Rumour: Arri wants to strike back [Archive]

Cüneyt Kaya

12-05-2008, 02:21 PM

ok this is a rumour i heard today.....source...like every source a rumour comes from....friend talking with someone inside that company.
so i posted it in the offtopic section.

the rumour is following.

arri wants to release a 4k cam for 40k
and a smaller version for 20k

global shutter

and their biggest selling point should become: Open Source Coding...RAW

And packages with Arricam/Support/Assec. will be possibly offered.

--------

my notes on this rumour:

i dont think that an arricam itself has a chance against a red comparing price/perfomance....
but the goal to be integrated immediatly in the postworkflow sounds pretty seductive.

i know some producers who would say: arri can the same? no stress in post? more expensive, but still cheaper than 35mm? lets do it....we will save it in Post.

package deal with lenses.....would rock.
But i thought the Dalsa Arri deal is still not finished?

And i dont think that Arri can just buy sensortechnology which can compare to RED.....but who knows.

Nick Wolf

12-05-2008, 02:29 PM

Its not what can be baught that makes the differance in such matters but whom ...

DogDay.

Radoslav Karapetkov

12-05-2008, 02:39 PM

4K for 40K $?

I'd take 3K for ~3K $, thanks.

But open source and open formats is the future, IMHO.

No matter how good they are, redcode, cineform, etc. will be killed by open format[s].

Gunleik Groven

12-05-2008, 02:46 PM

It would be only odd if Arri/Sony (where did Dalsa/SI go???) didn't have plans for the RED market...

Cüneyt Kaya

12-05-2008, 02:46 PM

4K for 40K?

I'd take 3K for ~3K $, thanks.

But open source and open formats is the future, IMHO.

No matter how good they are, redcode, cineform, etc. will be killed by open format[s].

4k for 40k is expensive.
But thinking of the situation of redcode and the SDK i guess such a cam will be welcomed by big rental companys...and post production companys.

dont know how long it will take to develop the red sdk so that red can open it.
Or maybe RED should sell the SDK to the postsolution vendors.

Noah Kadner

12-05-2008, 02:46 PM

I'm sure Arri, Panavision, Sony and a lot of other companies want to 'strike back.' Question is, can they and will they. Personally I'd like to see a camera that shoots RAW, QuickTime MOV ProRes and .AVI too. RAW is great and all but there are times when I'd just like to have ready to edit clips coming out of the camera.

Noah

David Mullen ASC

12-05-2008, 02:53 PM

ARRI will definitely make something like a 4K RAW camera, and there will definitely be some people to buy it, just as there are people who buy Sony F23's, etc. ARRI rental houses, for one thing. The RED market overlaps this, but it is not exactly the same market, just as RED overlaps Sony's professional broadcast video line but it's not exactly the same market either.

Sure, there are some people who would rather spend less, or have no choice but to spend less.

You can find cars that have most of the same features as cars that cost three-times as much, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a market for the more expensive car.

ARRI really doesn't have to make a $20,000 4K RAW camera, for example, just as they don't have to make a 35mm movie camera that costs only $20,000. If they can demonstrate some advantages for buying something more expensive, either because of features or quality of workmanship or ruggedness or advantageous workflow, they will find buyers. Afterall, we have Sony, Panasonic, Canon, etc. all competing with each other but also aiming for different parts of the market as well as the same parts. We have Honda, Toyota, etc. ARRI will definitely be a key player in the digital cine camera market.

Cüneyt Kaya

12-05-2008, 03:03 PM

I guess if Arri really goes the way of fully integrated postworkflow from start
they will get a huge push.

I like modularity but thinking of the everyday shoot where certain things have to work...and make a working comfortable...they definitly will get market share.

A RED without Elementtechnica gear is lets say less workable (imho)

Stephen Pruitt

12-05-2008, 03:13 PM

Eliminate this bit of ignorance on my part: What do you mean "open format" RAW?

Is that just something like Linux for computers?

Stephen

Patrick Tresch

12-05-2008, 03:23 PM

What do you mean "open format" RAW?

This is the key that will prevent RED to be the leading camera manufacturer in the next months and years...

Patrick

PS: I'm begging to be wrong and that RED opens the RAW format!

Fredrik Harreschou

12-05-2008, 03:24 PM

Open formats are XML, JPEG, HTML, PDF etc.
Adobe Cinema DNG is an open format RAW file.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_format

Cüneyt Kaya

12-05-2008, 03:26 PM

http://www.openraw.org/info

just some informations on this topic...based on photography

Ramesh Jai

12-05-2008, 03:29 PM

I don't think it's just ARRI. You can be sure Sony, Canon, JVC, Panasonic, etc., all have plans. You just have to commend RED for coming out of nowhere and making a ground breaking camera at a ground breaking price. You really need passion to pull off a feat like this.

OT. Sony had a show In Accra a few months ago. Their reps didn't even know how to transfer footage from the EX1 on to my laptop for me to try out. They were really ignorant about the workflow. Maybe they just sent the wrong guys or maybe that's where passion comes in.

Chris Kenny

12-05-2008, 04:09 PM

ARRI really doesn't have to make a $20,000 4K RAW camera, for example, just as they don't have to make a 35mm movie camera that costs only $20,000. If they can demonstrate some advantages for buying something more expensive, either because of features or quality of workmanship or ruggedness or advantageous workflow, they will find buyers. Afterall, we have Sony, Panasonic, Canon, etc. all competing with each other but also aiming for different parts of the market as well as the same parts. We have Honda, Toyota, etc. ARRI will definitely be a key player in the digital cine camera market.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this sort of "Our existing customers have deep pockets and they trust us, so we don't have to make our stuff cheaper" thinking is what has lead to Red having... what, maybe 70-80% market share in the digital cinematography camera market after about 12 months? (How many D20, Genesis or F23 units are actually out there?)

While this works fine in the short run (I'm sure Arri isn't losing all that many customers to Red at the moment; Red's market share comes mostly from enlarging the market), it's lethal in the long run. Because guess what equipment the next generation of up-and-coming future pros use? Yeah. The cheap and widely accessible stuff.

To some extent this is what caused Avid's downfall. I'm 26. Guess what I learned editing on? Final Cut Pro. Guess why? Because I had access to it in my early 20s, without being in the video industry. It was cheap and it ran on commodity hardware.

I started a production company out of college. Guess what editing software we use?

I am not an isolated case.

If Arri really wants to head this off, even a credible $20K digital cinema camera offering isn't going to do it. You know how many film students with well-off parents are going to own a 2/3" Scarlet in a couple of years? Hell, film programs will probably buy them -- it's sure a lot cheaper and more sensible than having students shoot 16mm film, and they can even reuse some of their 16mm camera accessories. The implications five or ten years down the line will be substantial.

Cüneyt Kaya

12-05-2008, 04:30 PM

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this sort of "Our existing customers have deep pockets and they trust us, so we don't have to make our stuff cheaper" thinking is what has lead to Red having... what, maybe 70-80% market share in the digital cinematography camera market after about 12 months? (How many D20, Genesis or F23 units are actually out there?)

While this works fine in the short run (I'm sure Arri isn't losing all that many customers to Red at the moment; Red's market share comes mostly from enlarging the market), it's lethal in the long run. Because guess what equipment the next generation of up-and-coming future pros use? Yeah. The cheap and widely accessible stuff.

To some extent this is what caused Avid's downfall. I'm 26. Guess what I learned editing on? Final Cut Pro. Guess why? Because I had access to it in my early 20s, without being in the video industry. It was cheap and it ran on commodity hardware.

I started a production company out of college. Guess what editing software we use?

I am not an isolated case.

If Arri really wants to head this off, even a credible $20K digital cinema camera offering isn't going to do it. You know how many film students with well-off parents are going to own a 2/3" Scarlet in a couple of years? Hell, film programs will probably buy them -- it's sure a lot cheaper and more sensible than having students shoot 16mm film, and they can even reuse some of their 16mm camera accessories. The implications five or ten years down the line will be substantial.

Chris, only scratch can do a full debayer from redcode raw files...as 3rd party. apple is doing a half debayer...
arri doesnt aim to the scarletguys market ....they didnt market them as the hvx200 were around....or now with the EX1.

thinking of 15 months of beta/buggy/surfer rescue/monkey coming/clipfinding workaround software...i guess people who need the tools THEY WANT (This indicates that there is a choice to choose from) arri would have a great chance to get market share.

And if you are honest...to use the Redsystem without workarounds of any kind was RED+Scratch (still is)....that is 75 000 USD.+30 000 USD for a Camera and a Datamanagertool with mediocre(imho) CC Tools.

So lets say this rumour is true....you would save against RED comparing the full pipeline without workarounds.

RED will gain a much greater reputation once the postworkflow is fully integrated.

Albert Armes

12-05-2008, 04:54 PM

What's the image quality though? Price is important too though. $40k for 4k sounds a lot more than $17.5k for 4k which is red right? Mention of global shutter is strange though as don't arri use a mirror for their optical viewfinder? If you have a mirror shutter, you don't need a global shutter right? From what I'm reading about sensors, it's a trade off if you have a global shutter. Will it be cmos or ccd? Will it be compressed raw that I can record on a CF card, or those big files I need lots of hard drives for? Is this a one person camera or a film crew camera? Lots of questions and no answers. That's rumors for you!

Andrew McCarrick

12-05-2008, 05:14 PM

It would be only odd if Arri/Sony (where did Dalsa/SI go???) didn't have plans for the RED market...

Anybody know if Arri did indeed by Dalsa's Camera division?

Thomas Dobbie

12-05-2008, 05:26 PM

Don't right off Arri, or any of the other competition.
Red is a great camera,and it's changed the face of independent production forever,but Jim and crew are going to have to keep on their toes to keep ahead of the game.
Tom.

Sanjin Jukic

12-05-2008, 05:29 PM

Whatever,

but i would say that companies like ARRI or PANAVISION will still owe the market

for making the main stream of feature films until the companies like a RED will take them over.

But the companies like a RED should finally realised that the main weapon is not the size of the sensor in the camera

and also its resolution, fps speed and whatever in that way.

Simply it is called the set of FAST LENSES (aspherical and anamorphic) that would make you the next king on the market.

In a year or two everybody would have a powerful sensor but all that depends on the second stage in overall acquisition

and there is simply the market for the (FAST) LENSES.

So if you are looking at the future of that thing you should INVEST in a development of fast spherical or anamorphic

lenses and then you could owe the market anyway even if it is a FILM or a DIGITAL acquisition under the question.

Cameras are not owing the market.

Its about overall system and workflow.

If you are missing something or you are in a "scissors" or your partners and also if you are counting only on one thing then

you are the looser of the all game very soon.

Pawel Achtel

12-05-2008, 05:31 PM

Tom Lowe

12-05-2008, 05:35 PM

The more competition, the better.

Pawel Achtel

12-05-2008, 05:38 PM

The more competition, the better.

Absolutely! And I can see some healthy competition developing here.

Tom Lowe

12-05-2008, 06:09 PM

Absolutely! And I can see some healthy competition developing here.

Probably not that healthy. Arri will have huge trouble keeping up with Jim, IMO.

David Mullen ASC

12-05-2008, 07:03 PM

I don't think that consumers necessarily stick to the cheaper brand they started out with once they get more money. I started out shooting on Super-8 Sankyo cameras, then 16mm Eclair cameras, and now 35mm Panaflex and ARRICAM cameras. Where's my loyalty to Sankyo? :shifty:

Just because film students may start out with cheaper cameras, doesn't necessarily mean they'll want to use the same cheaper cameras when they have a larger budget. Maybe, maybe not. They'll probably re-evaluate and choose whatever makes the most sense for their budget and project, not make the sentimental choice. If someone sticks to FCP even on a bigger project, it's probably because FCP does what he needs it to do -- if it didn't, he probably would choose whatever did.

Honestly, the professional cinema equipment market is limited. It's always going to be limited. The costs of making feature films are barely related to the costs of the technology compared to all the other costs, once you get above the minimal amount of money to make a movie. So having gathered an expensive cast, expensive locations, expensive key collaborators, etc. you are unlikely to make the final choice on technology based solely on cost or a sentimental attachment from film school days, not with so much money on the line.

So as long as ARRI makes a great product, there will be people who will find the money to use it if they feel it is worth it.

Besides, from my recollection of film school, most students dreamed of using more expensive technology they perceived as being better -- they weren't brand-name loyal to whatever they could afford in school. In fact, familiarity can breed contempt, hence the techno-lust that some students fall into, thinking they MUST use the most expensive Zeiss Master Prime for their thesis film when a used Zeiss Super Speed would serve them just as well.

Like I said, look at the car market -- some people still buy expensive cars even when a cheaper car has just as many features, performs just as well. Just because Toyota does well doesn't mean there isn't room for a car company like Porsche.

Tom Lowe

12-05-2008, 07:09 PM

As usual, David is correct.

Jeff Kilgroe

12-05-2008, 07:16 PM

I'm all for healthy competition. And I think with the recent sale of Dalsa's cinema camera division, we may start seeing some.

While there is nothing to substantiate the rumor that sparked this thread, one thing is for certain. Digital cinema is here to stay and just like the still photography world, will undoubtedly be the dominant acquisition form in the not too distant future.

Arri already makes digital cinema cameras and we know they are salivating over the potential market of RED customers. They're already seeing more business on the accessory side of things due to RED. Arri will continue to evolve their digital offerings and who knows, they may even make some entries that appeal to smaller boutique production houses and owner operators with proportionately smaller budgets. Which is a relatively new market that did not exist a few years ago, as the few such operations were slugging it out with prosumer gear.

I'm actually surprised with the run-away sales on RED cameras and the over-inflated prices on 20 year old lenses out there, that Arri hasn't stepped up more on the accessory end. They could have made a killing already selling a RED-oriented set of Ultra Primes at a serious discount. Specify a kit of 5 lenses like 18, 24, 35, 50, 85 and price it to move lots of them. Wish they had, still wish they would...

RED is the new game in town with a new business model for this industry. It's only a matter of time until others step up with products that compete on a feature for feature basis. We'll see how they compete on price. As has been mentioned, Arri may continue to charge more if they can justify it based on one or two small features they can offer or even just their name alone.

David Mullen ASC

12-05-2008, 07:25 PM

It will be interesting to see what ARRI comes up with to address what was the Super-16 market, not just the more expensive 35mm market. Or if another Super-16 camera company like Aaton will instead jump in with the digital equivalent of an Aaton XTR or Arri-SR3 relative to a more expensive 35mm version.

In other words, while I think there is a profitable niche market for an expensive digital cinema camera for high-end production, will ARRI also address the midrange market that was buying their Super-16 cameras, like for European TV, etc.? Or had they already given that up to Sony HD cameras and whatnot? Super-16 had a huge increase in usage over the past few years as sort of the "anti-digital-but-more-affordable-than-35mm" choice for filmmakers, but that seems to be declining now thanks to RED and other single-sensor cameras and better 3-CCD HD cameras (better as in more dynamic range than before.)

Tico Llaurador

12-05-2008, 07:40 PM

Super-16 had a huge increase in usage over the past few years as sort of the "anti-digital-but-more-affordable-than-35mm" choice for filmmakers, but that seems to be declining now thanks to RED and other single-sensor cameras and better 3-CCD HD cameras (better as in more dynamic range than before.)

True. And exactly my case. I was about to pull the trigger on a Aaton A-Minima package when I found out about the RED One.

The RED One won.

Jeff Kilgroe

12-05-2008, 08:11 PM

I thought Aaton had announced a digital magazine system that could drop into some of their newer cameras. 6K resolution, if I recall...

Christian Munoz D

12-05-2008, 08:45 PM

I thought Aaton had announced a digital magazine system that could drop into some of their newer cameras. 6K resolution, if I recall...

http://www.aaton.com/files/penelope2.pdf

Kwan Khan

12-05-2008, 09:07 PM

humm...

Priyesh P.

12-06-2008, 01:41 AM

If 4K for 40K $ for an Arriflex camera is true then it`s a huuuuuuge bargain. Sony`s F35 comes at 300K if I´m not mistaken. And arrogance plus ignorance of Arri aside - if they do / produce something they do it expensively but (!) right. period.

Chris Kenny

12-06-2008, 02:50 AM

I don't think that consumers necessarily stick to the cheaper brand they started out with once they get more money. I started out shooting on Super-8 Sankyo cameras, then 16mm Eclair cameras, and now 35mm Panaflex and ARRICAM cameras. Where's my loyalty to Sankyo? :shifty:

Just because film students may start out with cheaper cameras, doesn't necessarily mean they'll want to use the same cheaper cameras when they have a larger budget. Maybe, maybe not. They'll probably re-evaluate and choose whatever makes the most sense for their budget and project, not make the sentimental choice.

I'm not saying people who shoot with 2/3" Scarlets in film school are going to go out and shoot features with them professionally after they graduate. I'm saying they're going to be more likely to choose Red cameras (probably higher end models) because they're all going to share many of the same characteristics -- on-camera controls and menus, workflow, etc. There's nothing sentimental about choosing tools that you're familiar with and that you know can achieve the results you want.

If someone sticks to FCP even on a bigger project, it's probably because FCP does what he needs it to do -- if it didn't, he probably would choose whatever did.

Red appears to be planning to have a camera suitable for every level of production.

thinking of 15 months of beta/buggy/surfer rescue/monkey coming/clipfinding workaround software...i guess people who need the tools THEY WANT (This indicates that there is a choice to choose from) arri would have a great chance to get market share.

And Arri would... what? Launch from day one with an end-to-end integrated workflow hosted on commodity hardware and using low-cost commodity software? Of course not. They'd make sure there was a solid high-end workflow, but it has always been easy to work with Red footage if you throw enough money at the problem. Just transcode everything to DPX and feed it into any one of the existing DI workflows.

What has taken so long to arrive workflow-wise is a workflow that lets you work directly from the (compressed) native camera files, avoiding transcoding and huge file sizes with without giving up access to the full range of data in the raw file. If Arri targets a higher end market, odds are they wouldn't even try to implement such a workflow.

Albert Armes

12-06-2008, 06:28 AM

Has anyone seen the Arri raw tools, what they look like, how they work, what workflows they fit into?

M Most

12-06-2008, 07:10 AM

Has anyone seen the Arri raw tools, what they look like, how they work, what workflows they fit into?

The current situation, based around the D21 and its RAW delivery via Arri's T-Link interface (which delivers data over a dual link transport) basically revolves around third party support for original recording and data management and Arri's own software tools for final file conversion. Both S.two and Codex are supporting T.Link, with S.two having a bit of a more evolved system at the moment because they were the first on board. You record into an S.two DFR (uncompressed, with the RAW data frames formatted in a DPX wrapper). You then use S.two's A-Dock to create a number of products simultaneously - Quicktime files (with a quick debayer and a 1D LUT applied), RAW file backups to portable drives, and one or two LTO3 cartridges. All of this is done automatically, time codes are maintained, and metadata is also maintained. At the same time, you get XML files that are fed into an S.two developed database that document all pertinent metadata, along with information as to what files are on what LTO. The files are automatically put into a hierarchical directory structure that is based around DMag ID (the DMag is the disk based portable recording pack that loads into both the DFR and the ADock), date, scene number, and take number. This hierarchy is maintained throughout production and post production. When editorial is locked, the EDL is then applied (using S.two's tools) to the database, and an automated file restoration is done from the LTO's. This restoration brings in only the frames used in the cut (the RAW files are individual frames, not wrapped movie files) and recreates the original directory hierarchy. You then use Arri's software (Image Booster) to debayer and apply the color matrix of your choice to create RGB DPX files, in either 2K, 3K, or HD formats, that also match the original directory structure. The color matrices available are designed primarily with film output in mind (although there is one for Rec709 video as well), and basically conform to Cineon print density, which gives you a 10 bit log image that works very, very well with a print preview LUT. This all probably sounds very complex to a Red User crowd, but the truth is that it all works quite well, and there's really no special workflow inventions needed. The RAW conversion time, in my experience, is a bit less than Red's full debayer, but it definitely takes some time. The nice thing is that the Image Booster software does all the work - you point it to the RAW files, and it recreates the same directory hierarchy for the converted files, so everything is ID'd the same way from the start of the process to the end.

Hans von Sonntag

12-06-2008, 08:38 AM

Iridas SpeedGrade performs RT Arri D21 RAW. The quality Arri's D21 delivers is simply stunning. Uncompressed RAW is not a bad thing - quality wise. There are many LUTs for Arri RAW availabe. Arri is definately not sleeping. Perhaps a bit slow. And Red is lightning fast - but there are downsides to this, we all know.

Today a D21 is a heavy mother, hardly to use handheld, etc... Not a substitute to the sleek Arri LT or even the 235. But please bear in mind that Arri is a company that has a 100+ years tradition in long-term thinking. And their business does not rely only upon movie cameras.

David's thoughts about the S16 market are interesting. Currently there are more S16 features/shows shot than ever before. Here in Europe Sony's F900 did not eat up much of the S16 market. For PAL S16 is still a very viable format with a known and proved workflow. Red is currently entering the TV market but many productions stay with S16 - a lot easier to handle on postproduction side.

In the last 20 years Arri's main customers were rental houses and some private owner on the S16 side, rarely 35mm and if so, only commercial production houses were buying an Arri 35III.

With Red not too much changed. Some 435 bodies are sitting now on the shelf, but the PL glass market increased a lot, same with all necessary acessories such as matteboxes, FF etc. Doubtless, in this regard Arri is not losing an inch, on the contrary.

Im dead sure that Arri will release a RAW camera that will substitute the SR3s and 416. It won't be as cheap as a Red Scarlet, much more in the high Epic numbers. I suppose it will be techically very different to Red's offerings, probably utilising a conventional, optical viewfinder, mirror shutter, etc...

There will be many who will love the Arri and rent it, as theys do now. Others stick with Red. Private owners, however, are likely to stay with Red, I guess.

Hans

David Mullen ASC

12-06-2008, 10:07 AM

All I'm saying is that there is room for more than one digital cinema cameramaker in the world... that competition is good... and to not write-off ARRI.

As for young people becoming "comfortable" with RED, so much that when they advance in the industry, they want to keep working with RED, well, that may be true with some owners-operators, but as a DP doing feature films, my AC's are the primary people that have to deal with the camera body and how it is set-up, and the director has even less interaction with the physical camera than I do. And as a professional DP, I have to be comfortable with any number of cameras by Sony, Panasonic, Panavision, ARRI, RED, etc. -- my livelihood depends on it. This tends to push more cinematographers to evaluate cameras independently and dispassionately, rather than to stick to one brand and never deviate. Now there are some bigger DP's who have the luxury of just using a Panaflex on every show, and using the same Kodak stock, the same lens package... but most of us aren't in that position, we are faced with a potentially new set of tools on every show we are hired to shoot.

So it doesn't really matter if some film school DP today or tomorrow is more comfortable with the RED versus an ARRI -- I'm comfortable with Panavision cameras today, which I didn't even use in film school! I used Eclair NPR's mostly, and the Arri-S. Imagine how little my career would have advanced if I told people interviewing me that I was most comfortable using an Eclair NPR...

The people that advance are the ones that reject sticking to a narrow brand-name out of comfort and are willing to constantly re-evaluate one's options as new tools come on the market. So if -- and this is a big hypothetical "if" -- ARRI comes out with a "better" product, then most professional DP's will gravitate towards it no matter how comfortable they have gotten with a RED camera. Same goes for FCP -- if someday someone made an editing software that was better, and you (Chris) stuck with FCP because it's what you were comfortable with since a beginner, you'd be no different than the people you are deriding for sticking to AVID today.

Maybe it's just my particular bent, being someone who alternated between Fuji and Kodak most of their career, and Panavision and ARRI, that -- as someone who doesn't own any equipment other than two light meters and now a Micro Litepanel -- that I'm so prone to avoiding brand-name loyalty, but there are other cinematographers who feel the same way as I do -- which is: make the manufacturers give me a good reason to use their product. And if a better product comes along, then go for it.

It's more complicated than that, of course, because there is a human side to this, we develop personal relationships with companies, we prefer some company's tech service over others, etc. all of which affect our decision-making process. But as a general principle, one should be guided by a clear and dispassionate evaluation of the tools available, and make constant re-evaluations as new tools come along, or old one's are revised, all the while avoiding the trap of assuming that anything new must be better... this general approach is more practical than simple brand-name loyalty and sticking within one's comfort zone.

All of this is to say, don't write-off ARRI...

Cüneyt Kaya

12-06-2008, 10:11 AM

And Arri would... what? Launch from day one with an end-to-end integrated workflow hosted on commodity hardware and using low-cost commodity software? Of course not. They'd make sure there was a solid high-end workflow, but it has always been easy to work with Red footage if you throw enough money at the problem. Just transcode everything to DPX and feed it into any one of the existing DI workflows.

What has taken so long to arrive workflow-wise is a workflow that lets you work directly from the (compressed) native camera files, avoiding transcoding and huge file sizes with without giving up access to the full range of data in the raw file. If Arri targets a higher end market, odds are they wouldn't even try to implement such a workflow.

reds camera is cheap.
reds workflow not.

if someone comes a long with an open SDK...hey we are talking about RAW...there are vendors who can reverse engineer and implement in weeks...

the techniques of debayering are here since years.
dont know chris...this arri thing is just a rumour...

but red is like a cheap sports car needing 30 liters of gasoline for 100 km.
if red would only open up their SDK immediatly....
which they will do...question is when.

Joe G.

12-06-2008, 11:01 AM

This is exciting. I want to see both the new FF35 scarlett and the new Arris.

I have been wary of the Red One because of the 12 bit / compressed, dynamic range thing, and even the rolling shutter.

If I'm going to make a feature, I need the highest quality imagery, period. On that I'm not entertaining any compromises. The new Scarletts with 16 bit 13+ stops and full frame sensor seem to meet or exceed 35mm film quality. That is what I have been anticipating. Arri will probably do likewise. They know their business. They're not going to make a sub-standard image acquisition system. And they have the hindsight of what Red has done, and the other competitors, as well as the latest advances in flash memory and faster processors. It's a very exciting time, although the competition pushing films onto the public will be crippling.

Chris Kenny

12-06-2008, 11:51 AM

reds camera is cheap.
reds workflow not.

Red workflow is scalable. You can create a 2K DPX deliverable for a feature film using less than $10K worth of hardware and software, or you can spend $100K+ to have a high-end post house take your footage though something more like a traditional DI workflow.

if someone comes a long with an open SDK...hey we are talking about RAW...there are vendors who can reverse engineer and implement in weeks...

A $40K+ camera that only shoots uncompressed is going to be much less widely used than a $17.5K camera that shoots at a data rate that plays back from a single hard drive. This creates much less incentive for software vendors to support the format. Redcode is absolutely the key to Red's "mainstreaming" of 4K acquisition.

Mind you, I have little doubt that Arri can hold on to some fraction of the high-end rental market for a very long time, if they play their cards correctly. Avid is still selling its products despite Final Cut, after all. But it can be dangerous to have your offerings relegated to specialty markets while your competitor's products become the standard. And it's really hard to imagine Arri doing the things that would be necessary to prevent that at this point, if Red executes about half of what it has announced.

So it doesn't really matter if some film school DP today or tomorrow is more comfortable with the RED versus an ARRI -- I'm comfortable with Panavision cameras today, which I didn't even use in film school! I used Eclair NPR's mostly, and the Arri-S. Imagine how little my career would have advanced if I told people interviewing me that I was most comfortable using an Eclair NPR...

Sure, well, nobody's silly enough to say "I'm familiar with the 2/3" Scarlet, let's shoot on that". If you spent most of film school shooting on a 2/3" Scarlet, the line will be "I have extensive experience with Red cameras. Let's shoot on Epic." Which the producer probably wanted to do anyway because it was the cheapest high-end option.

Cüneyt Kaya

12-06-2008, 12:13 PM

Red workflow is scalable. You can create a 2K DPX deliverable for a feature film using less than $10K worth of hardware and software, or you can spend $100K+ to have a high-end post house take your footage though something more like a traditional DI workflow.

yeah....
pretty good "workaround" workflow for less then 10k...and pretty heavy unnesserrary workflow on the counterpart...
i know both routes chris.

But here everybody has his own opinion.

Steve Sherrick

12-06-2008, 12:23 PM

I have been wary of the Red One because of the 12 bit / compressed, dynamic range thing, and even the rolling shutter.

Fair enough, but in the meantime there are people getting films made using their understanding of how Redcode currently works in the Red One and working within the parameters. There will always be something better around the corner, but it's those who make use of the tools available now that tend to advance their skill sets and foster their creativity. I've seen some footage shot in 2K, 2:1 that looks nicer than some things I have seen shot in 4K. Certainly improvements in technology, specifically with the new Red lineup, give us more options, more ways to achieve higher quality imagery, but I see no reason to be weary of Red One.

Justin Kirchhoff

12-06-2008, 03:37 PM

4K for $40k?

How about 28K for $53k. That sounds more reasonable.

Cüneyt Kaya

12-06-2008, 03:48 PM

4K for $40k?

How about 28K for $53k. That sounds more reasonable.

justin....i am interested in the narrative cinema/commercial market.

even if a 28k camera exists (will exist)....thinking of On set work...pulling focus...postworkflow...vfx...and most important...distribution channels....4k can be the standard at theatres in a couple of years....lets say 3 years.

so because i am interested in using PL Cine Glass or maximum VistaVison Glass...i see no need for a 28k camera in narrative/commercial work...

photography is cool...but i love moving images.

---even when the arri cam would be the best available 4-5k camera with all the hardware quality and good postworkflow solutions i wouldnt invest in it...

i always knew that the whole 4k+ thing will be like computers....
the time to get a return of investment will be reduced to 6 months.

and beside all the greatness that is floating around from red and arri....i am responsible to add the tools.....which offer the best mix of price/perfomance (not only aquisition....post too) and realworld workability, to my inventory.

so as much as i love RED...i am looking for the whole package that is good....which today is RED.

Mitch Gross

12-06-2008, 06:47 PM

Steve Sherrick

12-06-2008, 06:52 PM

Arri is developing digital cinema product.

Aaton is developing digital cinema product.

Sony is devloping digital cinema product.

Panasonic is developing digital cinema product.

My dog is developing digital cinema product. A little slower R&D.

I know a few thing about a few things, and there's a great many things I don't know, but let me ask a simple question:

If someone offered you the equivalent of a RED One that had a true optical viewfinder and uncompressed RAW recording for twice the price, would you be interested? I can tell you I sure would, and so would just about every DP I know.
Maybe, but it would depend on how that RAW material was recorded. It has to be in a very portable medium for the kinds of shooting I do. Personally, I just need a 1080P viewfinder that is accurate, doesn't strobe, and sharp as heck. That would also suit most of my needs. But I can see others needing more and perhaps this solution you mention would be ideal for them and the price won't be an issue.

Tico Llaurador

12-06-2008, 06:55 PM

If someone offered you the equivalent of a RED One that had a true optical viewfinder and uncompressed RAW recording for twice the price, would you be interested?

As much as I loved my dear RED One, the one thing I could never get past was the EVF. No matter how superior it's supposed to be. To me, nothing beats an optical viewfinder. So, the answer to your question would be "yes"... that is, *if* I had the money.

Can I meet your dog, Mitch?

:biggrin:

Mitch Gross

12-06-2008, 07:08 PM

A Phantom CineMag holds about 40 minutes worth of uncompressed RAW material if it were shot at the RED One's top resolution and the bit rate was upped from 12 to 14-bit. That CineMag is flash-based memory not a hard drive, and can accept that data at a very high data rate (it would take that uncompressed 4K material in at about 100fps -- yeah and it's UNCOMPRESSED!). And it is just a little bit bigger than the RED Drive. So it is certainly technically possible, and if one were to lower these specs so that it did not have to perform at such high data rates then the price could drop dramatically as well. All these things are possible today.

I actually don't type, but instead dictate as I prepare gormet meals for my dog. She's the one doing the typing. All the posts about setting backfocus I let her write herself. If only she would stop hogging the TV remote...

Chris Kenny

12-06-2008, 07:33 PM

If someone offered you the equivalent of a RED One that had a true optical viewfinder and uncompressed RAW recording for twice the price, would you be interested? I can tell you I sure would, and so would just about every DP I know.

Biased sample. Would I be interested in shooting with that camera on someone else's dime, which is how most freelance DPs work? Sure, probably. (Especially if I didn't have to physically operate -- an OVF does have certain costs in terms of size and weight.)

Would I buy such a camera for my small production company? No. Would I recommend such a camera over the Red One to someone shooting a low-budget (say sub-$250K) feature? Probably not.

Without compressed capture, a 4K camera, regardless of its own price tag, becomes a very expensive tool to use. Which raises the question of why it's worth bothering to try to make a 4K uncompressed camera inexpensive in the first place, if you have to have lots of money to do anything useful with it anyway.

I have to say it really baffles me that so many people are hung up on the compression issue. If ever there was a game of diminishing returns, this is it. Even if you could get uncompressed at only twice the price (which you can't, even remotely, especially if you include an uncompressed post workflow), you'd still be spending twice as much for an image quality difference that would be imperceptible to most viewers, with most material, under most viewing conditions. There's almost certainly some better place to spend that money.

Mark L. Pederson

12-06-2008, 07:50 PM

My dog is developing digital cinema product. A little slower R&D.
I know a few thing about a few things, and there's a great many things I don't know, but let me ask a simple question:

If someone offered you the equivalent of a RED One that had a true optical viewfinder and uncompressed RAW recording for twice the price, would you be interested? I can tell you I sure would, and so would just about every DP I know.

I would not.

I'd like an optical viewfinder for sure ... but there are a lot more considerations.

RED can offer uncompressed anytime they want. In fact, the boys from Codex showed me a unit with a connector they installed specifically for RED's RAW PORT. RED cancelled the RAW PORT because the demand was not there - not because they couldn't make it. When the workflow is considered - uncompressed 4K in long form is VERY inefficient. That might change, sure. And has anyone heard RED say that you can't get uncompressed out of the EPIC?? I didn't hear that Mitch ... did you??

Mark L. Pederson

12-06-2008, 08:19 PM

There's almost certainly some better place to spend that money.

Maybe invest it in the IPO Mitch's dog is planning?:clown2:

Pawel Achtel

12-06-2008, 09:17 PM

If someone offered you the equivalent of a RED One that had a true optical viewfinder and uncompressed RAW recording for twice the price, would you be interested? I can tell you I sure would, and so would just about every DP I know.

Personally, I'm not interested in any of those features. Acually, I would pay more for a camera without optical VF. Uncompressed RAW is a total and utter waste. I'll take higher frame rate and/or resolution every time over uncompressed.

There are many other features I would consider highly desirable that Red One does not have currently. Some very simple, such as remote power on/off. Another would be multiple GPIO sockets (or pins) and ability to assign just about any function to those inputs, such as 1:1, etc...
2.40:1 aspect ratio covering 4.5k ... I hear it is coming in future builds. Small size is very important to me. I could not care less about shoulder ergonomics.

Every user is different and many options will make it easier to meet more diverse requirements.

liquidigital

12-06-2008, 09:22 PM

Ultimately the price point of RED is astounding. For a comparable product, I have a difficult time imagining another company matching this price point. To some it may not matter, but to independent productions that really need that money for other areas, RED will really hit home.

Albert Armes

12-07-2008, 04:51 AM

Optical viewfinders on DSLRs don't accurately portray depth of field. They make the depth of field look deeper than it really is.

Shane Kelly

12-07-2008, 05:01 AM

Optical viewfinders on DSLRs don't accurately portray depth of field. They make the depth of field look deeper than it really is.

explain please.

Albert Armes

12-07-2008, 05:47 AM

http://www.dphotoexpert.com/2007/09/21/live-view-versus-the-cheating-dslr-viewfinder/

Albert

Nick Wolf

12-07-2008, 06:17 AM

Call me old fashioned but I am disgusted by the lack of LOYALTY.

When Red bends over backwards to do its customers right, I believe they deserve a little bit more back.

No humble opinions here Boys & Girls =Ö= Thats my point of view ... Period.

DogDay.

Eddie

12-07-2008, 06:27 AM

I have a feeling that Fujifilm might turn out to be a keyplayer beeing able to bring home the stakes. They already have all the patents in place for a camera, which leads everyone gushing. The superCCD sensor design solves the greatest problem people in the industry are havng with Red1, namely dynamic range. The claims made by Red about the DR, are often disputed by DPs feeling that they effectively only have around 7-8 stops to work with and nothing even close to the 11 stops otherwise claimed. In the industry DR and post are the reason, people stick with film. As long as RED are staying with bayer-sensor design, it seems like they are only able to increasy DR by going up to outragious resolutions, making post-production troublesome, whereas Fujifilm just need to wait until compression engines get down in price before they can use the technology from their S series to make a highly competitive camera.

but again this is all speculative... but an interesting thought anyway. Imagine an S5 pro shooting compressed raw at 24fps :sorcerer:

Sanjin Jukic

12-07-2008, 06:53 AM

Would be nice to get one stop more and we would get it with Mysterium-X soon.

But most important thing is to get a fast lens.

Download and watch those examples (outdoors and indoor) that were shot on RED1 with available night light all @ wide open

Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/1 (Made in Canada (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/Leica_Noctilux_50mm_f(1)_720p_h264.mov))

Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH (Demo lens, Made in Germany) (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/Leica_Noctilux_50mm_f(0_95)_720p_h264.mov)

Canon 50mm FD L f/1.2 (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/IMS_Canon50mmFD_L_02.mov)

Voigthlaender-Leica-M 35mm f/1.2 (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/voigthlaender35mm-1-2_h264.mov)

Mark K.

12-07-2008, 07:13 AM

This is great news. The more competition the better.

Eddie

12-07-2008, 12:09 PM

Steve Sherrick

12-07-2008, 02:17 PM

stephan orlandic

12-07-2008, 04:14 PM

I would not.
RED can offer uncompressed anytime they want. In fact, the boys from Codex showed me a unit with a connector they installed specifically for RED's RAW PORT. RED cancelled the RAW PORT because the demand was not there - not because they couldn't make it. When the workflow is considered - uncompressed 4K in long form is VERY inefficient. That might change, sure. And has anyone heard RED say that you can't get uncompressed out of the EPIC?? I didn't hear that Mitch ... did you??

This might be Your perspective only because it seems that You have never worked in a 4k production/postproduction which does not envolve 36MB/s 4K RED ONE files. Your Scratch system is only efficient in 4K worflow in hd/2k resolution with half quality, and only with 4K Red files. But try loading 4k 16bit tiff or 4K 10bit dpx and see what's happening.
Or work with RED 4K files, in 4K full quality.

Also, compare a compression level, especialy in blue channel with some Northlight 4k 35mm scans or Dalsa 4k images, and You will see why there is serious need for 4k uncompressed materials.

Also, anyone thinking about 4K post, knows that it takes a lot of time, and a lot of money. So if it is inefficient as You say, at least it offers a picture with no compromise. And in 100M+ production nobody cares about speed in 4K, when there is a big sacrifice in quality.

Also, any TITLE, VFX and CG work even from RED ONE's 36MB/s compression, will be done from 4K tiff or 4K dpx, so it will be still inefficient as if it have been shot with some 4K uncompressed camera/scan.

As for 4K uncompressed grading being inefficient, Baselight 8 and Resolve 350, can grade uncompressed 4k in real time, with 30-40 layers of CC, where Scratch can't even grade a full quality 4K RED.

You were saying something about inefficent ?

Mitch Gross

12-07-2008, 05:59 PM

I didn't put it out there as a challenge to what RED is offering, and frankly maybe they will offer it and show up everyone else. I'm just saying that there are certain things that clients want -- right or wrong, they want 'em -- and if someone else delivers then they'll go there. And everybody is trying to move down that path.

Chris Kenny

12-07-2008, 07:35 PM

As for 4K uncompressed grading being inefficient, Baselight 8 and Resolve 350, can grade uncompressed 4k in real time, with 30-40 layers of CC, where Scratch can't even grade a full quality 4K RED.

That's not just because it's uncompressed, it's also because there's no debayer required.

You were saying something about inefficent ?

Even most major Hollywood features aren't presently posted in 4K. So presumably at the moment it's considered too inefficient to justify the quality benefits even on those $100M+ projects.

Anyway, this is largely a moot point, with the data rates offered by the new Epic models. With images fed through a JPEG 2000 derived codec like Redcode at those kinds of compression ratios, you're probably going to need to do statistical analysis of noise patterns to tell the original apart from the compressed version at those compression ratios.

stephan orlandic

12-07-2008, 08:42 PM

That's not just because it's uncompressed, it's also because there's no debayer required.

Even most major Hollywood features aren't presently posted in 4K. So presumably at the moment it's considered too inefficient to justify the quality benefits even on those $100M+ projects.

Anyway, this is largely a moot point, with the data rates offered by the new Epic models.

You have completely missed the point of the hole post.

I was telling Mark, that his vision of efficient post workflow (Scratch) can't playback neither REDCODE in 4k nor 4K uncompressed.

And that You have to work at least a good part of the film in uncompressed data.

And that there is an objective and real need for uncompressed/raw data from camera.

We are talikng here why uncompressed vs. lossy compression and not why 4K at all.

And FYI, REDcode 225 (whatever it will mean) in 6k 16bit camera and especialy in 9k 16bit camera, means LOSSY compression.

Joe G.

12-07-2008, 11:13 PM

"With images fed through a JPEG 2000 derived codec like Redcode at those kinds of compression ratios, you're probably going to need to do statistical analysis of noise patterns to tell the original apart from the compressed version at those compression ratios."

You have hard data about the compression ratios?

Will we be able to minimize the compression somehow and maximize the data rate for a given frame size? Will I be able to get the listed 100MB/s at 6K, 4K, 3K and 2K? Would a 100MB/s 3K be able to be compared side by side to the 100MB/s 6K?

I don't believe the compression ratios have been determined yet. So you may be premature with your answer.

Chris Kenny

12-07-2008, 11:16 PM

You have completely missed the point of the hole post.

I was telling Mark, that his vision of efficient post workflow (Scratch) can't playback neither REDCODE in 4k nor 4K uncompressed.

Which doesn't make it particularly inefficient, because you don't actually need real-time 4K playback even for those very rare projects that are actually finished in 4K.

But you appear to have missed my point, which is that uncompressed 4K is sufficiently unwieldy that even the big-budget guys don't seem to want to work with it. Don't you think this suggests it's rather a bad format to be directly acquiring all your footage in? (Possibly dozens or even hundreds of hours, for a feature.)

And that You have to work at least a good part of the film in uncompressed data.

There's a huge difference between working on a few shots uncompressed, and having the camera capture uncompressed. For starters, you probably have at least a 10:1 shooting ratio, so even if every shot in a film requires an uncompressed workflow to put titles on it or to composite in CG, you're still dealing with 90% less uncompressed data if you use compressed capture and only create uncompressed versions of the shots that actually end up in the movie.

And that there is an objective and real need for uncompressed/raw data from camera.

There's really not. There might be a need for somewhat less compression in some instances. But something close to 2:1 compression can be mathematically lossless, and you can get image compression of 4:1 or maybe even a bit better with no losses other than essentially rearranging the noise a bit.

We are talikng here why uncompressed vs. lossy compression and not why 4K at all.

And FYI, REDcode 225 (whatever it will mean) in 6k 16bit camera and especialy in 9k 16bit camera, means LOSSY compression.

24 6144*4608 (4:3 6K) 16-bit raw frames compressed to 225 MB/s gives you about a 6:1 compression ratio. And remember, larger images tend to compress better. The benefits of uncompressed vs. 6:1 compression are going to be extremely marginal.

More to the point, though, a 6144*4608 16 bit frame compressed to 225 MB/s is going to still look better than (say) a 4096*3072 (4K 4:3) 16-bit uncompressed frame (576 MB/s). As I've pointed out several times in the past, of course uncompressed results in better quality if all else is equal. But it always results in worse quality at a given data rate. And in the real world, there are always some constraints on your data rate.

Chris Kenny

12-07-2008, 11:22 PM

I don't believe the compression ratios have been determined yet. So you may be premature with your answer.

I'm just basing this off of the raw frame sizes and the maximum data rates Red has announced. It's true that actual data rates may end up being a bit lower. But if this is the case, it will presumably be because Red has determined lower data rates yield perfectly acceptable images. (Remember, it doesn't require more processor power to compress data to lower ratios. If anything, it's generally the other way around.)

Robert Berger

12-07-2008, 11:46 PM

Sanjin Jukic

12-07-2008, 11:54 PM

Sanjin.. fast lenses does nothing to increase dynamic range... And as I have pointed out before, some people prefer to stay above f/2 simply BECAUSE of the shallow dof. This leaves them wanting good iso/gain performance and optical image stabilisation, instead of speed.

Eddie,

See the shallow DOF @ f/1.2 wide open at below picture

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/ViennaByNight3.jpg

The picture is from the test I shot last night.

THE LAST NIGHT TEST FOOTAGE>>> (http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/ViennaByNight3.mov)

thanx for putting "THE END" in your clip - it totally transformed these snippets into an epic story :clown2:

Thanx for your comment told in a kind of Swiss humor :clown2: .

I don't think fast lenzen wil win, because the littele dept of filed you wil have and a digital camera with later on the digigtal projection where 4,5 or 6K still stay 4,5, or 6K you need dept of field .So the market wil be won by digital camara's with more tha 640 ASA !! Mark my words, faster ASA camera's not faster lenzen!!

Robert

Robert

Robert to see some DOF @ f/1.2 wide open follow the footage from the last night with the link above.

Stephen Williams

12-08-2008, 02:56 AM

What did you set the focus on when you made that shot? The ear looks sharper than the front eye.

Eddie,

See the shallow DOF @ f/1.2 wide open at below picture

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/ViennaByNight3.jpg

The picture is from the test I shot last night.

THE LAST NIGHT TEST FOOTAGE>>> (http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/ViennaByNight3.mov)

Thanx for your comment told in a kind of Swiss humor :clown2: .

Robert to see some DOF @ f/1.2 wide open follow the footage from the last night with the link above.

Sanjin Jukic

12-08-2008, 03:47 AM

Stephen,

it's a handheld and documentary kind of shooting when you focus by eye in EVF.

For example this guy anyway didn't like that I was shooting him at all and

I moved camera a bit up to shoot the lights after just to avoid a contact.

Let's say a sort of "pararazzi" shot when you are not absolutely sure if you are in focus or not.

The lens was wide open at f/1.2 for sure.

Have a look at the footage again>>> (http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/ViennaByNight3.mov)

Jay A. Kelley

12-08-2008, 05:07 AM

Cüneyt Kaya

12-08-2008, 05:10 AM

Cüneyt Kaya

12-08-2008, 05:27 AM

I will say that RED's Lack of open file format is a MAJOR downside to their product line. If another camera were to come out with a completely open format from the get-go, then they would get very serious consideration from me.

Jay

yep...nobody will understand why it takes that long.

and lets say red will keep the status quo for a while----then they should provide the right Tools to get it to work.

but as long as properly working telecine software (Redcine) would eat into scratchs market we cant expect that the guys from assimilate will work hard for a solution.

pc redcine is a catastrophy.
the most annoying bugs are known.....loading more then 120 clips in redcine leads to what?

and honestly......that a skater from ny and a nz nerd saves the workflow with additional software and workarounds....is just weird..hey i paid more then 30 000 usd......ok i know its all beta...
but its now 15 months
maybe red should put some pressure on their partner assimilate:
something like
redcine should be as stable as scratch.

but the best....really the best would be if they publish the SDK.....RED is not a software company....right?
Right now the guys doing the software doesnt do RED a favour imho.
There would be much better software tools in 6 months than redcine...imho.
Let RED build the Camera and others the software.

--------------------------

just to clarify...

i dont want to bash red or hear something like, go get another cam.
i am one of the greatest supporters fo red in germany.
what i dont want is:
red falling behind

Nick Wolf

12-08-2008, 05:50 AM

Kinda hard to put the squeeze on someone who has got you by the balls ( : Emoticom Optional : )

DogDay.

Lucas Wilson

12-08-2008, 05:53 AM

I was telling Mark, that his vision of efficient post workflow (Scratch) can't playback neither REDCODE in 4k nor 4K uncompressed.

We have several customers in LA that are working on 4K uncompressed 10bit DPX in SCRATCH. It works just fine, as long as you have the appropriate hardware. SCRATCH cannot currently do multiple layers of realtime CC in 4K. That is currently reserved for a Baselight8, Resolve, and Pablo.

There is obviously a price/performance trade-off as well. It goes without saying that to get that kind of performance, you will be paying exponentially more for a complete system.

Best,

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA

Lucas Wilson

12-08-2008, 05:55 AM

but as long as properly working telecine software (Redcine) would eat into scratchs market we cant expect that the guys from assimilate will work hard for a solution.

REDCINE is a RED product. Feature development and feature requests are driven by RED, not ASSIMILATE.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA

Cüneyt Kaya

12-08-2008, 06:04 AM

REDCINE is a RED product. Feature development and feature requests are driven by RED, not ASSIMILATE.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA

thank you for claryfing...
what are the feature requests you are working on...i guess its a colabiration or you can tell me who is doing the coding at RED...

btw. scratch really works as datamanager/telecine...i mean stable etc.
who is responsible for that redcine has problems

Sanjin Jukic

12-08-2008, 06:36 AM

sanjin dont you think that its lets say unpolite posting footage of a person without permission in the internet?

Sorry Cüneyt,

the guy jump in front of my lens and then I just focused on his face.

Could be that he took a photo of me too and later will published at his blog page.

How should I know that?

We are living in the global information society and if I make documentary somewhere else

I'm not going to "hunt" after that for a permission all the "faces" that were appeared in my movie.

Also what about the animal rights? :)

Ridiculous!!

Don't be funny!!!

Hope you are not a sort of PAPARAZZI POLICE at the forum!!!????

---------------------------------

Also about REDCINE.

You don't need REDCINE at all.

Now everything works well with 2K FCP/Color workflow.

You want 4K?

Go REDALERT to output 4K ProResHQ or DPX, then go Premiere Pro to cut, then AE to CC,

conform in AE to DPX, go print to film or make a digital theater projection master.

You are fine.

It's all on a Mac, sorry :) .

What about PC?

Somebody here said it is for a high-end studio clients and customers the best platform!?

Just go SCRATCH and you are fine.

It would cost you a bit more but as somebody here said that he is at high end platform with his big clients and customers.

Hopefully they would have enough money to pay for that :) .

One more thing:

Buy a MAC!!!

It's advertised here in Austria as a(n) (Apple) PC :) . (http://www.saturn.at/?parentCat=T00.00.12.01.&cat=N01.24.01.)

Cüneyt Kaya

12-08-2008, 06:42 AM

Sorry Cüneyt,

the guy jump in front of my lens and I just focus him.

Coulkd be that he took a photo of me too and later published at his blog page.

How should I know?

We are living in the global information society and if I make documentary somewhere else

I'm not going to "hunt" after that for a permission all the "faces" that were appeared in my movie.

Also what about the animal rights? :)

Ridiculous!!

Don't be funny!!!

Hope you are not a sort of PAPARAZZI POLICE at the forum!!!????
.

ok i see....seemed you were hunting this dude paparazzi style....hehe

---------------------------------

Also about REDCINE.

You don't need REDCINE at all.

Now everything works well with 2K FCP/Color workflow.

You want 4K?

Go REDALERT to output 4K ProResHQ or DPX, then go Premiere Pro to cut, then AE to CC,

conform in AE to DPX, go print to film or make a digital theater projection master.

You are fine.

It's all on a Mac, sorry :) .

What about PC?

Somebody here said it is for a high-end studio clients and customers the best platform!?

Just go SCRATCH and you are fine.

It would cost you a bit but as somebody here said he is at high end platform with his high-end clients and customers.

Hopefully they would have enough money to pay for that :) .

sanjin scratch doesnt mean highend CC...and i am glad that they dont promote themselves as this anymore.

baselight/autodesk software etc. is highend

multiple layers of CC in Realtime.
--------------------------------------------------------

@mac vs. PC we could talk the next 10 years.....hehe

Cüneyt Kaya

12-08-2008, 06:47 AM

i will not talk about postworkflow anymore...
it doesnt change something.

wish lucas and nacho all the best...they are just trying to earn a living.

Sanjin Jukic

12-08-2008, 06:54 AM

ok i see....seemed you were hunting this dude paparazzi style....hehe

I do not know who is he and I didn't hunt him at all,

he just appear in front of my lens,

I was not in a front of his Panasonic compact digital camera :) .

sanjin scratch doesnt mean highend CC...and i am glad that they dont promote themselves as this anymore.

baselight/autodesk software etc. is highend

multiple layers of CC in Realtime.
--------------------------------------------------------

@mac vs. PC we could talk the next 10 years.....hehe

OK, SCRATCH is not high-end CC, could be but people like a Soderbergh doing it,

his film is going to run for some of Oscars, also got one Cannes Palme d'Or,

probably is not high-end enough for a German standard :) .

Also MAC can run Linux and then you go Baselight as a high-end CC...

Patrick Tresch

12-08-2008, 07:44 AM

thank you for claryfing...
what are the feature requests you are working on...i guess its a colabiration or you can tell me who is doing the coding at RED...

btw. scratch really works as datamanager/telecine...i mean stable etc.
who is responsible for that redcine has problems

I wonder how long Luki will take these critics until he "lashes out" to RED...?

It's a long time people do finger point to Assimilate. Even if multiple arguments have been told like :

RED is a camera company not a software developper.
Open format could decrease quality of R3D debayering by other companies.
Early supporting company should have a commercial advantage.
There is no written contract bounding RED to Assimilate.
SDK development is not an overnight process...

:angry02:

We user, just don't understand why locking up the post-REDvolution the way RED does ?

Patrick

Chris Kenny

12-08-2008, 09:55 AM

There are now very clear workflow choices at three levels:

Cheap: Edit proxies in FCP. Send to Color. Grade from compressed raw files. Output at anything up to 2K DPX.

Mid-cost: Edit whatever convenient format in FCP or other NLE. Conform and grade in SCRATCH. Output at anything up to 4K DPX.

High-cost: Edit whatever convenient format in FCP or other NLE. Transcode used shots to 2K or 4K DPX. Feed into Baselight or other DI system.

The only one of these workflows that hasn't existed for months at this point is the first one. The standard workflow on the cheap end prior to a few weeks ago was to transcode to ProRes and online in that, which is not ideal, but for the most part delivered quality that was perfectly acceptable for projects in that budget range. (It's not as if FCP or other low-cost tools had native access to the compressed raw files from any other 4K digital cinema cameras.)

Would there be more third-party support for Redcode data if Red documented its file format? Yes. We'd probably have quick transcoding from Redcode Raw to Cineform Raw, for one thing. Red should open up its file format. But my impression is Redcode is still getting tweaked with just about every firmware build right now. Everyone is going to spend a lot less time pulling their hair out if Red lets the format stabilize before throwing the doors open to the world.

Chris Bell

12-13-2008, 11:02 AM

Fredrik Callinggard

12-13-2008, 11:41 AM

I would love to see a reflex digital camera, like the Aaton. Replace the digital back every couple of years as technology advances. Keep the reflex body and all of its benefits. This is what cinematographers want.

Well Aaton is working on exactly that solution.

(not sure if that was you meant or not)

edit: Just saw that you wrote digital camera so that was what you meant, my apologies.

Jason Sinclair

12-22-2008, 10:37 PM

I'll keep loyalties to red until they change their ways. For me the people i work with is number one. I can see a few areas where Red needs to take a step back and re-look at everything in a new light. As far as camera technology is concerned I am very happy with the progress. Arri is now (apparently) following the lead if they are now able to bring out 4k cameras @ 40k. It's good they are "listening" now. However, it's hard to respect a company that only jumps up to the challenge when someone else takes the lead. In terms of listening to the customer, Jim is light years ahead and this has provided him much of the success he has had.

As far as i can see the following are examples that are creating roadblocks for Red's domination in the market.

#1 Red has not updated itself as an organization to handle the overload. The way Red has worked in the last 3 years has reflected the release of the Red One. Going into Epic/ Scarlett production they need IMHO to really focus on their online marketing/communications. Red has made so many bold moves into new business models like no advertising, selling direct online and these forums which is fantastic, however, I really believe there are some sticking points that have arisen as a result and competition has taken advantage of these sticking points. I think a refocus on these sticking points is needed, however considering that most of the threads covering these areas are shoved into off topic suggests a) either they don't want to look at these areas or b) they are working on it. A classical example is HERE (http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=23372)

What is Ironic i find, is that Red is so advanced in camera technology and has thought well into the future but we have no roadmap on communication and can only rely on these forums for information which is obviously the source of much frustration from all sides of the fence(s) I like forums for social chats but when it comes to sourcing information... It is a headache. Even now i know how to use google with reduser more effectively, it is a headache. Especially to a) prove a point to someone who is resisting or has been mill-informed. and b) when time is a factor (so much of the film industry runs on this). Reduser and DVXuser were pivotal in Red's growth and Jarrad has done a splendid job, but for information dissemination, forums are not the future. They are already outdated to a degree.

#2

Open source.

#3

Fully supporting and engaging third party providers with as much support as they give their customers. Third party providers are the life blood of the red system. Think IMS and Birger. If any competitor matched the price with a similar product (even 2k) and included these options, then Red would quickly loose a lot of ground.

The ethos for Red was from the beginning to give the people what they want. This has worked for obvious reasons... because those people have wallets.. It's not rocket science. I hope Jim takes a small break in Fiji and processes all the new information that only a rest can provide before embarking on the mammoth journey that awaits.