Red - it's grotesquely incompetent

[Nate Downes]

I'm sure the Canon MK III's are not using Foveon sensors. We'd sure know about it.

 

I've seen some exceptionally nice images from the Foveon Sigmas, and some not-so-nice also. I _am_ curious about their forthcoming DP-1 "point & shoot" with RAW capability ---- Well it could be a way to play without big $ commitment...

 

-Sam

Nobody said they were usign Foveon sensors, I mentioned Foveon technology, ie reading 2 or more colors from a single photosite. The Mark III Ds, from what I understand, can read 2 colors on a single photosite, giving a more accurate color interpolation system.

[Walter Graff]

"Why would the Romans want to kill a carpenter who preaches eternal life? The guy wasn't instigating any political or military form of anti-Roman revolt and thus wasn't confronting Roman imperial interest. "

 

Ahh... Maybe because Jesus preached that his 'kingdom' was bigger than Rome (RENDER UNTO CAESAR - Leviticus 19:4) and the mere thought of his words that the land was not owned by the Romans but God (Joshua 24:13) threatened thousands of years of social tradition? Not political you ask? As for the bible, its books were written years after Jesus' death, were not first hand accounts, and Gibson's movie tried to take account all the stories, which is tough because as the books were written, they more and more blame the jews for his death. In the end, Jesus upset everyone, Roman and Jew, so no one can take all the blame for wanting him out of the picture.

 

"Even with 3000+ reservations, the profit from such a huge undertaking is questionable with these prices, why would they wanna do that?"

 

One would hope that in a business plan you make predictions about ROI. Sometimes I think folks who had marketing successes think it's easy to do it again. In the world of electronics, it takes quite a bit of coin and time to do it well, and in this world of fierce competition, just because you have a novel idea doesn't mean you are going to sell a product like the second coming. And you can always look at it another way, if it doesn't work it sure makes a great tax write off.

[Stephen Williams]

But in the end, the creators of RED are offering their camera for 17 500 $ [25-30 000 $ for working kit].

 

This is MIGHTY cheap.

 

Even with 3000+ reservations, the profit from such a huge undertaking is questionable with these prices.

 

(Although I hope they'll have more reservations\profit in the future).

 

So my question is simple:

 

Why would they wanna do that?

 

Hi,

 

Red only expected to sell only 500-1000 cameras in the beginning; break even would probably be at the lower end of expectations. With 3000 reservations / orders Red can expect a huge profit. The first 100 cameras were replaced and with issues on various accessories, some of that profit will evaporate.

 

Keep in mind CMOS DSLR's sell for under $1000.

 

Stephen

[Freya Black]

"Why would the Romans want to kill a carpenter who preaches eternal life? The guy wasn't instigating any political or military form of anti-Roman revolt and thus wasn't confronting Roman imperial interest. "

 

Ahh... Maybe because Jesus preached that his 'kingdom' was bigger than Rome (RENDER UNTO CAESAR - Leviticus 19:4) and the mere thought of his words that the land was not owned by the Romans but God (Joshua 24:13) threatened thousands of years of social tradition? Not political you ask? As for the bible, its books were written years after Jesus' death, were not first hand accounts, and Gibson's movie tried to take account all the stories, which is tough because as the books were written, they more and more blame the jews for his death. In the end, Jesus upset everyone, Roman and Jew, so no one can take all the blame for wanting him out of the picture.

 

Levicticus and Joshua are both in the old testament, i.e long before Jesus was about.

Levicticus being the lovely section of the bible that says that if you beat your slave till he can't see you must surely let him go free. (Beating your slaves till they lose their teeth or eyesight is clearly out of order and you should do the decent thing and let them go at that point) I guess the idea is that you should only beat your slaves enough that they scream in agony and not that you cause visible damage.

 

The bit of Joshua that you refer to says "do not turn to idols or make gods of cast metal for yourselves", which seems more on topic and probably good advice.

 

To be fair to the Roman theory, pilate does attempt to talk the people out of crucifying Jesus and in the end washes his hands of the affair as he thinks it is wrong but the crowd are baying for blood but yeah there was obviously all kinds of stuff involved.

 

As for Render unto ceaser what is ceasers. I've always taken that to mean "yes you should pay your taxes" and that Jesus is making it clear that there should be a division between church and state.

 

I've not seen the Mel gibson movie you refer to but have seen the mad max films and even bits of lethal weapon 2 which is one of the most surreal films ever made.

 

love

 

Freya

[Walter Graff]

"pilate does attempt to talk the people out of crucifying Jesus and in the end washes his hands of the affair as he thinks it is wrong but the crowd are baying for blood but yeah there was obviously all kinds of stuff involved."

 

Wow, how easy you turned a fictitious story based on no fact into reality. No one really knows much of anything about Pilot or what he stood for or thought, and historians all have their own guesses. I haven't found one that will speak as if it's first hand knowledge. : )

 

As for Leviticus and Joshua, I used them next to the New testament concepts as I was referring to the old testament references to the topic since that would have been the references at the time of Christ's life.

[Freya Black]

"pilate does attempt to talk the people out of crucifying Jesus and in the end washes his hands of the affair as he thinks it is wrong but the crowd are baying for blood but yeah there was obviously all kinds of stuff involved."

 

Wow, how easy you turned a fictitious story based on no fact into reality. No one really knows much of anything about Pilot or what he stood for or thought, and historians all have their own guesses. I haven't found one that will speak as if it's first hand knowledge.

 

As for Leviticus and Joshua, I used them next to the New testament concepts as I was referring to the old testament references to the topic since that would have been the references at the time of Christ's life.

 

I'm not sure I turned it into reality, I'm just talking about the book really. Other than the stories in the book theres not much evidence of anything. You can't even talk about the stuff as first hand knowledge at all. It could all just be completely made up. That goes for everything that Jesus says and does in the new testament too! As for the old testament...welll...thats even worse mostly.

 

It is a book, whether you want to believe it's true or not, well that's up to you.

For myself I'm quite happy to discuss the plots of books or movies without really thinking of them as being reality. I can say this is what happened, but I know it's just a movie or a book, it's what happened within the narrative.

 

Yes I have no idea what really happenned (assuming anything happened at all!) but then nor does anyone else so I'm not going to worry about it too much. :)

 

I should have made it clearer I was reffering to the book and not the movie I guess although I do state that I have not seen the movie.

 

You have made me think about things tho, as obviously there are people who believe the contents of this paticular book to be fact, so maybe I need to be more aware when discussing this stuff with such people.

 

Hmmmm...

 

love

 

Freya

[Walter Graff]

"I'm not sure I turned it into reality, I'm just talking about the book really."

 

 

Okay, so we really are on the same page. And yes there are folks that think this and other books are fact so watch out. They may jump in here and start to lecture us. :) The bible has four different accounts of Jesus and Pilot's encounter, all slightly different and all portray is attitude towards Jesus slightly different, but since it's the bible, I didn't expect it to have anything but a sympathetic attitude towards him as it does to varying degrees.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

"I'm not sure I turned it into reality, I'm just talking about the book really."

 

 

Okay, so we really are on the same page. And yes there are folks that think this and other books are fact so watch out. They may jump in here and start to lecture us. :) The bible has four different accounts of Jesus and Pilot's encounter, all slightly different and all portray is attitude towards Jesus slightly different, but since it's the bible, I didn't expect it to have anything but a sympathetic attitude towards him as it does to varying degrees.

 

And what about the co-Pilot? :)

 

(sorry, couldn't resist)

 

Look, noone is lecturing here. I said it is a speculation, cause there's no real evidence.

 

But, IMO, what J.C. was speaking was just metaphorical blah-blah in the eyes of Roman political power. No real threat, cause there wasn't any resistance organization or anything.

 

And BTW, the Gospels were first-hand info, at least some of them, cause they were written by the apostles, but that's not hard proof.

 

Anyway, it's a question of faith.

 

But the effect of all this was too big for it to be just hoax.... or better - a scam. :)

[Adrian Sierkowski]

As far as I know, the first gospel was penned 70 years after Jesus' death. I believe that was Mark, but I'm not sure. Not exactly first hand, but pretty damned close.

[Freya Black]

As far as I know, the first gospel was penned 70 years after Jesus' death. I believe that was Mark, but I'm not sure. Not exactly first hand, but pretty damned close.

 

I don't want to get too dragged into this. I was happy to discuss the story in the book but now we are drifting into areas of what may or may not be true and all this kind of stuff. While I'm quite happy to discuss the story in the book I'm not too intrested in discussing what may or may not have happened historically, or even worse how true the bible is. I've been somewhat dragged into this by Walter already and these are really not discussions I'm intrested in or want to discuss. I actually find it quite boring at best.

 

To clear things up tho, There are 4 gospels, 2 of which were supposed to have been written by actual Apostles. (Matthew and John). However theres is a question mark over who really wrote these.

 

The gospel of Mark was supposed to have been transcribed from the recollections of Simon Peter (who obviously was supposed to have been there) so it's a sort of pseudo first hand account kinda thing, assuming that is true, which it might not be. There is some feeling that this one might actually have been written by Mark however, whoever he was.

 

Theres also a theory that some of the gospels are based on a missing earlier gospel or set of stories that is now lost.

 

A lot of people have put effort into trying to work this all out but they have just found it appears to be even more vague and unclear than when they started.

 

So stuff isn't actually very clear cut, as it is often made out to be.

 

I'm just posting this so people can understand why people might say different things.

 

Knew I should never have posted anything in the red section.

 

love

 

Freya

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

(nevermind)

Edited February 25, 2008 by Radoslav Karapetkov

[Freya Black]

"I'm not sure I turned it into reality, I'm just talking about the book really."

 

 

Okay, so we really are on the same page. And yes there are folks that think this and other books are fact so watch out. They may jump in here and start to lecture us. :) The bible has four different accounts of Jesus and Pilot's encounter, all slightly different and all portray is attitude towards Jesus slightly different, but since it's the bible, I didn't expect it to have anything but a sympathetic attitude towards him as it does to varying degrees.

 

Walter I'm not sure why you have taken this all so seriously. People were just making some jokes. Then they were discussing the story and making some jokes. You seem to have dragged it all into the realm of what is true or not etc, which is not a place that I for one wanted to go. I hope I won't have to suffer someone coming here and lecturing me, or even worse lecturing me or attacking me in real life (don't forget this is a real names forum) but in a way it's you that has put me in this position.

 

As regards the story in the book, it surely doesn't matter which group of people had the most blame in the death of Jesus as the point of the story is surely how the people wanted him dead. If there is some suggestion that the authoritys weren't as intrested as the masses that only serves to emphisize the extent that public feeling was against the guy. I'm not sure why you might care about whether this bit of the story was true or not IRL.

 

I have a strong feeling that if we were discussing King arthur and Merlin that we wouldn't end up getting into a discussion about what is true or not, or whether Merlin existed. and I wouldn't get the finger pointed for portraying the story as fact.

 

love

 

Freya

[Walter Graff]

"Walter I'm not sure why you have taken this all so seriously. People were just making some jokes. Then they were discussing the story and making some jokes. You seem to have dragged it all into the realm of what is true or not etc, which is not a place that I for one wanted to go. I hope I won't have to suffer someone coming here and lecturing me, or even worse lecturing me or attacking me in real life (don't forget this is a real names forum) but in a way it's you that has put me in this position. "

 

In my culture we use :) signs to signify lightheartedness in our writting as I have in my posts here. I am not as serious as you think on teh subject and perhaps that is where you have taken it personally. I was not attacking you or your beliefs. It is often difficult to carry on and understand conversations where only words (less than a quarter of how we interpret conversation) is all you have. Just saying that no one knows anything about Pilot, of the supposed story of him forgiving Jesus. It's all folklore like most of the Christian religion. I don't believe there are any truths in life, just what you believe. No one should condemn you for your beliefs. I believe Jesus was a good man but not a God. I also think RED is a good camera for the money and not grotesquely incompetent as is suggested here. But some others do and that is fine too. I hope that clears up my past exchanges with you. : )

[Robert Houllahan]

??

 

This thread started with a slip of someones med schedule and subsequent drinking of hater-aide and now ends with Jee-bhus and crew.....

 

Lame.

 

-Rob-

[Carl Brighton]

We've gone from denying the divinity of the RED to denying the divinity of Hay-soos in a little over 100 posts.

It's usually around this point that someone inevitably brings the Nazis into the discussion, so I thought I'd get in first for once :lol:

 

[Freya Black]

"Walter I'm not sure why you have taken this all so seriously. People were just making some jokes. Then they were discussing the story and making some jokes. You seem to have dragged it all into the realm of what is true or not etc, which is not a place that I for one wanted to go. I hope I won't have to suffer someone coming here and lecturing me, or even worse lecturing me or attacking me in real life (don't forget this is a real names forum) but in a way it's you that has put me in this position. "

 

In my culture we use :) signs to signify lightheartedness in our writting as I have in my posts here. I am not as serious as you think on teh subject and perhaps that is where you have taken it personally. I was not attacking you or your beliefs. It is often difficult to carry on and understand conversations where only words (less than a quarter of how we interpret conversation) is all you have. Just saying that no one knows anything about Pilot, of the supposed story of him forgiving Jesus. It's all folklore like most of the Christian religion. I don't believe there are any truths in life, just what you believe. No one should condemn you for your beliefs. I believe Jesus was a good man but not a God. I also think RED is a good camera for the money and not grotesquely incompetent as is suggested here. But some others do and that is fine too. I hope that clears up my past exchanges with you. : )

 

Walter, what I meant by taking it seriously is that you have dragged the subject onto more serious matters than discussing a book or a movie. As far as I can see, it is you that have done this, and you did it when you implied that I had turned the contents of the book into reality, which I don't feel that I did.

 

There was no smiley after the following sentance:

"Wow, how easy you turned a fictitious story based on no fact into reality."

Which given the nature of it would have been the most appropriate place to have put one. It's also a rather personal allegation whether you were joking or not because it implies that I would want to portray the matter as historical fact, which leads to some rather obvious insinuations about my personal character.

 

I'm not saying that you intended to attack me, but I was put into a situation where I felt I had to clarify matters, which then forced me onto subjects I really wasn't interested in discussing. I'm saying that you could have thought more about the possible consequences of what you were posting which later on you seem to be at least partly aware of.

 

It would have been nice if you had just said, I wasn't attacking you. Sadly what you wrote was, I wasn't attacking you or your beliefs. *sigh* So you have now taken the subject away from the plot of books and movies, onto historical fact or fiction, and now we are onto beliefs, a place I would have thought by this point in the discussion, it was preety clear I didn't want to discuss. Not sure if this is just wanton thoughtlessness or plain vindictiveness. I'm going to throw this back at you for the time being and I'm asking you where in this thread I actually tell you about my beliefs, and also I would like you to elaborate on how you would go about attacking them in the alternative universe where you wanted to do so?

 

Lastly I don't remember pilate forgiving Jesus at all. My understanding of the story was that he didn't see why the guy should be killed and tried to talk the crowd out of it. He then washed his hands of the affair but let it commence anyway. It seems he didn't want responsibility for what he felt was wrong but didn't want to get into a thing with the crowd either. There was also some insinuation that his wife had a bad dream and tried to talk pilate out of being involved. Perhaps it is this Mel Gibson thing you have seen? Does he forgive him in the movie?

 

I hope you can understand the difference between discussing matters of plot and narrative such as this and discussing this stuff in the context of reality and historical fact and even worse matters of faith and belief.

I'm saying that you changed the context from lighthearted discussion into something more serious and potentially dangerous.

 

love

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

??

 

This thread started with a slip of someones med schedule and subsequent drinking of hater-aide and now ends with Jee-bhus and crew.....

 

Lame.

 

-Rob-

 

Robert normally, I would think someone posting the word lame on a discussion forum was kind of annoying, but here, in this case, it seems entirely appropriate. :(

 

love

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

We've gone from denying the divinity of the RED to denying the divinity of Hay-soos in a little over 100 posts.

It's usually around this point that someone inevitably brings the Nazis into the discussion, so I thought I'd get in first for once :lol:

 

Thanks Carl, nazis don't normally cheer me up, run into too many of them lately but this worked for me! I especially loved the nazi cat. :)

 

It makes me feel like this point would be a good point at which to discuss Monty Python films! :) Sadly I can't think of a way to work it in here, and can only think of ways to discuss the producers, and I find Gene Wilder slightly scary. :(

 

love

 

Freya

Edited February 25, 2008 by Freya Black

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

It's my fault, cause I dug into the Jesus-Roman thing. But I can see there is some energy floating around these issues.

 

One thing's for sure - the guy probably had some pretty bad times + death for no good reason and Romans and Jews were equally wrong for doing that.

 

...

 

Anyway, what I'm seeing from the RED One is gorgeous. Not every single piece of footage, but most are very impressive.

 

I guess it's a question of who's using the thing and also how processing and post are done.

 

I'll be surprised if any company offers that kind of quality [s35 sensor, 4K, ~10 stops of latitude, RAW recording] on such a price in the near future.

 

And who would that be?

 

Sony? Don't think so.

 

Arri? It's possible, but what - they're gonna offer an under 30 k $ working kit? Dunno.

 

The RED gives people like me the opportunity to really focus on the story without having to worry for "not shooting on film".

 

I'm not a big budget guy and I don't have any particular ambition for ever becoming one.

 

There are some pretty good under 10k HD cameras around, but even with a 35mm adapter and good glass, footage from them has "almost" written on them.

 

When I watch good footage from the RED, that "almost" is gone.

 

My 2c.

[John Sprung]

It makes me feel like this point would be a good point at which to discuss Monty Python films! :) Sadly I can't think of a way to work it in here, and can only think of ways to discuss the producers, and I find Gene Wilder slightly scary. :(

 

love

 

Freya

Monty Python's "Life of Brian" -- fits perfectly with the Jesus thread. "Always look on the bright side of life", etc. ;-)

 

Consider also the filmed Broadway version of "The Producers" with Matthew Broderick instead of Wilder. ;-)

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Stephen Williams]

Can we get back to the topic. This is not the place to discuss religion, Jesus or the Bible.

[Walter Graff]

Can we get back to the topic. This is not the place to discuss religion, Jesus or the Bible.

 

 

Seven pages of bashing RED isn't enough? :)

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Seven pages of bashing RED isn't enough? :)

 

:).

 

I think the initial post is a little over the edge. "Grotesquely incompetent", etc. It sounds almost angry, why is that?

 

RED certainly isn't perfect but why such intense negativism?

 

Such new equipment causes very positive developments, IMHO, and is also used by some top professionals.

 

If RED is such a plague, people can just ignore it, no hard feelings are necessary.

 

My 2c.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

You've just missed out on a long line of questions which Mr Rhodes has put forth regarding the RED. And I'm quite thankful, at least, that he has. It always has generated a good amount of conversation, and some fighting of course, but at least it got people talking about the camera, and it's flaws, and it's good things.

 

To me, it's just a thing, but that's because I know better than to think any camera coming out it the uber-savior of indie. . .I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the HVX.

The being said, in it's time and with the right tweaks, I'm sure the camera will find it's niche in the industry. I like the images it has produced. They aren't anywhere near, in my opinion, what film produces, and they aren't video. They're different, and I think that's good.

 

Ok, I'm done now. I just had to chime in.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

You've just missed out on a long line of questions which Mr Rhodes has put forth regarding the RED. And I'm quite thankful, at least, that he has. It always has generated a good amount of conversation, and some fighting of course, but at least it got people talking about the camera, and it's flaws, and it's good things.

 

To me, it's just a thing, but that's because I know better than to think any camera coming out it the uber-savior of indie. . .I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the HVX.

The being said, in it's time and with the right tweaks, I'm sure the camera will find it's niche in the industry. I like the images it has produced. They aren't anywhere near, in my opinion, what film produces, and they aren't video. They're different, and I think that's good.

 

Ok, I'm done now. I just had to chime in.

 

Yeah, but why such negative pathos?

 

If it really is such a crap - f*ck it.

 

Why the flag-burning?