RED's battle against Sony -- Jim response succeeding the new Sony's Armada* move

[Emanuel A.]

Posted today @dvxuser.com (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=1411101#post1411101):

«Yeah, I've been reading the thread over at Red. Jannard likes to talk about how they are putting pressure on the big boys, and in many ways I think they are, but it has been the big boys that have rearranged Red's game plan over the last couple of weeks no matter how he spins it.

I'm not sure if Red has the R&D resources to even start to compete with Canon's sensor technology. When Canon finally wakes up, decides to get off their butts and move, they can do some incredible things instead of slowly releasing incremental improvements to make a buck. I'd like to thank Red for their presence in the market. I think they finally woke up Canon.

The problem is: Canon is now awake.

People over there seem to be concerned that Scarlett will now be even more expensive. I will go on record that Scarlett will now have to come in at cheaper price point than projected and have more features than the 5D if they hope to have significant market penetration. That is what will put Canon on the run and gut their camcorder line.

Scarlett:

2,499.00-2,999.00
fully manual
variable frame rates
XLR audio inputs 24 bit, 44.1, 48 and 96K, phantom power, line level/mic level
Eos and Nikon mounts
Full Size Sensor/Just as low light sensitive as Canon

This is where Scarlett needs to be if they hope to get a jump on Nikon and Canon. But I don't think they will be able to pull the sensor off. We'll see. I'll buy it if they do.

For some reason, Jannard reminds me of John DeLorean. Remember the DeLorean DMC-12?» ~ f64manray (dvxuser.com forums member)

I'd like to listen this community on the subject matter.


* (about the Sony's Armada quote...) Canon, Nikon...

[Kevin Wild]

RED is good for the industry. Any time someone comes in and doesn't play "by the rules," it usually kicks the competition in the arse and shakes things up. I think RED played all this just right, as they didn't just play "catch up" as a new company (which many companies would do...a startup that can MATCH the products of Sony, Canon and Panny? Sounds pretty good.), but instead flew right by them with innovation.

So...even if you're a Canon or Sony or Panny fan, RED is good and you are going to get better products at better prices because of them.

My $.02.

Kevin

[Rami Mustakim]

I saw the Nikon D90 and now the Canon EOS Mark II. Very interesting products.
However I'm very confident with RED and I just feel that Jim and Red team will amaze us soon.
Truth is I don't even imagine Jim not responding with something BIG.
RED seems to be a very flexible company really listening to their customers needs.
For me there is no doubt RED will win this battle.

[Joseph Ward]

I think Red just wants to do what they want to do regardless of competition. They are only influenced by the people if any.:spidy:

[Chris Pickle]

Red would never put a full frame in the Scarlet. The it would be a .... Red One.

[Fredrik Callinggard]

There's just no comparing to a camera that shoots Full HD but in a mpeg compression as Canon does. Scarlett will be RAW, 3K and will also be able to exceed the Canon in versatility for a "FILM" camera. The list can go on so why bother.

The ones who should be afraid of Canon's 5D MarkII is Sony with their EX.

[Johnny St.Ours]

John DeLorean was set up by Detroit and the FBI into a drug scandal that ruined him. This was after the Big Three did everything to keep him from getting an engine strong enough to pull his stainless steel car down the road. Too bad, it was beautiful and he had a real vision, I think. But in the days when he left GM I guess they didn't have the same stock options they do today, he wasn't as well funded as he should have been to complete his quest.
I think by Mr. Jannard having his own tools to evade the big company tactics of economic strangulation, supply embargo and trade strong-arming, he's already outwitted them. There isn't much they can do with somebody who doesn't need their money.
Although I will say after lugging my new RED around for two weeks, those other companies sure know how to make things smaller! But that doesn't work on me either, I still want a DeLorean- even if the engine is 130hp, I love steel.

[Tom Lowe]

I've been saying for a while now that Canon is the company that has all the tools to really jump into this digital cinema field and clean house. For whatever reasons, they have not wanted to. That might change, or it might not. Canon's current lineup of HD cameras is a disgrace. They are not even close to seriously being in the game. Arri and Dalsa are miles ahead of them.

The 5DM2's video option is awesome, but it's very far from being a digital cinema camera, if for no other reason than its form factor, lack of viewfinder, etc. No one knows if this is just Canon trying to keep Nikon at bay, or if they are serious about digital cinema.

Comparing the 5Dm2 to Scarlet doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I always thought of Scarlet as being something extreme-sports shooters would really love, with its small form factor and super high framerates.

All this talk about how Jim is flailing around is probably nonsense, since none of these people have any idea what JJ has up his sleeve. I for one have stopped trying to guess... because it's useless when things are changing this quickly. Jim has the luxury of running an extremely nimble company that can turn on a dime. That's a good thing.

[Robert Sanders]

Dude, I couldn't agree with you more. Canon could be a very serious competitor to RED. Not that I'm encouraging competition, per se. But competition is good at the root level. I could easily see a digital cinema world monopolized by RED and Canon.

Canon's got everything they need. A foundry with a head start on chip design. A badass lens manufacturing facility. They already understand ergonomics like no other. They just need to do it.

Sony made their move. F23 and F35. Panasonic said no thanks to the cinema industry. Panavision has stepped up. Who knows if Thompson will ever release a Viper2.

This is Canon's moment. They better show up with something special at NAB or they can kiss their HD markets goodbye forever.

[Craig Bowman]

Without Redcode all you have is a camera with a great sensor and too much data to stuff through the keyhole. Redcode Raw and its clever variations make not only Red, Epic and Scarlet possible, but the enormous killer delivery of Red Ray.

Its what gives Jim the big "two" in his one two punch!

[Kevin Wild]

Until Red Ray delivers...we probably shouldn't brag about what it delivers. :-)

I refuse to be a fan of something that doesn't exist yet in the market. Looking forward to it...but that's it. Looking forward...

[I Bloom]

You can't call RED's competitors "awake" until they list this feature:

Wavelet Compressed Raw

Until you see that feature or something even more innovative. Just don't worry about it because they are asleep.

IBloom

[Kenn Michael]

exactly...

Jim said it himself - Redcode is their ace in the hole.

[dalen johnson]

You can't call RED's competitors "awake" until they list this feature:

IBloom

you cant call them awake when their 5DII still features less than a 100% bright viewfinder. (96-98%...what a joke)
Even Sony got that one right. ;)

Peace

dAlen

[Jeff Coatney]

There's room in the market for a fully awake Canon, Nikon, Sony and Red. A lot of room. Scarlet isn't red's only market.

[JanneJansson]

John DeLorean and Jim Jannard are cool good-guys, I want o be like this when I grow up. :)

[Mark L. Pederson]

You can't call RED's competitors "awake" until they list this feature:

Wavelet Compressed Raw

Until you see that feature or something even more innovative. Just don't worry about it because they are asleep.

IBloom

post of the year

[E.J. Sadler]

When I read things like this I really have to wonder if these guys have ever actually shot or graded anything.

The power of RAW motion files is absolutely priceless.

I do agree that the 5D is far more competition to existing HD cams than RED since you're in the same paradigm of locking in 80% of your look at exposure time.

If the 5D's HDMI/HD-SDI out is a real output, the combination of the 5D and a Convergent Designs flash recorder @100Mbps long GOP could offer a combination that could instantly kill the use of 35mm adapters on HD cams for an awful lot of productions.

The ergonomics of a handheld SLR in a cinerig build should produce quite a few frankenrigs, but I bet they'll still handle better than an adapter stuck on to a HD zoom hanging off the front of HPX500.

Between RED and Cannon, I think Panny is the one really feeling the heat.

[Tom Lowe]

Not to mention Sony....

So... let's say you managed to get a 10bit 4:2:2 or better 1080p feed off the HDMI port into something like the Cineform HDMI Recorder and you mounted the whole thing on a "Frankenrig".... what could you use for viewfinding and pulling focus? I guess the Liveview could somehow be hooked to a small LCD for viewfinding?

[E.J. Sadler]

I guess the Liveview could somehow be hooked to a small LCD for viewfinding?


I'd use the HD/SDI loop out from the recorder to our current Nebtek.

[Robert Sanders]

Agreed. RED's RAW workflow is their claim to fame. No doubt about it.

But I can't help but feel there's a big gap in the middle between traditional HD cameras and the REDONE. On one side you have 2/3" 1080p YUV/RGB cameras. On the other side you have a 35mm 4K RAW camera.

If someone like Canon created a 35mm 2k RGB/Log camera with a native DSLR lens mount and an advanced codec at 1/2 to 2/3 the price of a REDONE they'd sell a ton of them. There are a lot of indie filmmakers and event videographers who want the 35mm look but don't want to get into the intricacies of a RAW workflow. Basically, it would be a Baby Genesis or Baby D21. I think there's a market for that.

[Joseph Ward]

The Big Boys will change when they feel the pinch. It will happen. If not they will be destroyed. Red and others are going to make it happen.:matrix:

[Simon Valderrama]

For some reason, Jannard reminds me of John DeLorean. Remember the DeLorean DMC-12?

Oh man, i LOVE DMC-12.

http://www.myspace.com/neonx2

[Tom Lowe]

I'd use the HD/SDI loop out from the recorder to our current Nebtek.

Can you explain what you mean? We're talking about the 5Dm2, right?

[David Rasberry]

When I read things like this I really have to wonder if these guys have ever actually shot or graded anything.


Between RED and Cannon, I think Panny is the one really feeling the heat.

"Panny" could blindside everybody with a 4/3 standard format D-cine/still combo cam next year. Check out the reviews on the new Lumix G1 micro 4/3 still camera.

[Emanuel A.]

For some reason, Jannard reminds me of John DeLorean. Remember the DeLorean DMC-12?Oh man, i LOVE DMC-12.

http://www.myspace.com/neonx2This quote is not mine. Only from the original poster quoted by myself as (point of) departure for this thread. As above-mentioned.

[Jorge Díaz-Amador]

I've always suspected that the reason Canon did not leverage their sensor and processing technology into a digital cinema style camera is because the "photography" and "video" divisions were totally separate and probably do not talk to each other.

Malcolm Gladwell writes about this in The Tipping Point. When companies get larger than 150 employees, these problems start to arise.

Keep in mind that up to now, "Cinema Camera" was a product that was made in very small quantities (ARRI usually made 1500 of each 35mm camera model over the course of 15 year model run). This used to be a low volume business. Until RED changed everything.*

Why is it that Canon and Nikon were never interested in making a 16mm camera (with the exception of the Canon Scoopic)? They had no trouble making Super 8mm cameras. But they just felt the volume was not there on 16mm.

Once RED ships more than 5000 cameras we can definitely say that things have changed. At that point, the RED ONE will exceed the numbers of the somewhat similarly priced ARRI 16SR 1-2-3 series (5100 were sold in 30 years, they started at about $15k end ended at $50k for the body).

I've personally told Jim how significant I think his achievement is.

---

*This explains the shortage of Zeiss cine lenses. ARRI placed the orders based on how many 35mm cameras they expected to sell, plus a few lens upgrades. Now there are 10x as many "hungry PL mounts" out there...

[Joseph Ward]

RedOne changed everything, even against the Silicon Imaging SI-2K, Phantom 65, ect.. Does anyone have a timeline and sales chart showing this? Red is only competing with themselves right now, maybe other small companies but not the big ones. The big ones just don't get it or they do but don't want to change until they have no choice!:tongue:

[Even Solberg]

Most likely the latter. There is a lot of inertia in big companies. The mentality is "If it ain't broken....". All paradigm shifts come from small, nimble companies with radical ideas.

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

Canon already offered HD 24p for less than a thousand bucks.

Canon is offering 1080p with 35MM DOF with one of their top of the lines DSLR.

Canon didn't make a move against Sony EX1.

Maybe Canon will make a move against Scarlet...
Creating a 2K solid state recording camera that does RAW?

But how much would it cost?

[lubomir.zvolensky]

imagine hf10/hf11/hg21 with 2/3" senzor instead of current 1/3" one, meaning much less noisy lowlight. Throw in wider lens.

This could cost approx. 500$ more. Easy. I really wonder why no manufacturer done this already. The only answer is they don't feel enough pressure on this oligarchic market with two or three significant players.

Come on Red, change that!

[Shane Betts]

I think everyone is too fixated on pixel numbers and have lost sight of the fact that it's sensor/film/target size that really makes the image. Take a look at well exposed footage shot with a single plane of focus on an HVX and it could pass for 35. As soon as the enormous DoF is exposed it looks like Betacam.

The digital projection standard calls for 2k which is barely larger than 1080. A 1080 camera with a Vistavision sized sensor and good stills glass would kill any 4k camera with a DX sized sensor IMHO. The images from the 5DM2 are stunning because the sensor is so big. The skew is a problem (note no horizontal movement in the Canon video), the 30fps is a problem and the compression may be a problem but the images are gorgeous.

And don't get concerned about how stills lenses don't adapt well to follow focus and iris racking. That's old technology - a guy stands by with a tape measure and a whiteboard marker? P-lease.

All Canon or Nikon (or RED) need to do (aside from banishing the skew) is offer up control over auto focus points to, say, a laptop where software could co-opt the face detection paradigm to virtually rotoscope shots. Just set the focus points during the blocking and then tell it to focus at keyframe 1, keyframe 2 etc. The camera would then dynamically maintain focus despite actors and grips missing marks. Use bezier curves for nice smooth transitions and slow pulls. The technology is all there it just needs to be put together.

Add in the super-high ISO ratings Canon are now using and you could be ramping ISO for varispeed shots rather than iris. Hold that DoF while you change frame rates and do it all from a laptop at pre-programmed settings. Just hit <return> for the next keyframe.

My question over RED is can they compete in the autofocus field against the incumbent DSLR players and can they make 24x36mm sensors? OK, that was two questions:biggrin:

[Tom Lowe]

So you think Jim should add an "ISO ring" to the DSMC? :)

[Evin Grant]

I think lenses really are the key issue for the DSMC. I have a significant investment in Nikon AF lenses so for me the DSMC has to have some significant interface with them to be desirable. I will continue to shoot the Red One and then Epic for cinematography but those will remain S35 sensors and continue to use existing PL mount glass. For the DSMC it's a different story. I think there may even have to be two versions, one in Nikon one in EOS. But can Red even get Nikon and/or Canon to license the AF/VR capabilities to them? If anyone can it's Jim.

[Sanjin Jukic]

I think lenses really are the key issue for the DSMC. I have a significant investment in Nikon AF lenses so for me the DSMC has to have some significant interface with them to be desirable. I will continue to shoot the Red One and then Epic for cinematography but those will remain S35 sensors and continue to use existing PL mount glass. For the DSMC it's a different story. I think there may even have to be two versions, one in Nikon one in EOS. But can Red even get Nikon and/or Canon to license the AF/VR capabilities to them? If anyone can it's Jim.

You would not need a license.

That's to expensive, you have to make millions with lenses like Sigma to make it sense to buy Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc... lens electronic licenses.

For DSMC you would need sort of IMS or just PST IMS to get as many lenses as you can afford.

BTW, I will put Birger's EF or Andy Lesniak's EF mounts on IMS soon.

Somebody should make soon Nikon AF (maybe Birger could do that!?) and I will try out also to put that on IMS.

[Shane Betts]

So you think Jim should add an "ISO ring" to the DSMC? :)

I think it should be controllable via software but, yeah, it should be there and on the Epic too. It's a no-brainer for the software to figure it out - no reason it shouldn't be totally accurate.

Think about it. How many stops do you normally rack in a speed up or slow down? Two? Three? We've seen in Build 16 how stable the image is over a a range of ISOs greater than a couple of stops. I think you'd notice the change less than a DoF change. Of course, sometimes you'd want to rack iris but sometimes you'd rack ISO.

My point in my previous post is that it might just be time to let go of some of the old ways of doing things and truly embrace all that technology can offer us. Come at things from a different angle.

[Stephen Williams]

I. Of course, sometimes you'd want to rack iris but sometimes you'd rack ISO.
.

Hi,

Why not change shutter angle, it's been done like that on film cameras for many years.

Stephen

[Shane Betts]

Hi,

Why not change shutter angle, it's been done like that on film cameras for many years.

Stephen

Yeah, why not. But why not also have other options if the technology can give them to you. That's my point.

[Dj Joofa]

Hi,

Why not change shutter angle, it's been done like that on film cameras for many years.

Stephen

Caution Stephen, with digital acquisition and display there are some notions that don't directly transfer from film world to digital world. If the frame rate is matched to line frequency then any shutter angle would suffice in the film world, however, since that role is taken over by exposure time in a typical (rolling shutter) digital camera, the concept moves over at the possible expense of flicker/banding, even if the frame rate is matched.

Additionally, it is easier to not notice the "defects" in a theater projection (could be as out of control of a film director/producer's reach as the variation in the bulb used in theater projector) since visual adaption is solely provided by the film content information. Therefore, once the human eye is adapted to theater conditions a lot of defects in color shifts, exposure, etc., are hidden.

Unfortunately, with the abundance of projection in today's world outside of the well-controlled environment of a theater made possible by digital technology, many defects which otherwise would be undetected in a theater might be visible in digital projection.

[Júlio Taubkin]

I think lenses really are the key issue for the DSMC. I have a significant investment in Nikon AF lenses so for me the DSMC has to have some significant interface with them to be desirable. I will continue to shoot the Red One and then Epic for cinematography but those will remain S35 sensors and continue to use existing PL mount glass. For the DSMC it's a different story. I think there may even have to be two versions, one in Nikon one in EOS. But can Red even get Nikon and/or Canon to license the AF/VR capabilities to them? If anyone can it's Jim.

Well Evin, and since you brought it up, to be compatible with 35mm stills glass, you cannot have a 2/3" or S16 sized sensor. We would never be able to use wide angles. But if they get us a 35mm sensor wouldn't the DSMC be a RED ONE killer?

what a dillema. Thank got it's RED. I guess I'll be happy no matter what they decide.

[Jannard]

Oh my gosh... the "big boys" are awake? We had better pack our bags and head for the hills! Why didn't someone tell us this sooner?

Yesterday we knew nothing. Today we know something. Tomorrow we just might be dangerous. Stay tuned for early November. Things are heatin' up.

Jim

[Shawn Nelson]

Why Nov? Seems arbitrary, or are you trying to deflate holiday season wind from their sales?

[Jannard]

Why Nov? Seems arbitrary, or are you trying to deflate holiday season wind from their sales?

We want to let our customers know what we are doing as soon as possible. It will take us another few weeks to finalize everything. We work to our plan... which is:

Develop a plan and begin execution.
Present the plan.
Listen to the feedback while there is still time to adjust.
Adjust.
Release.

That is why we announce a bit more in advance than our competitors. The upside is obvious. The downside is that our competitors know what we are doing ahead of time. We'll take the risk. This is a better way to do it... unless you disagree?

Jim

[Jannard]

Why Nov? Seems arbitrary, or are you trying to deflate holiday season wind from their sales?

You don't beat the competition with what you say. You beat them with what you release.

Jim

[Shawn Nelson]

It's an interesting balance, because it also gives you a healthy market-research feedback loop.

As for tipping off the competitors, eh, are you really yet to a point where that matters? They still haven't figured out how to go to war with you. They are too slow, too heavily armored for the nimble Red. It's Agincourt all over :-). Anyways, I appreciate the feedback loop.

[Shawn Nelson]

You don't beat the competition with what you say. You beat them with what you release.

Jim

True, but it seems to be a well regarded strategy in high-tech to release bigger-better-cheaper specs right before a competitor releases a product, to get market share to hold off on purchase.

[Jannard]

True, but it seems to be a well regarded strategy in high-tech to release bigger-better-cheaper specs right before a competitor releases a product, to get market share to hold off on purchase.

If we considered them a competitor, that might be considered an issue.

If someone needs a good still camera today... a 5D II is a great consideration.

Jim

[Benni Diez]

That's how you kick old school industrialism's butt. :)

[Jannard]

We are here because we are on your side. We are you. We tell you what we are doing because it is healthy. We are not the typical company that has a strategy to become a money making machine at the expense of our customers. We are a company who's sole purpose is to make the best stuff. The stuff the other guys can't afford to make because it is counter-productive to the "business model". I really believe we are different. We LOVE doing this stuff. I just spent the weekend working with Jarred and Matt on the program. We don't do this for "overtime". That is a hard combination to compete with.

Jim

[Roberto Lequeux]

We are you.
Jim

That's right motha!@&%!*^@'ers!
:watsup:

Sorry about the turrets syndrome, but I passionately believe that. Why?: RED ONE!



The giants are awake? LOL!!! Who says? The giant's marketing leeches? People that can't stand to look at the cameras they bought when they bought a bit too early? Listen... SHOW ME THE MONEY.. in this case the cameras. Are we talking about pathetic video functions in professional still cameras? I seriously hope not. Don't get me wrong, I am not screaming at anyone, I am just cheering on the Red guys here. I hope you don't read this post assuming anger cause the only way you would take offense is if you were some upper level management doosh-bag that prays every night to one day be one of the big suits with a disproportionate bailout umbrella bonus bribe to encourage the slow drip of technology that we've been putting up with... it may not be as big of a deal in the entertainment industry... but if this were health-care it would be impossible for anyone to rationalize that their actions were not criminal.



Jim has the luxury of running an extremely nimble company that can turn on a dime. That's a good thing.

I believe this is one of the key factors. And I believe that he could prove himself, yet again, by showing us how to keep that agility as operations grow exponentially.

[Tom Lowe]

We are here because we are on your side. We are you. We tell you what we are doing because it is healthy. We are not the typical company that has a strategy to become a money making machine at the expense of our customers. We are a company who's sole purpose is to make the best stuff. The stuff the other guys can't afford to make because it is counter-productive to the "business model". I really believe we are different. We LOVE doing this stuff. I just spent the weekend working with Jarred and Matt on the program. We don't do this for "overtime". That is a hard combination to compete with.

Jim

And this pretty much sums it up, folks. http://www.reduser.net/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif

With this mindset, and all the resources and talent at Red, I am getting incredibly excited about DSMC in particular. The main worry I would have -- if Red was a typical Sony/Canon type of company -- would be that the specs on DSMC would be "too awesome" and that it would compete with Red One and Epic, and therefore you would need to "dumb it down." But I never believed Jim and Red would operate that way. Your post right here, Jim, makes me doubly convinced of this.

Is DSMC still the hottest ticket inside of Red, in terms of what you guys are most amped about?

[Jason Ing]

We want to let our customers know what we are doing as soon as possible. It will take us another few weeks to finalize everything. We work to our plan... which is:

Develop a plan and begin execution.
Present the plan.
Listen to the feedback while there is still time to adjust.
Adjust.
Release.

That is why we announce a bit more in advance than our competitors. The upside is obvious. The downside is that our competitors know what we are doing ahead of time. We'll take the risk. This is a better way to do it... unless you disagree?

Jim

Love this!

[Nova Invicta]

Red are still a small company that are currently moving up to their 3000 camera. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus etc sell thousands of cameras every week and are all things to all people from simple point and shoot to top end SLRs. They are not comparing themselves to Red and nor can they communicate with all of their customers many whom merely buy a camera and dont want communication.
You seriously have to ask yourself why Jim is so preoccupied with Sony or Canon or Nikon or Arri or Panavision they are not running a business model like his and are not trying to.
What Red has done is pretty amazing stuff but equally these other companies do some pretty amazing stuff and anyone who thinks when Philips / Sony invented the CD it wasnt amazing need to look around them,or the Ipod from Apple or when Mercedes - Benz gave us ABS (how many accidents has that avoided) or the airbag etc etc. Being not in it for the money is OK when your a billionaire try telling that to the folks at Vision Research. All the threads that jump on the evangelistic band wagon actually loose Red credability let the products stand for themselves and if the new camera is revolutionary it will sell.

[Nova Invicta]

All the talk is about the sensor or camera which obviously is important but in this digital age the software to manipulate pictures is where the money is. Medium Format cameras have died back and many of the remaining manufacturers rely on companies such as Phase One to survive. Equally Adobe, Apple, Corel etc make better margins than the camera manufacturers do. In Hollywood or London the big bucks for features are in post not in camera rental so if Jim really wants to make a difference its here he needs to look next.

[Todd M.]

All the talk is about the sensor or camera which obviously is important but in this digital age the software to manipulate pictures is where the money is...

I think Panavision or Abel Cine Tech might take issue with where you think the money is. No doubt a larger portion of a production's budget goes to "post-production" as opposed to camera rental but it is also going to many companies, or a single much larger, higher overhead, diversified business or group of businesses. And software is small potatoes in the scheme of things. Sure a Quantel Pablo system is expensive, but how many actually exist... here in Los Angeles, I think I would be safe in estimating less than 100.

I for one am hopeful that RED will stay focused on what it does best: sensor development and camera system design.

Besides, all the post-production in the world doesn't do anything for you with no quality images to work with.

[Benni Diez]

Red does consider the Software side. By opening up their system and releasing SDKs. Soon more programs will be capable of handling r3d files than any other online hi def format.
That might not be profitable now, but it paves the way for a future of world dominance.

[Dj Joofa]

I think Panavision or Abel Cine Tech might take issue with where you think the money is. ... And software is small potatoes in the scheme of things.

Nope, Nova is right. Not just talking about camera business, if you study the models of those companies that develop software/hardware co-solutions, you would come to realize that (relative) higher profit margins on software products actually many times supports hardware platform R&D, since hardware products don't have that much margins.

[DanCar]

... We tell you what we are doing because it is healthy.
JimReminds me of open source development that is taking over the software industry. I have no doubts that 20 years from now, many hardware companies will adopt this philosphy also.

[Robert P. Hogue]

The good thing is Jim won't repeat the mistakes of John DeLorean. Therefore we can be assured a solid roadmap for quite some time in the foreseeable future, to hopefully de-throne the status quo.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Jim made himself a multi-billionaire, well I don't really know any of the details but he created a company from the ground up and sold it for 2.1 Billion... I have a little faith on the guy. Just a little... :)

[Chris Gustafson]

Jim made himself a multi-billionaire, well I don't really know any of the details but he created a company from the ground up and sold it for 2.1 Billion... I have a little faith on the guy. Just a little... :)

Roberto ! you are more right to have faith than you know !

As a Midwest sales rep. for him for almost 10 yrs. in the very early days of of that company, I observed but a few the "details" ...

-Number 1 beyond anything else... Be an artist, and a visionary, and have a very clear (albeit "illusive" to some) view of his artistic futuristic, ergonomic vision of a future "measurably better" than whatever the current status quo might have been at that given alignment of the moons planets and stars...!
-Have an inherent passion for your art, vision and dreams that is simply relentless, and no matter how the so called competition tried... "unstoppable".
-Surround yourself with equally as insane tireless human resource talent that share your art, vision, and dreams as you do !

-Start very small with a single "bullet proof" product "the EyeShade" that was revolutionary, immediately "controversial" AND, not "arguably", but "Measurably" better than any other sports eyewear lens on the market...
-Get it in the hands, and "on the eyes" of the worlds top athletes, i.e. the people that needed the "best of the best" performance in their "equipment" to be competitive.
-Listen, Listen, Listen, and then listen some more, to the needs and desires and "complaints" of those athletes on how to improve and "perfect" those improvements so that those people
at the top of the top, at the top of their game, could tailor the product to their specific needs...
-Use that feedback from those professional users of that product, to make each "new" product, and product platform incrementally and "measurably better" than the previous product, or products in their class...
-Back up those products with a customer service, communication, and support program that literally changed an industry...
-In expansion of the line... "always have the incrementally measurably improving core technology" at the root...
-Relentlessly "educate" at the grass roots level, and prove beyond question his technological superiority in the core invention of that product line... his "lens".
-Venomously "protect" the intellectual property and integrity that he and his company invented/created.
-Offer the culmination of that vision to the end user at price that was "reasonable", "justifiable", and most of all "obtainable". (starting from scratch, the trouble was always keeping up with demand) Oh Darn !
-Never sleep
-Oh yeah peoples.... "Build it in the good old USA"...

That eyewear line, originally designed for athletes gave them performance and the ability to "COMPETE" and view their sports with ansi z87.1 saftey glass Optical Clarity and ergonomic modular design never previously available....Much less even thought of by the so called competition... The trickle down effects of that company are now very very "CLEAR" in history of that industry...
Red is yet another company he is starting from "ground zero"... Can "I"/we see a "clear" correlation here

Yes Roberto.... be very comfortable having "a little faith in the guy" ..
Personally I believe it simple... and am confident history will show. Jim's gift/curse, is his tireless dream and vision to have all humans see the world more "clearly"....

Motion has never been my artistic vent, I shoot stills. However that said, I am soooooo looking forward to DSMC ! Started a piggy bank for it last week when I read about it !

Cheers
Chris Gus...

[John Caballero]

Great post Chris. Very inspiring!

[Hrvoje Simic]

We are here because we are on your side. We are you. We tell you what we are doing because it is healthy. We are not the typical company that has a strategy to become a money making machine at the expense of our customers. We are a company who's sole purpose is to make the best stuff. The stuff the other guys can't afford to make because it is counter-productive to the "business model". I really believe we are different. We LOVE doing this stuff. I just spent the weekend working with Jarred and Matt on the program. We don't do this for "overtime". That is a hard combination to compete with.

Jim


Now THAT's a quote right there.
Cheers, Jim. High five.

[A. Bastaki]

i dont think canon, sony, or panny really give a shit about some wannabe filmmakers. There was a hole in the market. Red filled it. There were images being made that are very filmic by canon's dslr's.. the video market was and still is TV content based. Red came along because of us. We wanted to shoot video because its cheaper but we wanted film quality and film aesthetics.. film lenses.. basically filmmaking on video. Why would sony give a major damn about that. go to any film market and see how many films are made... and what percentage of them suck ass and what percentage of them were low budget. sony.. and canon.. make big bucks catering eng type of shooting.. tv based stuff.. documentary style shooting.. there's safe money in that. Corporate videos.. weddings.. sports.. wildlife.. That's all sony right there.

Panny is just.. lol.. i don't know where they belong. I feel that they are lost in between.

It's all about taking a percentage of an emerging market. or capturing an emerging market. Honestly, i wouldn't do a soap with a bunch of red's hooked up hd-sdi or sd-sdi. i'd rather go with sony.. reliable technology.. its been there and it works best. And the world is still SD. RED is overkill. TV stations want everything done in an hour.. not even an hour.. they want it LIVE.. no time for raw and hiss and piss.

Calling them asleep towards this small market gap of high-end indy filmmakers is just like calling RED to be asleep towards the BIG ASS market called TV.

Each company has a goal, they have a market they cater. Therefore.. RED listens to us. Sony broadcast listens to broadcast ceo's and techs. Red found a market gap and is catering it, and it has done an amazing job so far.

[spitfire44]

software controlled focus pulling? I think not, at least in any project that is narrative driven. How is software going to decide when to pull focus when a actor hits a mark but delivers a line that motivates a pull? my point being that having a human being with a follow focus in one hand and a functioning brain that can interpret subtle nuances of dialogue or other creative impulses beats a machine everyday.....Anyone can put a mark on a lens at two points and spin the barrel, but the job of a focus puller on i.e, Dramatic Film or Episodics is nothing short of magic, not mechanical. As far as, telling a piece of software to pull focus during blocking then repeat during a take, that would be amazing, but again why would you want to eliminate the position of the focus puller? Who would I ask to get me a double espresso? The clapper/loader? oh.....he doesn't exist anymore and the DIT guy.....he has enough gear already that asking him to put a Cappuccino machine in his kit would be rude.
Eric





And don't get concerned about how stills lenses don't adapt well to follow focus and iris racking. That's old technology - a guy stands by with a tape measure and a whiteboard marker? P-lease.

All Canon or Nikon (or RED) need to do (aside from banishing the skew) is offer up control over auto focus points to, say, a laptop where software could co-opt the face detection paradigm to virtually rotoscope shots. Just set the focus points during the blocking and then tell it to focus at keyframe 1, keyframe 2 etc. The camera would then dynamically maintain focus despite actors and grips missing marks. Use bezier curves for nice smooth transitions and slow pulls. The technology is all there it just needs to be put together.

Add in the super-high ISO ratings Canon are now using and you could be ramping ISO for varispeed shots rather than iris. Hold that DoF while you change frame rates and do it all from a laptop at pre-programmed settings. Just hit <return> for the next keyframe.

My question over RED is can they compete in the autofocus field against the incumbent DSLR players and can they make 24x36mm sensors? OK, that was two questions:biggrin:

[A. Bastaki]

software controlled focus pulling? I think not, at least in any project that is narrative driven. How is software going to decide when to pull focus when a actor hits a mark but delivers a line that motivates a pull? my point being that having a human being with a follow focus in one hand and a functioning brain that can interpret subtle nuances of dialogue or other creative impulses beats a machine everyday.....Anyone can put a mark on a lens at two points and spin the barrel, but the job of a focus puller on i.e, Dramatic Film or Episodics is nothing short of magic, not mechanical. As far as, telling a piece of software to pull focus during blocking then repeat during a take, that would be amazing, but again why would you want to eliminate the position of the focus puller? Who would I ask to get me a double espresso? The clapper/loader? oh.....he doesn't exist anymore and the DIT guy.....he has enough gear already that asking him to put a Cappuccino machine in his kit would be rude.
Eric

I'm with spitfire. I gotta say i really hate the idea of controlling focus with a laptop.. i guess the focus puller is going to be there. sitting on his ass.

I'm not a fan of focus points.. im a fan of focus that and follow. but then.. even that is tough.. because say ure doing a closeup of a dog's tail.. it's all white... software can't follow that for you ;) you need a focus puller.

BUT what would really be interesting is if a guy.. not necessarily a focus puller but of course prefferably a focus puller can basically point his focus with a mouse, the mouse moves and the focus is electronically pulled to have that point in focus. like a pda kind of a thing that gets a videofeed and basically the guy puts the focus on one point and drags his stylo or pen around to have the point touching the surface of the pda in focus. That kind of auto-focussing makes sense. also the distance of the focus should be anotated on the screen along with aperture..etc.

[Kholi Hicks]

i dont think canon, sony, or panny really give a shit about some wannabe filmmakers. There was a hole in the market. Red filled it. There were images being made that are very filmic by canon's dslr's.. the video market was and still is TV content based. Red came along because of us. We wanted to shoot video because its cheaper but we wanted film quality and film aesthetics.. film lenses.. basically filmmaking on video. Why would sony give a major damn about that. go to any film market and see how many films are made... and what percentage of them suck ass and what percentage of them were low budget. sony.. and canon.. make big bucks catering eng type of shooting.. tv based stuff.. documentary style shooting.. there's safe money in that. Corporate videos.. weddings.. sports.. wildlife.. That's all sony right there.

Panny is just.. lol.. i don't know where they belong. I feel that they are lost in between.

It's all about taking a percentage of an emerging market. or capturing an emerging market. Honestly, i wouldn't do a soap with a bunch of red's hooked up hd-sdi or sd-sdi. i'd rather go with sony.. reliable technology.. its been there and it works best. And the world is still SD. RED is overkill. TV stations want everything done in an hour.. not even an hour.. they want it LIVE.. no time for raw and hiss and piss.

Calling them asleep towards this small market gap of high-end indy filmmakers is just like calling RED to be asleep towards the BIG ASS market called TV.

Each company has a goal, they have a market they cater. Therefore.. RED listens to us. Sony broadcast listens to broadcast ceo's and techs. Red found a market gap and is catering it, and it has done an amazing job so far.

It sucks that Panasonic doesn't care about the small filmmaker... I can't fathom why they put a flip function on the HPX170 like they knew what a 35mm Adapterwas... It's like Jan Critterdan was on DVXuser, looked at this long list of wishes for the next "HVX200" and passed them along for no reason at all...

Can't understand why Jan is even over at DVXuser relaying our words to Panasonic, they don't even care about the low budget filmmaker!

... moving on.

So who's waiting until the end of 2009/early 2010 for this new camera instead of buying one now and getting on with it? Me me me me!

[Nova Invicta]

Panasonic has sold over 80,000 P2 cameras worldwide so someone must have purchased them and they certainly got Sony attention to solid state recording.

[David Birdy]

We are here because we are on your side. We are you. We tell you what we are doing because it is healthy. We are not the typical company that has a strategy to become a money making machine at the expense of our customers. We are a company who's sole purpose is to make the best stuff. The stuff the other guys can't afford to make because it is counter-productive to the "business model". I really believe we are different. We LOVE doing this stuff. I just spent the weekend working with Jarred and Matt on the program. We don't do this for "overtime". That is a hard combination to compete with.

Jim

Quote of the Year Jim !!



Good ideas with good people making Great products!

Dave

[Nova Invicta]

The day we loose the 1st AC in professional filmaking at the highest level filmmaking is dead it just becomes point and shoot at that point so anyone who thinks stills style autofocus is for the professional market honestly doesnt understand things like splits, tracking actors to marks etc

[spitfire44]

Nova, don't fret....it'll never happen while there is live action to shoot.
Spitfire aka Eric


The day we loose the 1st AC in professional filmaking at the highest level filmmaking is dead it just becomes point and shoot at that point so anyone who thinks stills style autofocus is for the professional market honestly doesnt understand things like splits, tracking actors to marks etc

[Roberto Lequeux]

Just thought it would be a good thread to link this to:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=311703&postcount=183

[Alberto Caprioglio]

The problem is: Canon is now awake.

It sounds like somebody should start to shiver.
So far, Canon's idea of cinema is HDV.
Canon's current line of cinema cameras is 3 (good, for small budget and compact size) HDV cameras with 1/3" sensors and MiniDV cassette. Of the 3, only one has interchangeable lenses. Which is a pity, since canon glass is not bad at all.

[Alberto Caprioglio]

TV stations want everything done in an hour.. not even an hour.. they want it LIVE.. no time for raw and hiss and piss.

I agree.
In facts, I have never seen in my life a worse embarassing shit than this thing called TV.
And I'm sure millions of people agree with this.
Tv images also look ugly in fictions and in any program that hasn't an Oscars-like scenography and glamorous lights. Have TV-cameras with ridicule tiny sensors and fastfood workflow anything to do with this?

TV fictions shot on film look good. No surprise. Things shot on Red look equally good.
Things shoot with broadcast cameras look bad. You can't avoid having too much shit in focus with tiny sensors lenses, and this is awful for reality things (unless the reality is any good, like for example landscape of nature, sofisticated traditional dandicraft
and architecture, beautiful colors in clothes, sunsets, water, animals, beautiful faces... but usually all this excludes our familiar landscape in western countries, such elegance is so difficult to find when you look around. I don't know if the corrupted landscape makes TV look so ugly or if it is TV that has made transofrmed reality into an even more vulgar and ugly place. There are exceptions of course, where TV is not so dominant in life, like looks, and is much better. And is more pleasant - and makes much more sense - to use cinema cameras in such places that do not look like TV. Real, beautiful places, where you can capture all those colors... basically, shooting like if you where shooting film, even if it's not a film but an episode for TV.
A battle against sony may sound like a battle against TV, the cheap and kitch aesthethic of TV, the contents that TV asks for that demand broadcast-type tools, all that shit.
But I'm sure I may not necessarily be so. It depends on Sony if it wants to be associated with TV or cinema. And what TV and what cinema. To art or ta-ta-taaaa the News. Literature or quitz. Potentially and possibly good, or necessarily(?) bad.
Not that cinema is art at all, cinema nowadays seems to be reduced to a loud burp, not as loud as TV, but bad enough. Cinema is business just like TV. But at least, sometimes, when professionals are tired and forget for 1 minute that cinema is business and a sort way to grab some million from the people's pockets convincing them to pay a ticket with the promise of a wonder... and what a wonder they are... - just the same as what a circus does - I don't know how I caould call it differently... well, sometimes some one forget this and thinks wrongly that cinema is also art, so something that can remotely look like art may come up suddenly. It's not art, because businessmen are quite reluctant to produce a marsterwork (they are afraid that people won't appreciate a good work of art, yeah great excuse, as if museums all over the globe were not visited by paying people at a rate of millions every day, far more than those fantastic abortions they call films.)
Cameras are linked to imaging, aesthetics, and everything that keeps this hell alive.
Details are important, implications are big. It's all linked in many ways. Economy, ideology, aesthetics, tools, professions, till the fucking black metal sheet that costs 3000 dollars and is called matte box and is not of small importance.
Since sensors and workflow - linked one to the other too - are more important, they could be the center of the dynamics of all this dance. And of course nothing can be what is seems to us at a first, second and third sight, because all is - being TV and cinema what they are in their very nature and even more so at their current hysterical state - above everything, fake.
We can guess things forever but apart from the ones who are into the center of gravity,
we can't understant deeply why this and that.
I don't think this time I went completely out the topic. If I'm wrong and I said stupid things, I'm sorry.

[CinemaSpy]

I think I missed the bit where it says the DSMC offers autofocus...or did I?

[Jason Ing]

yeah, you missed it. Red electronic lenses have AF.. autofocus.

[kay madsen]

*This explains the shortage of Zeiss cine lenses. ARRI placed the orders based on how many 35mm cameras they expected to sell, plus a few lens upgrades. Now there are 10x as many "hungry PL mounts" out there...

Zeiss cine lenses will be back... ARRI and Zeiss are watching the market and they will try to make use of the great lens designs they have in their drawers to make money with them. And they know if they don´t do it somebody else will serve the market. Wait a year and we will see a brand new vintage Zeiss HS prime lens set reappearing. That´s for shure.