Emanuel A Guedes Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 PS Targeting the youtube as the RED screen would be the same than thinking the cinématographe as funfair curiosity in the XIX century though there was who had believed in such way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted April 8, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted April 8, 2008 Agreed. But... ...sometimes, it's funny to see you among the usual "suspects" (other word for naysayer in my dictionary). The rest, I won't post here. You can check as PM where you know how to find me. And where you're simply one of the best contributors there. As resume, you know very well to where the RED goes or can go. Hi Emanuel, I don't really know where RED will be at Build 16, that's my point. I don't want to pre-judge I want to see images, then decide what projects I could use a RED for. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel A Guedes Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 Glad to see you are contributing such informative posts, Emanuel . But please don't restrict yourself solely to the Red forum, there are many more forums on this site that could gain from your input. I doubt since I am not a cinematographer. Yet. ;) But I'm used to follow yours. Such as that one dedicated to the anamorphic lenses, for example. Very useful. I've been buying some stuff based on information so much appreciated coming from there. Thanks. The editing where I have my basics or the directing where I finished my education, it looks as though they are out of scope in a forum like this. As producer, I'm used to other "real forums" outside... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 So I'm just curious why we can't trust these screenings according to you, how you think a company that designed a camera that digitally acquires raw images, can be manipulated to look better when thats the whole purpose of a digitally acquired raw image. I guess you are right, I just always like to see what other people -independent from whoever is trying to get me to buy into whatever is that are selling, is saying about said product before I jump into the fire. Call it skepticism if you will, I just rather have as much info about some new fangled technology before I make up my decisions, especially when "the end of film" or similar claim is part of their PR/ ad campaign. That is all . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted April 9, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted April 9, 2008 I have finally managed to make a 1920 x 1080 MEPG recording of the Australian Seven Network's 2008 Olympics promo, but I am just going to have to back out of this one. The USB HDTV tuner I am using is very good, and from some I of the Ch 7 HD programming I have been able to import 1920 x 1080 stills into Photoshop that look like they were taken with a 4 megapixel still camera, so I am confident there is nothing wrong with the system I am using. According to Josh: "The current Beijing Olympic games promos on Channel 7 where shot on Red and Phantom v10 (High Speed Only)" Actually the Ch 7 promo (the one I recorded anyway) is mostly made up of old 4:3 footage which I assume comes from the Sydney 2000 Olympics. (There may be other versions, but I haven't seen any). There is some footage that was obviously shot recently that appears to be slightly overcranked, but in general, it seems to have been completely mutilated in Post Production. The only reason I can think of for doing that is that maybe the new HD footage tends to clash with the older SD footage. Basically the overall image quality is pretty awful, but I seriously doubt it went into the system that way! I have no idea what I am supposed to be looking at. I know the RED can do a lot better than that, so I am really wasting my time here. Well, not really, I now have HDTV set up on my office PC, so I suppose that's something:-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Fritzshall Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 Jim Jannard humble haha yeah ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A. Whitehouse Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 Hi Keith, Ive been looking out for this seven promo as well but have missed it (Very little to watch on 7). Was the Promo in HD? I only ask because we've delivered Digibeta for commercial work and my understanding was that commercials were all still broadcast in SD in Australia, I don't know whether that extends to promos. Also my understanding was that 7 broadcast in 720p so that may help explain some of the capture difficulties, I could be wrong though? I have the same setup as you, a usb stick HDTV which I got for $50 off ebay, it looks great and my reception is good but the capture is SD Mpeg2s. For what its worth I understand that the new Alex Proyas film shooting in Melbourne is a RED show but this is unconfirmed. There are going to be a lot of RED cameras for rent here, apart from the private owners I know of one larger rental house is apparently expecting 60 nationally. I expect the rental price is going to be very competitive, makes me wish I owned a set of PL primes their rental price will likely sky rocket. Does anyone else know of any local work on TV which is shot on RED? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted April 9, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted April 9, 2008 Hi Keith, Also my understanding was that 7 broadcast in 720p so that may help explain some of the capture difficulties, I could be wrong though? I have the same setup as you, a usb stick HDTV which I got for $50 off ebay, it looks great and my reception is good but the capture is SD Mpeg2s. Unfortunately I don't know anybody at Ch 7 any more so there is nobody I can ask. The stick I have allows frame grabs to the clipboard, and I presume they are whatever resolution the broadcast is, because sometimes I get 1080 and sometimes 720. The "travelogue" footage that Ch 7 show around the Olympics Promo always comes out as 1920 x 1080, whether I grab from live or disc playback. But don't take that as gospel; the USB stick is a sample that was given to me by a sales Rep; it works beautfully but the instructions and onscreen display prompts are completely incomprehensible, (which is why they decided not to proceed with the product:-) The resolution of my (CRT) monitor is 1152 x 864 so you only see the true resolution by importing into Photoshop and panning around in the images, but the difference between some of the allegedly "HD" images is downright nauseating! my understanding was that commercials were all still broadcast in SD in Australia, Well, there is an enormous range of picture in quality to be sure. The complete lack of "jaggies" on a few commercials suggests to me that some are true 1920 x 1080, but then there are others that I would swear were edited on Windows Movie Maker! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel A Guedes Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 (edited) haha yeah ok Why not? Because he is a billionaire? Oh, give me a break!... :-) At least to me, the actions count: http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=30089 PS I wouldn't do it. And I consider myself a humble human being. Edited April 9, 2008 by Emanuel A Guedes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJDeRiomol Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 I'm sorry but i had to say it. I don't understand all this at all. It's only a tool! I don't get the pro/contra stuff in this forum! Jannard doesn't get a gun in our head and say "buy it". For me? Price-quality are ok. I don't see the problem in some new stuff moving around, actually it's more fun like this. See, try, look and decide... simple like that. Greetings everybody from Spain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Jannard Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 I'm sorry but i had to say it. I don't understand all this at all. It's only a tool! I don't get the pro/contra stuff in this forum! Jannard doesn't get a gun in our head and say "buy it". For me? Price-quality are ok. I don't see the problem in some new stuff moving around, actually it's more fun like this. See, try, look and decide... simple like that. Greetings everybody from Spain. Smartest post in two years... Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJDeRiomol Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 Smartest post in two years... Jim Not even close but thanks. I was in the Ovide presentation of your camera in Barcelona. I just want to say I'm very impressed. Congratulations! Keep going! JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Flores Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 Lance, care must be taken whenever judging the merit of the camera based upon projection. It is not mathematically possible to have both satisfied *everywhere* with some of the current techniques used in signal processing in cameras: (1) (more) accurate reproduction of luminance detail (2) color fidelity near saturated primary colors Hence, any novice analysis that sees the imperfection manifested in (1) or (2) may be wrongly attributed to the power of a camera. DJ - I'm well aware of such, do a search of my posts and background. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Flores Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 I guess you are right, I just always like to see what other people -independent from whoever is trying to get me to buy into whatever is that are selling, is saying about said product before I jump into the fire. Call it skepticism if you will, I just rather have as much info about some new fangled technology before I make up my decisions, especially when "the end of film" or similar claim is part of their PR/ ad campaign. That is all . . . Saul - try http://www.digitalcinemasociety.org/ Digital Cinema Society. James Mathers is a co-founder and is well respected. Done both film and digital cinematography and is shooting his second feature film with the RED. Also the DP on the film we're in prep with now. Take a look at previous posts. I talk to Jim occasionally from the shoot, but I haven't checked for his public responses on the DCS site recently. Try the site, there might be some straight answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted April 12, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted April 12, 2008 "Till then" will be the only way this forum will satisfy itself. What's wrong with wanting to wait and see? What's the hurry? Must everyone be convinced of how great Red is by a certain date regardless of whether they've even seen any footage from the camera or not? Professionals in any industry are typically wary of new things until they can see and judge the results for themselves. I don't see any problem with that. On the other hand, it's quite annoying to watch a handful of people pull there hair out and act like children trying to convince the whole world of something, when the whole world isn't ready to be convinced. If Red delivers good looking footage on a 40ft screen that rivals that of the Genesis, then obviously it will be used for theatrically released films. If it doesn't look good, then it won't get much use. It's very simple. The market will decide for itself. We don't have to spend any more time talking about it, and hopefully we won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted April 12, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted April 12, 2008 What's wrong with wanting to wait and see? What's the hurry? Must everyone be convinced of how great Red is by a certain date regardless of whether they've even seen any footage from the camera or not? Professionals in any industry are typically wary of new things until they can see and judge the results for themselves. I don't see any problem with that. On the other hand, it's quite annoying to watch a handful of people pull there hair out and act like children trying to convince the whole world of something, when the whole world isn't ready to be convinced. If Red delivers good looking footage on a 40ft screen that rivals that of the Genesis, then obviously it will be used for theatrically released films. If it doesn't look good, then it won't get much use. It's very simple. The market will decide for itself. We don't have to spend any more time talking about it, and hopefully we won't. OK if you simply work in the industry or need to rent. Much more difficult for rental companies who have to make long term investment decisions, convince boards of directors and so on. If RED can ramp up their production schedule so there is no significant lead time, well and good. Otherwise there is a fear of being left behind. On the other hand, they have to also consider the scenario of the RED initially showing great promise and then turning into a dog, perhaps for reliability reasons, or simply because there are too many cameras chasing too little work. Not saying that this will be case but these are questions that need to be answered. Preferably by people with some credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Sprung Posted April 12, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted April 12, 2008 Much more difficult for rental companies who have to make long term investment decisions,.... On the other hand, they have to also consider the scenario of the RED initially showing great promise and then turning into a dog, perhaps for reliability reasons, or simply because there are too many cameras chasing too little work. Yes, I've long said that a major part of the value that rental houses bring to the table is that they take those risks and eat the depreciation. The good news in the case of Red is that the body is only $17.5K, and the rest of what you need is generic stuff. As for too many cameras chasing too little work, if Red really does play in the big leagues along with Panavision, Arri, Dalsa, Phantom, and Sony's F-35, that'll bite you in the tush no matter which cameras you have. The only difference is how big the bite.... -- J.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted April 12, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted April 12, 2008 OK if you simply work in the industry or need to rent. Much more difficult for rental companies who have to make long term investment decisions, convince boards of directors and so on. We're not talking about boards of directors here or rental companies. We're talking about individuals (most of whom own Red cameras) going on and on about how great the camera is and wanting everyone to take their word for it without any evidence. The camera's worth within the industry WILL be proven one way or the other eventually. It might be great, and it might not. But there's no point in going on and on and on and on about it before then. It's just a circle jerk to continue on like that. I know all the people that have invested money in the camera want it to be a success in the industry (for their own good), but they can't WILL it to be by talking and writing about it. I don't think it's just me who's sick of the neverending blathering about things that are yet to be decided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Drysdale Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 Just looking on REDuser about the subject of renting and the rental companies, one argument goes that the RED itself is no big deal for them cost wise, it can be used as almost a lost leader and they will make their money from the lenses and the ancillary kit. The concern appears to be for the lone RED owner who plans to earn money just from the rental, when a camera body itself could be only a small percentage of the shooting kit costs. I suspect there'll also be limit to how long producers will be prepared to pay a rental cost similar to an F900 when there are several thousand RED One cameras on the market. Currently the cost of renting a RED doesn't reflect its purchase price difference compared to the much more expensive digital cameras. In the end, people will make their decisions on their own tests and experience. The RED has its features and perhaps a look and other RAW cameras will have their features and perhaps their look. The rental cost will be a factor in lower budget productions, less so on those with higher budgets. Of course, they may also decide to shoot on 35mm film or even MiniDV, because it's right for the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Downes Posted April 12, 2008 Share Posted April 12, 2008 Smartest post in two years... Jim It would be save the issue isn't the camera itself I don't think, but this cult of personality that arose around it. Proclimations that it would change all of the rules, that film would be dead are only two examples off the top of my head I remember. I don't blame you for it, altho you did feed into it. I blame people that believe that their tools are the key to success, when infact a tool is only as good as the person weilding it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted April 12, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted April 12, 2008 infact a tool is only as good as the person weilding it. Hi Nate, Which is very clear when you look at 'awesome' footage posted. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Downes Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Hi Nate, Which is very clear when you look at 'awesome' footage posted. Stephen Now, don't diss all footage, I just watched a very nice one for Nescafe using Red with Lomo anamorphics that was very nicely done. Other footage... well, good try anyways... Red just gives a new palette and tool for the chain. Rejoyce in the variety, and let's drop this pointless bickering. Now if you don't mind, I have a roll of Foma R100 screaming my name.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Scheuren Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Hery Josh. You are fully right. There are plenty of cameras out there. But there is always the same old problem. The people who use them. 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