Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes is a Cinematographer, Technologist, Writer and above all Communicator. Never afraid to speak his mind, and always worth listening to, he's a frequent contributor to RedShark.

Understanding Colour: Colour Gamuts

Published in Technology & Computing

Gamut is one of the stranger words in the English language. Phil Rhodes sheds some light on this often misunderstood term

The Great Framerate Debate: Final Word (for now!)

Published in Technology & Computing

We've had a fantastic response to our series on the effects of different framerates. Phil Rhodes has the final word - for now!

Lighting: The Quest for White - Part 2

Published in Technology & Computing

Part 2 of our investigation into whether we can ever get good colour from modern lighting

Lighting: the Quest for White - Part 1 of 2

Published in Technology & Computing

LED lighting seems to have everything going for it: low power consumption, less heat, and a long lifespan. But there's a catch.

Keeping the pixel-count real

Published in Technology & Computing

There are several 4K cameras out there. Remarkable though they are, what the manufacturers mean by “4K” needs some interpretation and explanation.

Blackmagic: How to handle difficult PR

Published in Business

If you're one of the people who's preordered a Blackmagic Cinema Camera, unless you're very lucky, you will probably have noticed that you don't actually have one yet. RedShark, in common with the rest of the world’s media, is eagerly awaiting the arrival of a camera to put through its paces.

The art of Motion Tracking

Published in Post & VFX

For most of the history of film, if you wanted to insert something into the picture that didn't exist,  the camera had to be stationary. Motion tracking allows artificial objects to be inserted convincingly into real footage. Phil Rhodes explains

The Great Framerate Debate - Part 3

Published in Technology & Computing

If you've read the previous two parts of this analysis of frame rates, you'll be aware that what we're all doing is chasing a standard that wasn't picked for how it looked, on the basis of how that standard compares with something else that also wasn't picked for how it looks. Regardless of how much sense this makes, it does lead to a few regional variances in the way this stuff works, principally involving the interaction of 24fps film with local television standards.

The Great Framerate Debate - Part 2

Published in Technology & Computing

Last time, we looked at why we ended up with 24 frames per second for narrative filmmaking. Having recovered from the shock of realising that it wasn’t actually chosen for any reason to do with the picture at all, it’s worth looking at the fallout of that historical decision and how it affects us today.

The Great Framerate Debate - Part 1

Published in Technology & Computing

This is the first of three articles on concsecutive days that explores the reasons for using 24 fps. As our ability to capture and display much higher framerate that this has blossomed, so has the debate about which number of frames we should show per second. On the face of it, higher framerates should look more real - but in practise, instead of the expected reality, we see cheap-looking TV. 48 fps makes everything look like a soap opera, apparently.

Counter intuitive. Puzzling. What's going on here? Phil Rhodes explores.

F55: Where does it fit?

Published in Production

Phil Rhodes holds an F55 for the first time and tells us where he thinks it fits in the digital cinematography marketplace

If you or I were asked, given current technology, to create a system to record and display moving images, we probably wouldn’t build what actually exists right now. We'd do it completely differently, says Phil Rhodes.

Page 47 of 48

Twitter Feed