Jump to content

RED frame grabs...


Jim Jannard

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Are you people who placed orders following the break in story at Red HQ?

 

Suddenly this break in gets announced on the forum by JJ, kinda strange, why announce it at all? Most corporations would keep such a thing a secret and let the police investigate. If the break in will not delay delivery times then why wouldn't JJ just keep it under his hat? Why panic potential customers?

 

JJ has just demonstrated that his facility is not properly protected, and at the very least its an example of incompetence at the Red HQ. It's a very bad PR move to make the announcement IMHO.

 

Look Red order holders don't be surprised if Red announces that due to the break in your camera delivery is delayed six months or more. Just a theory mind you, I'm not accusing JJ of any underhanded stuff, I'm floating a theory we'll see if it comes true.

 

It just doesn't pass the "smell test" right now.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the thing kids need to realize is that film is the benchmark, whether they like it or not.

 

When the time comes that video camera users, by and large, stop trying to make their medium look like film, maybe video will become an artform instead of a cheap imitation.

I basicly don´t want to repeat myself, but you did notice, that the "kids" robert rodriguez, quentin tarantino, michael mann, david fincher, robert altman, jean-jaques annaud, james cameron, george lucas etc... shoot on video? Not that they would have your knowledge, let alone your understanding of what makes moving images an artform...

 

Also, let me add from my daily work: we intercut 35mm & hdcam since years, sometimes bringing photochemical to digital, sometimes the other way around in D.I. and nobody notices. I don´t have the impression that you ever have attended a D.I. session when 35mm and cinealta are combined.

 

Take a look at what was going on in the SLR market in the recent 5 years. You will find the same (obsolete) discussions there. No need to renew them here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Patrizio,

 

Do you know Tonino Guerra?

 

I met him last year and I had a Master Class with him. A great character... and a genius too! My favorite storyteller. IMHO, the best scriptwriter of the last 50 years!

 

Besides RED, we have a friend in common. You're welcome!

 

Emanuel

 

Emanuel,

 

It seems so.

 

Thank you for your kind words, Emanuel

 

Patrizio De Sica

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just doesn't pass the "smell test" right now.

 

I agree. As much as I want this RED thing to pan out, it seems funny. I haven't heard any buzz about this item, and all of sudden this announcement of a break in? The first thought that popped in my mind is that someone couldn't deliver, and a "break in" sure is a convenient excuse to delay a concept indefinitely. And what's with a 50K, then a 100K reward? Odd for a company looking for investors and funds to offer such a huge amount. Of course, it would be easy to offer such an amount, if one knows that no one is going to provide such evidence. Because there is no evidence. Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If all this is true then I don't understand why 80-90% of the projects going through ILM are still 35mm originated. What are these guys missing that you understand?

Did you just skim over the rest of the post, or do you merely have difficulty reading? I already explained to you why the majority of features shot in the industry are still on film. That isn't going to change for quite some time. That doesn't mean, however, that film is intrinsically better. Quite the contrary (and it has been mentioned several times previously), the professional world of still photography has largely abandoned film by a great margin. There's no question at all that the motion picture industry will follow - it just takes time for the technology to play catch up. People are interested in Red because it's a step in that direction.

 

If you mean experienced DOPs get irate over the hoards of kids who think they'll be shooting Lord Of The Rings just because they have an HD camcorder, then yes, you'd be correct.

I don't think many "kids" are going to be able to afford a Red camera even given its comparably inexpensive price tag. I also don't see what LOTR has to do with shooting film or acquiring digitally. A good deal of that movie was created in post, so the footage had to have been digitized at some point along the way regardless of how it was obtained. And being able to light well or tell a good story is completely independent of what camera you use to tell it.

 

We've been down this path before, and I still maintain one can learn to shoot video a lot faster than they can learn to shoot film. There is a lot more trial and error based experienced required for film than video for starters. And yes you video people can dog pile me on this issue all you like, but it' still a fact.

I don't disagree with you on this point, except that I don't think there's anything inherently bad about being able to learn something more easily or more quickly than whatever it was that preceded it. That's exactly why technology exists - to improve on the way things were done previously! Would you walk 10 miles to the grocery store every time you needed some produce now that you have a car? Of course not; even though there are health benefits, it's vastly inefficient. In the same way, there are definitely aspects about shooting film that are tedious, time consuming, and just plain take a lot of specific knowledge - and you're right - video does lack a lot of those shortcomings. It's just a matter of the pros outweighing the cons and at some point there's no reason to continue to meddle with the old method anymore. Simply because there are individuals who are perturbed by the fact that what they have their spent lifetimes studying is no longer going to be as relevant as it once was doesn't mean we're going to hold on for their sake. Whereas film always had the leg up in quality - be it resolution or dynamic range, the gap has shrunk tremendously and ultimately will be eclipsed, as I stated previously. Red takes a huge step toward closing the gap - perhaps it will completely - and thus the level of interest people have expressed in their camera is quite large.

 

I don't see the craft of shooting film being eclipsed at all, maybe in the eyes of those who can't shoot film it is, but industry wide film is quite strong indeed. Young people who don't learn film are not going to go very far as DOPs on narrative projects.

People thought vinyl would never die upon the advent of the digital compact disc, either. Sure, film probably won't truly "die," but it will become relegated to the artsy types who shoot it just because "it's film." Lighting for video can be just as challenging as lighting for film, and the ability to tell a good story transcends medium. Young people who don't learn film aren't going to have any problem making a career as DPs in 20 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just doesn't pass the "smell test" right now.

 

I agree. As much as I want this RED thing to pan out, it seems funny. I haven't heard any buzz about this item, and all of sudden this announcement of a break in? The first thought that popped in my mind is that someone couldn't deliver, and a "break in" sure is a convenient excuse to delay a concept indefinitely. And what's with a 50K, then a 100K reward? Odd for a company looking for investors and funds to offer such a huge amount. Of course, it would be easy to offer such an amount, if one knows that no one is going to provide such evidence. Because there is no evidence. Just my opinion.

 

Agreed. In the minimum, it's strange. And it is an unsuspicious Red believer who's speaking! It would be interesting a word from the owner of the company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Haakon I'm believing more and more that Red will be a non-issue, and never come to market. So I guess much of our discussion is and will be moot.

 

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Red will never come to market.. Sigh... You people are not the brightest lights in the room.. That much is clear.

 

Jay

 

I'd be more specific rather than painting everyone here with such a broad brushstroke.

 

The RED camera is completely possible technically, so there is no reason why it -- or something like it -- will not come to the market. I've only questioned how a company can turn a profit selling it for $17,500, and the practicality of a 4K workflow for the average indie person (and I'm sure those issues are on the minds of the RED team)... but not the feasibility of the camera itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red will never come to market.. Sigh... You people are not the brightest lights in the room.. That much is clear.

 

Jay

 

Jay,

 

I have a very strong feeling you'll have a big fat grade A egg on your face in 12 months.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just doesn't pass the "smell test" right now.

 

I agree. As much as I want this RED thing to pan out, it seems funny. I haven't heard any buzz about this item, and all of sudden this announcement of a break in? The first thought that popped in my mind is that someone couldn't deliver, and a "break in" sure is a convenient excuse to delay a concept indefinitely. And what's with a 50K, then a 100K reward? Odd for a company looking for investors and funds to offer such a huge amount. Of course, it would be easy to offer such an amount, if one knows that no one is going to provide such evidence. Because there is no evidence. Just my opinion.

 

You hadn't heard any buzz about RED previously? That's funny, because I've heard the camera's detectors complaining about all the 'hype' for months, here and in various other forums.

 

RED is backed by Jim Jannard, who's worth a billion dollars or so, and who from everything I've seen is doing this because he thinks it's interesting and he thinks this particular market is ripe for some serious change. I haven't see any indication that RED is seeking outside investment. And in addition to financial backing, Jim seems to have a large personal investment in RED. If I were worth a billion bucks and someone robbed the offices of my pet project with the apparent intention (based on what RED's said about what was stolen) of stealing my work, I think I'd be willing to put up some pretty serious cash to find out who it was.

 

Anyway, the theory that RED has invented this break-in to have an excuse for delaying shipment doesn't make any sense, as they've already publicly stated they'll only lose one or two days of work as a result.

 

Whether RED actually delivers as promised remains to be seen, of course. As RED folks themselves have pointed out several times, there are still many challenges to overcome. And healthy skepticism is never bad. But speculating that the company is lying about this break-in crosses the line, in my book, into unhealthy cynicism.

Edited by Chris Kenny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be more specific rather than painting everyone here with such a broad brushstroke.

 

The RED camera is completely possible technically, so there is no reason why it -- or something like it -- will come to the market. I've only questioned how a company can turn a profit selling it for $17,500, and the practicality of a 4K workflow for the average indie person (and I'm sure those issues are on the minds of the RED team)... but not the feasibility of the camera itself.

 

David,

 

This break in story does not seem the least bit fishy to you?

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Canon GL1 is not good enough for home movies?

 

Geez some one should tell all the Fortune 500 companies that use the GL1 to make corporate videos that it isn't even good enough for home movies. We should also inform all of the reality cable TV shows that use the GL1 that they are using a camera not even good enough for home movies.

 

R,

 

 

 

You sound silly here... there are no shows that I know of on any network being shot on the 1/4" CCD 60i GL1. DVX, XL2, PD170... etc. but not GL1 which has been replaced by the GL2 and now 2 new HDV cameras.

 

 

ash =o)

 

I'd be more specific rather than painting everyone here with such a broad brushstroke.

 

The RED camera is completely possible technically, so there is no reason why it -- or something like it -- will come to the market. I've only questioned how a company can turn a profit selling it for $17,500, and the practicality of a 4K workflow for the average indie person (and I'm sure those issues are on the minds of the RED team)... but not the feasibility of the camera itself.

 

 

I have always been with David here. I am rooting for the camera but I personally dont know how he can do it at that price. I suspect what COULD happen is the price may go up after the pre-orders are filled. They also seem to be tackling the workflow issues as well. I do think that whatever happens, this will positively effect the industry. I have said it before but I hope Jim doesnt become the Preston Tucker of the video camera.

 

ash =o

 

)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is RED's price considered so untenable? It does seem possible the price might rise after the pre-orders, but really I don't think the price is all that absurdly low. I think too many people are used to judging by the standards of the film and video production industries, where pretty much everything costs five times what it should as a general rule, due to limited volumes and the simple fact that many customers have the ability to pay.

 

I'm coming at RED from a very different angle. While I've got some experience with video production, most of my background is in the computer industry, where obviously there's a huge amount of competition driving prices down, and where everyone is used to major improvements every year. This computer industry model seems to have carried over to dSLRs... why shouldn't it carry over to digital cinema cameras as well?

 

Well, I can think of one reason why it hasn't. I think most of the big players in digital cinema right now are assuming that the volume wouldn't be there even if they did cut their prices to RED's levels, so they don't see any reason to cut prices. I personally believe they're missing the boat on this... from what I've seen a lot of the people currently shooting on prosumer cameras have the money for something at RED's price point, there just isn't anything presently on the market at that price point that justifies the extra expense over prosumer offerings. Well, 4K at that price point justifies the extra expense!

 

From some things Jim has said, it seems pretty clear that RED shares this general view -- that they can make lots of money moving (by industry standards) large numbers of cameras at low prices. One way or another, this will get tested. Even if RED never ships (and that's not the way I'd bet today), someone else will try the same approach. Silicon Imaging is actually trying something similar right now, though with a slightly lower-end (and even cheaper) camera, and they're further along.

 

Interesting times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue of price is related to the number of units sold, units that pass the quality control, etc. That is why Jim is on such an aggressive pace. If you are paying a staff of experts to do R&D, much easier to pay them for 1 year than 5 years. There is also the cost of producing sensors which, I am told, have a very high failure rate. There is a lot of cutting edge tech on this camera and in order to get it below the $20k mark they are going to have to get very creative, which they appear to be doing. I find it so odd that with technology people whine and complain about how much the higher end stuff costs but you get what you pay for. I mean, on PAPER there is no reason a Porsche should cost 10X as much as a Ford Festiva but you are paying for engineering, style, performance, etc. not just metal, leather and rubber.

 

In this example, Jim has promised a Ferrari for the cost of a Honda. I personally hope he does it and so far, he seems well on his way.

 

 

 

ash =o)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Why is RED's price considered so untenable? It does seem possible the price might rise after the pre-orders, but really I don't think the price is all that absurdly low. I think too many people are used to judging by the standards of the film and video production industries, where pretty much everything costs five times what it should as a general rule, due to limited volumes and the simple fact that many customers have the ability to pay.

 

Major video manufacturers like Sony have the advantage of mass production of multiple product lines that share parts to keep costs down, which is why RED is at a disadvantage compared to someone making and selling thousands of video cameras every year.

 

When you say that pro cameras cost "five times what it should" what are you basing that on? Are you saying that they are taking their costs of R&D and manufacturing and then multiplying it by five times to determine the selling price? Or is it simply that it costs five times more than what you personally would like to pay?

 

And if limited volume is what keeps movie camera prices high, then why should RED be able to get around the economics of scale when other companies can't?

 

I'm not saying that they don't have some sort of plan to deal with this problem of turning a profit, but they are keeping it a secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say that pro cameras cost "five times what it should" what are you basing that on? Are you saying that they are taking their costs of R&D and manufacturing and then multiplying it by five times to determine the selling price? Or is it simply that it costs five times more than what you personally would like to pay?

 

And if limited volume is what keeps movie camera prices high, then why should RED be able to get around the economics of scale when other companies can't?

 

The "five times" thing wasn't just about cameras; I was also thinking of e.g. $1200 matte boxes, $8000 tripods and the like. This stuff just doesn't cost that much to make.

 

I don't think the situation with cameras is quite that bad... but if you look at what you get in the prosumer market vs. what you get in the pro market, it's clear there's some pretty serious price inflation. The jump in price from an $8K HVX200 to an AJ-HDC27H VariCam at $66K (with no lens or viewfinder) frankly just isn't justified by the technical differences.

 

Maybe this is a result of real R&D costs. And on that front, addressing your other point, I think RED (or if not RED, then someone) will be able to achieve economies of scale that current players can't because current players aren't really trying to achieve scale with their pro products. Either they they think demand for pro products wouldn't expand enough even with lower prices (I think it would), or they like the current sort of market segmentation, with nice high margins on their high-end stuff (that works only as long as everyone tacitly agrees to do it).

 

I think this market segmentation is largely a result of the fact that for many years, video could only be pushed so far, while film could only be made so cheap. There was no real possibility of a mid-range, and two distinct markets with totally different types of customers emerged. In the last few years, as high-end video has started to approach film quality, the major players have continued to design for these two distinct markets, despite the fact that the same technology now allows for a continuum of products, literally all the way from cell phone cameras to high-end cinema.

 

Cameras like RED and the Silicon Imaging camera seem so radical not because they're making huge unforeseen leaps in technology (though I don't mean to downplay the serious technical challenges involved), but because the market has been lagging behind the technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite the contrary (and it has been mentioned several times previously), the professional world of still photography has largely abandoned film by a great margin. There's no question at all that the motion picture industry will follow - it just takes time for the technology to play catch up.

People thought vinyl would never die upon the advent of the digital compact disc, either.

 

Your first statement is total bullshit. *Photojournalists* and other low-end, commercial photographers have gone digital, which is really no different than what happened in the TV News industry over 20 years ago. Are you a professional still photographer? Where do you get your stats? According ot the Eastman Kodak company, over 70% of wedding photographers (an area that is probably most similar to filmmaking in the amount of room allowed for artistic and creative lighting and composition) still shoot film. I know a guy that shoots everything on color 8x10 negative film, at $20 per frame. As far as still photography goes, there is a clear quality advantage for film. It has higher dynamic range, MUCH better skin tones, and frankly, the equipment is much cheaper and easy to service. Yeah, I could get away with digital because amateurs often can't tell the difference, but what kind of artform is driven to choose a certain medium solely on economics?

 

I know several DJs who spin only vinyl. They can get all the new releases on this "dead" format. There were two companies that came out with portable record cutters for DJs, and several new turntables that were released since 2000. Have you ever listened to a record and then the same CD immediately after? No comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Forum Sponsors

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CINELEASE

CineLab

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Film Gears

Visual Products

BOKEH RENTALS

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...