jan von krogh

Which does have certain advantages, doesn't it? It certainly eliminates the fact that everyone and their grandmother publicly voices their opinion, which in the case of this 8000Asa shot can only be unconclusive since you really need several seconds of full res images to fully evaluate what it looks like. But then again any publicity is good publicity as they say.

To -fully- evaluate the quality one would need a sequence of uncompressed 4k or higher 2540p RAW images.

However, the 8000 shots @1k can already be used for a comparision to a Kodak Vision or Sony 750/900, as grain/noise at 8000 would be pretty problematic with film/sony hd already at 1K in a still.

OK so here is a 720 pixel x 576 pixel zone plate, specifically engineered to test DVD players and TV set chroma decoders. This is just a "scale model" that can be transmitted over the Internet!!

Hello Werner,

if you use a vector-based sourceimage, as "svg", "ai", "pdf" or "eps", your testchart will become resolution-independent and pretty small: some kilobytes for a 10.000*10.000 image, so you could share also hiresolution versions on the internet. Just make sure that the displaying renderer isn´t using antialiasing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svg

BTW If anybody could tell me how I might divert a USB signal meant to go to an inkjet into a bitmap file instead, I could supply the graphic on a CD-ROM. There is then a good chance that a graphics bureau with an A0 printer might be able to run off copies. (But not all those big printers have much resolution, a lot of them print out as though you took an A4 copy and enlarged it!)

A good solution for this problem is using open-source or freeware postscript/acrobat printer drivers as pdf95 or ghostscript.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostscript

The printer - and its rasterizing method - are indeed critical. Best thing would probably also be feeding the printer with a vectorbased version of your testchart.

We usually don´t use printers for testcharts, but do record them with a linotronic.

And who are you to respond to me anyway? Did I ask you? No. Please keep your unfounded, arrogant attitude to yourself.

Mr. Thompson, i suppose that you missed the purpose of a internet discussion board a bit.

And, if i may add, your manners leave as much room to be enhanced as your basic knowledge of the red workflow.

And you missed the point about the LCD question.

You are wrong.

The answer, as posted before, is the downconverter.

If you shouldn´t know what these devices do:

They convert the HD-SDI output into FBAS/YUV/YcbCr/SDI/YC etc SD signals.

Size from matchbox to 1/2 inch tape, price from $$$ to $$.$$$.

The more I think about it, the more I like my Aaton, once again, with it's optical viewfinder and it's inability to let noses pry into MY images.

Obvious.

arri, panavision and sony didn´t release testshots of the D20, Genesis and 750/900R/950/23. I am not sure of Thomson/GV and Dalsa for the Viper and the Origin.

S.I. and RED did. I think that a good trend. RED posted fullscale 4K images months ago. They posted 100% resolution crops of the new high-asa shots as well.

Thanks Michael and nice work on the diagrams! Let me ask you this since you seem to know a lot about it, and excuse me if it's in those links and I'm not seeing it.

many good threads are on the reduser forum. takes certainly many hours to find em all.

For example, most shoots are going to realistically shoot with an HD or maybe a 2K workflow.

fully possible - however you can shoot at 4k redcode raw and then -later- convert that in post.

FCP, as example, converts 4k redcode raw on the fly to 2k.

So in several scenarios , it might be agood idea to reduce the quality to 2k later on, not already in the camera.

If that's the case, would one of my Zeiss Super16 primes be the most practical lens to use for a good while since, in it's 2K form, the RED is using a windowed S16mm sized portion of it's sensor?

different possibilities. with the zeiss super16 primes (we also have them on our rental) you will have a good lens (especially with the 1.2/3) for

- 120P highspeed. 2K can do that, 4K can "only" do 60p.

- deeper DOF

Or would many productions want 35mm lenses to cover the whole sensor because they'll want to scale down the 4K image to a 2K file? Or is that possible on camera?

Both is possible: 4k downscale to 2k in post or in cmera. However, be aware, for 4k you will need 35 glass. And using 4k downscaled offers better quality, without going into the details of debayering and lo/hipassfilters, you can expect a lower grain, ehhh, noise-level as well as a slightly better sensor readout overall. Oversampling is the keyword here.

I'm curious as it almost seems like the big 4K sensor is sort of a gimmik at this point.

I disagree.

Even if you don´t distribute 4k later, 4k offers many benefits even for todays typical 2k/1080p 35mm film DI/HD workflow.

- pan & scan. if the mic is visible, just scale it out. with 2k for 2k, you will lose quality, with 4k to 2k, well you can zoom in 200% and its still pixel by pixel.

- anarmophotic/cinemascope. nuff said :)

- for any kind of vfx or dophisticated postproduction, you can´t have enough image data - keying, tracking, rotoscoping etc.

- for colorcorrection and/or degrain/noise, higher resolution is a bleesing. you can easily degrain/denoise from 4k to 2k, from 2k to 2k its harder, if you don´t want to sacrifice resolution.

- smaller noise footprint. this also helps in staying clear off posterisations when grading footage a little bit more extreme

- and finally: 35mm dof - if you want 35mm dof, you will need the total sensor readout, and that is 4k, or slightly above to be precise.

Even new digital theaters are only able to project at 2K and it will be that way for a long time.

This topic is quite interesting, however i won´t go into it with much detail. Yes, most digital and 35mm recording is done at 2k. And yes, i suppose that 4k will take quite a time until it becomes the mayority. Besides the advantages of shooting 4k listed above, there is one thing worth considering:

- your master will always be reduced in quality in distribution.

35mm projection MTF in your average cinema is slightly below 2k. However, when you record your master in 2k, it will most certainly go through i/P i/n processes until it arrives at the cinema. So, the distribution copy will be quite a bit below 2k, even when the master has been recorded in 2k, thus becoming slowly the bottleneck. So, recording 4k might be, especially for 35mm filmout, be the better route to go.

And, how do I monitor with a non-HD LCD screen? Can I still use a normal 16:9 LCD to frame with? I ask because the outputs dont seem to include a video-out (BNC, S-video?). Also, how do we transmit an image for a director to watch or for remote mounting if there are no NTSC/PAL video outs? Is my VHF/UHF video transmitter useless now because it won't plug into it's HD connectors? Will I need some conversion box inline now?

As it seems, you will need a downconverter to use NTSC/PAL gear. AJA, just to name one manufacturer, offers compact and inexpensive downcownverters.

We however won´t recommend to monitor at 0.35MP PAL/NTSC - the risk of missing focus issues, tiny reflection etc seems pretty high. there are several good hd-lcds and even better hd-crts.

for the directors monitor etc, you can also consider using HDMI if you can use consumer equipment.

You should ask the forum "bosses" over there to lock the thread next time you post facts. Everytime someone works to explain something, fanboys go crazy with "hey i love that button and red is jesus... i cant wait to start shooting my actorless, setless, proless, film with it! one day there will be a picture of me standing beside my red with me pointing somewhere and finally looking like somebody... yeehoo!" ETC. ETC.

:lol:

No pun intended - several of the fans have certainly a quite higher knowledge than you regarding the red camera and its workflow, so it might be worth considering just asking polite question and you will probably get polite answers. furthermore, on peak times there are several thousands users online at reduser, and some houndreds in normal days. i suppose you would be able to find many qualified people among them.

Don't forget, Aaton, S.G., and others may rob your market over the next few years if you aren't careful.

i suppose aaton & S.I. together wouldn´t be unhappy with 2000 camera units on order.

Werner has a point, you want to sell the Red, right?

There are 100% crops on reduser.net, however not in the iso8000 thread i linked.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/5_1184475989.jpg

shows a comparison between 5218(320) and red(2000) in full scale. i suppose you must be logged in in the forum in order to see the link.

however, the on-line shots will only be previews. the original raw-images a) contain much more information and B) don´t use several layers of datareduction.

Werner, Phil, relax... soon you will be able to rent a red a to check it for yourself.

Also, these camera then won´t be prototypes.

It seems that the ISO8000 and ISO16000 shots have been done with the "Acapulco" testcameras, which Mark Neveldine recently used.

Purchasing a film camera effectively future-proofs me. My Filmo produces better results today than it did when it was made, because of the leaps in lens technology and the leaps in film technology. While you can get better lenses for the Red in the future in theory, the camera will be unable to take advantage of them as the system remains the same. No magically more dense pixel array. No better color fidelity. It comes from the factory as good as it will ever be. With a film camera, the future is wide open. New filmstocks give you new options for the same old camera that might occupy a back shelf of your closet.

Surely you missed that the Red One camera (just as example) is modular and upgradeable. That includes the sensor, which, without any doubt isn´t a 16mm, but a 35mm challenger at least.

Just have a look at red at iso8000, no mistyping, 8000, not 800:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3215

Regarding the bright future and evolution of filmnegatives and stock:

"Soon, I'm not going to be answering questions about film because I won't know. It will be too small for me to get involved."

Antonio Perez, CEO Kodak.

Bottomline is: If you are interested in a brandnew 16 or a upgraded 16mm - wait.

If Red is such a sucess as some expect, 16mm cameras will quite a bit drop in price, and a red kit might be wort considering.

If red fails, 16mm prices won´t change too much.

Now that one month gap between 'prototype' and 'production model' seems so short to me that I think they just called his camera 'prototypes' so that none of the reservation holders would get upset that he was allowed to jump the queue.

As a reservation holder, i do appreciate that the directors

Steven Soderbergh (Oceans 11)

Timur Bekmambetow (Nightwatch)

Peter Jackson (Lord of the Rings)

Mark Neveldine (Crank)

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3209

are volunteers for the beta test. Besides, it gives good namedrops and marketing, which again are helpful on the ROI on the Red Cameras for us.

With a little luck, ROI might be less than 6 months. And having 6 months ROI on 2 camera units is, besides brilliant images, what is interesting to us.

i would recommend to wait some months, if possible.

one important reason is that the introduction of red might change the 16mm camera pricing.

the prices on 16mm will not raise to much. however, if red starts delivering ~700 cameras a month you might be able to find a better deal for 16mm gear.

The manufacturer of the Red one published today images shot with the camera at ISO8000, lit with tungsten.

As i am not sure if it is legal to post the images here i provide a link to the images.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3215

Hi Jim,

 

I was trying to quantify what you meant by "so many high profile cinematographer's"

 

Stephen

Hi Stephen. I am not sure if you want to go the money-route 101...

however (i am mid 30) i do own $.$$$.$$$. camera & lenses.

financed only by the biz they did.

I have placed 2 orders for the red cameras.

i wish i would have more.

ludwig in munich has extended its order to 10 red one cameras, it seems.

if you want to go the artistic route, i would like to add that i rather do longform. sometimes even as producer.

you seem to prefer shortform & commercials, don´t you?

so, lets go to the "high profile cinematographers"-topic which you raised.

as an individual mid 30 guy, i am not certain how i should classify myself.

maybe the recents new york film festivals (only silver btw, to narrow down the search) or the documenta 1992 might be helpful.

if you insist to help out, my -rather artistic- insight into filmmaking is certainly not able to fullfill your (and all of the 8posters remaining here) requirements necessary allowance to shoot...

---

--- highly succesful

--- well shot

--- interesting movies.

so, let me apologize to have been any disturbance in the realm of your....

"high end" whatever.

btw. if you really need (or want) to learn how to operate a red camera in 2007, as a dp, i might be a fruitul ressource.

if this is a emotional discussion only, then please spare me.

if you prefer to use inferior proven products (as we do), then shoot on on the viper.

but don´t complain or get to emotional on the red hoax. ok?

btw - if you need a cheaper thomson viper or sony hdcam, combined with zeiss primes or angenieux lenses, my small shop in berlin might be a ressource for your shooting. but lets assume that price/performace or imagequality isn´t your paramount.

so it seems that we are certainly not the right, how did you type, "high-profile" shop for your needs.

we only focus on film & image quality.

i didn´t had the impression, that image quality is the main interest for some of the few remaining posters on the digital side of the board.

"crank" is another interesting example for creating new cinematic looks who use lots of digital styles. also "apocalypto" has some quite wild shots.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0479884/

Your posts lead me to believe that you are very much a small business owner or surely more of a business technician than film guy.

Hello Adam,

quite interesting from the production POV that you see these aspects as contradictions.

Mastering the artistic, technological and economic aspects of a production is what makes a good director/producer, imho.

If you want to know more, have a search in the d20 forum, i just recently posted there what kind of stuff we are doing and where we came from.

I'm involved with two projects in development by two different feature directors. One of them is a knowledge machine, knowing easily as much as I do about photography but encouraging risk, with an eye for really creating mood and environment with all heads of production. I'm helping him in various ways and will probably end up as an operator/AC on his show as there's a more commercially exp. DP on board. The other guy knows very little, if anything at all, about film, coming from the DV world, and only wants to get another movie under his belt to put onto the legitimate DVD market. I'm the DP on his. The thing they both have in common is wanting 16mm to be their medium.

without knowing the scripts - they probably both would get a proposal of hdcam or uncompressed 1080p from me, if i would be interested in the productions at this moment in time.

~ august/sept we would offer red if the different DOF makes sense to them, or red with our s16 glass.

if they still would be interested to use s16mm instead of uncompressed 1080 or red, i would probably try to understand why, arrange a 1080p->s16 look session in the DI and then decide upon their reaction, if i want to participate.

So if he came to you and you tried to tell him how stupid it was to shoot on S16, do you think you'd have any of his business, ever? No way. The 'just get it done' director might come to you and not be able to compete with your tech talk, but his Producer's rep surely knows more than you do about his project's needs.

its no only tech talk, adam. technology is always a source of good creativity, but never is its origin.

our basic approach is usually to give such projects 2-3 days for testshooting & DI. thats the creative part.

some wanted to stay 35mm instead of 1080, none s16 so far - since 2002.

then -money talks. thats the biz part. if i am really eager to get into a movie, i´ll accept most things, s16 being a side issue.

if i am only interested, then i do my pondering and so far opted out on all the s16 longform projects we could have been participating in the recent years.

with short form, i couldn´t care less. we have a s16 zeiss 1.2 primesset, s16 cameras are cheap to rent and if its shortform the stock isn´t so problematic.

Who are you to argue with either guy?

usually i don´t argue. i am interested or not.

furthermore, you don´t start conservations in the restaurant while the production meetings with a formal "Who are you to argue with us", but rather with smalltalk.

You'd just end up hurting or confusing the 'just get it done' guy and you'd end up looking really, really ignorant trying to talk film vs. video with the other guy. Either way, you'd not do any $$ with either one, ever again.

gronk. you mean "boddington" him?

however, i suppose you don´t understand how we do our productions.

usually it takes 6 months to 2 years until a production is prepared, financed, casted, dp & director are choosen etc.

especially when we put our money in a production, i try to be quite selective about the inner circle of a team.

if we do a co-production, partnership and trust is paramount.

if its only rental, the guys might be interested in our zeiss s16 1.2 primeset, but its pretty uncommon that they rent from us them, as in most rentals, the house who rents the camera then asks us & offers the lenses under their name to the customer - and that won´t be our company if its s16 shooting.

So good luck with that.

thank you very much. our Di suites and cameras are booked well, the recent projects are sold and we do have nice scripts in the pipeline, so a little luck wouldn´t hurt.

Thank God for Hd-SDI.

yeah, hd-sdi was one of our main reasons to go 750 instead ot the 900/2 & /3.

the new 900/r has integrated hd-sdi as well, the 900/1/2/3 only had component.

btw - i don´t know that, are the converters (as miranda etc) meanwhile able to get hd-sdi out of the old 900 camera, or do they retransform yuv to hd-sdi?

If you're recording to the internal recorder rather than out to SR or disk it would be better to apply a look to the image before it hit the 8-bit HDCAM recorder.

900 & 750 both have limits when you use the multimatrix and gamma, so i wouldn´t recommend to use the camera functions to much if you can grade later on.

boosting black gamma boosts noise as well, while in post you can use a lowkey with a lumadependent noise reduction - just as an example.

however, steve mcnutt uses the 900 to generate his look all the time and he shoots some pretty neat stuff, if you ask me.

F900 still has a 12 bit A/D as opposed to a 10 bit one on the 750.

sonys HDV have even 14 bit A/D. this a little bit misleading, as the limit is in the media (hdcam 8 bit) or interface (hd-sdi 10 bit), not in the camera.

you won´t get 12 bit precision out of a 900, as you won´t get 14bit out of HDV.

you get 8 or 10.

if you do in camera color"grading", then the 12 bit are better, but you really have to push the paint menu to the extremes to get any benefits, for basic correction you don´t get any differences.

we measured it, doublechecked everything before deciding between 750/900 and the differences become visible only if you go to the last ~15% of a few settings which in realworld is certainly a rare exception.

if you want to see the 10bit "crap" out, go to the black gamma, set it to high, and boost it to the max. at settings >+90 you will begin to see the slight differences on a class 1, at >=+95 the 900 will have a slight little bit more lumaresolution.

so, bottomline:

for galactica etc, on set grading etc the 12bit are of advantage.

we, however, usually prepare several finetuned settings (3-10 looks, for interior, night, sun etc) for every feature and don´t alter them to have consistent looks for the whole movie - and record straight 10bit A/D->10bit to disc via hdsdi for the grading. We prefer this workflow over 12bit A/D->incamera grade->8bit tape.

However in the USA, different from the EU, the 750 is a non-starter for cinema, as the US-750 (and 790) don´t do 25p, but 29.98, so there the 900 is paramount.

back to red and Viper and D20 - the RAW workflow gives much better control over all the different digital stages of the shot, but it requires another step in the post, the, lets nickname it, "digital lab".

for several productions however we will use the red directly to 2k 10bit duallinked hd-sdi without raw, as that is clearly faster to produce, and good enough for many scenarios.

Hi Brian,

 

He only has 750's, told me in a previous thread that they are just as good as a 900. I asked if he was using Digital Praxis gamma curves when comparing the cameras, & got no answer!

 

Stephen

hello steven, we skipped the old 900, even as it would have been ~10.000$ cheaper than the, back then, new 750 fully loaded.

FYI 750 & 900 have the same optical system & sensors.

for the reasons why we choose the 750 over of the back then cheaper 900/2/3 please see my previous post.

ps.

no offense, but you are aware that hdcam is a 8 bit format?

we will use our 2 reds with our "classic" zeiss 1.2 primeset, our 1994' cooke primes and our 5 angenieux zooms, FWIW.

i hope they all pass the 4k CA challenge.

we´ll see.

i think the guy who is finding the sweet spot of the camera is more demanded as a dp than the one who breaks it.

All I can say is that if we all shut up and didn't talk about the RED for the next two years, I suspect that after the two-year mark we'd see that the RED has found a niche in production big & small, but other formats would still be considered by different filmmakers and producers regardless of their budget restraints.

that belongs into the 35mm vs/or/and digital forum :)

ok, no joking.

in germany they have a -tough- saying.

"the normative power of the facts".

we have >2.000 red cameras incoming in our industry.

within months.

so i hardly can follow any "niche" argumentation.

if they deliver -and i think meanwhile agree that this is no queston of "if", but rather of "when"" -

i would have -strong- objections for any s16 shooting, just from the production POV.

stopmotion / 3d animation isn´t a good comparision.

they both do fifferent things.

35mm digital sensor and 35mm stock don´t.

There is no such thing as film VS video. Film VS video threads are really 'my aesthetic VS your aesthetic' threads or they are economic, social or even (dare I say it) religious discussions rather than practical discussions on the relative strengths and weaknesses of a particular tool.

i agree on the artistic side. i disagree, however, from a producers pov and especially money&workflow-wise.

Unfortunately the fact that the RED is a 4K Bayer-filtered digital camera sort of means that it's meant to compete with film, not with typical broadcast video cameras, hence the constant comparisons. Over at the RED site, there is a number of posts with a "film is now dead" subtext (or primary text) -- it's just flipflopped here the other direction because as a general cinematography site, there are a lot more film shooters here.

agreed.

The RED forum should just be more heavily moderated. I think any posts that drift into a classic film vs. video tirade should get a warning from the moderator to discontinue that line of attack, as Geoff Boyle does on the CML (or the quote him "...not another f--king film vs. video argument!")

thats why i dont post on CML anymore - i -hate- censorship and at cml, i have to agree, its necessary.

The F900 went through this same controversy, because it was touted when it was released as a "film killer" by Sony, (who knows better now), and who can forget all the paranoid nonsense surrounding the Panavision Genesis before we started seeing it used on productions?

my humble opinion.

the sony hdcams/gv vipers/panavision genesis etc... were for me an -alternative- to film.

we bought, we shoot, we used them. and there were several situations where we used 35mm instead of digital.

red (and the certainly following cameras) are for me not an alternative.

they are (for me, just my producer/director/colorist opinion) the 1st cameras to actually make film obsolete.

bold statement. i know. however i think so. and for this discussion, we shouldn´t abuse the red-forum.

as this statement of mine will, and has to, make other people with other opinions write down their pov.

but that has not anything to do with the red one camera. its just a symbol for the other debate.

i am -really- ready to explain why i think we all will be shooting digital within 5-10 years for the huge mayority of our work. my opinion.

however, even if red delivers, i don´t want to base that on one particular camera - dozens of other cameras, 4, 8, 16, 32 MP will follow. because that is their product. not my opinion.

and this subforum has the awful tendency, as we just saw in the arri d20 forum, to mix these both -different- aspects all the time.

i can´t talk about red vs. d20, if i have to go into film vs. digital. i can´t talk about film vs. digital, if i have to go into red vs. millenium.

this subforum has become a mess due to these reasons. a -i suppose we can agree on that- outstanding camera system like the red one deserves better,

a proven camera system as the d20 deserves better as well. so, i recommend to split 2 topics into 2 forums.

Sure, we can create a "film vs. video" subforum for posts with pointless posturing, but I won't be reading them... It's a little like what someone once said that more people write poetry than read poetry. More people want to write film vs. video posts than want to read them.

for me (as i am spending $$$$.$$$ on film/and/or/digital cameras a year) this discussion has more than just artistic, "poetic" values.

i do appreciate your contributions, i do respect your experience - but when it comes down to business, its dollar time and its sad that we mix up those fully different, however not independent topics in this subforum all the time.

in every single thread.

cinematography.com deserves better.

i am constantly distracted by the always returning digital vs film subtones in, especially, the red forum.

its getting on my nerves - yes, i do have the opinion, that in a given amount of time most of us working digital. that is my -opinion-.

But that has nothing to do with the red camera.

The red may accelerate the translation i see happening, the red is a symbol for that, but besides that, its a excellent camera worth having a forum free of axegrinders.

so, how about a subforum "film and or against digital".

i personally am -tired- of being touted somewhone who is against film or haves a red agenda (hey, i have ONLY 35mm and hdcam to rent out & shoot on right now).

35mm started my career, i -LOVED- my first 35mm shots, i still own one arri 35b, and some of my best stuff is done on 35mm - however i think that film is almost done for me. but that isn´t a RED topic - that is a different discussion.

furthermore, i think it would be interesting to read this subforum - independent of products. And it would allow both sides open communication without speculation.

i think it makes sense to be detailed about the offer.

yes, it is a very good price for a very good cinematic and/or top-notch HD/SD TV production level.

this is why we invested back then in 2002/2003.

first of all, the package.

our standard gear usually consists out of:

Sony HDW 750 25P Camera

Sony HDVFC 30 Color viewfinder

Sony HKDW 702 Downconverter

Sony HKDW 705 Slowshutter

Sony BCM 150 Quadquickcharger

Sony BP-IL 75 LiIon Akku (4 units)

Sony ECM 88 Stereo Elektretmikro

Sony VCT Tripodadapter

Sony Transport hardcase

Portabrace HDW750CVF

Angenieux 7.8 (7.8-206mm) AIF HD F2.2, x2 extender

Angenieux 5.3 (5.3-53mm) AIF HD F2, x2 extender

Crosziel 4.5 / 3 Mattebox

15/19mm Support System

sony or maxell tapes, 40'.

options which we do have in house and add depending on the feature/doc and for $$/$$$.

9' and 14' and 20' Sony BVM (the 14/20 are class 1, the 9' is just a lcd, so don't use it for color)

tektronix vector/wave unit or hamlet 19' based computer based measurement.

follow focus etc, a variety of tripods (sachtler, manfrotto & vinten).

zeiss primeset

coliometer.

and important for feature & vfx, 2 uncompressed 10bit discrecorders.

thats the package we usually rent out for feature and docs >=15.000 euro for 30 days of shooting, if available.

included in the package can be furthermore timecode dups with digibeta, betasp and/or dvcam, dvd with or without tc-burnin

so we can (mostly) choose who we work with, and after 17 years of production & rental its usually the same clients.

when a script, director, dop or idea is interesting, we participate as co, exec or even as producers, if whished for/necessary.

the filmout is done typically at 2k.

as there are preferences (stock, type of filmrecorder, location etc) we do have 3 partners who do the filmout.

with the necessary uncompressed or even native online we usually charge >=15.000 euros here at well.

when the movie is rather niche or doesn´t have/find a distributor for filmrelease, we recommend to go digital cinema for >100 screens.

this shaves of another ~5K from the budget.

when both is booked (shooting & filmout) we offer a package deal for =<25.000$

fallback 750 camera can be booked, but costs additionally.

when DI or grading is ordered as well (now that is something which you can´t offer with fixed pricing) we apply extremly good prices for customers who can go standby and booked the shooting & filmout (usually 3-6 weeks until we have a 2-4 week slot free in the suites). area of 300-1000 euro, mainly depending on the booked colorist, instead of 1200-2000.

the studio is equipped with 2 1080p online systems, one native 1080p hdcam system, sonys flagship hdcam vtr (we won´t introduce sr however it seems) and 4 class 1 monitors.

so, this is our basic digital offering since 2003 - and we have done >100 masters since then. ranging from fulfeature over series over documentary over arts over installation.

the equipment is well maintained.

with this setup we usually do 3-4 productions features/docs a year, 2-4 specials (installations, event etc) and 5-10 commercials/corporate. thats typically 6-8 months.

in the remaining time (usually we are in post/negotiations etc then) we offer these packages - and that is exactly why we wanted to add digital.

so, lets go to 750/900.

when we bought the 750 we choosed it over the 900/2 back then.

would we be US-basing, we 100% had picked the 900.

we, however, are doing almost anything at 25p as in the Eu thats the most hasslefree framerate and you can easily can go 24p from 25p.

the 750 had an uncompressed hd-sdi out (900/2 hadn´t back then) which we needed for VFX/complex grading.

the 750 was lighter, what was important for steady & run'n'gun/drunken cam style - and our steadyguy instisted.

the 750 had a slowshutter (900/3 hasn´t) which we wanted for #1 creative options and #2 shooting in -extremly- dark situations

the 750 had a colorviewfinder (came out later for the 900/3, sony is bizarre sometimes)

the 750 hadn´t a fan and was almost noiseless (the 900/3 can be pretty loud sometimes)

the 750 had the the whole interfaces we needed, incl. downconverter options without having to attach 2 or 3 devices.

the 750 comsumed less energy (~-30%)

the 750 has a picturecacheboard (timelapse etc) which also was important for shooting stock.

this is why we choose the 750 instead of the 900/2/3. price btw, was slightly lower on the 900 than for the fully geared 750 including color vf.

meanwhile, the new 900/r (which is the 750 expanded) is the better camera. the 900/2/3 has better framerates and wasn´t the camera for us.

i was intrigued to the 900 as it came out. but as it was to loud, to heavy, hadn´t uncompressed out, had many creative option (slow/timelapse) missing, needed 2-3 additional devices, hadn´t a colorciewfinder etc - so i resisted.

to the bitdepth. hdcam is 8 bit.

not 10 or 12 or even 14.

the 900/R better bitdepth is -important- if you intend to grade incamera (->battlestar galactica)

when one (as we do) grades in the post, that isn´t important. hdcam is 8 bit to repeat it once more. 8 bit.

the 900/R today is better, but don´t let yourself be fooled by 12/10bit on a 8bit system.

back to the topic.

yes, we often rent out the camera & give the filmout deal in foreign countries.

so far we have had cuba, mauritius, south africa, kenia, egypt, turkey, spain, france... 16 countries if i am counting right.

but not us & japan, as they are ntsc and you´ll be better of with 24, 23.98 to be precise, fps . the 750 version in us/japan isn´t 25, btw, therefore succesfully blocking use for cinema.

with red we want to have a similar pricerange. much higher in the first 6-12months to earn on the buzz, lower than hdcam in 2008/9.

finally a good use for our 35mm optics again! our arri IIb (not BL, argh) is rarely in use anymore, but man, the lenses (angenieux zooms, cooke prime, both -6 years old).

p.s.

as i am talking money here, should that post be moved to classified?

Hi Jan,

That's really not an issue for many productions.

Hello Stephen.

ok, lets talk facts.

So you suppose that -money- is not a reason for A-budget?

Let me say that i really think you are leaving out (or missing) something here.

Money is, indeed, the only reason for A-budget.

The productions you are referring to (minute price $$$.$$$-$.$$$.$$$$) are often frequented by time, budget, workflow and quality-aware producers.

As a producer, you have to differentiate between necessary and unnecessary spending

They both are part of a budget. One part you want to get rid of. The other you don´t want to.

Was the same song in still fashion photography, btw.

many people thought "hey, putting up this catwalk is so expensive, nobody cares if i shoot film or digital", and were very vocal about this in 2000.

every little part of the machinery counts.

however, just my opinion & experience. i might be wrong. i don´t think so, but i might.

Until digital projection becomes the standard for cinema, the cheapest way to get a film on the silver screen will remain 35mm origination with a photochemical finish.

Stephen

different from the first statement (money isn´t an issue) - here you are wrong.

you are most welcome to book a shooting ratio 1:15 for a 2 hour drama with 4 weeks shooting on 2 lens systems & hdcam camera and 30 hours hdcam stock including 35mm filmout here for <25.000$.

i have the next 2 free slots in august, with a little luck in july, btw.

i would be interested how you calculate that on 35mm, even if you don´t do dailies and don´t telecine the 30 hours footage and plan to edit on moviola/steenbeck - online.

back to topic - in the mid-term (6-12 months), we want to hold that pricerange for 4k. And this is where, back to topic, red comes into the calculation.