philosophical debate re-opened

Jérôme Keller · July 15, 2007

Not quite sure why my initial topic was closed, probably my own fault. Anyway, here you can post comments referring to my other topic which obviously has to be taken with a grain of salt. Still, my main argument stands, the RED is not going to be a camera for the indie crowd and after some period of trial and error will end up being one of many useful tools for professional film productions. Reliable support will obviously be crucial to the RED's success and seeing how "helpful" Jim and his team have been so far with forwarding detailed tech specs and hard test evidence I am more than sceptical as to whether they will deliver in that departement. I guess that's the downside of starting a company that now has just about one year of experience with the production of motion picture cameras, it's bound to be a bit geeky and quite a bit immature (see RED forum for any further proof). I am sure that the finished product fresh from the assembly line will work just fine, but business is business after all, at least let's be realistic about that, and whatever you'll save on one end of the bill you will find yourself investing in another. It's not like they invented and alchemical procedure to turn silicone into Oscar material. My question then is how will the RED change a filmmaker's and DOP's understanding of what film is and what it could be, i.e. what kind of stories will the RED help to explore and will there be entirely new world's to discover? Personally, I think it might be used to push the envelope as far as formal irony is concerned. You could now shoot an extremly insignificant subject and make it look like the biggest story ever told. Which, by the way, is a pretty good definition of Hollywood movies in general :) Just kidding, always kidding...