<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: RED camera endorsed</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/red-camera-endorsed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/red-camera-endorsed/</link>
	<description>Low/no budget filmmaker blogs daily on subjects like video production, HD cameras, screenwriting, etc.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 04:18:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Zodiac shot in digital &#124; FilmDailies.com - A filmmaker's blog</title>
		<link>http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/red-camera-endorsed/#comment-28017</link>
		<dc:creator>Zodiac shot in digital &#124; FilmDailies.com - A filmmaker's blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 09:02:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmdailies.com/?p=205#comment-28017</guid>
		<description>[...] Michael Mann&#8217;s lead, David Fincher has decided to shoot Zodiac with a digital camera.     It seems the Viper FilmStream camera has been the camera of choice, while Sony F900 is being [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Michael Mann&#8217;s lead, David Fincher has decided to shoot Zodiac with a digital camera.     It seems the Viper FilmStream camera has been the camera of choice, while Sony F900 is being [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: modifoo</title>
		<link>http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/red-camera-endorsed/#comment-26112</link>
		<dc:creator>modifoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:12:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmdailies.com/?p=205#comment-26112</guid>
		<description>Sarthak,

I used to think the same to be true for stills photography.

But on the net I saw some pictures which compared 35mm images scanned at 2K with the Red camera downsampled to 2K, and boy is there a difference;
While they both have comparable resolution, the Red camera is very pristine, while on the Film you do see the grain.

That said, I &lt;i&gt;love&lt;/I&gt; the living quality of projected 35mm film.

But now Red is working on a 4k projector, so it looks like the future will be digital in aquisition as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sarthak,</p>
<p>I used to think the same to be true for stills photography.</p>
<p>But on the net I saw some pictures which compared 35mm images scanned at 2K with the Red camera downsampled to 2K, and boy is there a difference;<br />
While they both have comparable resolution, the Red camera is very pristine, while on the Film you do see the grain.</p>
<p>That said, I <i>love</i> the living quality of projected 35mm film.</p>
<p>But now Red is working on a 4k projector, so it looks like the future will be digital in aquisition as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sarthak</title>
		<link>http://www.filmdailies.com/archives/red-camera-endorsed/#comment-10110</link>
		<dc:creator>Sarthak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Dec 2006 10:19:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmdailies.com/?p=205#comment-10110</guid>
		<description>Do you really thing &lt;a href="http://digital-filmmaking.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow"&gt;digital camcorders&lt;/a&gt; can match the celluloid resolution any day? I dont think so. Celluloid will always stay 2 steps ahead, just as the human brain stays quite some steps ahead from the computer...Filmmaking on celluloid might be expensive, but then, its worth it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you really thing <a href="http://digital-filmmaking.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">digital camcorders</a> can match the celluloid resolution any day? I dont think so. Celluloid will always stay 2 steps ahead, just as the human brain stays quite some steps ahead from the computer&#8230;Filmmaking on celluloid might be expensive, but then, its worth it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
