? Amazing stuff. I love my 5D2. Film still holds up well but comes with a cost, production and logistics hit.

I would also love to know what lenses were used on what shots because they bring certain textures and characteristics to the image. Like those shots of the helicopter landing from the boat pov seem to have much more contrast to them.

I racked my brain on this stuff and found it a fun little test. What happens if we tie or get close Shane? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Victor, I double checked those shots.</p>
<p>00:26 &gt; Sticking with Arri &#8211; I see texture from the grain.<br />
01:03 &gt; I still think 5D because of some aliasing on the boat but the Sony could have this too.<br />
01:05 &gt; Still Sony for me. It doesn&#8217;t seem like film to me and the highlights in the water look too clipped/sharp.<br />
01:10 &gt; The cockpit is so dark, still expect more from the 5D here but could be either.<br />
01:17-01:18 &gt; Yes should have been 01:14- 01:17. So we agree here.<br />
01:23 &#8211; 01:24 &gt; Def not the Arri. The highlights are way to harsh and you can see the compression working over time. Still say Sony but could be the 5D.<br />
01:49-01:50 &gt; There is what looks like lint on the image which would make you think it was film but there are some distortions on the ceiling lines that should be the 5D. So still 5D for me<br />
01:50 &gt; Sticking with my first answer but could go either way.</p>
<p>If you can manage the 5D faults it can look as good or even better that the Sony, this really shows you how much this camera offers. How much more money is the Sony? Amazing stuff. I love my 5D2. Film still holds up well but comes with a cost, production and logistics hit.</p>
<p>I would also love to know what lenses were used on what shots because they bring certain textures and characteristics to the image. Like those shots of the helicopter landing from the boat pov seem to have much more contrast to them.</p>
<p>I racked my brain on this stuff and found it a fun little test. What happens if we tie or get close Shane? <img src='http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shane</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-197</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 15:36:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-197</guid>
		<description>Victor and Tim, keep it up, I love your analysis.  You guys are getting close.  Winner to be announced tomorrow, Monday the 2nd.  Answers to follow.  Good luck</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Victor and Tim, keep it up, I love your analysis.  You guys are getting close.  Winner to be announced tomorrow, Monday the 2nd.  Answers to follow.  Good luck</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Victor</title>
		<link>http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2009/10/25/wheres-the-5d/comment-page-2/#comment-180</link>
		<dc:creator>Victor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:36:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/?p=98#comment-180</guid>
		<description>Tim, I just compared your analysis to mine, and it seems very similar. We differ on these time frames:

Time  You     Me
00:26 Arri    5D
01:03 5D/Sony Sony maybe
01:05 Sony    Arri
I ruled out the 5D based upon the rotors of the helicopter not being curved. I couldn&#039;t decided between Arri and Sony. Interesting that you ruled out Arri but thought 5D could have done it.
01:10 Sony    5D
01:17-01:18 you actually have covered by two cameras. I assume the 01:14-01:18 should have been 01:14-01:17, in which case, I think we agree.
01:23 Sony    Arri
01:49-01:50 you didn&#039;t separate this out. I did -- I thought Arri.
01:50 5D      Sony

Perhaps unfair to the 5D, a dead giveaway is the artifacts that appear from converting from 30fps to 24 fps. Assuming Canon&#039;s firmware update next year contains 24 fps, this issue will go away. These artifacts usually look like smudged lines or distortions of elements in a picture. For example, a straight line will appear curved. Since I&#039;m not familiar with either the Sony or the Arri, I just guessed at those based on the Arri being a film camera. If my guesses are right, the Sony seems to have some CA that is absent in the Arri clips. The Arri clips also reveal dust and emulsion imperfections that are absent on digital. These aren&#039;t very noticeable at full speed, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim, I just compared your analysis to mine, and it seems very similar. We differ on these time frames:</p>
<p>Time  You     Me<br />
00:26 Arri    5D<br />
01:03 5D/Sony Sony maybe<br />
01:05 Sony    Arri<br />
I ruled out the 5D based upon the rotors of the helicopter not being curved. I couldn&#8217;t decided between Arri and Sony. Interesting that you ruled out Arri but thought 5D could have done it.<br />
01:10 Sony    5D<br />
01:17-01:18 you actually have covered by two cameras. I assume the 01:14-01:18 should have been 01:14-01:17, in which case, I think we agree.<br />
01:23 Sony    Arri<br />
01:49-01:50 you didn&#8217;t separate this out. I did &#8212; I thought Arri.<br />
01:50 5D      Sony</p>
<p>Perhaps unfair to the 5D, a dead giveaway is the artifacts that appear from converting from 30fps to 24 fps. Assuming Canon&#8217;s firmware update next year contains 24 fps, this issue will go away. These artifacts usually look like smudged lines or distortions of elements in a picture. For example, a straight line will appear curved. Since I&#8217;m not familiar with either the Sony or the Arri, I just guessed at those based on the Arri being a film camera. If my guesses are right, the Sony seems to have some CA that is absent in the Arri clips. The Arri clips also reveal dust and emulsion imperfections that are absent on digital. These aren&#8217;t very noticeable at full speed, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
