Arni Heimir Posted April 6, 2006 Share Posted April 6, 2006 I heard about this new site www.red.com Seems far out! Is it a hoax? I heard that it is going to revolutionize digital image quality and prices . One thing I find hard to believe are the lenses they say they are designing. It would be interesting if they could deliver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted April 6, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 6, 2006 I heard about this new site www.red.com Seems far out! Is it a hoax? I heard that it is going to revolutionize digital image quality and prices . One thing I find hard to believe are the lenses they say they are designing. It would be interesting if they could deliver. Hi, Its not a hoax, the owner owns Oakley sunglasses, he is rich enough, so it could happen. Stephen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arni Heimir Posted April 6, 2006 Author Share Posted April 6, 2006 He asserts that it will be cheap compared to similar products. Do you think it could ruin the D-20, Genesis and the Dalsa? Could it also wipe out the 35mm and telecine market? I think it is going to be very exciting. Funny how Arri and Panavision haven't bought him out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted April 6, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 6, 2006 First of all, let's not forget that this camera does not exist yet, its quite amazing specs still whishful thinking at this time. Allthough they claim on their website that they 'decided to skip several generations of evolution' that would only be true if they released the camera right now, which is obvioulsy not the case. By the time this camera will be ready, it will not seem such a big evolutionary step anymore (if at all). Since the camera has a Super 35 sized sensor it is obviously aimed at professionals, the reduced depth of field of 35mm making it useless for amateurs. But the professional market is quite small, so I really do not see how this camera could possibly retailed for such a low price as they claim. Even if that is the case one still would need PL mount lenses, which are comparatively expensive to rent, not to mention to purchase (the prices for a single Master Prime start at ? 13.500 for instance) and all the accessories that go with it. It remains to be seen what their own lenses will look like and at what price. Once again, designing good lenses is not cheap, especially if one starts from the ground up. The next step in lens design would be zoom lenses that are optically as good as the best primes and just as fast (under T2). But there I would put my faith in companies like Zeiss, Panavision or Cooke, who have a proven track record and decades of experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Allen Posted April 7, 2006 Share Posted April 7, 2006 The specs and price will (reportedly) be announced at NAB. I will be very curious to see them. The D20 and Genesis are very expensive cameras. There is an enormous chasm between the 6000 HVX and the ...what 500k (I don't know) priced existing cameras it sees as it's competition. Will it be 300k? 100k? If they came out with a 50k camera at the Genesis / D20 quality - they'd own that market (and maybe a few others would spill in as well). Would that be enough market share to lower the price? Hard to say. Something worth keeping an eye on, but there are a lot of iffy steps between announcing specs and announcing production. Will be a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Sheehy Posted April 7, 2006 Share Posted April 7, 2006 I ran across that site several months ago... I can't see that much has changed :huh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Mottram Posted April 7, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 7, 2006 I think it is going to be very exciting. Funny how Arri and Panavision haven't bought him out. How could they afford to? Do you have any idea of the financial gulf that exists between a company like Panavision and Oakley?* Panavision and Arri with access to the small professional market have to consistantly balance their R and D expenditure with their operating proffits - or frequently losses. A company that generates it's income from overpriced consumer products will always win out financially. From the interviews I've read with Jannard this project seems to be a bit of a labour of love. Personally I cannot see how he can make money from this project, but again until NAB there is no way of knowing. Keith *An example, as Red is not directly a devision of Oakley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jim Murdoch Posted April 8, 2006 Share Posted April 8, 2006 First of all, let's not forget that this camera does not exist yet, its quite amazing specs still whishful thinking at this time. Interesting that I said much the same thing about the Dalsa Origin about 2 years ago, although they did eventually demonstrate working hardware a few months later. At the same time I received an e-mail through my account here from Dalsa, telling me it's now "all systems go" and "watch this space" and so on. However 18 months on, I haven't hard of any serious productions using their system. The "Red" web site doesn't appear to have changed in over four months; and most of it is still "under construction." I would have thought it would be a lot harder to build an HD camera than to put up a half-finished website, but that's just me Since the camera has a Super 35 sized sensor it is obviously aimed at professionals, the reduced depth of field of 35mm making it useless for amateurs. Why would that make any difference? If you were that bloody inept, I don't think you'd be shooting too many features! But you make an interesting point; is that why George Lucas thinks 2/3" sensors are ideal for making films? :P Perhaps what's really happening is that everybody is waiting to see what Superman Returns looks like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jim Murdoch Posted April 8, 2006 Share Posted April 8, 2006 (edited) Funny how Arri and Panavision haven't bought him out. Well, that was probably the whole idea; hardly a new concept And which, I rather suspect, is why Ronald Perelman paid such a ridiculous price for Panavision in 1997! You gotta admire the enterprise of ex-CEO John Farrand; not only did he unload his shares in a worthless, debt-ridden company for a ludicrously inflated price, as part of the deal he had himself installed as CEO for several more highly-profitable years. When they finally began to realize how incompetent he actually was, it cost PV another $3.5 million in severence pay just to get rid of the prick before he could do any more damage! Edited April 8, 2006 by Jim Murdoch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filip Plesha Posted April 8, 2006 Share Posted April 8, 2006 Is it just me is that site reduced to a front page? I can't seem to access it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dickson Sorensen Posted April 8, 2006 Share Posted April 8, 2006 Is it just me is that site reduced to a front page? I can't seem to access it. Seems like it's just a front page here also. Hype? As the well known Wendy's tv commercial said, "Where's the Beef?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Weis Posted April 8, 2006 Share Posted April 8, 2006 This whole situation reminds me of that video game console (cant remember the name) that was supposed to be great (specs-wise) but it never pulled through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filip Plesha Posted April 9, 2006 Share Posted April 9, 2006 IF this is all true, another layer of film-shooters might go to the dark side of the force, those that stick with film for image quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Mottram Posted April 10, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 10, 2006 IF this is all true, another layer of film-shooters might go to the dark side of the force, those that stick with film for image quality. yawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spieden Posted April 12, 2006 Share Posted April 12, 2006 Keith... do some homework. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Elhanan Matos Posted April 12, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 12, 2006 yawn I'll second that yawn... I think we are all sick of hearing comments like Filips made here on this site and elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted April 14, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 14, 2006 I just stumbled accross a discussion at dvinfo.net about the pricing of this Red camera. They seem to be hoping for something in the vicinity of 25K (some go even as low as 4K). Oh, that includes a 'decent lens' btw... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Jannard Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 (edited) Other than "wishful thinking" from those forum members, it was stated that $4k was NOT reasonable and there was never a mention from the RED team about a "decent lens" included. Edited April 16, 2006 by jannard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted April 16, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 16, 2006 This actually wasn't meant to be a comment about the Red camera itself, but about the people who are so excited by this camera. They obviously have no clue what a 'decent lens' costs. I have a feeling they will be very dissapointed once the actual price of the camera gets announced since it very likely will be out of their league. Even if they can afford the camera, they're in for a surprise once they try to get lenses for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Allen Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 There's a recent interview with employee number one of RED at www.hdforindies.com In a week it will be much more interesting to speculate about the camera as some details will be revealed. Oakley isn't known for making the cheapest products - but it seems they intend to make products for the consumer who want the best and are willing to (sometimes) pay multitudes more for it - ten times or more for sunglasses (oakley vs. rite-aid for example). I would imagine that this is maybe where the camera is going to be aimed. I just think it will take a lot of time before it comes out and hope that people like me who get tempted easily by new technology don't post pone anything until the camera goes into production. There's just such a long road from here to there. If it takes too long, the rest of the industry will catch up though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Mottram Posted April 17, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 17, 2006 Other than "wishful thinking" from those forum members, it was stated that $4k was NOT reasonable and there was never a mention from the RED team about a "decent lens" included. Hi, you may have noticed that people often sign their posts with thier name/ occupation. can i assume that yours would be 'jim jannard. ceo RED'? keith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Leavitt Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 I've been following RED for a while, and what's exciting about it to me is the possibility that there may be some kind of trickle down effect for small indie filmmakers. Canon's XL series would be a lot more interesting to me if the chips weren't so damn small and there were more interchangeable manual lenses to choose from. The fact that Jannard has taken the time to personally post at DVInfo leads me to believe that his camera will come in at a price within reach of at least some people who are using XLs and DVXs now. Otherwise, why bother? If that turns out to be true, I would expect Canon, Panasonic and JVC to respond with at least a token improvement in their technology. Canon's XL-H1 is already priced at $10,000, and it seems like a market they would want to protect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 I'm continually amazed by how consumers and indies always try to co-op the latest and greatest professional-level technology for their low-cost non-professional use. No one from RED has ever stated anything close to a $4K camera or a product in the XL-1 price range. This is a camera technology that is competing with $70K cameras and above, and the company has a massive startup cost to contend with. I wish them all the best and will be very interested to see what they have to show at NAB next week. Until then all this internet traffic is rather silly. I have heard some very substantial reports from people who have actually seen some working product, but until the word comes out officially I won't bother to add to the rumor mill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Otaviano Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 There's a new interview with Ted Schilowitz here: http://www.podcast.net/show/184 Actually it's a podcast. I think it just came out today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Mottram Posted April 17, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted April 17, 2006 he's interviewed on hdforindies.com as well, a partnership with aja is a healthy sign. keith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.