Brian Dzyak Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 As I was trying to say (not so well :P ) is that there are many different kinds of boxes with holes in them that we use for image acquisition. Not all of them are appropriate for every situation. I'm not about to shoot a wedding with a Platinum and I won't shoot a feature film with a PD150. Where RED falls into the mix remains to be seen, but I think the important issue that this thread brings up is that healthy competition ultimately helps all of us who have to use these kinds of machines in order to do our work. The innovations in the RED will inevitably be integrated by other companies as they improve their own "Brownies." RED may be great, but I'm sure that someone out there, either at Sony or somewhere else, will look at what has been done and find a way to improve it a little more. That's how things get better. Sony SHOULD be looking at the RED and so should every other company out there. I'm sure RED looked at Sony's cameras too when developing their new box. Research on what has come before to create the next best thing is necessary and ultimately helps us all to acquire the best images possible. None of this technical talk, though, "fixes" everything else that happens on a project, from budget to quality talent, etc. While the camera is important, if all it took to make an amazing movie (et al) was a nifty camera, then nobody would get anything else done in life because we'd all be mezmerized by all the amazing movies flashing in front of us. RED is just another camera. And in a year or two, they'll be something else, then something else.... And it's all good. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted April 23, 2007 Share Posted April 23, 2007 Mark, it's been interesting watching you turn in just a couple of days from fanatically anti-red to fanatically pro-red, regardless of the verified facts. Yes, those two quotes above are both from Mark. A VERY promising future in politics here...... -Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Jonathan Benny Posted April 23, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 23, 2007 This forum is kind of meaningless. I post a discussion about SONY being kicked out of the RED booth and we get completely sidetracked. Doesn't anybody else think that this was highly inappropriate? Is the appropriateness of the forced removal of a Sony rep from the RED booth a subject worth exploring on this site? I would have preferred to read about your impressions of the actual technology since you were there and could possibly provide us with some valuable first-hand observations. But pardon the sidetracking. AJB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakaree Sandberg Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 everyone is missing the point.. REDs goal is not to MAKE MONEY!.. Jims a billionaire. He wants to make the big companies realize they can not dominate the film industry anymore. He wants film making to be available to the more talented yet dirt poor artists. Who else is sick of seeing big budget big hype studio flops? I know Jim is!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Jannard Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 RED is a money making venture... Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Gourley Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 RED is a money making venture... Jim :lol: Jim isn't a billionare by accident!!!! Jim, spend my 27500 well buddy! Red#249 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunleik Groven Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 RED is a money making venture... Jim I'd say that if I even suspected it wasn't, I wouldn't have dared ordering -;) But the issue that the founder has some cash @ his disposal, and the ability to hire good people to see things through are also quite important parts of the equation. Cheers! Gunleik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Sweetman Posted May 14, 2007 Share Posted May 14, 2007 If you want to talk about stuff that's off topic, could you please at least start your own thread? Huh? I thought the red forum was the off-topic forum? no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Greyson Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 everyone is missing the point.. REDs goal is not to MAKE MONEY!.. Jims a billionaire. He wants to make the big companies realize they can not dominate the film industry anymore. He wants film making to be available to the more talented yet dirt poor artists. Who else is sick of seeing big budget big hype studio flops? I know Jim is!! This is the kind of statement that is causing problems. Of course RED is a money making venture. If not, what would Jim have proved? That you can lose money and make great tech? Yah, that will really show SONY. As far as flops go? Again, another silly statement. Pick a flop, any flop... now, let's pretend it was shot on RED. Uhh... yeah... I say again, technology has not been the limiting factor in Hollywood for a LONG time. There are greedy producers, politics, etc. that are the main obstacles. It is a gross misconception that some new technology will cause the gates of Hollywood to swing open. Producers, promotion, actors, marketing, etc. are each about 1,000,000 times as important as resolution or any tech... ash =o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Oshiro Posted May 21, 2007 Share Posted May 21, 2007 I say again, technology has not been the limiting factor in Hollywood for a LONG time. No, but it's been a huge limiting factor for filmmakers like me who are just trying make pretty images on a budget (who have been using video as an economical means of acquisition). My first video shorts, shot on "Beta I" and "Video8," looked awful technically. My first 16mm short, shot on a beat up old Eclair NPR, and cut on a Moviola upright, looked awesome. Film has always been "better" than video for making "pretty." Now, finally we have a camera that eclipses an F900, and attains a much "prettier" picture. No, it's not film, but it's miles ahead of what we've had to work with in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Greenwalt Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 everyone is missing the point.. REDs goal is not to MAKE MONEY!.. Jims a billionaire. He wants to make the big companies realize they can not dominate the film industry anymore. He wants film making to be available to the more talented yet dirt poor artists. Who else is sick of seeing big budget big hype studio flops? I know Jim is!! And here I thought I had been seeing some really good movies lately. Guess I was mistaken. Hurry up on getting that camera out so I can watch movies by indies about people commiting suicide and hating each other. You know... good movies. ^ Not intended to be taken as any sort of criticism of RED or its organization. Just that post. 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