Tim Pipher

Thanks Richard. I was hoping you'd chime in on this, as I've followed your interesting endevours on this forum. I won't try to win the whether it looks real argument. I'll have to show you when it's up and running. I will say, though, that there's national virtual studio programming running right now that looks fantastic and people don't know it's not real. Like "DVD on TV" on the FX network, and with up and running new installations on CHCH and Global in your neck of the woods. And another national cable network in the US is converting to it right now -- not allowed to tell you which one, but it's also available in Canada. http://www2.pny.com/Pressroom/caseStudies/Stateof8.pdf I'm hoping, though, that if people don't want to go virtual, they'll still find my set-up great for traditional greenscreen shoots, with excellent gear right on site. By the way, I'd love bit of a pipeline of people and equipment between Florida and your neck of the woods -- I spend as much time as possible near Collingwood, Ontario, and my home town of Toronto.

Mike: What's your over-all assessment of the 3000 now -- have you had a chance to put the footage through an edit yet? On another forum, comments were made that the 3000 was noticeably sharper than the Sony F900r and Panasonic HPX2000, and "visually indistinguishable" from the Sony F23. Do you feel that's an accurate assessment? Thanks, Tim

Thanks David. Do you know what city he's in and/or the name of his company?

Thanks John. Cameras won't be XDCams though -- probably Panasonic HPX3000's -- a very good camera from the reports I've seen.

I've started businesses before when people thought I was crazy. I've proved them wrong -- and proved them right. When I started a little television station, the first on Hilton Head Island, SC, and moved my 7 1/2 month pregnant wife and four year old son across two states to do it, people said I was nuts. "If starting a TV station on that island was a good idea, someone else would've done it". Luckily, despite some rocky times initially, I caught lightning in a bottle, had a ton of fun, and made out really well financially when I sold the station. While at the station, I had another idea. Why not build a TV studio to seat 200 people or so, hire a band, fly in celebrities in from NY and LA, and make a Tonight Show style syndicated talk show with soap opera stars as the celebrity guests? That's exactly what I did, renovating an old movie theatre, and starting "The Tim Pipher Show". http://video.google.com/videosearch?source...sa=N&tab=wv People said I was crazy, and they were right -- I lost money on that one -- but not my shirt. The bright side of that one was that it was tremendous fun, the facility made my TV station look good and helped me when it came time to sell it, and the contacts I made are useful to this day. After I sold the TV station, I came across a product I loved -- electric scooters. So I started my own brand, produced and hosted an infomercial, and did a small test run. After the positive results of the infomercial test, (I suspect I was duped by my call center -- many of the initial orders turned out to be bogus), I launched into sizable national infomercial buys, imported 5,000 scooters from a factory in China, and had almost every conceivable problem you can think of. I hated every minute of it. I lost my shirt on that one. I now come to my latest -- and probably last -- gamble. I'd love to hear your thoughts as to whether you could ever see yourself using any part of my facility or services. I'm trying to make it a business where professionals will be able to take advantage of it whether they want to use all of it, or just want to use a small part of it. I can assure you that it will be priced right -- I want and need it to be used steadily. Southeastern Studios (www.southeasternstudios.com), will consist of a professionally lit three walled greenscreen cyclorama (40 ft. across the back wall, 20 ft. up the two side walls, and an additional 20 ft. back to the control rooms), three high-end cameras and zoom lenses in a studio configuration (originally RED but now likely to be Panasonic HPX 3000s -- also available for on-location shoots), run through an HD switcher, Ultimatte HD/SD chromakeyer, and Orad 3D Virtual Studio system, and recorded to a Wafian HR 2 and/or HDCAM deck. We'll also have lots of audio equipment, and the latest Final Cut system. We'll also offer camera tracking for live or post compositing through two encoded (and expensive) jibs, with the third camera being tracked with another system, good for hand held etc. I need people to come from all over the place to use this facility, or allow us to transport it to their locations. I'm fully prepared to offer great pricing to make this happen. If you're a believer in virtual studio technology, this is a one-of-a-kind set up that will offer live compositing of what appear to be massive million dollar sets, including gorgeous virtual windows with striking ocean views (made with gorgeous video plates), resulting in sets with views that would be difficult to attain in the real world. Whether you believe this virtual set technology works (I believe with the right virtual system, the right virtual set creator, lighting, and Ultimatte, the results are indistinguishable to viewers from the real thing), I can tell you that at least one major cable network is in the midst of precisely re-creating many of their real sets into virtual sets, and assuming that the viewers won't notice the difference. If you're not a believer in the benefits of virtual sets, you may still want to use the rest of the greenscreen cyclorama, tracking and equipment for traditional greenscreen work. If you don't like our cameras and/or lenses, you could bring your own. If you don't need greenscreen work, maybe you'd have a need for our cameras and lenses on location. We could deliver them right to your set, maybe even in our two very luxurious motorhomes that your cast and crew will love. By the way, your producer, cast and crew will enjoy using the motorhomes at our site too. This stuff will be priced to, hopefully, make you want to travel here to use it, from anywhere. If you're concerned about the cost of accommodation, don't be. Stay for free in our two luxurious and fully equiped homes by the beach, sleeping 12 cast and/or crew. If you have time, the beach is spectacular, the surfing the best on the east coast (the houses are five minutes from the Sebastian Inlet), and they're right beside a beautiful golf course and major league tennis. Here's a video of the homes: www.BuffHome.com/Rental.wmv If you're worried about the cost of travel, don't be. Keep in mind our reasonable rates and it's more than worth it. Fly Spirit non-stop from LA to Ft. Lauderdale, even if booked only a few days before, for about $280 round trip. From NY it's less than that. Fly from London to Orlando round trip for $400 (or so), or from Toronto, use your strong Canadian dollar, drive to Buffalo, and fly non-stop into Orlando for $178 round trip on Southwest. Remember, I'll price this to make it worth your while. So there's my pitch. If the price is right, can you see wanting to use some or all of my services or facility? One more question: What will be the best way for me to promote this? Thanks!

Could the same images be produced using the equivalent broadcast HD lens instead of cinestyle? It's my understanding that the optics of both lenses are the same. Does the difference in image (if any) come from the more precise focus control of the cine lens, meaning with the proper skill you'd be more likely to get the perfect shot?

Thanks Michael. Good points about the clean matte edge and virtual background blur for a 35 mm DOF effect. I do want to use these cameras on location, too, where I thought the 35 mm characteristics would be to my advantage.

Thanks Mitch. What's your guess of a ballpark HPX3000 vs. RED rental rate? Also, what would you recommend as a jack of all trades zoom lens for the HPX3000, suitable for as wide a range of in-studio and on location shoots as possible. Also, for maximum utility, would you go with a cine or broadcast zoom lens? Thanks!

I've been excited about the RED camera since I found out about them two years ago, and ordered three of them at this year's NAB, with delivery scheduled for late January. I thought the camera was fabulous -- and still do. However, in now appears the the RED won't work for me. Because they dropped their 1080 recording, they're not able to offer HD-SDI outputs. HD-SDI outputs are crucial for my studio configurations. I've been now forced to choose new cameras. I think my choice is the HPX3000. Like RED, the HPX3000 looks like one fantastic camera. But I'm worried about my switch to it for two reasons: 1. They're a lot more expensive 2. I was really excited about RED's 35 mm DOF. Here are my questions: 1. Do you feel that there will be a higher rental demand for the 3000's (and/or higher rental rate) than the REDs to help cover the additional cost? 2. Do you personally think that you'd usually prefer the 3000's 2/3 inch DOF with a good quality 2/3 inch lens, or would you prefer that the 3000 be rigged for 35 mm DOF for most applications, achieved using a B4 35 mm adapter and RED 18-50 zoom lens? Any comments will be greatly appreciated.

I know I'm all over the place on this. I was sold on RED and was just waiting for my January delivery, and now I'm scrambling to find the right cameras with HD-SDI outputs. I still thought the HPX500 sounded pretty good, especially since they'd be mostly used in-studio, recording to a Wafian 2 deck (presumably creating better images than the camera's on-board recorder), and with my Orad 3D HD virtual studio system adding a 35 mm DOF to my backgrounds. Add in David's idea of using my savings for the purchase of a RED for on-location shoots, and I thought my product might be pretty good with that combination. A Panasonic salesman today, though, recommends the HPX2000 for me. The most compelling argument he made was that national cable networks like Discovery and National Geographic won't accept programs produced on the HPX500. However, a person who I think is very much in the know from a message board says that that's nonsense due to the 500's 2/3 inch chips -- that only 15% of their programming can come from 1/3 inch chip cameras like the HVX200 -- but that the networks have no problem whatsoever with HPX500 produced content. Who is right about the network requirements -- the salesman or the guy from the message board? One final alternative I could undertake, proving even more that I'm all over the place: Two of my three cameras will be tracked in my greenscreen virtual studio productions using encoded jibs, so my cameras can have lots of movement. Maybe I could go with two HPX3000's on jibs and skip a third studio camera, and give up the RED for location shoots too (using the HPX3000's in studio and on location). Any sense of how well I could cover studio shoots with two cameras on jibs and dropping the third?

Thanks Mitch. I actually saw you at NAB and hung around for a few minutes to say hello and thank you for your valuable posts to this forum. You were mobbed, though, and when I noticed the crowd around you had finally dissipated, I was told you had just left for lunch!

Just a note to say thanks for your comments on Reduser.net concerning the RED/Output drop situation -- I suspect your assessment is bang on.

Hello Michael. Thanks for your camera summaries. Sorry to muddy the waters further, but do you have any thoughts on the Panasonic AG-HPX500? It's certainly cheap and appears to have a lot going for it.

Thanks Walter. Sorry -- those were questions, not comments. I've heard great things about those cameras. Would you use those Ikegami's for movies and narrative TV? And any guess as to their price (I just found a couple used for $55,000 each including 790A CCU) and their "sizzle" factor? Thanks again, Tim

Hello Walter. I looked quite closely at the HDK-79E when I started this process almost two years ago (I've had massive red tape to deal with from my local government concerning my building construction causing the delay), but I ruled them out because I'd like to do on-location shooting with my cameras in addition to the studio work, and I kept hearing F900, Viper, F950, Varicam etc. However, David's suggestion to save a few bucks on the studio cameras and buy a RED for field production makes sense. Two years ago the Ikegami's were big money -- I assume they still are. Any ballpark guess of their price? Also, those cameras were introduced a number of years ago, so I assume I'd lose the "latest/greatest" factor -- do they still carry the "prestige"? Finally, would a producer or cinematographer ever request the Ikegami's for shooting a movie or dramatic TV show? Thanks for your comments/answers!

The RED won't be suitable for studio work because it has come to light that RED won't be offering outputs for line recording anytime soon, if ever. It turns out that the 1080 output won't work until 1080 recording is enabled on the camera, and 1080 seems to be out of fashion to RED's way of thinking, so it may never happen. On the other hand, I started a thread on Reduser.net about the output problem and possibilities for solutions, and I think RED is now understanding that a lot of us need an HD-SDI output -- maybe they'll make something happen. However, you might have a great idea -- go with the HVX900's, and use the savings to get a tricked out RED with lens.

I'm deciding which cameras to purchase to put into a three camera studio configuration, with recording to an external deck. These will be usually used in-studio for greenscreen work. I'd also like my cameras to be excellent on location for 24p TV and movie work. For on location shoots I'll be recording into the camera. I was sold on Red and have three reserved, but now it turns out that the 1080 outputs won't be activated soon, if ever, making Reds not usable for my studio work. The HDX900 will cost condsiderably less than the HPX3000. In your opinion, is the HPX3000 worth the extra money? If nothing else, will the perception that the HPX3000 is more valuable or better (since it costs more) likely to carry more weight when convincing outside users to choose my facility for their productions or for networks to choose my programs since they were produced using higher end or more "prestigious" cameras? (I know -- the story, photography etc. of the shows are more important than the cameras used, but assume equal story, equal cinematography, equal crew, equal talent etc. with both cameras). In my experience, so much of any sales effort boils down to how much sizzle I can generate in my pitch -- can I generate more excitement in my pitches with the HPX3000 vs. the HDX900 to justify its added expense? Thanks for any input or ideas.

Anybody know if the color out of the Red in studio shoots like this can be usable as recorded live, or will post color correction always/usually be necessary?

Thanks Stephen. I figured I had to have this confused -- thanks for clearing this up! Tim

Thanks Stephen. So you're saying the Sigma $670 lens couldn't be used as-is on the Red -- it would have to be modified, and that's where the expense comes in, correct?

I assume I'm missing something here, but does that mean that I could buy the $670 lens from Sigma instead of the $7,500 18-50 mm zoom from Red and get similar or the same performance?

Hello Brian and thanks. Actually, all three cameras will be simultaneously tracking. We're installing an Orad HD 3D virtual studio system, running the cameras through a switcher, and compositing live.

Actually, it's a cheaper solution than our other tracking options and probably more reliable. But cost and tracking aside, would two jibs on the same shoot offer any advantages or disadvantages?

I'm putting together a three camera set-up to be used on a greenscreen cyclorama sound stage. We're hoping to have a decent level of flexibility so our set-up will be useful for many types of productions, including dramatic television and features. All three of the cameras need to be tracked. In evaluating different tracking options, one possible configuration that was proposed was for two cameras to be on motion control jibs, and one on a tripod (or dolly or handheld if desired). My question is: Are there any glaring disadvantages to having two out of three cameras on jibs? Other than helping with tracking, are there other advantages to having two jibs? Thanks for any input!

Sorry to keep pumping you for info, but is there a risk that the union would cause trouble for the DP if they found out the member was involved in a non-union project? Also, would SAG actors be likely to get into trouble for non-union acting jobs?