RED is for real...I've seen it

[Brian Drysdale]

Absolutely correct! But the comparison is still valid: RED's body is only $17.50k while it's competitors' "body" are in the 100s of thousands!

 

I think there is no point in suggesting today that the RED is not gonna have any impact on the current market for digital movie-cameras. I think minimizing the fact they truly are slashing their competitors' prices doesn't make much sense at all! Not only are they slashing the price, but they also seem to offer better performance. So, I clearly see no reason to refuse to smile today, because today, we, cinematographers, truly have an interesting and affordable new tool to play around with :)

 

There are a number of new HD cameras in this price bracket, all of which will offer new possibilities for the lower budget productions. The "affordability" is relative, they're bringing higher end HD prices down to Digibeta type prices. Some of the high end HD cameras are rental only and consequently have a low production run, so you can't really compare those to camera that has much higher production figures. However, I'd expect the higher end HD cameras to now offer higher quality like 16 bit as offered on the Dalsa and push their highlight handling abilities. A few also offer expensive options like optical viewfinders.

 

Tests will reveal if RED is better than the current HD cameras and in which areas. Certainly the 8 bit recording formats are a serious limitations on some HD cameras.

 

RED's offering of the new lenses is important to the success of a lower priced 35mm sensor camera. Could these lenses be Russian?

[Nate Downes]

Something I noticed the other day. Red's biggest claim to fame outside of it's sensor size is that you are not limited by an in-camera compression system. My thought was, how is this different than outputting HDMI to a recording deck from any other HD camera? Not trolling, honestly curious here.

[Max Jacoby]

It's 'Blade Runner' Richard...

[jan von krogh]

There are a number of new HD cameras in this price bracket, all of which will offer new possibilities for the lower budget productions.

i wouldn´t compare them to red, all have

- no raw

- no uncompressed

- no 4;4;4

- no S35 sensor

- no 120p

- no ArriPL mount

- no 4k / 12 MP

etc

 

The "affordability" is relative, they're bringing higher end HD prices down to Digibeta type prices.

hm, digibeta cams are still more expensive than the red one - also HD is less than 25% of the resolution of red. i think 4K between HDV and digibetaprices is rather where in the longrum the red will find its pricing.

 

Some of the high end HD cameras are rental only and consequently have a low production run, so you can't really compare those to camera that has much higher production figures.

this is the important thing - i --always-- told arri that i wanted to buy a digital 35mm sensor arri, and they had no offer. now, we as a midsize production, large scale rental houses as ludwig as well freelancers will start offer in the market with a, as it seems, somewhat superior camera to genesis or d20 for a fraction of the price. this won´t affect A-budgets in the beginning, as we simply can´t and won´t offer the logistics, support and international service & support for, lets say, 8 cameras. however, in germany a-budget is ~8-12 mio euro typically, and this market as well as b,c and indy will be fully adressed with offerings. additionally, many producers who traditionally rented the camera now will see a lower buying price when comparing to arri/panavision genesis.

 

RED's offering of the new lenses is important to the success of a lower priced 35mm sensor camera. Could these lenses be Russian?

i agree, sadly nobody has a clue where there are from .... but i thought about russia often as well

[Chance Shirley]

So, RED is for real. I'll admit, I originally thought the whole thing was vaporware. Now that I've been proven wrong, I'd like to try one out at some point.

 

I have a question that doesn't seem to come up much in the film vs. digital discussion -- what do the distributors and television stations think? Last I heard, distributors and television stations had a strong bias toward shot-on-film material, at least as far as feature-length movies were concerned. Anyone know if this is still the case?

[Hal Smith]

RED's offering of the new lenses is important to the success of a lower priced 35mm sensor camera. Could these lenses be Russian?

And will they be available to anyone? Their lens prices could tempt me to finally PL convert my Arri 2 and buy new RED lenses.

[Nate Downes]

So, RED is for real. I'll admit, I originally thought the whole thing was vaporware. Now that I've been proven wrong, I'd like to try one out at some point.

 

I have a question that doesn't seem to come up much in the film vs. digital discussion -- what do the distributors and television stations think? Last I heard, distributors and television stations had a strong bias toward shot-on-film material, at least as far as feature-length movies were concerned. Anyone know if this is still the case?

 

Still the case, so much so that shows shot on HD not even 2 years ago are now being shot on film again.

[Brian Drysdale]

i wouldn´t compare them to red, all have

- no raw

- no uncompressed

- no 4;4;4

- no S35 sensor

- no 120p

- no ArriPL mount

- no 4k / 12 MP

etc

 

 

You need different cameras for different jobs. A fully rigged RED with 35mm lens is hardly compact, it looks around the same size as some 35mm film cameras.

 

SI 2K has RAW and has a PL mount (plus quite a few other lens mount options) and if you need to shoot in confined spaces - with the Mini - it may prove a better option than a RED.

 

For a lot of TV work the 4K isn't really important. Also, for news and current affairs the XDCAM HD and Infinity cameras could offer better workflows.

 

The ergonomics also start to factor in on some types of productions more than the raw specs.

 

It's good that a number of cameras are out there offering these options.

[jan von krogh]

You need different cameras for different jobs. A fully rigged RED with 35mm lens is hardly compact, it looks around the same size as some 35mm film cameras.

size & weight are rather arri 235 than millenium however.

 

SI 2K has RAW and has a PL mount (plus quite a few other lens mount options) and if you need to shoot in confined spaces - with the Mini - it may prove a better option than a RED.

really? is the SI any smaller than red? i was under the impression that they are comparable in size.

 

For a lot of TV work the 4K isn't really important. Also, for news and current affairs the XDCAM HD and Infinity cameras could offer better workflows.

i agree, for ENG the XDCAM HD workflow is superior, and the pricing is quite good as well.

Any news on when Infinity is shipping btw?

 

The ergonomics also start to factor in on some types of productions more than the raw specs.

It's good that a number of cameras are out there offering these options.

i fully agree.

[Andrew Ray]

Something I noticed the other day. Red's biggest claim to fame outside of it's sensor size is that you are not limited by an in-camera compression system. My thought was, how is this different than outputting HDMI to a recording deck from any other HD camera? Not trolling, honestly curious here.

 

Nate, ?camera not limited by any compression? it mean that you can take RAW data in the single channel as it is coming from the Sensor. Also any meta data will be present in the data stream. HDMI will not let you sinc multiple cameras, no meta data present etc.

HDMI standard was created for connecting the monitors to the devices not video recorders or video mixers.

It is like taking the RAW from the DSLR as oppose to RGB from this little LCD screen output that some DSLR do have so you can watch your pictures on your TV.

However for poor man solution one could use HDMI in the plain capture mode, I guess.

[John Thomas]

Seriously, the final test will come when the RED camera is shot badly, not shot well, because everyone can make mistakes sometimes.

 

Don't worry, the RED camera will not allow mistakes. No matter what you do, you'll look like a genius. The RED camera will bring an end to bad photography for all time.... Where can I get one?

[John Holland]

And if you did somehow produce a bad image , men in sunglasses will be at your door and have a word with you !!

[Stephen Williams]

is the SI any smaller than red?

 

Hi Jan,

 

The mini is way smaller than a red. Smaller and lighter than many PL mounted lenses.

 

Don't worry, the RED camera will not allow mistakes. No matter what you do, you'll look like a genius. The RED camera will bring an end to bad photography for all time.... Where can I get one?

 

 

Like word processors did for writing.

 

Stephen

[Brian Drysdale]

really? is the SI any smaller than red? i was under the impression that they are comparable in size.

 

I haven't seen any diamensions for the SI-2K, I'd imagine the body size is similar to the main RED module, but the hard drive appears to be internal rather than external.

 

However, I'm thinking of the removable Mini sensor head that is part of the SI 2K camera.

 

They might be giving details on the Infinity at NAB, it has been given a revamp with the new sensors etc. I've heard a rumour about a separate REV PRO recorder - I don't know if it's true. Depending on pricing, that could be interesting for a number of cameras if you can record jpeg 2000, especially if this has a HD SDI input.

[Douglas Hunter]

I think minimizing the fact they truly are slashing their competitors' prices doesn't make much sense at all! Not only are they slashing the price, but they also seem to offer better performance.

 

But we don't know that they are actually doing this. It only a reduction in price if they are providing an equal or better product, that is, if their chip delivers; and no one knows what the performance will be like in a practical setting.

 

What I am waiting for is to see what the engineers from their competitors have to say about the camera after they have taken it apart.

 

No need to rush to judgment on the camera, good, bad or indifferent we will all find out soon enough.

 

Actually, the one thing that's safe to say if that FCP 6 will have some great bugs that effect 4K editing. :(

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Like word processors did for writing.

 

Stephen

 

Careful that's almost an endorsement. I don't know about you but I don't want to go back to the typewriter!

 

I don't think red as far as film production goes is necessarily going to inspire any kind of discernable shift. But I do think a digital workflow will change how movies are made somewhat dramatically. Whether or not that turns out to be for good or ill is I think yet to be seen.

 

Gavin

Edited April 17, 2007 by Gavin Greenwalt

[David Sweetman]

I don't know about you but I don't want to go back to the typewriter!

I rock a typewriter...instant hardcopy, it's awesome.

[Daniel Smith]

I think the RED camera will be some form of a 'break' the British film industry in some way...

 

One of the biggest problems in the U.K is not having the proper funding. However when you can achieve 35mm like quality for a fraction of the price I'd say this is Britain?s chance at competing with the huge Hollywood productions shooting on 35mm.

 

I'm not saying it's all down to the shooting format... far from it. But it WILL help.

 

Who in the U.K will bother shooting film? 16mm was about the height of any U.K funded production, and this RED camera supersedes its quality. And it's probably cheaper.

Edited April 17, 2007 by Daniel Ashley-Smith

[Brian Drysdale]

I think the RED camera is some form of a 'break' the British film industry in some way...

 

One of the biggest problems in the U.K is not having the proper funding. However when you can achieve 35mm like quality for a fraction of the price I'd say this is Britain?s chance at competing with the huge Hollywood productions shooting on 35mm.

 

I'm not saying it's all down to the shooting format... far from it. But it WILL help.

 

Who in the U.K will bother shooting film? 16mm was about the height of any U.K funded production, and this RED camera supersedes its quality. And it's probably cheaper.

 

Quite a few UK productions are shot on 35mm. "Hot Fuzz" & "Sunshine" are recent 35mm features and "The Queen" was a mixture including 35mm.

[jan von krogh]

I think the RED camera is some form of a 'break' the British film industry in some way...

However when you can achieve 35mm like quality for a fraction of the price I'd say this is Britain?s chance at competing with the huge Hollywood productions shooting on 35mm.

Who in the U.K will bother shooting film? 16mm was about the height of any U.K funded production, and this RED camera supersedes its quality. And it's probably cheaper.

 

the cost advantages of shooting digital instead of 35mm are quite remarkable if you have a tight budget. no stock, lab, telecine/scan, runner, daily, soundsyncing... that all sums up to some $$$.$$$, if planned carefully.

 

there are many good scripts, actors and crews wasted every year because they still shoot the movie, but due to budget reasons on Dbeta-DV and then its quite a bit more challenging to find at least distributors for the DVD-market. Usually we could help out such one or two such productions a year with hdcam, but still the sony gear was to expensive to really make business in this spot of the market.

 

with red this will be quite different. 2007-2008 we will mainly focus on earning the cameras back, but once that is done, i think we will often support more risky or less good financed projects. quite a difference if you have to earn 200.000$ back or 40.000$ per camera.

 

what i really find amanzing - the whole peter jackson red WW1 short everyone is raving about right now has only used 500GB in Redcode... 500GB disk is less than 100 euro, even with triple backup less than 300$ "stock" cost for a 16 minute 4K short doesn´t sound to shabby.

 

another trend which helps this development is that the prices for filmrecording have come down finally. meanwhile its no problem to get a good 2k filmout for 90min at ~15.000, thats including DD Sound and the testouts.

 

but be warned of one thing - good cameras can be a nightmare for low-budget! they are cruel in exposing sloppy sets, muddy makeup, weird wardrobe etc. which would simply disappear in ntsc or pal.

[Daniel Smith]

Quite a few UK productions are shot on 35mm. "Hot Fuzz" & "Sunshine" are recent 35mm features and "The Queen" was a mixture including 35mm.

Well there's three...

[Stephen Williams]

another trend which helps this development is that the prices for filmrecording have come down finally. meanwhile its no problem to get a good 2k filmout for 90min at ~15.000, thats including DD Sound and the testouts.

 

Hi Jan,

 

I guess that is not using an Arri Laser, or is it?

 

Stephen

[Daniel Smith]

the cost advantages of shooting digital instead of 35mm are quite remarkable if you have a tight budget. no stock, lab, telecine/scan, runner, daily, soundsyncing... that all sums up to some $$$.$$$, if planned carefully.

 

there are many good scripts, actors and crews wasted every year because they still shoot the movie, but due to budget reasons on Dbeta-DV and then its quite a bit more challenging to find at least distributors for the DVD-market. Usually we could help out such one or two such productions a year with hdcam, but still the sony gear was to expensive to really make business in this spot of the market.

 

with red this will be quite different. 2007-2008 we will mainly focus on earning the cameras back, but once that is done, i think we will often support more risky or less good financed projects. quite a difference if you have to earn 200.000$ back or 40.000$ per camera.

 

what i really find amanzing - the whole peter jackson red WW1 short everyone is raving about right now has only used 500GB in Redcode... 500GB disk is less than 100 euro, even with triple backup less than 300$ "stock" cost for a 16 minute 4K short doesn´t sound to shabby.

 

another trend which helps this development is that the prices for filmrecording have come down finally. meanwhile its no problem to get a good 2k filmout for 90min at ~15.000, thats including DD Sound and the testouts.

 

but be warned of one thing - good cameras can be a nightmare for low-budget! they are cruel in exposing sloppy sets, muddy makeup, weird wardrobe etc. which would simply disappear in ntsc or pal.

Out of interest, where is this red shot film by Peter Jackson? This is the first time I've heard of it. Love to see it it, or some information on it.

 

And hopefully with the low costs of shooting digital, things like makeup, costume design, set design should be improved. Not that it will make much difference on the large productions, they've got enough money to cover it well enough even with 35mm.

[Brian Drysdale]

Well there's three...

 

I didn't go that far back or do much checking.

[jan von krogh]

Hi Jan,

I guess that is not using an Arri Laser, or is it?

Stephen

 

no, arrilaser would be certainly 15-35% higher. last time i requested offers for arrilaser was 83 min feature, 2k scope, in january iirc best offer was at ~22.000 and after the testouts the production decided to use cinepix instead of arrilaser.

 

however, in germany there are luckily several pretty good shops who specialise in filmrecording and have reasonable prices - some of them are "only" 2k, however.

 

 

 

 

Out of interest, where is this red shot film by Peter Jackson? This is the first time I've heard of it. Love to see it it, or some information on it.

 

right now its showing in reds own 4k theathre in las vegas - soon after the NAB it will be available for download. peter jackson has to reedit the movie as the music (which was given be universal) doesn´t allow free distribution.

 

audience reaction so far was -WOW-.

 

2.5 days shooting, lots of aerials (dogfights between WW1 planes), colorgrading by weta, red prototypes boris & natasha, cooke lens, runtime ~15 min.