Luke Haywood
-
Posts
61 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Luke Haywood
-
-
The fact that the poster was shot down so nicely by someone who actually WORKS on the show is the real killer :lol:
-
A particularly embarrassing example of not counting to ten before posting....my apologies to all and sundry, particularly Richard, who didn't deserve such an ad hominem attack.
Oh drat. I realize now that that was a quote of the same post once in part, and once in full.
I also spelled your name wrong!
So was it you who deleted the original post then?
One thing I like about cinematography.com, what is said on this forum, STAYS on this forum.
But beware, nothing is ever permanently erased on the Internet!
-
That's pretty funny it just says "Hey Jim I found you!"
Then....
Banned.
Those where the good ol' days. Now Jim and I are best buddies and the RED is sweeping the globe.
R,
It's no wonder the people on this forum were such "RED-haters". Look at the mean and loveless environment they grew up in.
Jay A Kelly hates cinematography.com
Pixelated hates cinematography.com
Acehole hates cinematography.com
Zakforrest hates cinematography.com
MojoTrancer hates cinematography.com
Kalone hates cinematography.com
John Allardyce hates R.Boddington
John Allardyce hates R.Boddington 2
I hope this has been a growth experience for all of us, and not a malignant one ;)
-
I'm interested in seeing not just any Red footage, but rather something well shot. "Manure" may be the first, any idea when it'll be released?
-- J.S.
IMDB just says "2009". Of course, they have to find a distributor first. I think David said something to the effect that when he finds out, so will everybody else probably.
It does sound like a pretty good film, leaving aside all considerations of how it was shot.
But what a masterpiece of ironic allegory. The saga of two early '60s American businessmen, approaching late middle age and facing the bleak realization that their only (and rapidly-devaluing) business skills are based entirely around three decades of marketing ... well ... bullshit!
And it's shot with the RED camera. It's all there I tell you :lol:
-
well.............. any AC reading this post would be careful now
anywayz.......where should i start taking pictures? What should i shoot with my still camera? Techniques that would help me working with motion pictures cameras?
Well, as I just got through saying in another post, most of the storytelling skills like framing and composition are pretty universal no matter what sort of camera or medium you're shooting on.
However, you can really only learn lighting with real film, but you don't need a particularly fancy camera or lenses for that.
At first thought you might think that if you can light successfully for video, then it would be even better for film because of its more forgiving exposure latitude, but you usually wind up with dull and lifeless-looking images.
There's no particularly easy or cheap way to learn skills like focus pulling.
-
I claim the right to call myself a filmmaker
conceived film
wrote script
wrote lyrics
VV camera operator
DP
grip
film loader
producer ....
currently editing on VV flatbed
will musically score the film when print is done.
working out a system to project my film in Vistavision WITH sound in a theater for the premiere. this has NEVER been done for a complete film EVER.
you don't need an army to make a film.
So, dare we ask, what sort of film is it?
Don't get me wrong; I have nothing but respect for people who actually manage to stop dreaming and actually get out there and shoot something, even if it's only on a Handycam and edited on their home computer. Even with the most basic equipment, you can still acquire a lot of valuable skills like framing, editing and script discipline, for no cost, something that simply wasn't available to earlier generations. But nooooo, your average dreamer couldn't possibly do anything like that. It's got to be all or nothing, and it's usually the latter.
Well anyway, congratulations on your entry into the rarified ranks of people-who-have-actually-done-something :lol:
So what did you do?
Will we get to see it?
-
Sorry, that's Ruairi Robinson. I missed the 15 millisecond edit window:-)
-
I think I still have the dubious honour of being the shortest lived member of that forum. Jared had me booted and banned within 30 seconds.
With the comment, "don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out."
Odd thing is that I had no problem re-posting a few times using a Yahoo account and he had no idea it was me. Oh well I guess he needs better IP address blocking software.
I'm sure they have snipers up on towers there 24hrs a day looking for Phil Rhodes. Geez if Phil put a toe onto their property Jared would have it machine gunned off in two seconds. Be careful Phil :D
Any way we don't want another "forum war" we love our Red brothers and the Red camera.
R,
I was actually doing a Google search for Information on Richard's recent indy film when I came upon that very post!
R Boddington's 27 minutes of fame According to the post itself, the content was deleted by Jarred Land 27 minutes after Richard signed in, but of course may have been banned much sooner! We're coming up to the second anniversary of this momentous event. So remember Halloween also celebrates the Martyrdom of Saint Boddington.:-)
That whole DVXUser thread is quite surreal with the level of sycophantic excess shown. It's hilarous in places if you have the time and stomach for it.
A lot of 'blasphemers' have had their posts removed entirely my the moderators, which is really amatuerish, since the software apparently then re-numbers everything making the conversation impossible to follow. Oddly, while the original posts have gone, they remain fossilized in the responses of other posters.
This thread is worth another read too if you have time on your hands.
I have to thank Rauiri Robinson for the phrase: "Welcome to Club Irony Bypass". I crack up every time I think of that one.
You know, I think that's one of the main differences between this forum and some others I could mention: people make jokes here that are actually funny :D
Oh. And I'm still waiting to see some RED footage on the big screen.
-
I suppose most of you will have seen this by now:
http://www.wired.com/entertainment/hollywo...09/ff_redcamera
Bit of a Nerds-eye-view of the RED one, although the writer clearly knows little about the film industry. But at least we get a few new tidbits of information amongst the usual boiler-plate funhouse-mirror regurgitation of propoganda.
"Analog Film"? Is there any other kind?
And what's this?
"Standing nearby is the man who developed it?a handsome guy with a neatly trimmed goatee and a pair of sunglasses perched atop his clean-shaven head. He clutches a can of Diet Coke in his left hand, an unlit Montecristo jutting from between his fingers."
At least one of the cinematographers interviewed complains that he was quoted wildly out of context, but I guess we're used to that :P
-
I just did a test on 1 minute of "average" close up footage (subject from chest to head with shallow depth of field) and got fairly similar results in all codecs. My machine (which is far more beastly than the avg computer) is a 2.8Ghz 8 core MacPro with 10 GB's RAM and a 2.7 TB RAID-5. On avg I got about 4-7 FPS out of RedCine with 4k 2:1 footage set to Full Rez, with the processing and quality set to full/max. As far as I know, that is the max settings you can export footage out of RedCine at. So a 1 minute clip, depending on the codec, was taking 7-9 minutes. Of course, RedCine was only using 450% to 550% of my processor time--so it wasn't using as much as my MacPro has to offer.
That said, 1/2 Rez high looks fantastic in 1080P...yes full rez decode looks a little better but you've got to get your face up close to the screen to see the difference (or maybe my eyes are worse than I thought!)
Matthew
Yes, this is the sort of figure that tends to get quoted on Reduser.
But not everybody wants to invest in such a "beastly" computer, and if a machine like yours is taking that long to render footage, I shudder to think how long it would take on a more modest machine.
Probably something they would rather not talk about.
That's not to say it would be unworkable, as long as it's faster than an overnight process/HD scan of a day's footage at a processing lab. :lol:
-
I just read that an article about a company "Digital Playground" filming their movie Pirates II in HD with the red. Apprently the original Pirates was shot in HD and was released with an R rating. Do you think porn using cameras like the red will help it enter the mainstream world?
I started a discussion about this some time back, which you can check out here in a thread about sound and the RED
It was all a bit tongue-in-cheek, but some good discussion emerged!
-
However, it would appear that there are time advantages with the tape systems, because of the need for rendering with the data cameras.
(I know this probably belongs in the RED folder, but it does have a bearing on thevoriginal poster's question.)
Is it possible for anybody to give me the straight dope on this:
Say I had a 8GB Compact Flash card holding the regulation 6 Minutes of "4K" video (whatever that means) plus sound, how long would it take me to convert that to a standard 1920 x 1080 MPEG file ready for feeding into an existing HD worklfow.
That is, not using any software other than RedCine, and not using a RED, just a PC.
And I'm talking about using it on an ordinary high-end consumer type PC, 3GHz dual-core or thereabouts, allowing for reasonably cheap upgrades such as more RAM and a bigger Hard Disk.
I'm not interested in using Macs or $10,000 supercharged setups.
What are we talking about? Hours? Days?
Luke 'Just the facts, Ma'am' Haywood
-
I've just noticed that on the www.red.com website they've now included "Jumper" in their "Shot on RED" section.
From what I've heard, only a few seconds of RED-derived footage actually appear on the screen, apparently some surf-based action, which sounds suspiciousy like a "crash-cam" scenario!
Can anybody clarify this?
I never got round to seeing "Jumper" on the big screen, which is just as well.
I finally saw it on DVD yesterday, and there's another 90 minutes of my life I'll never get back.
What a stupid f*cking movie!
OK it had some nice helicopter shots of various scenic wonders around the world, but that was all it had going for it.
Basically it starts with this kid who falls through the ice on a frozen-over creek and gets carried off by the current.
Just before he drowns he suddenly finds himself in the middle of the Ann Arbor Public Library, soaking wet, and having brought half the creek with him.
He decided to leave town for no adequately explained reason, and discovers he can teleport himself more less at will to just about anywhere, including the inside of locked bank vaults and so on.
But it turns out there are lots more people like him, constantly being hunted by some ultra-secret wacko religious cult known as the Paladins, and the battle has been going on for thousands of years.
The Paladins now have an array of high-tech gizmos something like Tazers that can temporarily suspend a jumper's powers long enough to kill them, (So what did they use before?).
The jumpers don't just teleport themselves, they can bring cars, buses, half an apartment building etc and throw them at the Paladins.
But nearly of the clashes would have ended far more quickly and in the jumpers' favour if they had simply bothered to take a GUN with them. Or even a f*cking knife for christ's sake, but no, apparently that never occurs to any of them!
(OK if the writers could come with some plausible explanation why that wasn't possible, well OK, but they don't).
Our hero eventually gets the better of the head honcho Paladin, although there is no explanation as to what he could do that none of the others could.
And despite the man's murdering his father and a large number of other innocent people, does our hero do the sensible thing and drop him into an active volcano or the middle of the Pacific Ocean? No, he leaves him on top of a big rock in the middle of the desert, presumably so he can starve to death, but also setting him up for a sequel, which tragically, is already in pre-production.
And as for the bit at the end with his mother, I felt like throwing the remote at the TV.
What really pisses me off most about this dreck, is that with better writers they could have made a really good movie for the same money, because the cinematography (when they weren't into NYPD Blue-cam mode) and special effects were excellent.
Just as well not much Red footage was used on this film, it would have been a major embarrassment to them:-)
I haven't seen such a load of steaming poop since "Signs".
-
Hi,
Well I thought there was going to be an upgrade X sensor before that. I personally would like to see a stable RED one camera before people get excited about future sensors. I include both hardware and software issues in that statement, just so there is no confusion!
Stephen
Exactly 44 minutes elapsed between the time JJ announced that Build 16 Ver 3.1.8 was available for download, and the first (of many) aggrieved RED owner posted to claim it was worse than 3.1.5!
That must surely qualify for some sort of record:-)
Although I begin to wonder if these are actually hardware problems that are getting blamed on the software.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong Jim but David is the most prominent DP to work with RED so far?
Well, I don't know, these guys seem overwelmingly positive about the performance of the RED.
They're fully committed to Blu-Ray release, and are absolutely fanatical about producing a quality product.
They've bought several REDs and are anxious for more.
Don't know about sound, but if anybody stands or falls on skin tone rendition, it would have to be them!
If you don't believe me, just check out the downloads on their site.
They're number 1 in the USA and they still want to try harder.
-
Have I got this correct?
In this post: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?...mp;postcount=32
Jim Jannard appears to be saying that no actual RED footage was incorporated into the final cut of "Wanted"
An excerpt:
RED was on the "Wanted" set last summer to "see how it would do". The RED ONE prototype (several months before our 1st shipment) was shot sparingly but in several different setups. Everyone seemed very happy with the footage. In fact, Timur bought a RED camera (and paid for it and took delivery when his number came up). So did Jon Farhat (VFX supervisor). At that time the workflow was not smooth with their Avid system and I suspect that integrating some token RED footage would have been a courtesy they did not have time for. This is entirely speculation on my part. Maybe they couldn't find an appropriate "add film grain" filter? :-)
So over a period of months we've gone from "Shot on RED" to "Parts Shot on RED" to "Parts Shot on RED but not actually used"!
I was going to go see Wanted in the cinema, (even though it sounds like a pretty stupid movie, maybe worthy of DVD rental after it stops being a "latest release") just to see how the RED scrubs up on the big screen.
But I guess I'll save my ticket momey for something else.
Does anybody know what the first All-RED cab off the rank is likely to be, that is likley to be playing in my local cinema?
-
"Film Is Dead" people be damned:
Initially the director, Jon Favreau (ZATHURA, SWINGERS), wanted to shoot with the Genesis camera, after having shot a pilot in HD. But after doing tests, the strobing of aerial footage was unacceptable so the decision was made to shoot 35mm film. The exception is 65mm greenscreen footage used to shoot inside the IRON MAN's suit, as it was the best way to avoid lens distortion they got from 35mm.
Film is not dead, it's just pining for the Fijords.
Why would there be strobing? If the Genesis is set for 1/48th second shutter, surely it would be similar to shooting film.
-
Who's Jim Jannard again?
I think at core we are all Jim Jannard really.
-
Hiya Shawn!
Could you provide a link?
I've never been to the red homepage and when I tried googling I got many hits on the red camera but didn't find the home page. :(
Thanks!
love
Freya
Just of the off-chance, did you try "www.red.com" :lol:
But here's a link to www.red.com , to save you typing www.red.com into the address bar.
-
Wow. The local cinema packed two screens last night for Iron Man. This, in a town that NEVER packs a theater. I wonder what Jon's back door deal looks like.
I've been waiting for this day for 40 odd years!
Looks like Marvel decided to ignore all the Hollywood "regulations" and make the film the way they thought it should have been made. 2K super-35 Roolz!
The one thing that was a sure sign of success was that both male and female reviewers loved it.
I remember 30 years ago when I saw Star Wars for the first time, I was thinking that if people didn't actually KNOW that we don't have huge spaceships like those, they would just assume that those scenes really were shot in outer space! It all looked so incredibly real and the first films still hold up very well today.
After that things went into a bit of a decline until Jurassic Park, when, again, I was thinking the same things about the dinosaurs in that film.
And that's how I felt about Iron Man, everything looked so plausible. Robert Downey Jr is absolutely perfect to play Tony Stark.
Someone on Reduser suggested that Jeff Bridges's Obadiah Stane character bears a remarkable resemblance to Jim Jannard, right down to the cigar! Is that true, or were they just making a joke?
-
Hi Jim,
That was an address that Red advertised some time age, I have received many emails from you but never from that address.
Stephen
I just stumbled on this post from about two years ago:
Granted it doesn't specifically say it's Jim's address, but you can see how people might get the idea that it is.
So can we conclude that just because we write to Jim at that address, it does not mean that he will be reading it?
-
Well, the whole problem with what you are talking about is that RED doesn't record onto SD cards--it uses Compact Flash cards. Also from my understanding, not just any CF cards will work. I believe starting in beta build 15 that RED stopped letting you use other cards that didn't ID as RED cards. I believe they did that because people were having so much trouble with third party cards that said they were 300x, but really were not. Not 100% positive on this info, but it seems like I did read something like it at RU.
Matthew
My Bad. I actually wrote "CF" when I was composing my original post, and then for some reason I got the idea I really meant "SD", and changed them all. All I remembered was that they were the type of cards that DON'T work in my still camera :lol:
So are you saying that RED will not allow you to use anything but the CF cards they supply?
-
I've read that RED state that most larger capacity SD cards do not meet the manufacturers claimed Read/Write speeds.
Does anybody know how this is detremined, apart from simply putting the SD card in the camera and trying to record onto it?
If that's all they do, I can't help wondering whether the problem might be with their camera, and that some cards are simply more tolerant of the interface.
I was also wondering if you can use 4K SD cards. I know that would only give you about 3 minutes of 4K, but 3 minutes was all you got out of a Super-8 cartridge, and lots of good stuff has been shot on that :lol:
I know an importer of SD cards who is willing to lend me some samples with a view to seeing if they are "RED-worthy" . Some of the Toshiba ones are marked "Ultra High Speed" , whatever that may mean.
Not having ready access to a RED One, I was wondering if there is some other way to determine the actual speed performance of an SD card.
-
This is not my email address... your point?
Jim
Well, it appears numerous people have written to you at that address and
had replies back they thought were from you, coming back from the same address.
I suppose it's one thing to have replies "ghost written" by one of your employees
when you're too busy to attend to itself, that's certainly better than nothing at all.
But you're saying you don't know who sent the email!
So does this mean that all the people who thought they were writing to you at that address
were actually getting replies written by someone else without your knowledge?
So they have no way of knowing whether the replies they received are an accurate
reflection of The Thoughts of Chairman Jim, or not.
OK if you don't think that's a big deal, well that's your privelege.
Recent testing of the new M-X sensor
in Red
Posted
So where does that leave all the prople who invested in a RED One?
5-6,000 people can't be wrong?
But this is what always happens.
Every generation of cameras is gnat's whisker short of being indistinguishable from reality
Then the next one is always Vastly better.
Great if your the rentee, Sh*thouse if your'e the rentor.
Oh well, 'twas ever thus.