Hank den Drijver Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 Because thats the practical timeframe of turning a prototype into a product produced in quantity under economicaly viable conditions. I think your a bit ill-informed, Andy. Check http://www.red.com/news/view/79 . They could be lying of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Oshiro Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I don't yet see underwater Red cameras, Red crash cameras, nor high speed Red cameras. 1. Third-party UW housing manufacturers are currently working on a RED housing. 2. RED is spec'd to do 120fps at 2K. 3. RED is currently developing a smaller version of the camera, which I would guess may be an excellent crash camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Williams Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 (edited) I think your a bit ill-informed, Andy. Check http://www.red.com/news/view/79 .They could be lying of course. What I have seen of the red so far its a great camera but its without the latitude and it doesnt look like film. When they get the latitude right it will be better but it still wont look like film it will look like good video in my opinion. I also think George Lucas got it wrong I think his films would look a lot better shot with film and I hope Steven Spielberg gets to shoot indy 4 on film, and cuts it with a moviola. Because I dont want to see indy "improved" by video or Steven change the way his films are edited. An example of watching a show deteriote is DR WHO they began the new adventures with 16mm and now through using video cameras the show is deteriorating again my opinion. When will the studios learn? Especially our BBC. Arriflex and kodak are the way to go for drama. Edited April 30, 2007 by Mark Williams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Oshiro Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 (edited) Yes great lets discuss Red, but remember its still a hypothetical conversation, and will be for 2 or 3 years till a few of us actually get to shoot something on it. Yup. I think I muttered those exact same words at NAB2006. Exactly 12 months later, at NAB2007, I saw footage and working prototypes. If RED maintains their published production schedule, I should be shooting something with my RED before Turkey Day this year. Edited April 30, 2007 by Ralph Oshiro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 When will the studios learn? Especially our BBC. Never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Oshiro Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 What I have seen of the red so far its a great camera but its without the latitude and it doesnt look like film. Agreed. RED doesn't have the latitude or the wider color gamut of film. And no electronic acquisition system I've seen mimics the motion characteristics of film quite right either. But anyone who's seen the 4K projected demo can make their own qualifications. For $17.5K, you can't beat this image quality with a stick. Completely noiseless, ultra-high resolution imagery. No, it doesn't quite look like film. What it does look like is pretty awesome, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank den Drijver Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 ...it still wont look like film it will look like good video in my opinion. I also think George Lucas got it wrong I think his films would look a lot better shot with film ... How can you have an opinion of something you haven't seen yet? Oh and btw, I also think Lucas got it wrong. It looked awful. Lucas didn't shoot with a Red though, he used a Sony F900. Something totally different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Agreed. RED doesn't have the latitude or the wider color gamut of film. And no electronic acquisition system I've seen mimics the motion characteristics of film quite right either. But anyone who's seen the 4K projected demo can make their own qualifications. For $17.5K, you can't beat this image quality with a stick. Completely noiseless, ultra-high resolution imagery. No, it doesn't quite look like film. What it does look like is pretty awesome, though. But why should it look like film? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 (edited) Yup. I think I muttered those exact same words at NAB2006. Exactly 12 months later, at NAB2007, I saw footage and working prototypes. If RED maintains their published production schedule, I should be shooting something with my RED before Turkey Day this year. Maybe because Film cameras are produced in such a small quantity compared with most items, the normal schudeule for factory production will take less - their production schedule does seem very ambitious but I guess the whole RED thing has been very ambitous. Still its worth noting I first saw news and photos of the Arri D20 over 2 years ago, it wasn't till about 2 months ago I finaly saw one in action. Edited April 30, 2007 by Andy_Alderslade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Oshiro Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 (edited) But why should it look like film? David Mullen made an excellent post that responded to this question in another thread. Something to the effect that 35mm film has been the gold standard of what we define as a culture of motion picture imaging, and it's a natural tendency to compare RED with film. My response, is, it doesn't have to! The RED spokesperson in the Apple ProRes demo stated (to paraphrase) that it doesn't quite look like video, and it doesn't quite look like film--it's something different. Edited April 30, 2007 by Ralph Oshiro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Mottram Posted April 30, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 30, 2007 can't we move stupid threads such as this to the first time filmmakers subforum as it is clear that those who post such dumbass topics are such. or how about a reduser.net immigrants subforum for fulltime bandwidth wasters? and doesn't anyone search previous posts any more? i meen for tom cruise's sake what the blazing gaboogles does this have to do with cinematography anyway? it's like a playground arguement my favourite untested camera is better than another camera that i've never used- what kind of bollocks is that... keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Williams Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 (edited) How can you have an opinion of something you haven't seen yet? ------------------------------------- Because I saw the demonstration film and on the new red camera the latitude is the only thing improved ---------------------------------------- Oh and btw, I also think Lucas got it wrong. It looked awful. Lucas didn't shoot with a Red though, he used a Sony F900. Something totally different. -------------------------------------- It was the the F900s predecessor. Which I dont think is going to be much different to the red except of course in price. And on that score the red will beat everything and also give poor film makers a chance to make films of great quality but it wont compete with mainstream. Edited April 30, 2007 by Mark Williams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 can't we move stupid threads such as this to the first time filmmakers subforum as it is clear that those who post such dumbass topics are such. or how about a reduser.net immigrants subforum for fulltime bandwidth wasters? and doesn't anyone search previous posts any more? i meen for tom cruise's sake what the blazing gaboogles does this have to do with cinematography anyway? it's like a playground arguement my favourite untested camera is better than another camera that i've never used- what kind of bollocks is that... He has a point, I see a thread like this, raise an eyebrow in disgust and then post a reply! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank den Drijver Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 can't we move stupid threads such as this to the first time filmmakers subforum as it is clear that those who post such dumbass topics are such. or how about a reduser.net immigrants subforum for fulltime bandwidth wasters? and doesn't anyone search previous posts any more? i meen for tom cruise's sake what the blazing gaboogles does this have to do with cinematography anyway? it's like a playground arguement my favourite untested camera is better than another camera that i've never used- what kind of bollocks is that... keith Haha, funny, Keith. The first-time filmmaker and poster of this dumbass topic you're referring to is actually Jim Jannard. OK, back to the subject, Red vs Film. I still haven't heard a lot against the Red camera except 1.7 stops lesser dynamic range. And I came up with that one. Things like 'I don't like it' or 'it looks video-ish to me' I cannot count as a real argument, for it is a too personal preference. Unproven workflow is of course a nonsense argument against the camera, we wouldn't be driving cars and flying planes if all was turned down for unproven workflow. We're just talking about the camera as a tool, and the presumption that it will work like Red says it will. If you don't believe it will in the first place then don't bother replying. I would like to hear real arguments about the technical side of the comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 can't we move stupid threads such as this to the first time filmmakers subforum as it is clear that those who post such dumbass topics are such. or how about a reduser.net immigrants subforum for fulltime bandwidth wasters? and doesn't anyone search previous posts any more? i meen for tom cruise's sake what the blazing gaboogles does this have to do with cinematography anyway? it's like a playground arguement my favourite untested camera is better than another camera that i've never used- what kind of bollocks is that... keith I agree that these threads are pretty pointless (and more to the point, boring) But it's still good to get opinions from all kinds of people. I'm a film student, I've never shot on RED or on 35mm cine, does that mean I don't have any right to express my opinion? Considering it may well be students that are the main proprietors of this new RED camera, I'd say I do. Provided I don't go talking about the things I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank den Drijver Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 I think you are right, Daniel. Forums are there to discuss stuff. Appearantly the Red camera is interesting enough to talk about. We could talk about ways to use it, instead of talking about what outperforms the other. Why not. I am very curious about how other people shoot digital. When I talk to other D.P.'s about it, I feel like they all have invented their own way of things, which is very interesting. I, for instance, tend to let nothing overexpose, or maybe a very tiny spot of reflection. And I try to downsize the sharpening in the camera, and up the gamma, so that I will record quite a low-contrast flat image. In post I can easily make it harder without getting too many artifacts. So in general I am used not trying to achieve anything close to the final look while shooting, but to capture as much of the light to tape as I can. In theory this could mean I will get into the limits of quantization, but in practice I haven't come across it yet. How do others approach this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank den Drijver Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 It was the the F900s predecessor. Which I dont think is going to be much different to the red except of course in price. I think that the F900s predecessor is very different from the Red, in terms of....well... everything. The only thing they have in common is a V-lock battery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Joyce Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I am very curious about how other people shoot digital. When I talk to other D.P.'s about it, I feel like they all have invented their own way of things, which is very interesting. I, for instance, tend to let nothing overexpose, or maybe a very tiny spot of reflection. And I try to downsize the sharpening in the camera, and up the gamma, so that I will record quite a low-contrast flat image. In post I can easily make it harder without getting too many artifacts. So in general I am used not trying to achieve anything close to the final look while shooting, but to capture as much of the light to tape as I can. In theory this could mean I will get into the limits of quantization, but in practice I haven't come across it yet. How do others approach this? Depends on the format I'm shooting to. People have different beliefs when it comes to this(as with everything else), but I find that I prefer to tailor the look in-cam when shooting to a heavily compressed format like HDCAM or DVCPRO HD, but for the most latitude when shooting to a more lightly compressed format like SR. I've tought myself to work on the Avid Nitris system, so I generally work the footage to my own liking. However if I was unable to, didn't know the colourist or wouldn't be able to sit in when the grade was done I'd be inclined to hand over the footage without my "signature" applied to it in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Williams Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I think that the F900s predecessor is very different from the Red, in terms of....well... everything.The only thing they have in common is a V-lock battery. I was talking about what ends up on the screen. And the fact their both high quality video cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted April 30, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 30, 2007 Due to multiple complaints I am closing this thread! Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Tyler Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 Appearantly the Red camera is interesting enough to talk about.We could talk about ways to use it, instead of talking about what outperforms the other. Why not. Because we can't use it. It's not available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts