Brian Langeman

Hehehe, I'm definitely saving this post. You are gonna eat these words a lot sooner than you think. Later grandpa.

That's why RED has their own army of engineers, and you're not one of them.

Hey old, cynical, grandpa. It was rhetorical because it wasn't intended to be answered, though I knew it would be. It's not because you don't know what the lighting conditions were like. It's because you don't want to discuss potential. You choose not to be constructive, but destructive. You don't know what sensors HDRx is going into, but that doesn't stop you from talking about that. You don't know how much the relevant software costs, and you talk about that. You don't know how RED is compressing footage for RED RAY, yet you still talk about that. I could go on for quite a long time here. So, one thing that you do know. You know how good these test results are looking. But... you don't talk about it... haha. You can't say something bad about them because everyone on the board can see the results, and it doesn't require them to trust your "words of wisdom."

If you don't want an answer, then don't ask the question. The shot in the barn WAS random. That's why they didn't have another camera on hand to compare the results with. I didn't ask if you were there, but if you'd seen the shot. Don't put words into my mouth. You're turn to answer a rhetorical question. Why won't you discuss how the clip looks?

Hahahaha! I'm assuming that you haven't seen the second motion clip of HDRx from inside the barn with zero processing. Or should I have started talking about the latest NFL trade rumors. It would have had as much relevance to this thread as your last post Keith. Just keep on ignoring the real world results. I'm sure everyone wants to know more about lines of software coding. We don't care about what a usable image looks like. Also, HDR modes are in all new sensors including the scarlets, and the software for processing it in redcine x which is free. For the Foundry's processing techniques, $375 for Storm. Wow..... that sure is gonna break the bank for anyone who is already buying an Epic........

Ahhh yes. I was mistaken. This really is amazing.

I think the two of you have it backwards. Even though the camera is panning right to left in the fire truck scene, the buildings and the lights on them are actually moving left to right. The short exposure comes at the end leaving the sharp highlights on the left side, which is the trailing edge. A little confusing I know, but at least the picture in motion doesn't look weird because of it. The Foundry is working on this stuff too. So a lot of improvements will probably come regarding options of processing the two streams after the fact.

http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/red_visit_21_september_hdrx/ http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/red_visit_21_september_epic/ Hehe you guys are too funny. The end result is all that matters, whether you use film or digital, who cares. We're in the business of making great pictures and sound to accompany it. It seems like a lot of people seem to think they're stuck in a cult that says it's evil for them to get these great images with anything but film. I think the Epic will surpass 35mm film (and larger format film with their bigger sensors in the future) in every way technically. Higher resolution, higher dynamic range, and equal to or better color reproduction. The only reason I could see why you would want to shoot film would be for fun, or because you want film grain and film scratches. I personally prefer a smooth clear image as opposed to film prints. But that is always subjective for everyone on an individual basis. P.S. To whoever was complaining about Red's big sensors being a pissing match...... OF COURSE having bigger sensors with more resolution matters! Why do you think everyone makes such a big deal when something is shot on IMAX film or something larger???? You don't need do output to 4K. A lot of my projects finish on an SD DVD. But the RED footage looks a million times better than footage shot from any SD or HD camera, hands down.

hehe agreed

Then IMHO you need to lighten up a bit.

Can't you read? He's eating his popcorn right now. Eating popcorn is way more important than increasing post counts. Dang... I wish I had popcorn right now...

You're right. That's exactly what RED has been telling us the whole time.

I've read that recording in 1080 modes gives you less compression artifacts than the 720 modes, so if you have the hard drive space, I'd use the 1080i 24PA mode. I have to agree that the name for it does sound pretty screwed up hehe.

Scaling down and having sharp pictures isn't the only advantage that a higher resolution camera offers. Don't forget about the ability to punch in to a shot 1.5x and still have full res if you go by the 3.2k full res spec that's been tested. You can punch in even more, 2x and still have really sharp images. And that also allows for re-framing, panning and the like. And also lots of room for stabilizing or smoothing shots in post for VFX shots. With the EX1 1080p is your max resolution. If you stabilize or smooth a shot in post you're more than likely going to have less than that when you're done all depending on the shot. That's not the case with the RED. You and some other people may not have workflows that would allow for some of this. But many do.

A lot of posts here assume that people getting into the RED have no equipment or anything to do with making films or videos. Maybe some people are getting into it that way, but I think most people buying a RED already have some investment, a lot of them possibly a Mac with FCP. The RED One is a relatively cheap alternative compared to a Genesis or Dalsa or F35. But it is in no ways a "cheap" camera. A lot of people getting into the RED have probably been using prosumer cameras like the HVX or the other brands' HDV cameras. If they're editing that footage on a Mac with FCP then they already have what they need to edit RED footage. Not everyone needs to finish in 4K. A lot are probably finishing in 1080p, and that's a perfectly viable solution for many productions. Some people like to point out the one extreme and make things look bad because you have to spend $100 grand for a full out 4K finishing and grading suite. It's only fair to point out the other extreme, which could be an HD, or even SD finish. It might be arguable that the proxies aren't the best quality for a 1080p finish, but if you're finishing in SD then you can edit and grade with the proxies that you have to work with IMMEDIATELY after you connect your RED Drive or CF card to your Mac. (I keep pointing out the Mac side of things because that's what it's geared towards currently. It definitely is a disadvantage for windows users looking for a cheaper solution at the moment, but it will hopefully change this Summer and Fall with the SDK) The only extra coin you have to spend if you're using a Mac already and are finishing in SD is some hard drive space for the R3D files. You don't need fast drives for that, and you should be working that cost into the budget of your projects. Your space needs dramatically increase once you demosaic the files into 16 or 10 bit image sequence files at either 2K or 4K resolution. You don't even need to go through that step if finishing in SD. Just render the final movie at the end. There's a huge amount of flexibility in the RED workflow, and you can't really have a meaningful conversation about editing RED footage in general unless you have outlined the specific conditions that you need.

Relax. That's all I'm gonna say. hehe

The RED Drives are configured in a RAID 0. They are on backorder right now. I think the ones you're thinking of are the Flash Drives.

I never knew who I was talking to in the first place. The assumptions I made were based on the fact that you continued to ignore that hard drive failures are a short coming of the digital acquisition workflow on a whole, and not just one company's problem. I never said that failures are common. But backing up digital data is nothing new, and should be a standard procedure for a workflow with any digital camera.

I don't think you understand the concept of a hard drive failing. So there isn't any point in trying to persuade you that it's not Red's fault. If you don't understand the need to backup digitally acquired footage because of hard drive risks, then you should definitely stick with film. There's nothing wrong with film, and it's definitely got it's advantages, especially if you aren't willing to research this new way of obtaining footage.

So....... :huh: That's still 2 hard drives... Any type of spinning media hard drive is susceptible to the same inherent flaws that they all have regardless of who manufactures them.

Don't hard drives fail no matter who they're from? Red or anybody else? So isn't it a risk you take with any digital camera that records to a hard drive? How can you blame Red for something they can't control, or anyone for that matter. Hard drives sometimes fail, it's a fact of life.

I'm not saying that it doesn't matter if the sound options are bad either. I think they should be fixed, and eventually will get better hopefully. But I'd rather the small team at Red focus their time on the picture, because the sound issue is an easy workaround, especially if you're recording to both.

No, that's not what I'm saying. If you're investing in a RED camera that also includes the lenses, mattebox, follow focus system, a fluid head capable of handling the load. If you don't do the research about sound recording and expect perfect sound from a camera, then you're making a mistake, just as if you would neglect to buy a mattebox. The bad sound quality which dooms said projects is usually due to the wrong mics, and the placement of them. Single system definitely has it's advantages, but I don't think it would be wise to ever do single system on a feature film. That's what RED is aimed towards too, being used with an experienced crew. With single system you are sacrificing the sound recorder's full attention with the audio, and putting a burden on the camera operator or AC or whoever would monitor the incoming audio to the camera.

It's very reasonable to review the audio capabilities of the RED like this. Although it doesn't concern me if the audio is sub par, because I'm gonna be going double system anyways. It's very understandable that the RED would have more trouble with the audio than the HVX. It has a lot more electronics inside to interfere with the audio signal. I would assume that someone who is purchasing a 30K plus camera system knows about recording to a separate sound recorder. When you're in this price range, making the mistake of thinking that you can record your main audio to the RED ONE, is pretty similar to making the mistake of thinking you could support a RED ONE with a tripod that has a max limit of 15 lbs.

How much does the highest priced Bolex cost on ebay? I really have no idea. Also, relax man. People can put whatever they want in their signatures. If a group of people or one person has their camera's serial number in their sig, it doesn't make them cool, and I doubt they are trying to be cooler than you or anything like that. What purpose does it serve to make posts like that? It's only picking fights with other users, and we're all lucky Shawn took it maturely and didn't retaliate with an equally pointless post.