{"id":30348,"date":"2013-10-25T13:33:02","date_gmt":"2013-10-25T13:33:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/philipbloom.net\/?p=30348"},"modified":"2018-12-29T17:11:37","modified_gmt":"2018-12-29T17:11:37","slug":"moonchicago","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/philipbloom.net\/blog\/moonchicago\/","title":{"rendered":"From Chicago to the Moon: The power of 4K resolution and how to make it work for you creatively"},"content":{"rendered":"

 <\/p>\n

Yes it’s another post where 4K video features highly. You just can’t get away from it! But this post is not about making a 4K film – it’s about using 4K to make a 2K film.<\/p>\n

I have just finished a 3-day speaking tour with TV-Bay for the Broadcast Show tour in Belfast, Leeds and Pinewood Studios. One of my talks was all about the pros and cons of 4K and raw. Although I didn’t use raw in this film, I used 4K enormously. In these talks I talked about reframing in 4K. Something we traditionally have rarely \u00a0done because it looks so bad in SD and even in most HD. The only time I did it regularly was with my old EX1 shooting 1080p but editing on a 720p timeline.<\/p>\n

With 4K TVs, channels, distribution etc being rare to non existent, why are so many people shooting 4K, myself included? Part of the big draw is just that the image looks so lovely, yes better than HD of course. So even for HD stuff for myself I shoot 4K and downscale it to a lovely 2K image. The other big draw is that we can reframe with 4K…with some caveats.<\/p>\n

When you take a photo on your DSLR, is that the image you use? Never re-framing or cropping? Of course you do! With large resolution in photos, that ability to crop stuff out and tweak our composition is common and, unless it’s done to an extreme, you just can’t tell.<\/p>\n

Now with 4K and higher video on HD timelines, it’s becoming quite common. In video, the danger of course is we use this reframing ability to be lazy and not get coverage. That’s a bad idea, never be lazy….also the frame size will change but the DOF won’t, nor will the field of view, that would change by cropping but would on a tighter lens giving a better looking image to cut too if they are cut together.\u00a0\u00a0Also if the image isn’t completely clean you will a change in the grain structure, suddenly that grain looks bigger. Something to be very wary of.<\/p>\n

But sometimes the convenience is worth the cost, as long as you really are not getting tighter shots as a matter of course simply because you can’t be bothered when you have the glass and the time to do it. It’s often a great get out of jail free card when stuck editing.<\/p>\n

A good example of when you might use this in a practical situation that is beneficial to you is interviews. \u00a0I shoot most of my interviews in 4K, regardless of whether they are going to HD, 4K or even SD! I am able to get a tight and a medium on one camera which means I can chose the framing in post. Very useful indeed. I do this even though I knot that my cropped-tight shot won’t look as visually appealing as if I had gone tighter optically. Nothing in life is without cost! \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n

So other than the use of getting you out of sticky situations in post and the practical use in interviews you can also use 4K in a very creative way. This is what I have done with this short film “From Chicago to the Moon”
\n\"1236669_10151920865554365_186350418_n\"

\"PB_promoBanner_670x67_V02\"

I was in the US last month to make a short documentary about the Amish. Early on in the trip, in fact the very day I arrived after flying in, I went to have dinner with a friend in small town on Lake Michigan, but I was clock watching as I saw the clouds and was hoping to get a lovely sunset on camera. We missed it really, by the time we ate, paid and I was set up I had 5 minutes before the sun vanished. I mostly just had the afterglow, the nicest bit, but it would have been nice to have both!<\/p>\n

That didn’t stop me. We just so happened to have with us an 800mm Canon F5.6 Prime lens, and I desperately wanted to us it! \u00a0 I have never used one before, and it’s a beast, super heavy and super expensive BUT has a super lovely sharp image. The reason I wanted to use this was you could see Chicago across the lake…that’s 40 miles away.<\/p>\n

On the sand by the water, you can just see the tops of the Chicago Skyline. The curvature of the earth means the horizon at my level and with my height is around 3 miles or so of visibility, but because those building are so tall I was able to see them. So when I went a little bit higher, around 15 higher than the water, I was able to see that skyline even more. If for some reason the Burj Khalifa (the world’s tallest building) was there and I went up to the top I would see all off Chicago…and then some! Around 64 miles visibility!<\/p>\n

\"1176134_10151920862619365_1530803295_n\"

So after looking around for the Burj Khalifa and any skyscraper by the water I realised the 15 foot option was the best I could do.<\/p>\n

Now…this is a long lens but it wasn’t long enough for what I wanted to see, I wanted to fill the frame with the top of the skyscraper. Luckily, I had my 2X Canon extender and my friend had his. Not the sharpest things in the world, but they do help. I also had 4K resolution cameras, my 1DC and F55, meaning that if I shot in this format I could take my 4K image and crop it on my 1080p \/ 2K timeline to get a “digital doubler”.<\/p>\n

\"942762_10151920861674365_1190361198_n\"