Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 4, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 What I was actually going to say was: Any camera that shoots HDCAM will destroy a RAW camera Well, perhaps you should make a real "RAW" camera, and then we'll all be able to find out! Oh, the wit of me. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted February 4, 2010 Author Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 I did? When? Where?... I believe you are thinking of someone else.... I do have a common last name so this often happens :lol: I imagined there might be a story nto tell! but don't most of the DV users now shoot RED? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Rakoczy Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 I wouldn't know... I am a FILM ONLY guy! :P *I now see your pun... very funny Stephen! :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted February 4, 2010 Author Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 I think Jim I have a right to point out the un-called for nature of what I was called on Red User.net, and that it was never deleted or moderated by the staff there. That's all I'm commenting on. R, Hi Richard, Interestingly I have been insulted by both Jarred & Jason, however both threads were cleaned up within 15 minutes. The last communication I had received from Jarred, Jason or Jim before my ban were extremely friendly, so Jarred's actions were a little hasty IMO, I always thought we had a gentleman's agreement that nobody would do anything stupid. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted February 4, 2010 Author Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 What I was actually going to say was: Well, perhaps you should make a real "RAW" camera, and then we'll all be able to find out! Oh, the wit of me. P Phil, Did you hear about Red's new colour science? Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 (edited) Saul... we are so worried about what Canon is releasing that we are folding the company and I am moving to Fiji in shame. Although Canon has not announced what you proposed, I am quite sure that we are doomed no matter what they really do release, line-skipping and all. All our work to provide a valid option to the industry has turned to ashes it seems. Stephen has acknowledged that the the M-X sensor is something he would shoot... but alas, he will never get the opportunity. Any camera that shoots HDCAM will destroy a RAW camera. HDCAM is the industry standard... no question about it. REDCODE RAW really has no place in the industry. Keith... it is certainly great to see you posting again. I just wish we could stay around a bit longer so your valuable input could have been implemented into our program. Phil… your posts are so inspiring. I wish I was starting over so I could connect better with you. You are an inspiration that I obviously missed the 1st time around. Richard... I'm sorry that our personal emails meant nothing. I wasn't prepared for this. Well... farewell. It was a good ride while it lasted. Jim Cute. It seems Jim has decided to let sarcasm be the only way to respond anything that his company's involved in. Apparently, (and this is supported by Stephen Williams' banishment from the Red User site) the only way to question Red's moves is by not doing so and appearing like a groveling fan boy at every step of the way. To be sure RED has done some good things, but its refusal to address some other camera problems --like the stubborn refusal to use anything but the heavily-compressed RED "RAW" code (and QT proxies) as native recording codec -- warrant asking hard questions. Questions that are not welcome, apparently. "Kiddies, daddy knows best, so ask no questions, or else." Edited February 4, 2010 by Saul Rodgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Lowe Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 Any time Jim tangles with Keith and Phil here, it's pure entertainment gold, from my point of view. See Stephen, I told you that you'd be back in action soon! :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Paul Bruening Posted February 4, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted February 4, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 Jim, no offense at all intended, but comments such as those are what I mean by alienating people. You need us customers a lot more than we need RED, and I think that's something often over-looked especially with many venomous remarks I've seen on reduser/scarletuser (which keep me from posting anything there despite having an account). Simple fact is you make a camera. It's a nice camera, but it's a product, and while of course we expect the company to back up and believe in its product, you need a certain amount of separation from the product in order to keep your sanity; same as we as DoPs sometimes need to back off from our images and understand that we are making something for other people as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Sprung Posted February 4, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 I would wonder if RED would still be around in 2012. I could see Sony or some other industry giant buying them outright, .... One huge problem with that: Nobody can buy Red outright unless Jim Jannard is willing to sell. He has plenty of money, he enjoys having the Red company, so why would he say yes? -- J.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted February 4, 2010 Author Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 Any time Jim tangles with Keith and Phil here, it's pure entertainment gold, from my point of view. See Stephen, I told you that you'd be back in action soon! :lol: Hi Tom, To be honest it's a lot more fun posting here. Best Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted February 4, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 Eh wot :blink: Jim, I wasn't criticizing RED here, in an earlier post on this thread I said, on a personal level you where a good guy. Did you not see that post. I think Jim I have a right to point out the un-called for nature of what I was called on Red User.net, and that it was never deleted or moderated by the staff there. That's all I'm commenting on. R, I'm very much afraid Mr Jannard suffers from some of the same maladies as the cheapo cameras he so eloquently derides: line skipping and generating spurious artifacts. For example, the word "Scam" . But that's always been the case; criticism of the loonier Fanboy Fringe is somehow interpreted as an attack on himself. And on that subject, whatever happened to Jan von Krogh? His last post on Reduser was in September last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted February 4, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 4, 2010 Phil,Did you hear about Red's new colour science? Stephen Is this a new vaudeville routine...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 One huge problem with that: Nobody can buy Red outright unless Jim Jannard is willing to sell. He has plenty of money, he enjoys having the Red company, so why would he say yes? -- J.S. True. But he did sell Oakley, so I am sure there is a price that would tickle him to give up RED. Don't know that anyone else would give it that much tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Hunter Hampton Posted February 5, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 5, 2010 That is strange you were banned like that Steven. Not trying to be an butt towards reduser as I like some of the resources on there, but I think there may be a concentration of (I really dont know a nice way to say it) "cinemagraptohically-retarded" members and you could have been be hurting Red's online market as being one to question and push them towards something better- I mean isnt that one of the jobs of a cinematographer is to bitch about products that need to be improved? Reduser is a strange place though, For instance a while back someone posted a thread about a super16 test film I made and people started throwing all sorts of insults at me when they didnt even know the first thing about me and they didnt even know I was present on the forum- just because I wanted to shoot some stuff on super 16 over Red. Weird... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Reduser is a strange place though, For instance a while back someone posted a thread about a super16 test film I made and people started throwing all sorts of insults at me when they didnt even know the first thing about me and they didnt even know I was present on the forum- just because I wanted to shoot some stuff on super 16 over Red. Weird... It's a very different group. Most of the guys there are doing a lot of corporate and industrial type of stuff. The vast bulk is non broadcast and non-narrative. They've already called me a "f---k stick", what can they call me worse than that? So why should I care at this stage? R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Webb Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'm very much afraid Mr Jannard suffers from some of the same maladies as the cheapo cameras he so eloquently derides: line skipping and generating spurious artifacts.For example, the word "Scam" :lol: Oh my gawd you guys are hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 (edited) It's a very different group. Most of the guys there are doing a lot of corporate and industrial type of stuff. The vast bulk is non broadcast and non-narrative. I do have to say, I just watched a 35mm print of Lars Von Trier's Anti Christ, shot on RED and Phantom by Anthony Dod Mantle, and the picture blew me away. I would dare go further and call it top contender for Oscar cinematography award, IMHO. Not that I was expecting anything less from Mr Mantle, mind you. Of course, any gifted cinematography can achieve great looking images on any format, be it 8mm or DV. Still, the RED pictures are the best I have seen from that camera so far (not so video-sharp as other RED features, tons of dynamic range, lots of detail in the highlights, etc), and the Phantom hi-speed footage is breathtakingly gorgeous. So credit where credit is due: RED camera is certainly proving itself more than capable to produce top notch cinematography in the right hands. Edited February 5, 2010 by Saul Rodgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted February 5, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 5, 2010 So credit where credit is due: RED camera is certainly proving itself more than capable to produce top notch cinematography in the right hands. I don't think anybody has any argument with that. It's just that vast majority of RED Ones do not seem to be in the right hands... If you assume it has the exposure range of a 1988 SP Betacam, you will get stunning images. Lots of stunning video was shot on SP Betacam. By people who knew what they were doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted February 5, 2010 Author Premium Member Share Posted February 5, 2010 I don't think anybody has any argument with that.It's just that vast majority of RED Ones do not seem to be in the right hands... If you assume it has the exposure range of a 1988 SP Betacam, you will get stunning images. Lots of stunning video was shot on SP Betacam. By people who knew what they were doing. Dynamic Range claims were where I originally fell out with Jim here all those years ago, the original sensor was supposed to have a greater range than a Viper. The new MX sensor probably does, it's just not included in the original sale price of $17,500. If you buy a new camera today you still have to pay for the upgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Of course, any gifted cinematography can achieve great looking images on any format, be it 8mm or DV. Late edit. Should read: Of course, any gifted cinematographer can achieve great looking images on any format, be it 8mm or DV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted February 5, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted February 5, 2010 Late edit. Should read: Of course, any gifted cinematographer can achieve great looking images on any format, be it 8mm or DV. Kind of reminds me of an ACS (Australian Cinematogrophers Society) awards night where the token celebrity/MC was a prominent Sydney newsreader, who made a long and gushing speech about his lifelong fascination with the art of cinematography and the "cinemaphotographers" who had made his job possible over the years. After using the expression "cinemaphotographers" countless times he must have begun to wonder what everyone was smirking about. I've never heard a news cameraman called anything but a news cameraman myself, but maybe he thought he should make the effort to use the correct terminology :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted February 5, 2010 Author Premium Member Share Posted February 5, 2010 Late edit. Should read: Of course, any gifted cinematographer can achieve great looking images on any format, be it 8mm or DV. Most people on REDUSER don't believe you, and there lies the problem. Buying the $17,500 wonder camera that Peter Jackson uses is believed to be a shortcut. Interestingly the other cameras forum got removed as it became clear that cameras such as a Canon 5D MK II could also produce awesome images even with line skipping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I've never heard a news cameraman called anything but a news cameraman myself, but maybe he thought he should make the effort to use the correct terminology :rolleyes: Interesting. In the US, news video cameramen are referred to in a lot of news stations as "photographers." My correction was simply because I put cinematography when referring to cinematographers, like a dumb ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevie wara Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 That is strange you were banned like that Steven. Not trying to be an butt towards reduser as I like some of the resources on there, but I think there may be a concentration of (I really dont know a nice way to say it) "cinemagraptohically-retarded" members and you could have been be hurting Red's online market as being one to question and push them towards something better- I mean isnt that one of the jobs of a cinematographer is to bitch about products that need to be improved? "cinemagraptohically"??? Is that really a word? I can't find it anywhere. Is this an industry in-phrase reserved for real DPs? Why "bitch" about unnecessary products that need to be improved. Why not just shoot with something that is already superior? I would hope that film could survive indefinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts