Jump to content

JPEG frames


Phil Rhodes

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member
Why is everyone so passionate one way or another over this camera. As I see it, Red is just another tool that can be considered when planning a project. Yes, film has a number of aesthetic advantages over video, but video or in this case 4K have a number of economic advantages. From a producers stand point, maybe your working on a really tight budget, consider that by alleviating the cost of film stock and possessing you may have more to spend on production design, costumes, postproduction, or what ever. I know this is the wrong place to say this but, the cinematic process is only part of the film not the entire film. My point is, what ever tool allows you to make the best possible movie with the time and money allowed is the better format. If you have the budget and time to shoot film do so, but it?s nice to know that we also have another acceptable choice if needed.

 

I couldn't possibly agree more. When it comes to filmmaking in general, there isn't, and as far as I can tell, never will be a "one size fits all" solution. While I'm not one to hop on the RED wagon yet, I can say that if the camera truely does deliver on it's promises it will act as another complementary tool within a set which includes SD, HD, and Film instruments. Each one of these tools has it's own drawbacks, limitations, and areas of greatness. In the end, a the choice of media should be aesthetic, overall (this isn't entierly the case), but even the aesthetic reasonings often are forced to the backseat by budgets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
The good news for us is that no matter how married to film you are, we are going to build and finish this camera. And we will continue to improve it over time.

 

Jim

 

Hi Jim,

 

I look forward to getting a Red one in my hands, hopefully before IBC.

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Carl and Werner... it sounds like your position is that any cinematographer that uses RED is really NOT a worthy cinematographer? And their work should be discounted because they chose another medium besides film?

 

As for marketing tactics... we said we had someone shooting our NAB fotage but couldn't say who it was. At that point we were called down for "hyping". As it turned out, Peter Jackson shot the footage, which turned out to be a mini-movie. I don't think ANYONE felt like we had over-hyped the reality of what we showed. It is really hard to stay quiet here about what is happening because of all the "real men won't shoot RED" posts.

 

Here is the good news for you. You can shoot film all you want. The good news for us is that no matter how married to film you are, we are going to build and finish this camera. And we will continue to improve it over time.

 

Jim

 

 

Just to be clear.It is my understanding that you executive produced that short. I have a feeling you financed it then? It wasn't Jacksons choice or his dp's choice to use the camera it was something you bought with the included condition being that they use the RED proto right?

Edited by Michael Peploe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear.It is my understanding that you executive produced that short. I have a feeling you financed it then? It wasn't Jacksons choice or his dp's choice to use the camera it was something you bought with the included condition being that they use the RED proto right?

 

This kind of stuff is what makes me want to stay off this board. PJ had placed an order(s) for RED cameras last year. Peter invited us down to shoot test footage so he could be included in development and on the workflow. Peter volunteered to shoot this movie. We had no idea what type of test footage he would shoot when we showed up in NZ. And he has since upped his order for cameras. You can try to paint this some other way, but you would be wrong.

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This kind of stuff is what makes me want to stay off this board. PJ had placed an order(s) for RED cameras last year. Peter invited us down to shoot test footage so he could be included in development and on the workflow. Peter volunteered to shoot this movie. We had no idea what type of test footage he would shoot when we showed up in NZ. And he has since upped his order for cameras. You can try to paint this some other way, but you would be wrong.

 

Jim

 

 

Jim, don't get discouraged or feel like your being run off because of a few cynics. I and I'm sure most of us on this forum appreciate your input. This is a forum to discuss cinematography, its techniques, and tools. It would be completely ignorant of us to dismiss any tool. The first hand knowledge you offer has been a valuable resource.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
PJ had placed an order(s) for RED cameras last year. Peter invited us down to shoot test footage so he could be included in development and on the workflow. Peter volunteered to shoot this movie. We had no idea what type of test footage he would shoot when we showed up in NZ. And he has since upped his order for cameras. You can try to paint this some other way, but you would be wrong.

 

Jim

 

Hi Jim,

 

Thats interesting to know, not sure if it was common knowledge to all.

 

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This kind of stuff is what makes me want to stay off this board. PJ had placed an order(s) for RED cameras last year. Peter invited us down to shoot test footage so he could be included in development and on the workflow. Peter volunteered to shoot this movie. We had no idea what type of test footage he would shoot when we showed up in NZ. And he has since upped his order for cameras. You can try to paint this some other way, but you would be wrong.

 

Jim

 

The last thing I would want is for you to leave again. I used proper punctuation didn't I (?). I can also infer whatever I wish when the only facts are the pieces you decide to throw out. Its a half effort open process when it comes to the scrutinizing of actual footage and how you got it and I can only guess then what the rest of the truth is. With a little prodding regarding a pro cinematographers/directors use of RED you explained the situation in the making of the short more fully here than anywhere else and I believe you.

I was working on a pilot recently that was shot with the Genisis by a major film DP and the AC , a good friend of mine and one of the top AC's around and who really loves the Genisis and doesn't want to shoot film anymore, we started to talk about the RED and he told me he heard the chip you used for the NAB footage was taken out of some other camera. Know I defended the RED because I felt that was way out there gossip. Thats what the street is like and until you lay it all out there thats whats going to happen. So stick around bask in the accolades that might come when you release the cam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Just to be clear.It is my understanding that you executive produced that short. I have a feeling you financed it then? It wasn't Jacksons choice or his dp's choice to use the camera it was something you bought with the included condition being that they use the RED proto right?

 

Michael, does this mean that I can get Steven Spielberg to direct my Super-8 feature film as long as I supply the camera, film, processing and transfer costs, because I think I could swing that and I don't know why I hadn't though of that before your post.

 

If you're going to take a shot at Mr. Jannard like that, than I guess when someone takes a shot at me it really means diddily since I've never even attempted to invent anything new. Oh wait, I am an inventor just like Mr. Jannard! While I was in the store getting some brass brads for a short script I had written I figured out a way to use the larger size brass brads (they don't fall through the holes as easily as the smaller brass brads) on a very thin script and TWO PEOPLE said I should patent the idea I came up with to do it. So speaking as a fellow inventor...

 

The way I see it the only people that have a "right" to slam Mr. Jannard are those who have paid for a RED camera up front AND are also unhappy. Do you or anyone else that "seem" to be hating on Mr. Jannard fit BOTH of those criteria?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Carl and Werner... it sounds like your position is that any cinematographer that uses RED is really NOT a worthy cinematographer? And their work should be discounted because they chose another medium besides film?

 

Here is the good news for you. You can shoot film all you want. The good news for us is that no matter how married to film you are, we are going to build and finish this camera. And we will continue to improve it over time.

 

Jim

 

Now see here Jannard! Did you or did you not recently make this post?

 

We did NOT build this camera to replace film (see my posts from 8 or 9 months ago). I love the look of film. We did this project to offer an alternative to film. One that looked "filmic". A digital camera with a full size 35mm sensor (with wonderful focus fall-off) and an image that did NOT look like over-sharpened HD.

Jim

 

"Over-sharpened HD"? And would you like me to rattle off the slack handful of "respected" producers who over the past decade have thought "over-sharpened HD" was the greatest thing since since the bag they put sliced bread in? I thought the images were rubbish, and so I imagine did all the other respected cinematographers, who obviously voted with their feet (or their order books) and DIDN'T use HD cameras! And from the above quote, I would imagine you also agreed with us, and THAT was why you put all your resources into developing the RED.

 

I totally agree that your camera does not look like over-sharpened HD, and I said as much. I'm trying to point out the flaw in your reasoning, that just because somebody embraces a new technology, that does not mean they necessarily know what they're taking about!

 

What I meant was, other people are not necessarily going to see the enthusiasm of Peter Jackson or any other luminary as a ringing endorsement of your product, just as they didn't follow the lead of other luminaries in the past and switch to tarted-up ENG cameras.

 

I am not saying there is anything wrong with your product, it is the best and most practical I've seen by a long way.

 

Have you spent so long surrounded by yes-men and fanboys that you immediately mistrust anybody who agrees with you but appears to have no vested interest in your activities? You get enough of that in the film industry.

 

Look if you like, I can give you my bank account details and you can pay me a couple of dollars a week so I'll then be technically an employee, if that will make you feel more comfortable. (Not too much though; I think there's some "peppercorn" threshold where I don't have to declare the income for tax purposes. I'll ask my accountant) :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...