Whats the deal with this camera?

[newb]

I'm such a newb with camera technology. I'm a just young dude looking into making some short films. I've been looking at HD cameras for a while now, trying to find something. Then I hear about this camera on the internets and my question is why do people care if it can capture at 4k, if we're only beginning 1080p right now. That's only like half of 4k. What's the deal with that? Why invest so much into something you can't really use. Learn me.

[Yash Keough]

Okay well 4K is actually like around 6 times the resolution of 1080p for one. So much greater quality. Second, we are only beginning 1080p resolution in the video world so to speak. Film has always had a much higher resolution, around 4K I believe although I may be wrong. The big deal with 4K is when blown up for theatrical release, it will look as good if not better then 35mm film. I say possibly better because film prints in theaters do not hold all the original resolution and degrade resulting in a lower quality print, some say less than 1000 lines of resolution. 4K digital projection on the other hand shows you exactly that with no quality loss. Hope that helps and somebody please correct me if I'm wrong. :-)

[Craig Schober]

I'm such a newb with camera technology. I'm a just young dude looking into making some short films. I've been looking at HD cameras for a while now, trying to find something. Then I hear about this camera on the internets and my question is why do people care if it can capture at 4k, if we're only beginning 1080p right now. That's only like half of 4k. What's the deal with that? Why invest so much into something you can't really use. Learn me.

because 4k is about a lot more than 1080p and red is even about a lot more than 4k still. redone's 4k camera and workflow is an acquisition format similar in quality to 35mm film. broadcast standards might not be up to 1080p yet but films and tv shows have been shooting 35mm for years. so the acquisition format has always been superior or equal to the broadcast/distribution format.

so now we have this 4k format that is as good as 35mm at the fraction of the price. so i ask you with red leading the charge, why not 4k?

[Paris Remillard]

Cinema...over sampling...future proofing...etc...1080p is only where TV is right now. Besides, 4k, or resolution in general, is only one piece of the puzzle.

Also, since you mention price, compare this camera to other cameras in the same/similar category: Arri D20, Panavision Genesis, Dalsa Origin, (35mm film cameras)... You'll be shocked. Not that you can even own any of the others (well except the film cameras). Their rental rates should give you an idea of their cost. The price of the Red often makes people think that it should be compared to cameras at similar price points. But it should be compared with other Digital Cinema cameras with similar features and uses.

Look at Red's website and read some archives and posts on this site and you'll find many, many reasons why you can actually use 4k these days, and even more so in the coming weeks/months/years....

Welcome to the forum.

[Brook Willard]

This (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1487) will answer some questions.

[Bachman]

I see everyones wakin up on the westcoast. Its almost past my bed time

[P Andersson]

This (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1487) will answer some questions.


Those blow up samples tell it all brook, well done.

[Steve Gibby]

Why invest so much into something you can't really use. Learn me.

Can't really use? While you're working your way up to your 4k projects, there's a ton of other work you can do with RED One. Here's some input that should give you some ideas on how to generate funds to get established and finance those eventual 4k projects:

Link: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1105

[newb]

Thanks for explaining. I'm not even close to being able to afford one of these things, I was just wondering thats all. You done good, thanks.

[Steve Gibby]

Thanks for explaining. I'm not even close to being able to afford one of these things, I was just wondering thats all. You done good, thanks.

Someday you may be, and the more you stay on top of the tech specs, the better off you'll be should you get in a position to make a move on it!

Nobody is born knowing anything - we all started out with a blank slate. The only dumb question is the one that isn't asked.

You'll find almost everyone here is willing to answer questions from others.

[Kittihawk]

Hi,

In the TV HD world we are using two main HD cameras in the UK: Sony 750 (price £42,000 = $80,000) and Panasonic 900 (price £16,000 = $30,000), that's without lenses of course.

If this camera does what it seems to do then it is a revolution for all types of production TV and Feature.

Very small companies (like my own!) will be able to produce an archive useful to broadcasters and film makers world-wide for many years to come.

Even on the HD 1080 format it will be useful to film wide and crop the images getting WS, MCU and CU all in one go! It would also allow pans across the 4K image to be done in the 1080 post.

Three things come to mind immediately:

1) Where's the catch? How come such an apparently superior camera is on sale for so much less than the current 1080 HDCAM cameras?

2) Can we easily get the output of a Red Camera into Final Cut Pro HD? How much extra time will it take to process in FCPHD (E.G. from its 4k format to 1080i or 1080p)? I do this to some extent already using 10MP images from digital still time-lapse cameras like the Nikon D200. Rendering times can be long for even a few thousand frames.

3) When and where can I get one in the UK?


Sounds like a great camera though!

John

[Craig Schober]

Thanks for explaining. I'm not even close to being able to afford one of these things, I was just wondering thats all. You done good, thanks.

that's the great thing about red. everyone is eventually going to have to match or beat red's pricing so if you're not getting 4k from red, you might get it for less from sony or who knows.

[TimothyD]

Hi,

In the TV HD world we are using two main HD cameras in the UK: Sony 750 (price £42,000 = $80,000) and Panasonic 900 (price £16,000 = $30,000), that's without lenses of course.

If this camera does what it seems to do then it is a revolution for all types of production TV and Feature.

Very small companies (like my own!) will be able to produce an archive useful to broadcasters and film makers world-wide for many years to come.

Even on the HD 1080 format it will be useful to film wide and crop the images getting WS, MCU and CU all in one go! It would also allow pans across the 4K image to be done in the 1080 post.

Three things come to mind immediately:

1) Where's the catch? How come such an apparently superior camera is on sale for so much less than the current 1080 HDCAM cameras?

2) Can we easily get the output of a Red Camera into Final Cut Pro HD? How much extra time will it take to process in FCPHD (E.G. from its 4k format to 1080i or 1080p)? I do this to some extent already using 10MP images from digital still time-lapse cameras like the Nikon D200. Rendering times can be long for even a few thousand frames.

3) When and where can I get one in the UK?


Sounds like a great camera though!

John

1. From what I can tell, there is no catch. Having to use a B4 adapter is a slight glitch I guess in terms of the lost light, but aside from that no catch. Unless you work for one of the competing companies, and then I guess this whole thing is the biggest "catch" that has ever come about:)

2. FCP 6.x will natively support Redcode, that support will not be available until sometime later this year. But unless you are an early reservation holder, that won't be a problem. Which brings me to:

3. If you order now, apparently you won't get your camera(s) until sometime in 2008. As far as buying in the UK, apparently Red will be selling the camera directly only. At least that is the last I heard on it.

Peace,

Tim

[Colin Hubick]

It's been my experience with all kinds of technology, that those who ride on the current wave of technology tend to be left behind since they don't look forward enough. While I admit looking forward can be dangerous in that you may jump into something that doesn't really pan out as promised (this is where experiance, and asking lots of questions comes in). In the case of Red, I've seen enough, and heard enough first hand to feel comfortable that the technology will live up to expectations, but this isn't always the case. If you think that 4k is overkill for television, well your probably right. But why would you get into something else that only gives you the bare minimum, with no future for growth. I look at the redcam that we purchased as an investment that the rest of our post workflow will grow around, instead of hitting a wall with other formats.

just my two cents

[Shane Betts]

Where's the catch? How come such an apparently superior camera is on sale for so much less than the current 1080 HDCAM cameras?

It's a little thing called lateral thinking. These guys are coming at it all from a totally different (more logical) direction. Rather than building bigger video cameras, it seems to me they have built a faster stills camera. This means they don't have to build in all that electronics crap that video camera manufacturers do to try and make video look good - to take ancient television based technology and dress it up for film. They also don't have to build an expensive and mechanically complex videotape recorder into the camera.

It's all pretty much standard technology but it's 21st century technolgy, not tied to the 1940's - or whenever it was :-).

They have also adopted the approach of companies like Apple, Blackmagic Design and AJA and not inflating the price to "professional" levels. Charge what it's worth, not what you can get...

[Stephen Gentle]

1) Where's the catch? How come such an apparently superior camera is on sale for so much less than the current 1080 HDCAM cameras?

Well, there's no autofoucs, but I assume most professionals use this for TV work. This could be a catch for sports, and some run and gun situations though.

[Rocco Schult]

hey newb,
you got that already probably, but its simply about an invest in the future if you regard the tech specs and aim for film.
But I'd like to point out in case you are not familiar with filming procedures, as of the current state, theres not much auto features in the camera, meaning you need some kind of experience and maybe one or another helper too. But then your pictures will look much cooler than with those videos thingys..


..but films and tv shows have been shooting 35mm for years. so the acquisition format has always been superior or equal to the broadcast/distribution format...

2 additional comments before you spend everything you might have JUST in the camera.

1st: stuff for TV AND CINEMA has also been shot on inferior media too, since these medias existed. Think about "blair witch project" as the worst, but successful example and many others, as well as 8mm film which has a resolution far below everything used today, but still its charm remains, right ?

2nd: get the script.