Red

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Hi,

 

You need a large HD monitor to check focus! Otherwise you can't tell if the take is sharp.

 

Stephen

Jim (Jannard) is saying that RED will have a nice and an innovative focus assist.

[Stephen Williams]

Jim (Jannard) is saying that RED will have a nice and an innovative focus assist.

 

Hi,

 

Thats fine but being to see the DOF on a large screen is also of interest.

 

Stephen

[Mark Allen]

I can't help but notice that none of the cameras you just mentioned actually exist as a product you can purchase, rent, or use. So for the foreseeable future, the point it completely moot.

 

mmost - we're here talking about a camera in development in a forum dediciated to a camera that is in development. So, how can referencing other camera's in development be moot? I didn't say I was going out on a shoot next week and was wondering if I should use one of them. Honestly sounded just like you wanted to slap me for some unknown reason, did I say something that offended you?

[Guest Jim Murdoch]

Kim,

 

I agree. I'm particularly tired of one little mouse behind his big keyboard. I came here to ask for ideas, not idiotic banter. If any of you have suggestions you would like us to consider, please email us at 4k@red.com. Or visit some of the other forums where this stuff isn't tolerated.

 

Signing out.

 

Jim Jannard

RED

Excuse me while I cut that and paste it up on my wall :P

[Guest Jim Murdoch]

Jesus H., Keith.

 

 

Between cranks like you and Jim Murdoch, I'm amazed anybody bothers to post on this site at all. The genuine information you add to the discussion is completely wiped out by your jerkwater attitude.

 

Homer: He has all the money in the world, but there's one thing he can't buy.

Marge: What's that?

Homer: (pause) A dinosaur.

[Brian Drysdale]

All I'd say is try and be standardised.

 

And sturdy connectors, please. I appreciate this is difficult with standards like USB and firewire (when is someone going to define a standard for doing those on more robust connectors?) but audio comes on XLRs not RCAs and other things come on Lemos not DINs.

 

The consumer connectors might be OK as a cost saving exercise on domestic camcorders, but this is extremely important on professional equipment. Even the BNC connectors on the DSR 570 are not as robust as those found on the more expensive cameras and tend to break off more easily.

 

Like all high tech projects it's the team that's important. The fact that Jim Jannard has a vision for enabling a 4k at a lower price is fine. There are companies doing the same for 2k (with working prototypes) who are getting overlooked in the hype. The important thing for success in a venture like this is that he has the both the financial resources and the R & D team in place to do so.

 

With all this rush to the market and the hype, one thing that could result is a camera with a lot of bugs. JVC had problems with the early production HD100s which took a few months to clear; with a new radical camera like RED the early customers shouldn't beta testing it. It's not a luxury that you can afford in this business.

[Guest Kai.w]

"4K Online???????" What year do you think this is?

I'm quite aware of the fact that there is probably very few established 4k pipelines (efilm ?) for finishing a whole feature. I was just referring to the fact that the time the red eventually comes out it will be probably easier than doing it yourself.

So to answer your question, I think this is not the year we actually have the problem.

 

-k

 

Hi,

 

You need a large HD monitor to check focus! Otherwise you can't tell if the take is sharp.

 

Stephen

 

For sure. But don't you think you can do this on a rather cheap TFT-computer monitor? I was referring to doing the color work in SD on a cheaper SD control monitor. You still see the HD image on your computer monitor. Thats at least how the decklink works.

I think this might be a reasonable setup if money is short.

 

-k

[Keith Mottram]

Jesus H., Keith.

 

For the record, I was the one who asked the question and I appreciated the answer.

 

Between cranks like you and Jim Murdoch, I'm amazed anybody bothers to post on this site at all. The genuine information you add to the discussion is completely wiped out by your jerkwater attitude.

 

Kim, ma cherie, appologies if i have offended you- my only intention was to correct misleading information. as far as your concerns about my attitude i can understand if i might come across as occasionally crass, but a crank? in what particular way? one might be calling a kettle black here no? setting out incorrect information as fact and quoting list prices for equipment which you seemingly have no knowledge of reminds me of a certain Mr Landon D Parks... now those were the days.

 

peace,

 

keith

[Tenolian Bell]

the deck and the $14,000 monitor we now have a figure of $8500 (using your figures) add another $4000 for a g5, HDLink and 23" apple display (for HD monitoring- not colour correction) and you have a grand total of $12500. This figure could be reduced further with deals. Your post is really quite daft and is completely misleading.

 

The point of the post is the fact that just because RED will possibly deliver uncompressed 1920x1080 HD does not mean that full production of uncompressed 1920x1080 HD will be affordable for the common person.

 

I gave an example of a small I company I know of and components they bought for 1920x1080 post production. All the equipment was not bought brand new. I believe the HD deck and Sony monitor were bought used. But its not like the price was significantly reduced, it was still well beyond what most people can pay.

 

I don't see what is misleading about my post. If anyone were to purchase this equipment brand new that is what it would cost. I take for granted most intelligent people would know its possible to buy used equipment. There is no standard price list for used equipment the same way there is for brand new equipment.

 

Of course there are other options besides what I listed but I don't see how that invalidates what I said.

It is possible to rent the most expensive components of the HD system. It is possible to rent the entire system and buy none of it. It is possible to just pay someone else who owns the equipment to do all of the work.

 

All of these options have their advantages and disadvantages. As I said at the top of my original post it depends on what you need to do.

 

setting out incorrect information as fact and quoting list prices for equipment which you seemingly have no knowledge

 

I believe Kim is replying to the fact that you expended more energy insulting my post than you did providing useful information to the discussion.

 

If I don't know what I'm talking about please do enlighten us.

[Keith Mottram]

The point of the post is the fact that just because RED will possibly deliver uncompressed 1920x1080 HD does not mean that full production of uncompressed 1920x1080 HD will be affordable for the common person.

 

I gave an example of a small I company I know of and components they bought for 1920x1080 post production. All the equipment was not bought brand new. I believe the HD deck and Sony monitor were bought used. But its not like the price was significantly reduced, it was still well beyond what most people can pay.

 

I don't see what is misleading about my post. If anyone were to purchase this equipment brand new that is what it would cost. I take for granted most intelligent people would know its possible to buy used equipment. There is no standard price list for used equipment the same way there is for brand new equipment.

 

Of course there are other options besides what I listed but I don't see how that invalidates what I said.

It is possible to rent the most expensive components of the HD system. It is possible to rent the entire system and buy none of it. It is possible to just pay someone else who owns the equipment to do all of the work.

 

All of these options have their advantages and disadvantages. As I said at the top of my original post it depends on what you need to do.

I believe Kim is replying to the fact that you expended more energy insulting my post than you did providing useful information to the discussion.

 

If I don't know what I'm talking about please do enlighten us.

 

tenolian,

 

blunt maybe. insulting no. but apologies if i've offended. just wanted to clarify what i saw as a misleading post. which i think i did. not actually really sure why i'm posting anyway- i suggested that there really is no need for this subforum. so there you go- i'm a bit of a twat, but a twat with a balanced understanding of both film and digital's real world costs.

 

its too sunny to worry about this stuff anyway, lets all eat ice cream and cool down.

 

keith

Edited May 10, 2006 by keith mottram

[Jonathan Spear]

Is there something evil about this camera that I'm missing?

 

Jesus. Why does that Jannard dude have to be insulted off a CINEMATOGRAPHY site?

 

How dare he try to promote his camera here! :rolleyes:

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------->>>

Edited May 10, 2006 by TSM

[Keith Mottram]

Is there something evil about this camera that I'm missing?

 

Jesus. Why does that Jannard dude have to be insulted off a CINEMATOGRAPHY site?

 

How dare he try to promote his camera here! :rolleyes:

 

 

a) Last time I looked this site was not for issues of corporate promotion- that's what banner adds are for.

B) To truly promote a 'camera' it would actually need to exist.

[Jim Jannard]

Please read my posts. I didn't come here to promote our camera. I came here to ask for ideas. What I received was heckling. I do appreciate the many direct emails from this group with real suggestions. Some here actually have reservations.

 

It is funny. When companies ignore the suggestions of their customers, they get trashed on boards. When a company actually embraces suggestions from a board... it gets trashed.

[Chris Cooke]

It is funny. When companies ignore the suggestions of their customers, they get trashed on boards. When a company actually embraces suggestions from a board... it gets trashed.

 

Very good point.

 

These are my thoughts:

Latitude - Any digital camera that claims to have the same quality as 35mm should look very carefully at this issue.

Lenses - It looks to me that you only have one 300mm lens on your site. I'd like to see you make one GOOD zoom lens that comes standard with the camera and just let Cooke, Zeiss, Primo, etc. do what they do best for all the varying primes.

Body - Don't worry about making the camera look all futuristic but just make it comfortable.

Viewfinder - I'd like to see a super high quality flip out screen that the 1st AC can actually judge focus on.

Storage - Wireless RAID? I don't know, this will be one of your biggest issues for whether or not this camera will sell.

Editing - Contact FCP, Avid, Quantel, etc. and get the support you need.

Audio - Give us at least 2 channels of onboard audio (balanced XLR jacks)

[Keith Mottram]

I'd like to apologise for my last post, the stupid yellow head should have actually been 'B)' ... I stand by everything else. This does not mean I am damning the project. I sincerely hope it succeeds as I can see many potential uses for this potential piece of equipment....

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Please read my posts. I didn't come here to promote our camera. I came here to ask for ideas. What I received was heckling. I do appreciate the many direct emails from this group with real suggestions. Some here actually have reservations.

 

It is funny. When companies ignore the suggestions of their customers, they get trashed on boards. When a company actually embraces suggestions from a board... it gets trashed.

That's also why I said it hasn't been fair!

 

As this board have professionals like the reputation of David Mullen (a must around the web), this cinematography.com community (as reader I'm included since a long time ago) must be grateful for to have here someone as Jim Jannard. As I posted before, does we know a humble successful entrepreneur like him asking to his potential customers which are their real (affordable -- specially those) needs? Not all filmmakers are working as professionals in the mainstream. Some professionals with skills and background, they are choosing other way, probably a harder one but their own. RED will be a bless to my indie work. We need your input Jim, despite... (well, it's enough!).

 

As STRICTLY future buyer, please carry on posting here and take care of our requests. Your success will be ours too. And there are a lot of people that are needing of your effort to pursue their projects.

 

I'd like to apologise for my last post, the stupid yellow head should have actually been 'B)' ... I stand by everything else. This does not mean I am damning the project. I sincerely hope it succeeds as I can see many potential uses for this potential piece of equipment....

Your post made my day! :)

 

EDIT -- [shills talk aside! -- I'm joking! :lol: maybe because I have (and Jim, for sure, too! :D -- this I can 100% guarantee!) my conscience clean!]

Edited May 10, 2006 by Emanuel

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm excited by the potential of the RED camera, just as I was with the Kinetta and Dalsa, D20, Genesis, and all the other single-chip, film-style digital movie cameras out there or soon to be other there. And it's a good sign, of course, that the RED team are listening to the filmmaking community for ideas.

 

It's the marketing hype that makes me uneasy, but in a capitalistic world, it's hard to blame a company for promoting a product... but on the other hand, since the product isn't available yet, they should hardly be surprised by a wall of skepticism, especially since they are not a long-standing camera manufacturer.

[Emanuel A Guedes]

I'm excited by the potential of the RED camera, just as I was with the Kinetta and Dalsa, D20, Genesis, and all the other single-chip, film-style digital movie cameras out there or soon to be other there. And it's a good sign, of course, that the RED team are listening to the filmmaking community for ideas.

 

It's the marketing hype that makes me uneasy, but in a capitalistic world, it's hard to blame a company for promoting a product... but on the other hand, since the product isn't available yet, they should hardly be surprised by a wall of skepticism, especially since they are not a long-standing camera manufacturer.

I think this skepticism is welcome! You haven't idea what I suffered :P in another board between my fellows. I've been their friend but our POV related HVX or the blind Pana love it wasn't/isn't the same...so, they are seeing what I can't :angry: or the opposite it's equal true. RED has been my salvation... :lol: Here my nick(name) it's safe because the majority of you are unbiased. (Good Lord! -- please, now it's my turn to ask you be gentle with RED even if always from an exclusive unbiased/indie POV; with the due respect with everyone specially with the others' work and with the necessary good faith in order to be more an asset than a liability, including to Jim Jannard!) Edited May 10, 2006 by Emanuel

[Tenolian Bell]

Why is RED your salvation?

 

What will it be able to do for you that no actual working camera on the market cannot do now?

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Why is RED your salvation?

Well, that statement was produced in that precise context. I was referring the prior phrase regarding my previous experience in that particular board considering the HVX camcorder.

 

What will it be able to do for you that no actual working camera on the market cannot do now?

One sole concept or if you prefer two words: film & money. I'm working in a market that if you have a subsidy you have $600,000 - $1,200,000 for your feature, if not, you are just a "paper filmmaker" or you can work in the movies of the people that have connection with the power. The power to decide who is filming who is not. That's the way it works.

 

Or you have a last chance: the video. And the video festivals, as well.

 

RED will be really revolutionary to the people that are working in this arthouse market. Yet more, there will be skilled people that will can return to the moviemaking business. With professional background, film education but now they are doing what they don't want to.

 

Of course, there are other high resolution cameras/camcorders but at what price range?

Edited May 10, 2006 by Emanuel

[Tenolian Bell]

Somehow I figured that?s what you would say.

 

For the past eight years there has been this believe that (insert name of new digital camera) will revolutionize filmmaking. In that time there have been some interesting new developments, but by and large the studio dominated business model has continued uninterrupted.

 

Many people outside looking in erroneously believe film itself is the barrier between them and the industry. While it can be a barrier its not really the main barrier. There are probably tens of thousands of movies shot on film that will never see wide distribution.

 

The movie business is far too complex to be simplified down to what camera format a movie was shot on. In the larger scheme of things that doesn?t even matter.

 

In the indie world the reason a movie shot on film could potentially sell better than a film shot on video is because a production shooting film will take more care with its quality. A movie shot on film will more likely have a decent script and hire an experienced crew.

 

Hollywood continues to shoot 35mm partially because of legacy and momentum, but mostly because 35mm film truly offers advantages over other formats. If you are paying your star actor $20 million and have a well paid and experienced production crew why use an inferior recording format.

 

For the most part no matter what format a movie was shot with what makes the largest difference in being accepted for distribution comes down to the people who champion it. A well known actor, a powerful director, producer, or studio head. Those are the true gate keepers who hold the keys.

[Jim Jannard]

What will it be able to do for you that no actual working camera on the market cannot do now?

 

A lot, actually. I can't think of any 35mm DOF camera (with full frame sensor) that shoots 4k at 60fps (other than film cameras). Let alone 2k at 120fps. Or 1080p and 720P with 35mm DOF without adaptors. And 4k and 2k RAW, 4:4:4 or 4:2:2. There are digital cameras that do SOME of these, but not all. And the cameras that do SOME of these are not for sale. If they were, speculated prices are all above $250,000. Add in modularity, flexibility (interchangeable lens mounts for one) and UPGRADEABLE (including the sensor as technology advances) and the list shrinks to none. And these are just the top line advantages. Correct me if I am wrong... there are no other full frame 35mm sensor cameras that are for sale on the market.

 

Now, if you don't believe we can do it (the hope that Mr. Murdock clings to for some personal reason) that's OK. Sit back and watch. I'm looking from the inside and see all the pieces and feel comfortable enough to take reservations. Some the outside, who have no visibility whatsoever of what we are doing or the technical capabilities that we have, strongly believe that they can't see how we will be able to do it. Pick a side. No problem with me. The only issue I have is someone being disrespectful.

 

Jim

 

You might be surprised at the names of some DP's that have placed reservations.

 

Jim

[Guest rndfilms]

Dear Jim:

 

A few suggestions, since you're looking for feedback:

 

-optical viewfinder (already done?)

-image intensified viewfinder

-integrated underwater housing

-multichannel audio on board;

-more power options, I'd really like to see an option to use standard dry cells (C or D size, for when you're stuck in the boonies)

-some method of abstracting the display over a network, a la X windows; so proxies could be sent elsewhere in realtime

-GPS/IRIG receiver on board

-single mode fiber connectivity

-lens control via TCP/IP

-lighter and smaller never hurts!

-integrated intercom with text messaging

-a laser sight (no, really! for robocam applications....)or instead, selectable UV sensitivity in the chip, so I can paint with an exernal laser and have a robo head track the dot

-mpeg4 output for easy integration with satellite uplink

wot elz....? On behalf of everyone here, sorry for the abuse, but as they told me on my first day in USMC boot camp- SUCK IT UP, BUTTERCUP!

[Jim Jannard]

Dear Jim:

 

wot elz....? On behalf of everyone here, sorry for the abuse, but as they told me on my first day in USMC boot camp- SUCK IT UP, BUTTERCUP!

 

Thanks for the feedback.

 

In Boot Camp they say it to your face...

 

Jim

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

Actually at NAB I did say "It's not that we don't think you can do it, we just don't think you can do it in the advertised timescale and budget."

 

But this really is becoming a witch hunt, which is not very fair. The advertised spec is very big and it would offer quite a bit that no current camera can, mainly in terms of the speed/resolution ratio. At the very least, they aren't building just another Sony style handycam. Nobody from Red is saying it'll get you past some imaginary barrier to making a living.

 

Perhaps we should not assume that they will fail utterly.

 

Phil