RED in Post

[Adrian Sierkowski]

I think in terms of freelance DP buying equipment, it really depends on the market sector you're after. On the low/no end, often owning a camera, be it a DVX or an HVX or a whatever, will be the modicum of getting the gig, and while you may not get a day-rate, you can negotiate for a kit fee. Not perfect, but it happens.

[Stephen Williams]

If your primary career goal is to be a freelance DoP working on other people's projects, then yes, buying equipment is probably a mistake. But this is not my impression of what most of Red's customers are trying to do.

 

 

 

That's nuts. Will rental prices drop? Probably. But not that far. Why would the Red One rent for less than the HVX200 or EX1?

 

Hi,

 

I work as a professional DOP to earn money, I think you are right that many Red owners are hobby filmakers.

 

$1-200 would be approximately 1% of capital cost. Pro gear usually rents in that range, with 4000 cameras in the field, supply will outstrip demand & prices will fall. HVX or EX1 is a semi pro camera with a short life, they will command whatever rate people will pay. An EX1 is a working package out of the box I am using one tomorrow, the rental fee being about $150. Why would I want to rent RED package for $1000, the client wants to save money.

 

Stephen

[Chris Kenny]

Hi,

 

I work as a professional DOP to earn money, I think you are right that many Red owners are hobby filmakers.

 

You know perfectly well I didn't say that, and you also know perfectly well that there are many more options in the world than "DoP who works exclusively on other people's projects" and "hobby filmmaker".

 

It's entertaining that so many people in this forum refuse to even acknowledge the existence of certain business models.

 

$1-200 would be approximately 1% of capital cost. Pro gear usually rents in that range, with 4000 cameras in the field, supply will outstrip demand & prices will fall. HVX or EX1 is a semi pro camera with a short life, they will command whatever rate people will pay. An EX1 is a working package out of the box I am using one tomorrow, the rental fee being about $150. Why would I want to rent RED package for $1000, the client wants to save money.

 

So, let me get this straight... because the Red One is pro gear rather than semi-pro gear, you expect it to rent for less money? Not just a lower percentage, apparently, but fewer dollars per day?

 

You used to be one of the more open-minded posters in this forum, it's pretty clear that at this point, you're simply trolling. I don't appreciate having my time wasted by people with no interest in substantive discussion.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Chris,

While I may be wrong, I think Mr Williams is inferring that because the red one is a pro-system but produced in pro-sumer quantities, that overtime the rental rate will drop because there will be too many around. Hence starting a price war between rental houses and private owners, renting the kit out for less in order to get more days.

I can see this happening as well, though I don't know if 4000 of them in the field would really cause the price to substantially plumet. I can see the Red renting for $600/day, give or take, for the body and basic sotrage (lenses and the rest of the kit, would be more)

[Chris Kenny]

Chris,

While I may be wrong, I think Mr Williams is inferring that because the red one is a pro-system but produced in pro-sumer quantities, that overtime the rental rate will drop because there will be too many around. Hence starting a price war between rental houses and private owners, renting the kit out for less in order to get more days.

I can see this happening as well, though I don't know if 4000 of them in the field would really cause the price to substantially plumet. I can see the Red renting for $600/day, give or take, for the body and basic sotrage (lenses and the rest of the kit, would be more)

 

$600 for the body, batteries, and a couple of CF cards, I could see. That's pretty close to what we were expecting when we decided to buy the camera, and we were a little surprised at how much higher things ended up being. This range is probably about where the camera should fall, in the long run, relative to the pricing of its its lower-end (prosumer) competition.

 

But it's worth noting that the Red One isn't really selling in prosumer quantities. Red can't even make the thing in those quantities at the moment. Panasonic sold 10,000 HVX200 units in the first three months. I'd be very surprised if the HVX and other cameras that could reasonably be substituted for it hadn't sold over 100K units by now.

 

I also don't think demand for an affordable digital cinematography camera should be underestimated. A lot of projects have traditionally been shot on prosumer hardware, I think, just because the cost/benefit ratio takes a huge nose dive once you move out of that market -- a VariCam costs a lot more than an HVX, but isn't that much better. A Red One has a much better cost/benefit ratio for many types of projects than a VariCam, so you might see people who would have previously shot with prosumer equipment being tempted to step up.

Edited July 21, 2008 by Chris Kenny

[Gary McClurg]

I've got a script for you: http://www.hollywoodbookcity.com/MovieScri...e_MV101099.html

 

:P

 

Didn't you hear... they've green lighted a remake... :lol:

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Very true and valid points, though I would think red one's market saturation might approach prosumer levels as they tool up their factories. IIRC they have 4000 ordered so far, I don't think (though i have no evidence to back this up) that cine gear from arri et al ever really approaches that number one year out of the gate.

Again, i could be wrong, and I'd not mind spending $600/day for a RED body, I think it's a very reasonable number.

[John Sprung]

$1-200 would be approximately 1% of capital cost. Pro gear usually rents in that range, ....

Rental houses have fixed costs and overhead, not just the capital cost of the individual cameras. So, it's probably some sort of fixed nut plus percentage. Lower cost items would rent for a greater percentage of their cost, which makes the little stuff a better deal to buy. That covers the rental company's cost of doing business, but....

 

There's also supply and demand. Red commands very high rentals right now while the demand is hot. It's sort of like when the Prius cars were first introduced, they were so hot that you could use one for six months and sell it for more than it was new from the dealer.

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Brian Drysdale]

I also don't think demand for an affordable digital cinematography camera should be underestimated. A lot of projects have traditionally been shot on prosumer hardware, I think, just because the cost/benefit ratio takes a huge nose dive once you move out of that market -- a VariCam costs a lot more than an HVX, but isn't that much better. A Red One has a much better cost/benefit ratio for many types of projects than a VariCam, so you might see people who would have previously shot with prosumer equipment being tempted to step up.

 

Is there any more reason for people to stop up from a Z1 to a RED One than there was for people to step up from a PD150 to a DSR 500 or DSR 450? Certainly the 2/3" SD cameras produced much better pictures than the 1/3" cameras - less noticeable on smaller screens, but it leaps out at you on a video projector on a large screen. The extra percentage points of image quality always cost more, the first 80% is relatively cheap, the last 20% is much more expensive.

 

There are various reasons that people shoot with the pro-sumer cameras and the compact size is one big advantage.

 

There are a number of cameras coming out in the RED One price range and they're going to have their own advantages and disadvantages. However, I can't really see a reason why many more people will move up to these larger cameras from the smaller cameras than have done so in the past. In recent years the movement has tended to be the other direction.

[Chris Kenny]

Is there any more reason for people to stop up from a Z1 to a RED One than there was for people to step up from a PD150 to a DSR 500 or DSR 450? Certainly the 2/3" SD cameras produced much better pictures than the 1/3" cameras - less noticeable on smaller screens, but it leaps out at you on a video projector on a large screen.

 

The 2/3" SD cameras had better lower light performance, less noise, and a slightly sharper image. With well-lit footage it was pretty hard to tell the difference. This is also true today with the HVX200 vs. many VariCam models. With Red vs. the Z1, the difference is much more dramatic. You get a substantially sharper image, many more lens options, a much less compromised recording format, the ability to use 35-format lenses without an adaptor, the ability to use film-style accessories, etc.

 

More succinctly, you get a digital cinema camera, rather than just a higher-end ENG camera. That makes a difference.

 

The extra percentage points of image quality always cost more, the first 80% is relatively cheap, the last 20% is much more expensive.

 

Yup. But Red changes the equation a bit. It used to be that maybe the first 70% was pretty cheap (high-end prosumer), then the next 10% cost maybe three to five times as much ($30-50K ENG cameras), and then the final 20% cost way more ($100K+ digital cinematography cameras with high-end glass, etc.)

 

Now it's more like the first 70% is pretty cheap (high-end prosumer), then the next 25% costs maybe three times as much (low-end Red package), and the final 5% costs way more (Red or other digital cinematography camera with high-end glass and accessories.)

 

So, spending three times as much vs. prosumer now gets you to 95%, whereas it used to only get you to 80%.

[Brian Drysdale]

The 2/3" SD cameras had better lower light performance, less noise, and a slightly sharper image. With well-lit footage it was pretty hard to tell the difference. This is also true today with the HVX200 vs. many VariCam models. With Red vs. the Z1, the difference is much more dramatic. You get a substantially sharper image, many more lens options, a much less compromised recording format, the ability to use 35-format lenses without an adaptor, the ability to use film-style accessories, etc.

 

More succinctly, you get a digital cinema camera, rather than just a higher-end ENG camera. That makes a difference.

 

 

On a bog standard TV the difference between the 1/3" and the 2/3 is more subtle (although you can spot it easily on my PAL TV), but when projected the difference is huge. I did an art installation for an artist on which, for one day, we had to shoot with a PD150 as against the usual DSR 570 - she had to de-focus the DSR 570 material's projector in order to get a match (and it still looked better). The lighting set up was exactly the same.

 

I think RAW with wavelet compression on the lower cost cameras will have the bigger impact than a camera like the RED One on that market. For many pro-consumer people the cost leap is too large and this is the market that Scarlet is trying to address. Especially if it can match the HD requirements of Discovery HD, the UK's BBC and Channel 4 The 35mm adapters are a niche market , most pro- consumer cameras never see one in their lives. The larger market is for 1/2" to 2/3" cameras not 35mm sized sensors (for very practical reasons), as much as people on forums may obsess about them.

[Peter Moretti]

I just finished shooting a dramtic short with the Red, build 16. The director, who is an experienced editor, wants to cut the offline on his Vegas 7 system, which he knows well. Online could end up in Scratch or another system.

 

Are there any suggestions for this workflow? Final cut will be about 12 minutes long, with output for digital projection and the web in 16x9.

 

Thanks!

Rob, I'd assume you'd import QT files from Redcine into Vegas. Then create an EDL and use that in SCRATCH to capture .R3D files.

 

But of course ask others.

[Peter Moretti]

On a bog standard TV the difference between the 1/3" and the 2/3 is more subtle (although you can spot it easily on my PAL TV), but when projected the difference is huge. I did an art installation for an artist on which, for one day, we had to shoot with a PD150 as against the usual DSR 570 - she had to de-focus the DSR 570 material's projector in order to get a match (and it still looked better). The lighting set up was exactly the same. ...

 

Brian,

 

I realize that DV and DVCAM are identical in terms of compression. But there are still big differences between a 570 and PD150 that go beyond chip size. Probably the most notable being the 570 will have a much nicer lens. And that, IMHO, is a lot of what you're seeing if you had to de-focus one of the projectors.

[Stephen Williams]

You know perfectly well I didn't say that, and you also know perfectly well that there are many more options in the world than "DoP who works exclusively on other people's projects" and "hobby filmmaker".

 

It's entertaining that so many people in this forum refuse to even acknowledge the existence of certain business models.

 

 

 

So, let me get this straight... because the Red One is pro gear rather than semi-pro gear, you expect it to rent for less money? Not just a lower percentage, apparently, but fewer dollars per day?

 

You used to be one of the more open-minded posters in this forum, it's pretty clear that at this point, you're simply trolling. I don't appreciate having my time wasted by people with no interest in substantive discussion.

 

Hi Chris,

 

You did not say it, I did because I have a sense of humor, you will find it's very useful in this business .

 

I accept that many people have a business model, the majority of businesses fail within 4 years so there is nothing revolutionary in that. I know many people who have left the buisiness as they could not make enough money. I left once for 4 months but returned, I fould working in an office rather boring.

 

Thanks for the compliment, having a different point of view makes for interesting discussion rather than trolling. Sorry if you feel your time has been wasted, after 29 years in the business I am still learning new things every day. In 1988 I stopped shooting film when video took over. My carear only took off when I dumped video for film. I made the biggest mistake in my carear aged 26 because of hyped new technology.

 

My best,

 

Stephen

[Brian Drysdale]

Brian,

 

I realize that DV and DVCAM are identical in terms of compression. But there are still big differences between a 570 and PD150 that go beyond chip size. Probably the most notable being the 570 will have a much nicer lens. And that, IMHO, is a lot of what you're seeing if you had to de-focus one of the projectors.

 

 

Absolutely, so why no rush to go out and buy DSR 570 cameras by the PD150 owners? I suspect the reason is cost and and the PD150 is a smaller and lighter camera.

 

The biggest impact for the smaller companies for the last ten years has been non linear editing in post and the reduction in costs in that sector. I'm not sure why this argument over business models has come up over a business model that has been around for some time.

 

In here people accept that you can go out and shooting with a camera on your own, a stripped down RED One is no worse than pretty well kitted out Digibeta camera, so no reason why you can't.

[Arni Heimir]

Hi,

 

In the last 29 years I have spent an awful lot of money on equipmet, I would be far richer today if I had never bought any equipment. I make my money as a DOP, I am happy to let others rent equipment. At the moment Red owners are getting a great rental rate, that will change with 4000 cameras in the market, then bodys will rent for $1-200 a day.

 

Stephen

 

Yeah I think you just hit the nail right on the head. I think that RED is great value for money. Maybe the D-21 and the Genesis are better cameras. But you get a really good image for a quarter or a third of the price.

[Chris Kenny]

Absolutely, so why no rush to go out and buy DSR 570 cameras by the PD150 owners? I suspect the reason is cost and and the PD150 is a smaller and lighter camera.

 

I still think Red offers more of a distinction vs. prosumer cameras than something like the DSR 570 did, because it's not just a higher-end ENG camera.

 

The biggest impact for the smaller companies for the last ten years has been non linear editing in post and the reduction in costs in that sector. I'm not sure why this argument over business models has come up over a business model that has been around for some time.

 

Yes, exactly. I've pointed this out explicitly here in the past. Many of the owner-operators and/or small production companies buying the Red are in markets where if they'd bought e.g. HPX500 packages, nobody would think anything much of it. So it's a bit strange that this forum is constantly full of claims that it never makes any sense to buy equipment. I think again that this is a result of some people in this forum misunderstanding who many of Red's customers are and what they're trying to do.

[Stephen Williams]

I still think Red offers more of a distinction vs. prosumer cameras than something like the DSR 570 did, because it's not just a higher-end ENG camera.

 

 

 

Yes, exactly. I've pointed this out explicitly here in the past. Many of the owner-operators and/or small production companies buying the Red are in markets where if they'd bought e.g. HPX500 packages, nobody would think anything much of it. So it's a bit strange that this forum is constantly full of claims that it never makes any sense to buy equipment. I think again that this is a result of some people in this forum misunderstanding who many of Red's customers are and what they're trying to do.

 

Hi Chris,

 

I am not sure many producers will pay more than they want to spend just to use a new Red One camera.

I suspect the biggest thorn in Red One owners rental plans will be Scarlet. So much camera for very little money, should be good enough for TV aplications, it even comes with a lens for a lens $3000. How are you going to manage to compete with that?

 

Stephen

[Brian Drysdale]

I still think Red offers more of a distinction vs. prosumer cameras than something like the DSR 570 did, because it's not just a higher-end ENG camera.

 

I don't think your average TV producer will see any difference. The budget is what drives most of them, the smaller cameras allowed(s) more shooting days for documentary producers, plus using researchers to shoot at least part of programmes.

 

The Scarlet or even a hacked 3rd party Scarlet with interchangeable 16mm film lenses would be of more interest - never mind the EX1 or EX3 (if up to spec for the commissioning channel).

[Chris Kenny]

There's little doubt that Scarlet is going to be very interesting to a lot of people. But again, I think one has to keep in mind that the market for digital cinematography cameras is not a fixed size. We've already seen that. I think many traditional vendors who moved into this market (Sony, Arri, etc.) viewed it as an inherently very small market, and so they marketed high-cost/low-volume cameras. Then Red came along and took 4000 orders....

 

So, is the Scarlet going to undermine interest in the Red One? Or is the Scarlet going to expand the range of people using digital cinematography cameras rather than video cameras (I put Scarlet in the former category because of recording format and workflow), and possibly result in more interest in the Red One because the Red One, instead of being a system that few people are familiar with, instead becomes a natural upgrade option from a system that's very widely used?

 

I could really see it going either way.

[Brian Drysdale]

There's little doubt that Scarlet is going to be very interesting to a lot of people. But again, I think one has to keep in mind that the market for digital cinematography cameras is not a fixed size. We've already seen that. I think many traditional vendors who moved into this market (Sony, Arri, etc.) viewed it as an inherently very small market, and so they marketed high-cost/low-volume cameras. Then Red came along and took 4000 orders....

 

So, is the Scarlet going to undermine interest in the Red One? Or is the Scarlet going to expand the range of people using digital cinematography cameras rather than video cameras (I put Scarlet in the former category because of recording format and workflow), and possibly result in more interest in the Red One because the Red One, instead of being a system that few people are familiar with, instead becomes a natural upgrade option from a system that's very widely used?

 

I could really see it going either way.

 

 

I'm not sure you can make distinctions between high end video cameras like F23 or even the F900 and what are being termed data cameras (like the RED and SI-2k) by only calling the latter digital cinematography, both sets of cameras are covered by the term. People could start debating if the RED is a video camera (is the Viper recording to Filmstream a video camera?) or is it something else?

 

The largest market is the broadcast and other TV markets, with the vast majority of productions not needing 35mm sensors. I doubt there's a need to upgrade to a camera which is a lot larger and heaver. The real move up is a Kinetta sized camera rather than a RED One.

[Stephen Williams]

The real move up is a Kinetta sized camera rather than a RED One.

 

Hi Brian,

 

I need a small high quality camera soon, Scarlet seems to fit the bill. I hope this does not sound like a fanboy post.

 

Stephen

[Brian Drysdale]

Hi Brian,

 

I need a small high quality camera soon, Scarlet seems to fit the bill. I hope this does not sound like a fanboy post.

 

Stephen

 

Hi Stephen,

 

The Scarlet does look like it could be a good piece of kit, a sort of digital Canon Scoopic, rather than Bolex. The yet unseen accessories will be key to its ease of use.

 

Although, I suppose it does depend if your "soon" and RED's time scales match up.

 

LOL I think you only become a fanboy if you're blind to everything thing else.

 

Brian

[John Sprung]

The largest market is the broadcast and other TV markets, with the vast majority of productions not needing 35mm sensors.

Big chips are good for the hour dramas and MOW's. We have some on Genesis. The sitcoms are better off with 2/3" because the focus pulls are less critical.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Brian Drysdale]

Big chips are good for the hour dramas and MOW's. We have some on Genesis. The sitcoms are better off with 2/3" because the focus pulls are less critical.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

 

2/3" is also better for documentary and er... all those reality programmes.