RED annonces prices on accessories

[Patrizio De Sica]

I stand corrected. Now $475 charged ($175 RED ARM adjustable arm + $300 EVF / LCD Extension Cable 10ft).

 

:rolleyes:

Edited March 18, 2007 by Patrizio De Sica

[Chad Stockfleth]

Patrizio. May I offer a friendly word of advice? Please post about something other than RED. It's bordering on obsessive.

[David Mullen ASC]

It's bordering on obsessive.

 

I told him that almost a year ago and it didn't help. Frankly, it's not "bordering" -- he is obsessive.

[Dan Goulder]

Patrizio. May I offer a friendly word of advice? Please post about something other than RED. It's bordering on obsessive.

Why? RED should be studied as a classic example of marketing. The quest to create obsession in so many who otherwise have no use for a product, but are now convinced they just can?t do without it, is the goal of marketing 101.

[David Mullen ASC]

Why? RED should be studied as a classic example of marketing. The quest to create obsession in so many who otherwise have no use for a product, but are now convinced they just can?t do without it, is the goal of marketing 101.

 

The bigger question is why some people are so susceptible to marketing. You can't blame a marketer for doing a good job at selling something, but you can blame people for not being smarter consumers.

[Patrizio De Sica]

I told him that almost a year ago and it didn't help. Frankly, it's not "bordering" -- he is obsessive.

 

It's easy to talk when others pay the safety-gear bills, isn't it DM? When we do not work in LA, there's no place for the comfortable sunny beaches. I invite you to come here and to try to get some money without an american comfortable budget. Then, we can see who is the obsessive. :P

Edited March 18, 2007 by Patrizio De Sica

[Chad Stockfleth]

Where are you based out of, and what does that have to do with talking about RED?

[Patrizio De Sica]

:rolleyes:

 

Europe. The more I pay bills, the more work I need. The Red camera will be my work. Mine is not your problem but sometimes there is who thinks that can talk about what it cannot.

[Chris Kenny]

I don't think I buy the premise that a significant fraction of people interested in Red "have no use" for it. What does that mean? It obviously doesn't mean they literally have no use for the camera, because they will, in fact, use it for things. I doubt many people who own a Red will leave it sitting in a closet!

 

It could mean that they could get by with lesser equipment. Well... yes, that's true. But there are very few cases where that isn't true. How many movies shot on 35mm could have been shot on 16mm instead, for instance? Pretty much all of them. They wouldn't have looked as good. Some of them might not have made as much money. But it would have, at the most basic level, worked. Yet few people claim that filmmakers "have to use" for 35mm acquisition.

 

So I suppose what it really means is that, in the view of whoever says it, the extra costs of Red don't justify its benefits, for many of the people buying it. This is a very thorny issue. It's hard to judge benefit on behalf of others. In this case it's also complicated by the fact that Red doesn't cost more than competing cameras with inferior specs. If someone had a profitable video production business shooting mostly SD and occasionally shooting 720p, most people here probably wouldn't blink if that person bought a Varicam. But some might object that a Red was overkill for that use case. Well... yes. But if a Red package costs the same as a Varicam package (and there aren't workflow considerations, etc. that get in the way), you'd be nuts not to buy one.

[Patrizio De Sica]

The bigger question is why some people are so susceptible to marketing. You can't blame a marketer for doing a good job at selling something, but you can blame people for not being smarter consumers.

 

We all know who you are. Taken your last posts, can we know what is your psichology background by the way?

Edited March 18, 2007 by Patrizio De Sica

[Stephen Williams]

I don't think I buy the premise that a significant fraction of people interested in Red "have no use" for it. What does that mean? It obviously doesn't mean they literally have no use for the camera, because they will, in fact, use it for things. I doubt many people who own a Red will leave it sitting in a closet!

 

Hi Chris,

 

Budgets will not rise as a result of somebody owning a Red. If they were making a living shooting with a PD150, they may have to throw their Red camera in at the same price as the PD150.

 

So my understanding of 'no use' is 'not commercially viable use'. I understand that the most expensive stills equipment is often bought by amateurs. Pro's can only afford the offerings from Canon & Nikon.

 

Just my 2c.

 

Stephen

[Patrizio De Sica]

:unsure:

 

We all know who you are. Taken your last posts, can we know what is your psychology background by the way?

[Chris Kenny]

Another point about buying a Red vs. buying lesser equipment... let's say someone is interested in a camera to shoot ultra-low-budget (but not quite no-budget) features. What are these cheaper options they should be looking at? 1/3" camcorders with 35mm adaptors? You can spend $15K on a package like that, easily, even if you're just shooting with photo lenses. And it'll be out of date in two years. You're much better off spending two or three times as much on a Red package, which will almost certainly have a much longer useful life span. And, if the worst should happen, and business goes south, probably a much better resale value.

[Patrizio De Sica]

On the way, it seems there are a lot of skills among the cinematographers, I'm curious on your other hobbies.

 

Not you CK! Your skills how to argue your pro JJ point, we already well know.

 

:D

 

And you are not a cinematographer CK. Lucky guy!

[Chris Kenny]

Budgets will not rise as a result of somebody owning a Red. If they were making a living shooting with a PD150, they may have to throw their Red camera in at the same price as the PD150.

 

Anyone upgrading from a PD150 to a Red is going to be looking to upgrade their client base as well. Some will succeed, some will fail. I suspect most people buying the camera have thought this through pretty thoroughly, taken a look at their local markets, etc.

[Stephen Williams]

Anyone upgrading from a PD150 to a Red is going to be looking to upgrade their client base as well. Some will succeed, some will fail. I suspect most people buying the camera have thought this through pretty thoroughly, taken a look at their local markets, etc.

 

Hi Chris,

 

I have sacked all my clients twice in my carear, it can be done but IMHO most people won't turn down paying work.

 

I get booked because I can light, thats it!

 

Stephen

[Chris Kenny]

I have sacked all my clients twice in my carear, it can be done but IMHO most people won't turn down paying work.

 

I'd suspect a lot of Red cameras won't be going to freelancers per se, they'll be going to small businesses. That makes a big difference in terms of flexibility, even if the small businesses are only two or three people. A business can expand into new market segments without leaving its old segments, hiring additional people (or subcontracting work) when the workload justifies it.

 

This sort of structure is pretty common in the video production world, and some of these little companies are going to start taking on higher end projects as the technology makes that possible.

[Brian Drysdale]

This sort of structure is pretty common in the video production world, and some of these little companies are going to start taking on higher end projects as the technology makes that possible.

 

The technology is already there for them to make SD higher end productions with cameras that already exist. I can't see a camera package that costs a similar price to a Digibeta is going to change this, it's their talents and contacts that will make the difference not a camera. For example post production companies head hunt editors, not the editing kit.

 

I assuming that we're dealing with people/companies who are working with clients here and you do need more than an extremely basic indie kit when you''re dealing with them.

[Gunleik Groven]

The technology is already there for them to make SD higher end productions with cameras that already exist. I can't see a camera package that costs a similar price to a Digibeta is going to change this, it's their talents and contacts that will make the difference not a camera. For example post production companies head hunt editors, not the editing kit.

 

I assuming that we're dealing with people/companies who are working with clients here and you do need more than an extremely basic indie kit when you''re dealing with them.

 

 

This makes sense to me.

 

I was looking at Varicam/HDX-900 or XDCAM.

 

I sorta see no reason _not_ to accept a 35mm sensor and PL glass, an i-frame 4:4:4 codec, even if the "real" resolution of the cam is "only 2k" as have been claimed - @ a lower pricepoint than mpeg2 based XDCAM HD.

 

If this cam can give me full raster 1080 when downsampled, I'm actually happy puppy and I already have the client base in need for this...

 

The 35mm DOF and FOV carracterristics are just an added bonus to me. If all the other claims about the camera are valid, they too will be only added value, not anything I really need or buy it for.

 

Why should I buy a digibeta wtih the need for something like the gross pvw-500 to boot, when I can have the full Red Meal for less than the price of a digideck?

 

Me not understand.

 

Gunleik

Edited March 19, 2007 by Gunleik Groven

[David Mullen ASC]

My advice to everyone is to not be baited by Patrizio into an argument. He's the first person I'm adding to my "ignore" list, which says something.

[Ken Willinger]

My first post here! Like some of the others here, I'm in the market for an HD camera as the technology and needs of my clients have changed. More and more often I am having to rent a Varicam, F900, or now the HDX900 etc. for these jobs. It gets to the point where you have to make a decision about acquiring. I've owned high end broadcast SD ENG/EFP cameras for almost 20 years. I currently have a Sony D600WS and it has been a great camera and a real money maker as well. But I've been up in the air about purchasing HD because of all the fluctuation. 720, 1080 etc. RED has definitely caught my interest because it gives you all the flavors, and also some good choices for capturing.

 

The biggest issue as a freelancer is delivering the raw product. For most freelancers that has been the draw of XDCam (but the HD version is 1/2" chips...unacceptable for me). Just pass off the discs like you did the tape. But XD is very limiting.

 

If I can figure out a great way to keep all the clients happy in receiving the footage, RED will be a winner if it really flies. The only area I don't see it working for me is with the major broadcast networks (who are also in great flux now regarding what format etc. they will move to).

 

I've also been watching RED since before NAB last year and have never felt that I was misled, and don't feel that what showed up on the pricelist was misleading. All along changes have been expected. I'll be truly amazed if they can offer a camera of the expected quality and chameleon like ability to record in all formats (but for SD) for less than 20K. Also I have to add, I've yet to own or use a professional camera that came fully equiped with a lens and all accessories. Prosumer cameras do. I've owned Ikegami and Sony. You buy the camera. Then you have to buy everything else!

 

And not to mislead anyone, I have a RED reservation. I'm going to NAB and I am hoping to be stunned! And also to have found an HD solution.

[Chris Kenny]

The technology is already there for them to make SD higher end productions with cameras that already exist. I can't see a camera package that costs a similar price to a Digibeta is going to change this, it's their talents and contacts that will make the difference not a camera.

 

Your question is, I suppose, if the guy with the PD150 has what it takes to move up-market, why hasn't he done so already with an existing camera? It's a little hard to answer that question given that the guy with a PD150 we're all talking about here is entirely hypothetical....

[David Mullen ASC]

Your question is, I suppose, if the guy with the PD150 has what it takes to move up-market, why hasn't he done so already with an existing camera? It's a little hard to answer that question given that the guy with a PD150 we're all talking about here is entirely hypothetical....

 

It's a valid question, which is basically if you have over $20,000 to spend on new gear to move up from your PD150, there are already products on the market in that price range that give you more quality than a PD150.

 

Obviously if the RED delivers on all of its promises, it's perhaps the best way to spend that $20,000 (or so), but that's a different issue than the one about whether owning a better camera can improve someone's career.

 

Since I don't own any cameras, it's hard for me to answer that, but I generally believe that one should not pin one's hopes on a piece of equipment... but develop and rely on your artistic and technical skills to master any equipment. But like I said, I'm not trying to sell myself as an owner-operator, and I live and work in a major rental market.

 

It would perhaps be healthier for people to stop seeing new technology as some sort of entryway into an industry, nor should they see the older technologies as some sort of barrier to entry. These are just tools. If I buy a new hammer, it doesn't make me a carpenter; if I buy a new scapel, it doesn't make me a surgeon. This is why I said that a $20,000-plus camera package is a serious professional investment, not something for beginners or film students (unless they are filthy-rich and frivilous with their money.) Maybe for a film school to buy and let students use, but there's no reason for a novice to buy a RED camera anymore than an Aaton XTR or a Varicam or a used Arri-35BL.

 

I think the argument for the RED camera has to be about its picture quality, about needing a film look from a digital camera, about it serving a need, being the right tool for the job, and its quality-to-price ratio compared to other tools on the market (after all, even if it ended up costing twice as much with accessories, what other 4K cameras are in the same price range anyway?).

 

When people start going beyond that and arguing that it somehow will allow anyone to make Hollywood-quality productions by themselves, or let them compete with pro shooters because now they have a better camera, well, it gets harder to swallow because it starts to elevate the technology over the artist who wields it. I know it's easier to sell things when you use romantic terms like "revolution" (the DVX100 was sold like that, the F900, etc.) because it gets people to dream big, it turns a tool into a lifestyle choice, but most of us in the film industry know that it's not the toys that matter, they don't make dreams come true. It's just a camera -- maybe a darn good one, I hope, and a bargain to boot -- but just a camera all the same.

 

Technically, yes, it is revolutionary if it does all it's supposed to do, but revolutionary as a camera. It will not revolutionize filmmaking as an art form simply by giving us better picture quality at lower prices.

[Patrizio De Sica]

My advice to everyone is to not be baited by Patrizio into an argument. He's the first person I'm adding to my "ignore" list, which says something.

 

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn on your ignore list. You had also entered in mine when you thought you can talk about you cannot, which says not just something but a lot:

 

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...st&p=161459

 

Be careful with your assumptions, like everyone here, you are not God even if sometimes it may happen who can think so. And you may believe it.

 

If your work is that one we know, you are not the owner of maturity (it's sad that should be a younger director to remind you), you are not the owner of anything else unless your words. And your crappy words too. If someone owes something it is not me who should pay more attention to the own wrong moves. A little bit of humbleness is a good advice for a lot of posters here (not everyone), including you.

 

I regret if it was touched a raw nerve with you DM (that one I got from MJ :D ). I answer your disrespectful abuse in a politeness way that I thought it would always be the preferred tone.

 

I could answer on your obsessive quote, saying that your hobby means an average 7.7 posts per day and mine is 0.7 posts per day, which says something. But I did not.

 

Your usual excessive paternalism (do you know me from where by the way?) on a talk almost a year ago says what? What you cannot argue unless subscribing your name without an argument, which means a lot. And I did not take this for granted.

[Patrizio De Sica]

Update :angry:

 

Before these accessories were included at the $1,700 LCD package, now:

 

RED ARM adjustable arm $175

EVF / LCD Extension Cable 3ft $200

EVF / LCD Extension Cable 10ft $300

 

Before JJ had announced a $200 mistake over the $550 charger (before $750) in benefit of the customer (it seemed so). A couple of hours later, there's no more RED LCD package for the same $1,700. Just a RED LCD Screen with a LCD Interface cable. Red cable, of course (but not with the $500 cables). :P

 

For those who search information over these pages, here's some testified data back to topic:

 

 

 

 

 

This was posted over RedYesUser. If the men heard the message, the dogs immediately killed the messenger (see next pages). :lol:

 

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.ph...1094&page=2

 

:rolleyes:

Edited March 19, 2007 by Patrizio De Sica