Comments on: All 4K Music Video Uses the FT-ONE Camera to Shoot Up to a Mind-Blowing 860FPS at 4096 X 2160

By: PeterK

PeterK — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 08:01:14 +0000

:-D :-D :-D

By: Who Needs 4K? The NFL, Apparently, as CBS is Using the FT-ONE 4K Camera During the Super Bowl - NoFilmSchool

Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:01:39 +0000

[...] Speaking of 4K and the FOR-A FT-ONE camera, they are being used right now in sports broadcast situations for very specific applications: slow-motion and close-up replays. Sporting events can be decided by inches, or at times even millimeters, and giving the officials of the game the best views possible is difficult when a blown-up 1080p image just doesn’t quite cut it. That’s why those who broadcast NFL games have been experimenting with using 4K cameras to do a super-zoom into the action, and they will be in use for this year’s Baltimore Ravens/San Francisco 49ers Super Bowl. [...]

By: Kemalettin Sert

Kemalettin Sert — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 14:28:12 +0000

where the hack is A-FT One ??? i saw the demo @ IBC and it was amazing but on this vimeo link they are shooting with F65

By: Jeff K

Jeff K — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 00:04:27 +0000

Vision Research’s bread and butter is in the medical and military field, not so much cinematography, but I don’t doubt that they could put out a Flex replacement if they really wanted to. Is it really necessary to replace the Flex yet though? This 4K camera is still expensive, not like production companies are gonna save a ton using it, and lets not forget the most important fact.. it’s 4K. Inception, Captain America, Jennifer’s Body, Drive, Jackass 3D, the list goes on, but the point is.. not a single one of those films finished in 4K, and they all used the Flex. I know someone will say “but Inception got 35mm converts to Imax”.. I know, but it was still shot 35mm and the bulk of the theaters screening Inception were not Imax. 4K will be more relevant in a year or so when computers and technology in general catch up. I don’t think Net Flix or Amazon Instant are gonna be putting out episodes of Pretty Little Liars (only mentioned because it’s shot on Epics) or anything like that in 4K in 2013, and even if they did… it’s 1.00$ more now for the HD version of an episode off Amazon, so the 4K version.. lets say it’s another 1 or 2 more.. plus you’ll have to have a 4K tv to make it worth it, yea… don’t see all of those chips falling into place for the gernal public for quite some time.

By: Cid

Cid — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 21:03:22 +0000

A CineMag for a Phantom Flex alone is $50k LOL your spending over $100k for media and still have to tac on the body

By: Cid

Cid — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 21:01:54 +0000

Well CBS is playing with one for the SuperBowl

http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/2/3943312/super-bowl-4k-is-a-game-changer

By: Cid

Cid — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 20:38:15 +0000

it’d probably come down to serious testing if I was directing a flic and had to choose or shoot with both cameras and decide in the edit room. Chances are if the image is exposed properly and lit right the 2K image will hold up very well. When your exposing with so much light at a high shutter and framerate (2500fps+) your image is gonna look so sick just cause of the exposure, the resolution at that point is a plus but I don’t think it’ll matter cause your capturing so much information, like super fractions of a sec which 800fps really can’t do.

By: dixter

dixter — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 17:23:08 +0000

Yes. Everything should be shot 4K at 1000fps. You can always speed it up in post if you ever actually need normal motion. Slo-mo is the new regular-mo.

By: Jenkins

Jenkins — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 16:27:35 +0000

Not true. You can record lower resolutions at higher frame rates.

By: Fahnon

Fahnon — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 15:21:56 +0000

Oh I’ll take 2 then…

By: DIYFilmSchool.net

DIYFilmSchool.net — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 14:33:02 +0000

You know, I’m really getting tired of seeing these test videos. Is high frame rate really such a priority in filmmaking now?

By: Marvin

Marvin — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 13:40:15 +0000

FT-ONE records 4K only, it can’t do any real-time down-sampling to achieve lower resolution.

By: Jack

Jack — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 11:28:36 +0000

Over $100,000 according to the previous article about the camera.

By: Jenkins

Jenkins — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 04:45:48 +0000

Phantoms don’t have to be tethered to a computer. Operating off a laptop running the phantom camera control software is just one option for using the phantom, not a requirement.

By: Blah

Blah — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 04:15:55 +0000

Actually, while YouTube used to support 4K, I think they’ve cut everything down to a 2K maximum for the time being.
For instance, if you set that video to “Original,” right-click the player and select “Show video info,” you’ll see the resolution of the video in the upper left-hand corner. It’s a 2048×1536 image, not 4K.

By: Joe Marine

Joe Marine — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 00:32:46 +0000

Yeah that wouldn’t surprise me if they announced near when Sony is sending out their firmware upgrades.

By: Kamerawerk

Kamerawerk — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 23:25:50 +0000

For those interested, we can offer a sample shot from the FT-One in full 4K over at our youtube channel: http://youtu.be/JhoT5sQ_yJ0
Make sure to set the resolution to “original” to get a 4K image.

By: kevin

kevin — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 22:11:16 +0000

Phantom is awesome, really awesome. But this is 4K resolution, which phantom cannot do at 900 FPS, phantom gold 65 4K can do 144FPS [1]. Phantom flex can do 2500 FPS in full HD[2]. As far as i know, phantoms also need to be tethered to a computer. Whenever we used them we had to lug around a computer at least. This camera can record in camera to SSDs[3] which is why its such a massive camera (at least one reason).

only thing is, i cant find anywhere that tells me how many FPS this can do in lower than 4K, they say nothing about it on their site

[1]-http://www.abelcine.com/store/Phantom-65-Gold-4K-High-Speed-Digital-Camera/
[2]-http://www.visionresearch.com/Products/High-Speed-Cameras/Phantom-Flex/
[3]-http://www.for-a.com/products/ftone/ftone.html#Tab2

By: kevin

kevin — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 21:58:12 +0000

I can see this being used a lot in research, especially by the military. For films, i see this being big in stock footage, especially destruction type stuff. My university had several phantoms for shock wave research when i was doing my masters (sadly that was not my project :(

By: Jillybean

Jillybean — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 21:10:53 +0000

This camera is in excess of 100K$. You don’t need a tech with it, like you do the Flex. The UI is very simplistic. The camera is great for 4K res at just under 1,000 fps but what commercials/ music videos are finishing in 4K right now, really? Even the feature films that are doing 4K finishing are far and few between. No rental houses in LA have these, yet at least, and I seriously doubt this will replace the Flex. Can you see this beast of a camera doing a table top Taco Bell commercial?