Are those crickets I hear???

[Mike Hunt]

Hmmmmmmm.... All the nay-sayers in here... All the non-believers.... All the fights... Camera comes out.... some amazing footage is being produced....

 

AND GUESS WHAT HAPPENS????? TA DAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

 

 

Chirp, chirp, chirp, chirp, chirp.....

[David Mullen ASC]

Do you have a point? Or are you just looking to start a fight?

 

Most people are taking a wait-and-see approach.

 

The "naysayers" were mostly three people.

[Guest]

Did reduser.net send you over to pick a fight?

 

R,

[Mike Hunt]

David,

 

 

This is not a question at all to pick a fight with you. Please, please, please do not pick up any kind of negative tone from my following question.

 

(by the way- I sent you a reply on the other thread)

 

I am very curious as to what you think of the Red camera. I have a huge amount of respect for you and your work. I certainly could learn so much from you.

 

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on the camera- good or bad. Do you think that image has a chance to hold up against film? I am sure you have seen some of the stuff some of these guys are posting. Maybe I don't have a trained eye, but I certainly think that picture has some serious kick to it. I certainly think for commercial work it is perfect for me.

 

Peter Jackson said he really loved working with it, and that it would really change things for the indie film-maker. What do you think?

[A. Whitehouse]

Theres been a lot of debate here and on CML. Not all positive and without scandal. I don't know if the issue of the Kodak comparison test has been discussed here or on Reduser but it has proven to be a big issue on CML. Now no one will discuss parties involved by name for fear of being sued.

[Guest]

Ok so you went from this:

 

"Hmmmmmmm.... All the nay-sayers in here... All the non-believers.... All the fights... Camera comes out.... some amazing footage is being produced....

AND GUESS WHAT HAPPENS????? TA DAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

Chirp, chirp, chirp, chirp, chirp....."

 

To this:

 

"I am very curious as to what you think of the Red camera. I have a huge amount of respect for you and your work. I certainly could learn so much from you."

 

All in one easy step, curious.

 

R,

[Mike Hunt]

Richard,

 

Come on dude. I know about you too. I have been reading your posts and you have changed over time. I have no debate with you.

 

You have to admit, there are some guys here that insult others pretty bad. Please don't make me name names. That guy had his video posted on another thread, and everyone dumped on not only the camera (which is cool- everyone can say it is video-y) but they went after him.

 

Making him out to be an amature who knows very little. I thought the video looked pretty good myself. My whole point is that I am just poking some of these guys in the eye a little. Nothing wrong with a little payback.

 

But I have never seen David do that to someone else's work. EVER! I have huge respect for him, so when he answers my post as he did, you can bet I am going to respond back. That post was not meant for him in anyway.

 

And to be honest, I am curious as to what he thinks about it. Nothing wrong with that... Just curious.

 

To me, I think Red has proved to be a fantastic tool so far. Maybe not perfect, but they certainly have done everything they said they were going to do.

[David Mullen ASC]

The only RED footage I have seen in a good viewing environment was the Peter Jackson short at NAB, which looked fantastic.

 

Since then, I've seen stuff posted on Reduser.net and it's a mixed lot, hard to judge. Some of it looks soft, some of it looks sharpened, some of it looks flat, some of it looks harsh, some of it looks great... so what am I to think? What I'm thinking is that I need to see something properly shown in a controlled viewing environment of known and familar (to me) quality, like in a 2K D.I. suite or a film-out viewed at a lab.

 

Also, I have no frame of reference online to know if this footage posted looks better than it would if shot on an F900 or a film camera; what I really want is for more people to shoot side-by-side with a different type of camera to provide some sort of frame of reference. I'm not a technical person, computer-wise, to know how to judge what I see online.

 

My main concern is the clippiness I see sometimes. I expect some of that with any digital camera, that sudden drop-off point where bright detail becomes white, but I can't tell if the RED is particularly better than a Varicam or a Viper, for example, in this regard. I may have to shoot my own comparison test to find out.

 

I don't mind discussing this, I just think your first post was a bit antagonistic, provocative. Which is your choice, of course, but my experience is that such posts just trigger more provocative, antagonistic, hostile replies, which is not very productive.

 

As for the comments about the other video being amateur-ish, I would tend to avoid saying that because I don't know the circumstances surrounding the shooting of it, the resources and time allotted. But some people here are blunt and if something looks like a beginner shot it, they don't see what the big deal is with expressing that opinion.

[Stephen Williams]

Hi,

 

I am sure many people here are waiting to get hold of a camera that they can test themselves so they can make an informed decision.

 

Stephen

[Guest]

"You have to admit, there are some guys here that insult others pretty bad. Please don't make me name names. That guy had his video posted on another thread, and everyone dumped on not only the camera (which is cool- everyone can say it is video-y) but they went after him. "

 

This is not a forum for people with thin skin. I post links to my work on this site and some people rip me pretty good. Look at the thread for my feature in the "In Production" area. Some are pretty blunt about what they think, that's show biz.

 

I expect it will be 100X worse on IMDB a year from now.

 

A lot of Red users are not that advanced, it's just a fact. No harm in that of course, we are all learning, and at different stages.

 

But when we hear Red owners explain how they can finally "compete with Hollywood" it gets a bit ridiculous.

 

R,

[Matthew W. Phillips]

I used to be a RED basher, but I saw the light. Did I turn to being a RED supporter? Not at all. The Gandhi-wisdom I gained was that ANY medium, whether RED, 35mm, 16mm, Super 8, camcorders, etc. are only as good as the lighting and people working with them. RED is a tool, nothing less, nothing more. I think it will have it's place in the world of cinema. I DON'T think it's a film killer.

 

In another thread, I apoligized to Jannard for my part of the RED bashing and he likewise apoligized for allowing his passion to cause him to say things he wished he hadn't. Working on my current project, I realize that there is so much more to filmmaking than the camera you use. It's really a stale argument at this point.

 

NO, using a RED will not guarantee you a distribution deal or entrance to any festivals.

[Chris Keth]

Oh, just delete his account. Mike Hunt? That hasn't been funny since junior high.

[Frank DiBugnara]

Theres been a lot of debate here and on CML. Not all positive and without scandal. I don't know if the issue of the Kodak comparison test has been discussed here or on Reduser but it has proven to be a big issue on CML. Now no one will discuss parties involved by name for fear of being sued.

 

 

Could someone elaborate on this? Just curious. I looked for reference to this on CML and could not find it. I shot a somewhat extensive 35mm/Red comparison test a few weeks ago. I'm waiting for the post house to give me 4:4:4 scans of the 35mm footage (which might take a while since I've asked them to thorw it in for free).

[Mike Hunt]

Chris,

 

Nice job buddy. That happens to be my real name. Michael Adam Hunt is my full real name. Feel free to call me if you want to talk about this. But not over this forum.

 

This is exactly what I am talking about.

[David Mullen ASC]

Basically what happened was that Jim Jannard made some posts that he was informed by an unnamed ASC member that Kodak was shooting a comparison test with the RED and had already pre-determined the outcome, and therefore to "watch his back." Part of the story was that the test was working under a false production name at the equipment check-out at Panavision. There were other elements that are more confusing, like whether a RED tech was kicked-out of the test, etc. Jim wanted to do an end-run around Kodak, I think, by labelling the test as unfair and biased before it ever was made public.

 

Anyway, eventually, despite signing NDA's, Bill Bennett, ASC, and Joe DiGennaro, who were shooting this test, spoke up because they felt they were being slandered. The false production name was not because of the RED, but because they were trying to test the Genesis too and felt that they had to do it under Panavision's radar. It was not exclusively a Kodak vs. RED test.

 

Bill even made a comment later that the RED faired well in the test, so he wasn't sure what the fuss was about.

 

A Kodak rep also posted on CML to say that Kodak occasionally runs such evaluation tests.

 

Part of Jim's concern/complaint was that they were using an earlier release of RED which was not indicative of the potential quality level.

 

Anyone remember Kodak's two comparison demos involving the F900 versus 35mm back in 2001-ish? There was Bill Bennett's 35mm-F900-Varicam car shoot and then this nightclub shoot shot by someone else.

 

Anyway, you have to keep in mind that no matter how fairly Kodak conducts a comparison test, half the people are going to mistrust it anyway, so they are under a high level of scrutiny with a lot of cynicism to overcome. If I were RED, I wouldn't be worried about any marketing campaign launched by Kodak against the camera. I'd be more worried about what sort of marketing scheme Sony is planning to combat the RED competition...

[A. Whitehouse]

Anyway, you have to keep in mind that no matter how fairly Kodak conducts a comparison test, half the people are going to mistrust it anyway, so they are under a high level of scrutiny with a lot of cynicism to overcome. If I were RED, I wouldn't be worried about any marketing campaign launched by Kodak against the camera. I'd be more worried about what sort of marketing scheme Sony is planning to combat the RED competition...

 

Just to add (and thank you for relating this for me, it got quite convoluted) that part of the scandal was over the way the story slowly leaked out and over the fact that RED techs removed the camera and equipment from set claiming that the RED camera team (a third party rental company) had been ridiculed and that the firmware wasn't up to date.

 

It was reported afterwards (as I understand it) that the firmware had been up to date but the story got somewhat fuzzy after awhile.

 

For my part, and understand I don't know anyone involved so this is just my two cents, it seems that Kodak

should be allowed to conduct whatever tests it wants. In particular if they are internal like they claimed. It seemed like a bad move to remove the camera from testing and then leak the story yourself in a public forum but then I don't really know what happened. I can understand that they would feel fairly attached to 18 months of hard work but its on sale and being delivered. If its in camera peoples hands and things are being shot with it then we shouldn't have to wait for future firmware upgrades before we can test it, that seems obvious to me. But then who knows what really happened. Ive certainly seen comparisons between RED and Kodak stocks on the RED website.

 

On a side note, in relation to that, I wonder how people feel about the idea of a manufacturer being involved like this at a point of production. Why should a manufacturer have any say in whats being shot with their gear once its been sold. If the third party rental company did ask for intervention why was it necessary? If they were upset with the production why couldn't they pack up and go home?

 

Maybe by years end some of the slowly released cameras will make their way to Australia and Ill get to have a look at one. Perhaps by then all the cameras abilities will be unlocked by firmware upgrades, I wonder if people will try hacking the RED for their own, impatient, purposes...

Edited October 23, 2007 by A. Whitehouse

[Stephen Williams]

Part of Jim's concern/complaint was that they were using an earlier release of RED which was not indicative of the potential quality level.

 

Hi David,

 

This was a production camera sold to a reservation holder at full price. We have heard many times that the camera will get better over time, so I never understood the justification of that complaint.

 

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

It might have been that the camera needed a software upgrade that was available but the testing folks didn't want to deal with it, I don't know the whole story. Anyway, I think it would have been better for Jim Jannard to question the validity of the test when or if it was screened publically, not months before while it was being shot, before the post work.

[Tim Carroll]

Is this side by side Kodak-RED footage available anywhere that I could take a look at. I would be interested in seeing the results.

 

Naturally, if Kodak produced the footage, I would expect it to be presented in a way that would give the Kodak footage an edge. Just like if RED did the comparison, I would expect it to be presented in a way that would give the RED footage the edge.

 

I would just like to see a side by side comparison of the RED footage because as I said on another thread, what I have stumbled across as far as RED footage so far looks like it's "been shot by folks who have just received their cameras and talked their friends into standing in front of it with a bright light on them." I have yet to see a side by side comparison where the RED camera and another camera are shooting the same scene, lit the same way, with the same talent in front of the camera.

 

Anyone know where I can see something like that?

 

Thanks,

-Tim

[Stephen Williams]

It might have been that the camera needed a software upgrade that was available but the testing folks didn't want to deal with it, I don't know the whole story. Anyway, I think it would have been better for Jim Jannard to question the validity of the test when or if it was screened publically, not months before while it was being shot, before the post work.

 

Hi David,

 

I was hoping Geoff Boyle would post some test results, he was intending to use 2 Reds for a 3d movie he is about to shoot. Since his recent thread on CML, I suspect his plans may have changed.

 

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

To do a proper comparison test needs a lot of time in post to decide how best to demonstrate the differences (A-B versus split screen, frame enlargements, etc.) plus you also run into the issue of whether you should color time them to match as closely as possible.

[Stephen Williams]

To do a proper comparison test needs a lot of time in post to decide how best to demonstrate the differences (A-B versus split screen, frame enlargements, etc.) plus you also run into the issue of whether you should color time them to match as closely as possible.

 

Hi David,

 

A set of 1/2 stop wedges would be a good start!

 

Stephen

[Mitch Gross]

Hi David,

 

A set of 1/2 stop wedges would be a good start!

 

Stephen

And viewed how? Do you move the film over to digital to compare or the digital over to film? And just how do you perform that move? There are literally thousands of variables at work, which is the fundamental problem with so-called "side by side" comparisons. Back when it was two film stocks it was a lot easier.

[Stephen Williams]

And viewed how? Do you move the film over to digital to compare or the digital over to film? And just how do you perform that move? There are literally thousands of variables at work, which is the fundamental problem with so-called "side by side" comparisons. Back when it was two film stocks it was a lot easier.

 

Hi Mitch,

 

Just compare Digital cameras with other digital cameras. I know how Film looks, I know how a bad DI looks, I know how a Viper looks.

 

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

And viewed how? Do you move the film over to digital to compare or the digital over to film? And just how do you perform that move? There are literally thousands of variables at work, which is the fundamental problem with so-called "side by side" comparisons. Back when it was two film stocks it was a lot easier.

 

You can't have a comparison if you don't pick something to compare it to...

 

The advantage of a comparison is that differences relative to each test are more apparent. Of course, you'd have to make it clear what the technical parameters were for this particular comparison, and each test, because of all the potential variations. This is why no test is ever definitive.

 

Like I said, my biggest question right now centers around the radically mixed reports I'm hearing regarding the dynamic range, which range from "amazing" to "like other HD cameras". It seems one cause, though, is how people are using the settings in RedAlert to convert the RAW footage.