Andrew Walker

Very true. Sometimes people are just unwilling to listen.

So the show has to be a hit for the camera to be worth anything right. That is some very interesting logic.

If I had their numbers I would.

I don't know what your talking about. RED hasn't run its course. Productions of all types are going to be shooting on it for years to come. I was just saying their customer service sucks and they really need to work on it.

I use to be one of RED's biggest supporters and I still love my Epic. But Jim needs to hire a PR person and just stop going on reduser or something. Personally I like Jim, at least the Jim I have met in person. Very polite and willing to listen to everyone. The problem is that when he's in front of a keyboard he does some really off hand things. The other problem that someone else stated here was that they have way too many moderators running around with the power to ban and make things disappear. RED also needs to stop dicking people around because its going to get so bad that no one is going to want to deal with them. Because at this rate they will piss off the wrong person and that will be the end of it, no matter how kickass their cameras are. RED is the only camera company that I know of that threatens their customers to shut up or they aren't going to even let them buy gear for their cameras they already have. I was told to shut up when RED was just sitting on my camera with all my money. When I kept asking where my camera was after they had my money for over a week I was told that I can be quiet or that I wouldn't get a camera. The biggest problem I see is that most of the Bomb Squad reps are completely in the dark as to what is going on. Why not tell them what is happening so that they might convey that info to the customers that they deal with day in and day out. Its a shame what happened to Phillip Bloom and his whole RED experience but it doesn't surprise me in the least bit. This kind of stuff has been going on for years. Its about time someone just said "**(obscenity removed)** it" and shed some light on what is going on.

I've seen some of "Great Gatsby" over at Warner Bros. projected in 3D off an Avid and I thought it looked pretty good. Of course the stuff I was seeing was in a very rough form but I still enjoyed watching it. Problem with watching 3D off the Avid currently is that each eye is only getting 1280x720. So there are all kinds of artifacts from this process. But still, even with all that it looks pretty cool.

Well the idea of shooting at higher resolutions beyond 1080p is so that in the future I don't have to go out and shoot the same shot over again. So, for me, shooting 4K, 5K and 5.6K works really well for me and the clients I works with. I understand that not everyone needs anything higher than 1080p...cool for them. But I know from tests that I have seen at Warner Bros., Disney and Fox that material shot at higher resolutions and then down converted to 2K look way better than material that was shot at 1080p. There is a noticeable and significant different between the two types of footage. Now is that to say that movies being shot at 1080p won't be watchable in 10, 20 or 50 years from now. Of course not. There are movies that have been shot almost 100 years ago that are completely watchable today. I don't think the argument is that movies shot at 1080p will be un-watchable in the future. I think its more that if you shoot at higher resolutions now the footage will be able to hold up longer against footage that will be shot in the future. Again, for me shooting at 1080p is a joke and I would never do it. Getty, Corbis and a couple other footage houses want 2K files. When I first started with Getty they were fine with 1080p. But now the times have changed and so has the demand. The idea is to be ahead of the curve. Not behind it or even in it. I would much rather my footage be selling for a very long time instead of not being sold because it isn't high enough resolution. Resolution matters and its going to matter more and more as digital projection moves to 4K and even home theater systems.

RED cameras are for some people, not all. For the projects I work on its great and worth the price. Those write ups about Scarlet are interesting but I think it was very smart of RED to do what they did for the specs of Scarlet. They gave us Epic owners enough of a gap between the two cameras to justify the price of the two. There are things I don't like about RED but its more about the way they conduct certain aspects of their business and not about their products. The fact is that the F3 isn't a 4K camera. Its a 1080p camera and it seems that format is on its way out. Does that mean that you can't get jobs anymore shooting on the F3...of course not. But I need to future proof my footage and 1080p is a joke...to me. So if I had to make a decision between Scarlet and the F3 I would go with the Scarlet. Sure the RED cameras are in a constant state of change with firmware builds but that's something I like. To me it seems like RED is always trying to improve their products even after they leave and are in the shooters' hands. Some people don't like that and if they don't then all they have to do is stick with the release firmware build and they should be fine.

This is a timelapse shot using the Canon 5D2 in RAW stills mode with it sitting on top of a motion control system that Dynamic Perception built and was nice enough to have me beta test for the past couple weeks. A lot of the shots I used the Zeiss ZF 50mm f1.4 and the Canon 24mm f1.4 II. The Zeiss is crazy sharp and I love using it. Its very different to plan out shots that move and adds a whole new dimension to the process, not to mention setup time. Here are also a couple pictures of my setup with the moco rig.

It sounds like Jim doesn't like misinformation to be spread around about the camera that isn't true. I hate that as well because when I run into someone that has actually listened to something said by a RED hater they seem to think its the truth, which most of the time it is far from the truth. So then producers, directors or whomever is making a misinformed decision based on something they heard from someone that didn't know what they were talking about. It just takes time out of my day to try and get these people the right info so that they are informed about what is really out there.

I like Jim because every time I have met him he has been extremely nice to me and all the other people talking his ear off. He shows incredible patience for someone that deals with some of the people I have seen him deal with. If he wasn't that way I would be indifferent about him but I would still like RED because its better than anything else out there and within my reach financially. Getting a RED One has changed my life in a way I had always hoped for. I really don't care if you like me. You have nothing I want so you might as well not even exist in my eyes. To me your just some name on a screen.

Looks like some words need to be eaten after that quote.

How old are you? I know its hard to admit you are wrong but guess what, you are very wrong. Besides Jim doesn't sell sun glasses anymore. He sells Digital Cinema Cameras, leads the digital revolution and is a studio head. Might want to get your facts right. The RED One measured resolution at 4K 16x9 on the new M-X sensor is 3.5K and it 4.5K is true 4K.

Okay, if you guys don't believe me about the noiseless footage that Fincher shot on the new M-X sensor RED One. Then talk with Jim about coming over to RED studios at seeing the footage up on their 4K projector. I'm sure he would be more than happy to prove you wrong...of course if he has the time (and of course I'm not speaking for Jim just trying to find a way to show you guys what I'm talking about). Why didn't the RED haters go to the RED Day event at RED Studios to see if they could pick apart the RED footage on the 4K projector. I know you guys are a little scared of getting proven wrong in front of everyone and having to eat your words. You could also ask any of the people that were there that day and they will tell you the same thing. Proof is in the footage.

I heard that it was mostly shot on the F23. Oh yeah and David Fincher is shooting with the new M-X sensor in two RED Ones on his new movie. Now lets sit and think why would he choose to shoot RED when there seems to be so many better options out there than RED, according to some of the people here. It might be because RED smokes all the others.

Well I've seen footage shot at ISO 2000 projected in 4K on a 40' screen and you would have to look very hard to see noise...oh yeah, no noise reduction was done to that shot either. Of course me saying it and seeing it with your own eyes are two completely different events. All I'm saying is that most of the negative posts on here come from people that aren't informed enough to trash a product. Its also funny to see when someone posts amazing footage that cannot be denied as beautiful that then people start talking about how horrible the workflow is. Again these people don't have a clue what they are talking about. All you have to do is LEARN how to process the footage and I'm not talking about work-arounds or something like that. There are plenty of post houses that know what to do with RED footage. Or you can process your shots from home or on the road. Do any of you guys have a motion picture film lab in your house or one you can put in your backpack?

I completely agree but it seems that some people can't see beauty even when its right in front of them.

I don't know why either, I guess its just fear of change. I have seen bad footage come from every medium out there. So to say RED looks bad because you saw something that was posted on the internet or even something in theaters where the people shooting with the RED clearly had no idea what they were doing...or the post house. Plenty of places to drop the ball. I'll search for specifics if you really want them but the post about RED that say "vaporware" and crap like that seems really small minded. Its like people have already forgot what happened. Before RED came out people were saying vaporware and that it would be impossible to build a camera like the one they did build. Even after the camera was out shooting on projects people were still saying vaporware. But now the camera has been out for over two years the vaporware comments have now gone towards Epic and Scarlet. Its like no one learns anything from the past. Also is film exactly the same as it was 100 years ago...no. It too has gone through a great many improvements and different processing steps in the last 100 years. Not to mention the cameras that shoot film. So in a 100 years I'm sure footage shot on RED well be fine, regardless of if it was transfered to film or not.

Why would he want to post here when most of the people here seem to hate RED for no reason what-so-ever. I keep hearing all this negative talk about RED and how a great many of the people posting in this thread think there are too good to even touch a RED because its not film or a $200K VIDEO camera, which is what the Genesis, F23 and F35 are...1920x1080 is video. At least with film and the RED cameras you can future proof your films for when 4K delivery has ramped up. Also what camera company do you guys know of where you can talk with the owner of that company and tell him what you would like to see in a camera. Now it helps if you don't just start off bashing the cameras for not good reason...then just maybe if you do that he might listen to your requests.

I was shooting between 1-15 second intervals. All of the star timelapse was 15 second exposures at 3200 ISO. The city stuff were shorter exposures, between 1-5 seconds. Most of the time those shots were at 250 ISO.

This is some timelapse that I shot with my 5D Mark 2 in RAW stills mode. I used the Canon 24mm f1.4 mk2 for most of the shots and the others I used the Zeiss ZF 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4 and the Nikon 80-200mm f2.8. It was nice to be able to use the same lenses I use on my RED on my 5D2. Vimeo Link to Timelapse

I just tired of hearing misinformation. Like at NAB this year, people were walking around talking out of their asses about the Red camera. Some of them still believed that the camera was vaporware even though it was out and being used on dozens and dozens of projects ranging from commercials to big budget feature films. I'm not trying to defend the camera, just trying to educate people on what they think is dead wrong...its my opinion of course.

To my eyes it seems that some, if not most, film shooters are afraid of change away from film. Not sure why. I also didn't come over here to stir things up. I just heard at Reduser that this clip made it over here and that you guys were freaking out about it. So I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. I started to read this thread and saw that most of the film people on here were trashing the Red camera. Basically the same thing I've been hearing from the beginning, since the Red camera was announced. First the camera was vaporware and then when it came out it just wasn't good enough. Some people can never be pleased. This thread and the other ones weren't directed solely at you Scott and I'm not sure why you would think that.

I take four batteries out with me when I go shooting at night or during the day. Each battery last about 90 minutes depending on what you have hooked up to the camera. So that's 6 hours of straight shooting, which I never do because most of my time is spent looking for shots. So does that 45 minutes include drive time, paper work and then having to drive back to get the film. Unless you live next door to a film lab I'm sure the total time from wrap to viewing is far greater than what I have to go through with my Red footage.

It might be really easy and basic stuff but I see it quite a bit at the studios.