Jump to content

Why Red causes conflict, and the future of filmmaking


Chris Kenny

Recommended Posts

The problem is this is exactly what people said when they heard about the HVX200, which is probably why this 'product' has become so championed on hvxuser (the king is dead long live the king etc...). there also seems to be a large amount of people who sit around thinking if only i had this kind of camera i could make that film i've always wanted to make. and these are probably the people who've chucked down their thousand dollars. and i also don't understand the idea that this is in any way revolutionary when it comes to filmmaking. revolutionary is scraping everything together to tell a story in a way that hasn't been done before. there is nothing revolutionary about owning expensive hardware- and thats what it is, regardless of whether its cheap in comparison to another piece of kit. the fact is the average joe will sit happilly infront of HD originated images if the script/ production is good enough. the people who are buying these cameras aren't the future of indy filmmaking, they are people with cash and a lack of ideas. when i visitied hvxuser this is what i found, people talking tech and cooing, thats not indy filmmaking- indy filmmaking is getting your idea on the screen regardless of medium. it is passion not pixels.

 

I think you're being rather unjust here. It's unsurprising that the posts in a forum dedicated to discussion about a camera mostly constitute discussion about the camera, rather than posts about the screenplays people are writing. It certainly doesn't demonstrate people aren't working on interesting projects.

 

Some of the people who have tossed down money no doubt match the description you give -- they're excited about the tech specs, and don't really know what they'll do with the thing. Neither of us has any firm basis to speculate about just how many reservation holders this applies to. But as I said in my original post, I do fully expect a lot of 4K junk to be produced. But there will also be some really great stuff produced, by people who wouldn't have otherwise had access to tools that could accomplish what they wanted to do.

 

On the importance of story, yes, you're right, people will watch just about anything if the story is good enough. Hell, look at how many people watch stuff on YouTube. But filmmakers themselves often care immensely about image quality. I don't think I really have to defend that notion in a cinematography forum.... And we are talking about a visual medium here. The image is a big part of how the story is told. Some stories actually work better with a grainy film 16mm stock, or over-sharp HD video with clipped highlights, but low-budget filmmakers don't want to let their equipment dictate what kind of stories they can tell, or be forced to tell stories in a visual style that isn't what they'd have picked if not for budget constraints.

 

That's what this is really all about -- slowly chipping away at the limitations imposed on filmmakers. And that's exactly what leads to new stories getting told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 188
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Premium Member
I think you're being rather unjust here. It's unsurprising that the posts in a forum dedicated to discussion about a camera mostly constitute discussion about the camera, rather than posts about the screenplays people are writing. It certainly doesn't demonstrate people aren't working on interesting projects.

 

Some of the people who have tossed down money no doubt match the description you give -- they're excited about the tech specs, and don't really know what they'll do with the thing. Neither of us has any firm basis to speculate about just how many reservation holders this applies to. But as I said in my original post, I do fully expect a lot of 4K junk to be produced. But there will also be some really great stuff produced, by people who wouldn't have otherwise had access to tools that could accomplish what they wanted to do.

 

On the importance of story, yes, you're right, people will watch just about anything if the story is good enough. Hell, look at how many people watch stuff on YouTube. But filmmakers themselves often care immensely about image quality. I don't think I really have to defend that notion in a cinematography forum.... And we are talking about a visual medium here. The image is a big part of how the story is told. Some stories actually work better with a grainy film 16mm stock, or over-sharp HD video with clipped highlights, but low-budget filmmakers don't want to let their equipment dictate what kind of stories they can tell, or be forced to tell stories in a visual style that isn't what they'd have picked if not for budget constraints.

 

That's what this is really all about -- slowly chipping away at the limitations imposed on filmmakers. And that's exactly what leads to new stories getting told.

 

I've just worked out what that pain is. its from me banging my head against a brick wall...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just worked out what that pain is. its from me banging my head against a brick wall...

 

Your original post was an argument that HD is good enough for storytelling at that the people reserving RED don't understand that. I think I had a fairly good response to that argument.

 

I don't think it's particularly helpful for you to imply I don't understand your argument merely because I disagree with it. Hell, I don't even really disagree with it. HD is good enough for storytelling. But for some storytelling, 16mm, or 35mm or 4K, or 3D animation, or something else... is better. And better tools are something that the people who use them tend to get excited about.

 

Once again, yes, probably some of the people buying RED do believe it will magically make them into filmmakers, and the only reason they haven't made a film before is because they couldn't afford good enough equipment, etc. But, you know what? This points out another interesting aspect of RED, and the slow erosion of barriers to filmmaking. With every barrier that comes down, another excuse disappears. All the people who've been saying they couldn't make a movie because they couldn't afford a good enough camera -- well, if they buy RED, and they still can't make a movie, we'll know the problem wasn't the camera.

 

Really, though, saying this is true of everyone buying the RED, or everyone over at dvxuser.com, is grossly unfair. A lot of those folks have made movies on lesser equipment. Or even on more expensive (usually rented) equipment. Hell, the guys over at Pixel Corps go on about RED at length in their podcasts, and they own an F-950. I doubt RED is going to be a first camera for many people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Your original post was an argument that HD is good enough for storytelling at that the people reserving RED don't understand that. I think I had a fairly good response to that argument.

 

Um no it wasn't. You had a fairly good resposnse to the post you wanted to reply to, not the post i actually made. to reiterate, most of the arguments for red- 'regarding revolutions in filmmaking' we've heard before. infact the same people with their handycams were probably talking about how they were going to buy an hvx then are now talking about getting a red (and putting down deposits now). most of the arguments on dvxuser are oxymorons- we need 4k to make a decent film, yet lenses etc are not important. It is like they want to have their dogfood and eat it too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you'd rather wait until the camera is completely finished and has a barcode on the side, you are more than welcome to remove yourself from the discussion until that time. I don't think anyone here would mind very much.

 

now you've not only missed my point but also hurt my feelings. I'm devistated. See richard someone did say BOO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

now you've not only missed my point but also hurt my feelings. I'm devistated. See richard someone did say BOO!

 

Yes. But minus the "KILL HIM! KILL HIM!!" I usually get :D

 

Any way I promised Tim I would not pick on the Redites "too" much any more.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Richard,

 

Congratulations on becoming a sustaining member!

 

Stephen

 

Thank-you. Now that I'm independently wealthy I thought I should give Tim 50 bucks.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell you what. If you'll send me 50 bucks, I'll make you an honorary member in good standing.

 

That's all? It's a steal. What is your e-mail address or Pay Pal account?

 

But I want a written guarantee that I can say what I want with impunity :D

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st) Digital HD 1080p and 2K are Hollywood A-Budget blockbuster-tools.

zodiac, superman, miami vice, 2 brothers, starwars, click, Sin City etc.

2nd) Digital HD 1080p and 2K are Indie, experimental and doc C/B-Budget blockbuster-tools.

sky captain, bowling for columbine, manderlay/dogville, aliens of the deep etc.

 

so that part of the discussion is over anyhow. film vs. digital is no longer a debate, its coexistence is production reality since years - and the audience loves both.

 

So, why the "hype". Actually it isn´t a hype. Every filmmaker has to master the technical challenges.

The typical creative choices and options cinematographers wish in their cameras, but don´t get them all in one camera right now, are:

 

- 2/3, 16 and 35 DOF, depending on what type of shot you want to do. shallow DOF for drama, deep DOF for documentary.

the red camera will do exactly this.

- uncompressed or datareduced, depending on what type of shot you want to do. uncompressed for VFX cinematic, datareduced for the pitch & longform doc...

the red camera will do exactly this.

- full studio setup or compact lightweight. depending on what type of shot you want to do. heavy long zoom, 2 assistance monitors & vector/wave, tons of follow/remote focus etc for the studio. redcage/rail. only body & prime lens: underwater, steady, run n gun etc.

the red camera will do exactly this.

- access the lenses you have in house (if you are in business a little bit longer that would be 35/16)

the red camera will do exactly this. the acutal HD-cams besides the D20 all need new glass. that is HIGHLY expensive, we bought 2 angenieux 2/3 for our Sony HDCAM which each are ~35K. We have 35 Zeiss primes and 35mm Angenieux Zooms anyhow - with red we wouldn´t have had to spendt the additional 70K.

- all framerates, incl. overcranking. there are many digital highspeedcameras, but the one camera for >95% of the speeds paradigm of film is/was better. red is at 120p/2k.

- "i want to buy, topquality do i need to bet the house." a solid sony setup will be for body and peripherals ~80-100.000, excluding lenses etc. we have our arri 35 and sony hdcam and believe me, i planned these investments for years. if i would have had the choice, i would rather have bought 4 reds and kept the other 100.000.

- camcorder and wired studio setup. depending on what type of shot you want to do. most digital cams are on or the other, or require additional gear at least like Venom or HDCAM SR or discrecorder.

red can do both.

- 2K is good and the mayority of the movies, but 4k gives you reserves in post and is futureproof, if the producers want to pay it. to aquire in 4k and still have the possibilty to go a 2K post/DI/VFX pipeline is great. The other digital 2K or 4k cameras are 2k or 4k centric.

- All resolutions, PAL-4K. Good for the fast job in-between. You dont want a 4k "making-of" camera editorial. and TV jobs can generate some money often enough.

- RAW, RGB, YUV - all 3 formats can be required, and most RAW cameras (actually all i am aware of) switch their monitoring if in RAW.

- Studios & rental want to buy. Arri & Panavision don´t sell their camera, Dalsa i don´t know.

- a manufacturer who listens. I like Sony - they have good service, excellent products - but you will hardly be able to get feature request to developers and if you meet one at IBC/NAB, they aren´t allowed to speak open.

- outstanding imagequality.

 

there are many many creative, commercial, technological and ergonomic points to add.

 

however, the illusion that the red is mainly attracting indies isn´t reality, even if it might seem so on some internetforum.

 

the camera design -if it materialises as they plan- is simply a solution t many different needs, requirement and artistic wishes. Also, the shortcomings or compromises or decisions panavision, sony and arri require you to have are mostly resolved in REDs design.

 

Besides us, and we have many $$$.$$$ in cameras, lenses etc, i know of several ueber-rental houses who have $$.$$$.$$$ in cameras who ordered the maximum of 5 cameras. The same is true for several hip top- directors & dops. RED could cost 200.000, and i would be highly interested, as many others as well.

 

i don´t feel threathened by red. ok it will devalue our hdcam and 35mm cams in the long run. but especially the hdcam has its niche and, more important, i suppose our movies will look better and will be easier to shoot when red, hopefully, reaches their design goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are also judging the RED camera in terms of what they've been using previously.

 

Those who have used nothing but DV are ecstatic about the features of the RED camera because it's already astronomically improved even in the compressed JPEG frame grabs.

 

Those who normally shoot film see no reason to get excited, they're already working with footage that is equal or better in quality.

 

I think Stephen said it best: some people 'seem to be looking for good enough but my clients demand the best'. Well... for most people on DVXuser.com RED is the best they can afford. I mean... wy not shoot 60mm? I don't see too many features being shot on 60mm even though the sensor is capable of being that much sharper and cleaner. We're all limited by our budgets. Everyone is looking for the best possible capture system, but Best is a situational definition.

 

The digital workflow, high quality image and low cost all enable RED to be the "Best option" in a number of situations, especially in the lower end Indie/PSA/Industrials market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Those who have used nothing but DV are ecstatic about the features of the RED camera because it's already astronomically improved even in the compressed JPEG frame grabs.

 

Correct Gavin, but Im curious as to how people who could previously only afford DV are going to afford RED + lenses. I mean, you look at the DVXUser forum and you see folks who spent $3,500(DVX) - $5,500 (HVX) so the RED is a HUGE step up in terms of price. If these people had this much money all along, why werent they shooting on 16mm or at least a cam like the SD900?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If these people had this much money all along, why werent they shooting on 16mm or at least a cam like the SD900?

 

Actually I think many of them were doing just this, the DVX forum has just become the most active board on the net where the Red camera is discussed, that attracts people, not the fact that it started as a DVX forum.

 

There is certainly a larger number of people on the DVX board whose expertise goes well beyond your average DVX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
i don´t feel threathened by red. ok it will devalue our hdcam and 35mm cams in the long run. but especially the hdcam has its niche and, more important, i suppose our movies will look better and will be easier to shoot when red, hopefully, reaches their design goals.

 

Hi Jan,

 

If Red delivers 500-2000 cameras over the next 18 months will anybody actually want to rent yours? They won't be the cash cows that your 35mm cameras have always been.

 

Stephen

 

There is certainly a larger number of people on the DVX board whose expertise goes well beyond your average DVX.

 

Eirik,

 

I spent 5 hours their today but did not reach that same conclusion.

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those who have used nothing but DV are ecstatic about the features of the RED camera because it's already astronomically improved even in the compressed JPEG frame grabs.

 

Yes, but Red will be out of range price wise for most people who are in the Mini DV world. The Canon XL1 is still the best value for the money for most of these folks.

 

I understand that the 17.5K price tag is for the camera body only? PL mount lenses will add a hefty price tag to that. The Red 18-85mm zoom is listed on their site for $9, 500.00!! The Red 300mm is listed for $4995.00.

 

A new SD Canon XL1 is selling on ebay now for $1795.00. People used to getting a complete ready to shoot camera for $1795.00 are going to choke hard on the near $30, 000.00 it will cost them for a Red package. I think there will be few takers for Red in the pro-sumer market. People who do budgets for universities, colleges, and corporate video departments, will balk at the Red price tag. Even the HDV version of the Canon XL1 is dirt cheap compared to Red. Don't waste your breath promoting the value of "4K" to most Mini DV people when you tell them they need to spend $30,000.00.

 

As has already been stated on this board, many of the people who have plunked down the deposits will not be able to come up with the rest of the money. Then there will be a bunch of Red cameras on ebay when many of the first wave of users find they can not generate the work to keep the camera.

 

The fact that Red is coming out with a 18-85mm ZOOM is very telling. How often are zooms used in feature films and higher end TV shows these days? 90% of the work is done with primes, and we change lenses based on the needs of each shot. This is a foreign concept to Mini DV and pro-sumer types. What they are used to is a zoom lens so the focal length can be changed for the needs of each shot. Very ENG style.

 

So it seems that while on the Red website they call it "Digital Cinema", this whole system has not been very well thought out for people that shoot for the "cinema" i.e. feature films.

 

End rant....let the bashing begin, this time I have the gate secured and the hot oil ready :D

 

R,

 

PS: "Hot Oil" as in a seige defence.

 

PSS: I'm still betting that an engineer some place will develop a 35mm, crystal synch, silent, pin registered, film camera with a price tag of under $20K NEW. I'm thinking it may be the alter ego of Jim Janard, a rich guy with a passion for film instead of digital. Once a revolutionary movement can be invented, the sky is the limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jan,

 

If Red delivers 500-2000 cameras over the next 18 months will anybody actually want to rent yours?

yeah, we have negotiations with 2 fullfeatures & 1 doc for mid-late 2007 who want to go red if available. 1 instead of 35mm, 2 instead of cinealta. all are b-budget.

 

They won't be the cash cows that your 35mm cameras have always been.

i am not certain. the body (after the first peak in demand) will be less expensive than a typical arri/sony.

however, as we have integrated post etc i suppose more service there and also i expect that the typical 30-60 days shooting * 5-8 / year schematic we see per camera will be somewhat more outbooked.

 

also, the HDV & DV & broadcast rental houses charge -sick- price for the hvx & jvc hdc.... the hvx is going ~200/day here in berlin, and the ps pro 35 is also overpriced IMHO. so i suppose we will fish in that pond a little bit as well.

 

then - usually we have lot of unrented 35/16 glass, as we have a choice here. usually 50-75% HD glass and 25-50% 35/16 glass in use. I suppose that besides the regular clients budget-style red-clients will show up which would be excited to rent zeiss 35 / s16 primes pr even sets of them.

 

cinealta however has its niche of its own anyhow, i am rather interested in seing how 35mm digital / 35mm chemical will be balanced.

 

and finally, rental is just one part. we are a studio, we produce, we have inhouse grade/di and digital vs. film is much cheaper if you own and know HOW to do it.

 

As a businessman, the question is not if i can stop that development. if i don´t offer red, you can bet that LUDWIG (he has 5 on order) would be happily make the business in berlin :) so its better to take away the biz instead of having it taken away. important to remember this in times of transition.

 

 

and finally, i don´t know this exactly, however i wouldn´t wonder if red will need until 2008 to deliver all preorders, and i think the 2007 rental market will be quite funny, that is, IF they deliver in early 2007, what i still can´t imagine how they can do it.

 

btw orders >800, final number not known as of yet, but people with ~850 etc are showing up over at dvxuser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st) Digital HD 1080p and 2K are Hollywood A-Budget blockbuster-tools.

zodiac, superman, miami vice, 2 brothers, starwars, click, Sin City etc.

2nd) Digital HD 1080p and 2K are Indie, experimental and doc C/B-Budget blockbuster-tools.

sky captain, bowling for columbine, manderlay/dogville, aliens of the deep etc.

 

Jan, I can't really see why people get excited over RED but I do respect your opinions and hope that RED delivers and meets your expectations. However, I can't help but wonder why out of HUNDREDS of movies produced in the last 4/5 years, only few have been shot on HD (less than 5%). I frankly don't think that RED will change the nature of the industry in any possible way, practically or from a creative point of view, nor will it open the market to other people. In the end, it's just another camera.

 

so that part of the discussion is over anyhow. film vs. digital is no longer a debate, its coexistence is production reality since years - and the audience loves both.

 

I'd say it's far from over, since their "co-existence" is far from being a reality. When HALF of the movies for theatrical release will be shot on HD, the co-existence will be a fact.

 

Arri & Panavision don´t sell their camera

 

Actually, Arri does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, we have negotiations with 2 fullfeatures & 1 doc for mid-late 2007 who want to go red if available. 1 instead of 35mm, 2 instead of cinealta. all are b-budget.

 

I'm sorry Jan, but I find it hard to believe that people with serious money (the b-budget that you mention) are seriously talking about switching their productions over to a untried, untested (and unseen) camera system.

 

So far, all anybody has to go on are the published specs, and a few screengrabs, Making production decisions on that basis is foolhardy, and if your clients are that easily swayed by what is still currently vapourware, then they are setting themselves up for a fall.

 

I would hope that you are advising them in the strongest terms to wait until the RED system has proved itself viable before committing a production to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Forum Sponsors

Visual Products

Film Gears

BOKEH RENTALS

CineLab

CINELEASE

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...