Chris Kenny Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 Jim Jannard has posted an update on the status of the project here. The summary is, they're on track to ship around NAB, but some features won't make it into the very first shipping cameras (they'll be provided via firmware updates), and initial production will be a little slower than they anticipated (though they still expect to have all the reservations filled by September or October). From a later post in the thread, it sounds like they also plan to announce pricing on the rest of the accessories soon, and there's a comment that reservation holders will be very happy, suggesting perhaps they'll get special prices on accessories, or a neat bundle, or that the price of the camera might be higher for people who didn't reserve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Borowski Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 DRAMA DRAMA DRAMA :rolleyes: Really, if you're this good at being dramatic, why are you behind cameras instead of in front of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Mottram Posted February 27, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 27, 2007 read some of the thread... and well... i am simply amazed. people are acting like all their dreams are comeing true, when jannard's post speaks of manufacturing problems, late deliveries and incomplete functionality. now i am happy to aplaud the progress that red have made, but i'm not sure if any of these reduser nuts have the faculties to look through a lens let alone create a watchable film... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted February 27, 2007 Author Share Posted February 27, 2007 read some of the thread... and well... i am simply amazed. people are acting like all their dreams are comeing true, when jannard's post speaks of manufacturing problems, late deliveries and incomplete functionality. Glass half empty much? It looks like reservation holders are mostly getting their 4K $17,500 cameras this summer. Compared with that, the "bad news" mentioned in that post is pretty insignificant. In particular, the feature issues will only impact the first ~100 reservation holders (less than 10%), and will mostly be related to the on-camera RGB features -- most people seem to be interested primarily in shooting 4K REDCODE RAW, which they'll be able to do from day one -- and as far as the manufacturing issues go, Red is saying they expect to fill all the reservations by September-October, which is in line with (or even a little before) what people were estimating anyway. Red isn't backing away from a previously announced delivery schedule here -- there was no previously announced delivery schedule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 Hi Chris or Red 404 . wish you and everyone else best of luck . Hope you have great scripts ideas , because a camera is just a camera may it be Super Panavision 70 or Super 8 , without something worth watching you are just f--ked . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 27, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 27, 2007 Hi, Notable lack of facts in that release! Lots of "We believe" and "I expect" and "we still believe". Some corporate-wall stuff - "we can't tell you...". Well, actually, yes, you can. You're just choosing not to. Don't be dramatic about it. And it's not really a 17 grand camera, is it? "EVF, LCD, drives and rail system will be ready when the cameras are shipping." So it doesn't actually include the EVF? Um. Then it's not really a camera, is it? Speccing out a full Red system will cost you $75,000 by the time you have decent glass. It is not a revolution in anything. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chad Stockfleth Posted February 27, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 27, 2007 Don't listen to Phil. You can ABSOLUTELY shoot without an EVF. Consider the scene in Star Wars where Obi Wan is training young Luke. Luke is wearing an opaque visor and yet is able to "feel" when the little floating robot is about to zap him, then parry the attack. Think about camera operating in much the same way. You must simply aim the camera, and "feel" the framing. It's all about intuition. Quite simple really. :P Lenses are quite overrated as well. I've gotten some very interesting images using the open cavity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Anthony Vale Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 Lenses are quite overrated as well. I've gotten some very interesting images using the open cavity. Even without stretching a piece of gaffer tape across it and poking a hole in it, two for low light? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chad Stockfleth Posted February 27, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 27, 2007 Now that is a really good idea. I've been using an old pair of glasses. I just read the reduser.com thread and they have a link back to this thread stating how everybody here sucks. Pretty funny. I really wonder how many of them make a living working with this stuff. I'll state again, I am not against the RED camera at all, just the mindless ass polishing and pie-in-the-sky dreaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Brighton Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 Hi Chris or Red 404 . wish you and everyone else best of luck . Hope you have great scripts ideas , because a camera is just a camera may it be Super Panavision 70 or Super 8 , without something worth watching you are just f--ked . Ah, but once you have a 4K digital camera all those hundreds of freeloaders whose names you see at the end of a movie will no longer be needed. The reduction in release stock cost alone will be significant. What stuff they do do will henceforth be done in post. And as for scriptwriters, what a bunch of phonies! I'm convinced a lot of them just make it up as they go along! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted February 28, 2007 Author Share Posted February 28, 2007 (edited) Speccing out a full Red system will cost you $75,000 by the time you have decent glass. It is not a revolution in anything. Even if your $75K figure were right -- and I suspect you know perfectly well that one doesn't need $40K worth of lenses, a $4K matte box, a $10K tripod, etc. just to get an image -- that's still less than the likely cost of 35mm film stock for a single typical feature. Maybe you only work on high-budget projects where that doesn't make a difference, but for a low-budget indie it's pretty significant. Why are you guys pretending nobody has ever made a decent movie without at least a couple of hundred thousand dollars and a crew of a few dozen? I'm quite sure you all know very well this is not the case. Edited February 28, 2007 by Chris Kenny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eirik Tyrihjel Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 (edited) Ah, but once you have a 4K digital camera all those hundreds of freeloaders whose names you see at the end of a movie will no longer be needed. The reduction in release stock cost alone will be significant.What stuff they do do will henceforth be done in post. And as for scriptwriters, what a bunch of phonies! I'm convinced a lot of them just make it up as they go along! I feel pitty for whoever thinks a hundred men is a must to create a beautiful image, let alone those who think it is impossible for one man to operate a camera in certain circumstances.... (Everyone know you need at least five; one to load/clap, one to pull focus, one to operate, one to orchestrate the camera and the three other guys, and then one maestro to tell the four mentioned before what to do....) Filmmaking works on many levels my friend, some stunning images can be captured by one man alone, some require hundreds - I have yet to read any claims by RED that this is what they intend to change! Wake up! Edited February 28, 2007 by Eirik Tyrihjel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Brighton Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 I feel pitty for whoever thinks a hundred men is a must to create a beautiful image, let alone those who think it is impossible for one man to operate a camera in certain circumstances.... (Everyone know you need at least five; one to load/clap, one to pull focus, one to operate, one to orchestrate the camera and the three other guys, and then one maestro to tell the four mentioned before what to do....) Filmmaking works on many levels my friend, some stunning images can be captured by one man alone, some require hundreds - I have yet to read any claims by RED that this is what they intend to change! Wake up! If you're going to make posts like this about the people on this forum, please refrain from using terms like "my friend". Personally I don't think you have any friends, which is why you hang out on REDUSER :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 This thread is actually humorous. Man oh man JJ is going to be pissed at you lot. Phil and Chad you're in deep dog doo :) There isn't a Red site at www.reduser.com, it's some sort of portal for a bunch of different companies. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Sheehy Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 LOL, yeah, the site they're after is reduser.net. I actually find it fascinating how there is so much talk of how the camera 'does' this or 'does' that. Last time I checked, it was still in the 'will do' or 'is supposed to do this' stage. Its come a long way since I first stumbled across the red.com page, with its announcements about how it was going to revolutionise digital film making... and no product to show, not even a prototype. :) I think the one, indisputable, good thing that has happened is that the Red Co. have announced a date when other film makers will be able to test it. (That is if JJ allows the hecklers to touch his creation ;) ) "never sell this guy no matter what" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrizio De Sica Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 What is this cinematography board after all? An anti-JJ paper? You hecklers are so ridiculous like those fanboys are... Take your picture. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Brighton Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 LOL, yeah, the site they're after is reduser.net. I actually find it fascinating how there is so much talk of how the camera 'does' this or 'does' that. Last time I checked, it was still in the 'will do' or 'is supposed to do this' stage. Its come a long way since I first stumbled across the red.com page, with its announcements about how it was going to revolutionise digital film making... and no product to show, not even a prototype. :) I think the one, indisputable, good thing that has happened is that the Red Co. have announced a date when other film makers will be able to test it. (That is if JJ allows the hecklers to touch his creation ;) ) "never sell this guy no matter what" Not to mention: "Fanboys motivate us the most. We will do everything in our power to NOT let them down. I will die trying to satisfy them." I mean OK, Jannard has every right to sell his state-of-the-art cameras to complete imbeciles if that's what he wants to do, but ... WHY? As I've said before, I'm not heckling him or his camera, I just don't get it. Maybe he's got some secret government contract and he's just using the Fanboys as a test bed to get the bugs out :D DISCLAIMER: 1. I am currently not the slightest bit interested in buying a RED or any other motion picture camera, film or video. 2. I do not own, nor am I likely to own, any Oakley eyewear, so don't bother trying that tactic either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Brighton Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 What is this cinematography board after all? An anti-JJ paper? You hecklers are so ridiculous like those fanboys are... Take your picture. :P You think imbeciles that that him is hard... the thing it trains and do I Jannard mean all rights to sell the camera of that state of the art which it has well in order to complete why? As I said before, as for me him and the じ っ て it is not or that camera, I do not obtain that by any means. Perhaps as for him using Fanboys in order to obtain the insect from biggrin.gif with the government contract of secret, as a test bed, the abandonment which is fair: 1. I red or other every motion picture camera can have interest purchase cause, the littlest bit film or video presently is not. 2. I do not own, I itself, perhaps am not in eyewear and/or all Oakley therefore trying the maneuvers do not apply annoyance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chad Stockfleth Posted February 28, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 28, 2007 This thread is actually humorous. Man oh man JJ is going to be pissed at you lot. Phil and Chad you're in deep dog doo :) There isn't a Red site at www.reduser.com, it's some sort of portal for a bunch of different companies. R, hehe, like i said, not against Jim or RED at all. i sincerely hope it is what they claim. the "fanboys" just seem a little crazy to me. nobody is saying that it takes 5 people to run a camera (although in some cases it does) or that it takes hundreds of people to make a film. only that if you can't do it with an hvx200 (or something similar) you probably can't do it with a RED either. everybody gets so sensitive. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmanuel Decarpentrie Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 (edited) sell his state-of-the-art cameras to complete imbeciles the "fanboys" just seem a little crazy to me. nobody is saying that it takes 5 people to run a camera (although in some cases it does) or that it takes hundreds of people to make a film. everybody gets so sensitive. B) Mmm... I am sometimes a little puzzled by the condescending tone some people here have toward the Red company and its "fanboys" customers. Of course I understand what you're talking about when you tell they should be reminded it takes "hundreds of people to make a film"! But I am somewhat surprised you seem to discover this "at last all my dreams are coming true thanks to this new thing-I-gotta-buy-ASAP" phenomenon when, as a matter of fact, it is as old as the world we're living in... Don't you think the "Red fanboy's attitude" you seem to despise smells a lot like "déjà vu"? Don't you remember the hype when the first DV cameras where out on the market? Don't you remember the "mini35-like adapter" hype? Don't you remember the many dozens of people desperatly trying to built their own "mini-35" just to pretend they too can now make movies? Don't you remember the many people you've met who thought they were the next Spielberg simply because they finally got a video camera in their hands? Even in film school, students like I am are constantly confronted to that problem! Some of us truly believe they will "by the next Georges Lucas" or the next "Kubrick" whatsoever, when in fact, it is pretty clear they don't have a tenth of a percent of what it takes to make a real movie! But should I feel the urge to let them know what I believe? Certainly not! Because, after all, who the hell am I to judge the dreams of another person! Sometimes, in fact, I have even been greatly surprised by some of the people I didn't really believe in! Some of them truly can become great storytellers! And some of the students I admired the most initially eventually turned out to be quite dissapointing... So, again, I think the only wise move is to refrain any condescending tone, and sort of "feeling of superiority" ever! I don't want to speak about "humility", because I clearly need more of it, but that's clearly one of the quality I admire the most! I think the motion picture industry is something many people accross the world feel attracted too... It is a dream of theirs! And we all know most people won't make it to the "job of their dreams"! That's life! No big deal as far as I am concerned: I certainly don't feel the urge to adopt a condescending tone towards the dreamers! Why? Simply because we're all part of the "dreamers" family, to some extend. And, may I point to you the fact the people who made this industry certainly all were dreamers too! Let those people dream if you please! Or, if you feel the urge, try to kindly, gently, remind them that, indeed, it takes a little more than just a camera, even if it seems "damned good" on paper, to actually make a movie! But to feel the need of insulting them because they keep dreaming anyway... well... I don't think this is the wisest thing you can do... Don't ever try to kill the child that lives in each one of us: that's the best thing life as taught me so far! :) Edited February 28, 2007 by Emmanuel Decarpentrie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted February 28, 2007 Author Share Posted February 28, 2007 As I've said before, I'm not heckling him or his camera, I just don't get it. What's not to get? Red is releasing what looks to be a tool that will create really great images, at a price some people (probably most of the people at reduser.net, who are, after all, a self-selected sample) are willing to pay. It's frankly rather bizarre to me that people are essentially being denigrated in a cinematography forum, of all places, for getting excited about image quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 Hmmm interesting link to that thread at Reduser.net. JJ Says: "Disrespectful skeptics turn me off. Likely to make the "do not ever sell one to this guy" list. If they turn around quickly, we forgive quickly. Hecklers absolutely make the "never sell this guy no matter what" list. We have just added "we reserve the right to refuse service (or accept reservations) for any reason" to our program. It is nice to be a private company." Ok and how will JJ stop people on the banned list from using a fake name or simply getting a friend to buy the camera for them? I'm sure I'm on the banned list and I could easily order this camera right now. I could just have it shipped to my US address. Sorry but this plan just won't work. Item #2. It appears that Jared Land now works for Red? The guy that runs the DVX forum. Every one should take this into account when using either forum. Some one took a picture of this giant SUV with the RED logo on the back, Jared responds as follows: "heh heh heh. yeah we all got them on our vehicles at Red. Right of Passage. As cool the truck is, the stickers are even more bad-ass. it doesnt really look like it because of the scale.. but that sticker is 20" around. oh.. and no, the truck wasn't bought with reservation money lol... heh heh heh." And: "Nice. I saw Jarred driving around about 2 weeks ago at the end of the 55 freeway. I noticed the logo so I had to get his attention, wave, and pretend I'm important. :D" He says "we got them?" So I assume he works there now. Which is fine of course, people are free to choose their employment. I'm not suggesting there is any thing sinister at work. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 For fu**s sake , when are you Red worshippers going to get it , you dont need a 4k digital camera to make movies , look at that awful film "The Blair Witch Project " shot with a couple of empty baked bean tins and a bit of tape running through them . Cost about if i remember about $25,000 , made about $250 million , the audiences loved it . Its story people , please understand it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chad Stockfleth Posted February 28, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted February 28, 2007 Don't you think the "Red fanboy's attitude" you seem to despise smells a lot like "déjà vu"? I sure do. Only those cameras cost a couple thousand, not nearly $25k. Now, they have somewhat revolutionized filmmaking, giving access to lots of people who couldn't afford it before. Especially in the documentary field. RED may very well do the same thing, but the cost is considerably higher. And I hate to bring up the same old argument, but how are people gonna handle the post? I'm talking small-time indie filmmakers who can't afford a tri-pod with their new RED One. I don't think I've said anything too inflammatory, just made a joke about people not considering all that they will REALLY need when they start making their movies. Also, the idea of losing sleep over a new camera is kind of silly to me. That's my opinion, I'm standing by it. I want RED to succeed, and I'm not trying to break anyone's dreams. I will be really excited about RED when they are available and I've seen lots of footage and all that, but excuse me for finding humor in people saying things like "keep the faith" in regards to a camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmanuel Decarpentrie Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 I'm sure I'm on the banned list and I could easily order this camera right now. I could just have it shipped to my US address. Sorry but this plan just won't work. And? What is your point exactly? As far as I understand correctly, the few people who are on the "banned list" are people who never trusted a single word that came out of JJ's mouth! So, why would you change your mind all of a sudden? Even if the Red turned out to be as good as it seems to be on paper I don't see why someone who was absolutely certain this whole thing was some kind of an Hoax would even bother to be on the "Black List"... Don't you know there are many alternatives (like... shooting 35mm film, for instance)? Are you feeling distressed to be on that list even though the actual Red prototype hasn't been shown yet... Are you feeling some sort of despair you need already to come up with alternative (and humiliating) plans like thinking about asking a friend of yours to buy the camera on his name? Its just a digital camera! Nothing else... Shooting 35mm film has never the major cost in a production and never will be! Furthermore, by the time the producers and insurance companies will be comfortable enough to accept a full digital workflow for most major productions, there will be many other/newer Red alternatives! So, again, I don't see the point of any professional being bothered to be on JJ's black list! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now