Get out your Crystal Ball: Red in August 2008?

[Tom Lowe]

I think the best thing for most people to do is to plan on getting their Reds late this year or early next year, and not stress too much about it in the meantime. I mean, does anyone doubt that Jim and them are breaking their backs trying to get this ready?

So, having said that, I'm wondering what you guys think will be going on with RED by around August of 2008, a little more than a year from now?

For instance, will more FPS be enabled in 4K REDCODE RAW by then? Maybe 48fps?

Will 4K monitors be available for editing and possibly even on-set monitoring?

Will other cameras be competing directly with 4K wavelet-compressed capabilities? Maybe 2K downsample cameras with 35mm-sized sensors?

How many REDS will be out there? Which percentage of major feature films will be shooting on REDs, Genesis, D-20s, Dalsas, etc?

What will happen to Color Correcting once 4K CCing is as simple as pie on any high-end PC or Mac, technologywise? Is this something more editors, directors and DPs will be trying to tackle on their own with REDCODE RAW footage?

Don't stop there. What else do you see in your crystal ball for RED and the future of digital cinema by August 2008?

[Paul Wizikowski]

Certainly the best thing to do is just wait. Of course thats also the only thing you can do. Even if you decide to jump ship and get your investment returned to you, you still must wait for something to come a long and do what you hoped RED would/will do.

Now the stress for me and people like me is justified when you think about the expectation that was set (with asteriks certainly) to be recieving the camera in early 07, then to be given a timeline that for me was June '07, and now to have an unknown "later-this year" timeline when I must continue to rent 35mm gear and spend thousands of dollars nearly every week that I had hoped/expected to be putting into my RED. By the end of this summer alone I could have nearly had the camera body paid off.

But hey, I still dream about the day when I'll get it. And I still get excited when I think of what I can do with the RED when it arrives. I am still proud to be a part of this revolution.

RED just don't ever stop.

[Tom Lowe]

Well I don't want this thread to be about the delays. But really, planning on receiving it early next year is the best idea. That way, if it comes early, it's just gravy. But if people keep hanging on every post from Jim and trying to plan their lives and careers around this, they are setting themselves up for misery.

Okay, how about the thread topic, though? Assuming cameras are delivered very early next year, what will the whole RED and digital cinema landscape look like by then? HD technology has to be one of the fastest adapting of all fields of technology -- very tough to predict!

[tj williams]

Tom I think that is a really good question as to what the Dig. Cine. landscape will look like. Probably one of the strongest motivators to get the RED out and delivered is that other companies will surely be designing cameras to compete with it. RED without delivering a single camera has signed more sales agreements than the whole 7 year history of Sony Cine Alta.

[Michael Brennan]

Until RED has a track record we are guessing. But we could go on previous history of the launch of 1st generation High Res cameras and editing software from other manufacturers.

12 to 18 months is not untypical for bugs to be ironed and all frame rates and features enabled. ie f900 and Quantal's iQ.

But RED Digital Cinema company is a different animal so it may be shorter.. or longer! At least with a freely communicating user base the issues and any fixes will become pubic in short order and so far RED has been transparent in communicating delays and pricing.

Unlike how Sony and Quantal launched their HD products, half baked at twice the price of same kit now and NOT communicating problems in a timely manner.




Mike Brennan

[Roberto B]

stop it!.. i want my camera in 2007..

[Fergus Meiklejohn]

Interesting thread..

I'd put my money on Canon coming out with a 2K (maybe 4, they have the sensors..), camera that'll take their L series 35mm lenses. They'd be stupid not to.

I also think that Apple is trying to create a really professional finishing suite in Final Cut Studio, and the RED integration is part of that movement, so I think 4K Redcode Color support by end of 2008 maybe 2009, and it'll only work on their most expensive MacPro system.

I think we'll be monitoring our 4k footage on 4k projectors (hopefully made by RED..)

And I still think that if the script is shit, then it doesn't matter how many k's of resolution you film it with; it'll still be a boring movie :)

[Ramesh Jai]

Tom I think that is a really good question as to what the Dig. Cine. landscape will look like. Probably one of the strongest motivators to get the RED out and delivered is that other companies will surely be designing cameras to compete with it. RED without delivering a single camera has signed more sales agreements than the whole 7 year history of Sony Cine Alta.
RED has definitel sparked off a revolution in low cost but high quality picture delivery cameras.

Somewhere in this forum is a thread which talks about the Russians already using a RED type camera.

OK, so, 3-5 years from now this is what I see - Everyone will be able to afford RED or the best cameras from any other vendor.

RED will be used to cover weddings and funerals and given as birthday presents to nephews and nieces.

We will be back to where we are now and will always be.. the most successfull film makers will be the ones with a good story to tell.

You have heard this before.

[JohnF]

If I could get hold of RED just before August 2008 I know I can get an amazing shot that has never been fiilmed before...

My point is that RED is offering a camera at a price and quality that will enable many many people to shoot quality material that can be released onto the main stage of film and TV. (but will all RED users be able to handle that capability by 2008?)

I believe George Lucus and co have stated that the age of the $200 million movie is coming to an end and that the indie/low budget sector is going to be the dominant force in movie production/releases. RED is, in some way the begining of that movement, though the cost of 35mm film is insignificant compared with the overall budget of large movies it is very significant to those out there who have great ideas but no budgetary support. The flexibilty of shooting at 4k but editing at "what ever you like" resolution will enable film makers to target their products at who ever wants to buy them. A TV movie for instance might not require 4k delivery but if it proved to be very succesful/popular it could be "remastered" back to 4k for cinema delivery...

But by 2008...?

Hopefully a sensible and reliable form or archiving would have been figured out. (to me more important than having a 4k screen for editing)

Documentary shooters and Run&gunners(it won't be that hard to run and gun with RED providing the setups right) will be having a great time!

And RED will probably be having a big impact on advertising and music vids by 2008.

Though once released as TJ pointed out "...is that other companies will surely be designing cameras to compete with it. RED without delivering a single camera has signed more sales agreements than the whole 7 year history of Sony Cine Alta."

Expect some announced competition by 2008. (this might include a simple case of fitting 35mm chips onto standard HD cameras. This combination alongside traditional tape workflow could knock alot of wind out of the movement for non-tape based workflows for a while at least - producers are much happier with a tape in their hand... There may even be the possibility of 24fps hard disk recording bolted on to DSLR's - think of the paparazzi potential!)

Some movies might well have been shot by RED at that point and we'll see how they go. If they go well expect some turbulent change!!!

JohnF

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

I think the RED will be pretty much the primary camera used to shoot ads and music videos in the future, as far as high-end work. I don't doubt a lot of people will keep using worse technology if they can get away with it, to save costs, but nobody is going to say, "Hmm let's rent an extremely overweight, clunky, and outdated F950 for even more money than the RED despite its much worse resolution and picture quality because it's by Sony, so it's automatically great." I think not. Almost everyone will be shooting that kind of stuff with the RED. Now whether feature films are shot with the RED commonly remains to be seen, that's a slower transition, but I imagine many, many indie films will be shot with it. I know for me, nothing else makes sense at all.

I can't afford to spend a few thousand dollars per day on equipment rentals. I want to spend no more than $2,000 per day *total*, so owning my own equipment like the RED makes that possible without the camera package and lenses and tripod and all that already costing $2,000 a day.

[David Mullen ASC]

You're forgetting the people who already own a Sony, etc. -- they aren't all going to stop using their paid-for equipment on January 2008. Yesterday I saw a crew shooting in the lobby of the AMC15 in Century City with a Digital Betacam, some sort of EPK probably. I suspect for the mid to low-end video production companies, they will keep using the Varicams, Digi-Betas, and whatnot that they have bought already, even if they add a RED camera for their high-end work. Or not, maybe they get plenty of work already with their current equipment. Not everyone needs a 4K camera with a 35mm-sized sensor, and if you only use the RED camera in 2K-windowed mode with B4 video lenses, would you also stop using a 2/3" CCD HD camera that you've already bought?

And the highest-end stuff will be shot on whatever the creative talent want it to be shot on. RED makes logical sense, of course, but not all decisions are logical when you've got a lot of money to spend and you hire artists to spend it.

The changeover to digital origination is significant, but for mainstream Hollywood films, it's not a changeover that a lot of audiences will notice, since the whole selling point of these new cameras is that they match the quality of what we've already been using, i.e. 35mm. So if Spider-Man 3 had been shot on a RED camera instead of a 35mm camera, that would be historically significant, but would that really make Spider-Man 3 "revolutionary"? I mean, the end result would be the same more or less, just the means of getting there would have changed.

The revolution would be more significant for those who had difficulty affording 35mm in the first place, i.e. low-budget indies, smaller production companies. For big-budget people, it would be more evolutionary than revolutionary, swapping out their Panaflexes for RED's, Genesis, Dalsa's, recording to hard drives instead of film negative, etc. But the stories told, the actors hired, the types of movies made, etc. -- Hollywood will keep doing what it tends to always do. In mainstream movies, the switch from 35mm to 4K digital origination will not be like the switch from silent movies to sound, it will be more like the widescreen era of the 1950's, and in some ways, that era saw more changes -- in aspect ratio, mono to stereo & multi-track sound, 3-strip Technicolor to color negative, larger negatives, etc.

Revolutions like the switch to shooting digitally tend to be more internal ones to the industry that the average viewer is less aware of, like the switch from cutting workprint to cutting on computers, a significant change, but an audience member can't tell you if a movie was cut one way or the other. They would never say "oh, I liked the flatbed cutting on 'Munich'" or "FCP made 'Cold Mountain' so much better!"

What the RED camera gives you is better image quality at much lower prices. That will have a major impact on those that could not afford that higher image quality than before, but less of an impact on those that could already. So in Hollywood studio films, I see the transition to digital cameras like the RED as being more gradual as the benefits are more and more understood, as people start to use the camera and see the results in the theaters -- but all of that requires more time than the eight months before 2008 arrives.

On the other hand, I also suspect that the transition rate will not be a constant and even, but speed-up over time, like a snowball rolling down a hill. But it cannot be overnight, not with so much other equipment out there, already bought and paid for.

[REDHKSC]

May I have dreamed an idea that " Buy back all SONY HDCAM Cameras/camcorders from one investors then we sell them all to the Tape Based TV Broadcasters worldwide to make some good revenues.

I hope many LEEs in HKG will do so.

Cheers,

STEWART
HKG / CHINA




You're forgetting the people who already own a Sony, etc. -- they aren't all going to stop using their paid-for equipment on January 2008. Yesterday I saw a crew shooting in the lobby of the AMC15 in Century City with a Digital Betacam, some sort of EPK probably. I suspect for the mid to low-end video production companies, they will keep using the Varicams, Digi-Betas, and whatnot that they have bought already, even if they add a RED camera for their high-end work. Or not, maybe they get plenty of work already with their current equipment. Not everyone needs a 4K camera with a 35mm-sized sensor, and if you only use the RED camera in 2K-windowed mode with B4 video lenses, would you also stop using a 2/3" CCD HD camera that you've already bought?

And the highest-end stuff will be shot on whatever the creative talent want it to be shot on. RED makes logical sense, of course, but not all decisions are logical when you've got a lot of money to spend and you hire artists to spend it.

The changeover to digital origination is significant, but for mainstream Hollywood films, it's not a changeover that a lot of audiences will notice, since the whole selling point of these new cameras is that they match the quality of what we've already been using, i.e. 35mm. So if Spider-Man 3 had been shot on a RED camera instead of a 35mm camera, that would be historically significant, but would that really make Spider-Man 3 "revolutionary"? I mean, the end result would be the same more or less, just the means of getting there would have changed.

The revolution would be more significant for those who had difficulty affording 35mm in the first place, i.e. low-budget indies, smaller production companies. For big-budget people, it would be more evolutionary than revolutionary, swapping out their Panaflexes for RED's, Genesis, Dalsa's, recording to hard drives instead of film negative, etc. But the stories told, the actors hired, the types of movies made, etc. -- Hollywood will keep doing what it tends to always do. In mainstream movies, the switch from 35mm to 4K digital origination will not be like the switch from silent movies to sound, it will be more like the widescreen era of the 1950's, and in some ways, that era saw more changes -- in aspect ratio, mono to stereo & multi-track sound, 3-strip Technicolor to color negative, larger negatives, etc.

Revolutions like the switch to shooting digitally tend to be more internal ones to the industry that the average viewer is less aware of, like the switch from cutting workprint to cutting on computers, a significant change, but an audience member can't tell you if a movie was cut one way or the other. They would never say "oh, I liked the flatbed cutting on 'Munich'" or "FCP made 'Cold Mountain' so much better!"

What the RED camera gives you is better image quality at much lower prices. That will have a major impact on those that could not afford that higher image quality than before, but less of an impact on those that could already. So in Hollywood studio films, I see the transition to digital cameras like the RED as being more gradual as the benefits are more and more understood, as people start to use the camera and see the results in the theaters -- but all of that requires more time than the eight months before 2008 arrives.

On the other hand, I also suspect that the transition rate will not be a constant and even, but speed-up over time, like a snowball rolling down a hill. But it cannot be overnight, not with so much other equipment out there, already bought and paid for.

[Jay A. Kelley]

David, it would be cool if you were one of the beta testers.

You have noticeable excitment about the camera, so you can represent us "REDguys" well, but at the same time you keep your head level and would cite any issues that you catch while working with it.

Jay

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

If someone already has equipment that works, they're not probably going to "waste" money buying a bunch of new equipment, that is definitely true. I'm thinking of lower budget producers who rent equipment on a per-shoot basis, RED might make a lot more sense to them than a lot of what else is out there. I would think.

I think the biggest difference will be the quality of lower-budget films, which might benefit in a variety of ways from using the RED. The picture quality should be a lot better, but also if they were going to spend a relatively large portion of their budget to shoot in 35mm, because they wanted a professional image, this could free up resources for other parts of the production. Say you were trying to make a movie for $500,000, then the 35mm camera and film stock and processing fees plus telecine is going to cost a very large portion of your total budget. But what if you could instead spend that money on locations, or production design, or better acting talent, because you found a digital solution (the RED) that will give you the same (or better) quality for much less money? That's where I think the difference will be the largest...

[Fergus Meiklejohn]

I wonder if the take up will be so very fast in the EFP/ENG world. To get the big benefits of RED I think you need to be using the entire 35mm sensor, otherwise the argument against other already acquired 2/3" HD cameras is not so strong, especially when production companies and broadcasters have a workflow they already understand and have invested in. And the real-life difficulty of filming with 35mm depth of field (field of view..whatever..), and dealing with the new post workflow will put off many people. Put simply your going to have to be a talented camera operator and a cannie FCP operator to handle filming with the RED 1, unless you've got money and crew of people on your side. I know lots of AP's here in the UK who are understandably wary of going out on their own or with a Director and filming on the Sony Z1, because they have to do the sound too, and there is no producer sorting stuff out, and they're in a foreign place, etc etc. The vast majority of doco TV acquisition in the UK is done that way. So even if the footage looks great, it's a real ask to expect everyone to suddenly start filming with a RED camera or whatever equivalent in 2008 (even in 2020, until there are a lot of dependable automatic features enabled). It's like how there are loads of great and affordable DSLR's on the market but most people want a really good point and shoot automatic digital camera; like the Panasonic DMC-TZ3 for example.

[David Mullen ASC]

Even in the EFP world, as Gibby will probably testify, there are all sorts of productions, high and low, simple and complex. Even in the documentary world, there is not one type of documentary - the needs of someone shooting nature in Africa will probably be different than someone shooting interviews with scientists.

While the difficulties of focusing 35mm are well-known, there are types of documentaries shot in 35mm, even IMAX, that find a way. If you're shooting shots of mountains, for example, I don't think focus-pulling is all that hard...

In terms of the impact in low-budget narrative filmmaking... since many people have already accepted that 1080P photography, available in one form or another since 2000, and in consumer HD form in the past few years, can make decent theatrical images, though not quite 35mm quality, well, the arguments for not shooting 35mm and putting that production money elsewhere have already been made -- the RED camera is more of a jump forward in quality than previous 1080P technology allowed, but it's not like the low-budget world only had a choice before the RED camera between shooting in 35mm or shooting in Mini-DV or Super-8. In other words, it's part of a transition towards better alternatives to 35mm.

What's great about the RED camera really is that no longer will someone have to feel that they are making any image compromises in order to save money; in fact, they may feel they are gaining some image benefits to boot.

The word "revolution" gets thrown around a lot, but real revolutions come from new ideas that are sometimes (in this case) enabled by new tools. If the new tool is only used to make the same old ideas come to life, then I think it's more of a technical and stylistic evolution, not a revolution. What will make the RED camera a true revolution is what you users here do with the thing.

[Jay A. Kelley]

Even in the EFP world, as Gibby will probably testify, there are all sorts of productions, high and low, simple and complex. Even in the documentary world, there is not one type of documentary - the needs of someone shooting nature in Africa will probably be different than someone shooting interviews with scientists.

While the difficulties of focusing 35mm are well-known, there are types of documentaries shot in 35mm, even IMAX, that find a way. If you're shooting shots of mountains, for example, I don't think focus-pulling is all that hard...

In terms of the impact in low-budget narrative filmmaking... since many people have already accepted that 1080P photography, available in one form or another since 2000, and in consumer HD form in the past few years, can make decent theatrical images, though not quite 35mm quality, well, the arguments for not shooting 35mm and putting that production money elsewhere have already been made -- the RED camera is more of a jump forward in quality than previous 1080P technology allowed, but it's not like the low-budget world only had a choice before the RED camera between shooting in 35mm or shooting in Mini-DV or Super-8. In other words, it's part of a transition towards better alternatives to 35mm.

What's great about the RED camera really is that no longer will someone have to feel that they are making any image compromises in order to save money; in fact, they may feel they are gaining some image benefits to boot.

The word "revolution" gets thrown around a lot, but real revolutions come from new ideas that are sometimes (in this case) enabled by new tools. If the new tool is only used to make the same old ideas come to life, then I think it's more of a technical and stylistic evolution, not a revolution. What will make the RED camera a true revolution is what you users here do with the thing.


This is a very empowering post.. The last paragraph should be a mantra for all of us.. Too bad we can take the quote and make it a banner or sticky or something.

Thanks David,

I'm a real fan. I plan on being first in line to buy Astronaut Farmer!

Jay

[Steve Gibby]

I think David made some very good points on this thread – some of which I would have pointed to if I’d discovered this thread earlier.

I’ve historically owned only the equipment I’d use on a daily basis – and simply rented the other need equipment on a project-by-project basis, building rental fees into the project budget. After receiving my REDs I’ll continue to operate that way because it is cost effective. Especially since the late ‘90’s it has been foolish to try to own everything in a digital acquisition scenario. Technology progresses so fast that as soon as you buy something it is rapidly becoming obsolete.

I think the key to solving the above conundrum is a camera system that is scalable, upgradeable, flexible, modular, and still affordable – like RED One. IMO a camera system like that changes the “should I own or rent” dilemma while simultaneously encouraging a horizontal spread of potential production genre uses and job position lateral and upward mobility. IMO a camera system like that is much better suited to indie cine and indie packager EFP production than large entity production. That’s not to say that giant entities won’t adopt RED cameras – it will just take them longer to amortize out their legacy investments and gradually institute a changeover, as David has pointed out. I think affordable and downsized technology like RED will now enable a middle class in the convergent motion media industry. In the late ‘90’s the overall motion media industry began to experience a shakeout of company sizes. It has evolved since then into mostly two sizes of entities: 1) large companies such as studio, networks, and business conglomerates that do huge projects and generally do union work in-house, but also now contract indie packagers and production houses 2) small boutique production and post houses that do non-union, indie work and packaging for the “biggies”, who scale up in staff size for projects using independent contractors, and then scale back down in between to control overhead.

No matter how right brain creative we are, business survival in the emerging paradigm is dependent on us being able to go left brained to analyze and implement the correct business plan for our own particular scenario. “A penny saved is a penny earned” is as true for our industry as it is for any other. An understanding of micro-economics and macro-economics goes a long way toward charting a safe business course, whether we’re a giant business executive or a small boutique “wear all the hats” entity.

In view of the above I see the RED One camera system, and others like it that may emerge, as a potential avenue for large entities to eventually spread their production genre offerings, upgrade their workflows to a more IT-based paradigm, begin a new cycle of amortizing some new investments, and compete with the growing horde of talented indie producers/packagers that are knocking at the production citadel gates. I also see the RED One camera system, and ones like it that may emerge, being on the vanguard of use by the talented, IT-savvy, project hungry group of indie types that are banging on those citadel gates and demanding access to the city.

The convergent motion media industry is dynamic, never static. IMO each of us needs to tap into that dynamism, evolve with technology while simultaneously preserving past technology that enhances our businesses, and stake out and maintain our own niches in the production industry paradigm.

Over the years I’ve been very fortunate to have worked in almost every cine and EFP motion media genre and sub-genre but narrative cinema. I look forward to also working in narrative cinema. I’ve set that as a goal – because I love dangling new carrots in front of myself. From the outset of the development of the RED One camera system I’ve espoused it’s utility potential across multiple cine and EFP genres and sub-genres. One trait I have in common with Jim Jannard is deeply enjoying someone doing me a favor by telling me something is impossible or that I can’t do something. If someone chooses to use the RED One camera system in a narrow collection of its intended uses I’m totally OK with that. We all need to make our own choices. I would ask of others that same respect back to me if I conversely choose to use my RED One camera systems in a broad array of genres and sub-genres.

I think David is spot-on accurate in his statement of: “What will make the RED camera a true revolution is what you users here do with the thing.” Let’s all get out and push this thing to its limits and beyond, add in our creative visions, and see what we can come up with! I know I’ll be doing that…and I invite you to contribute in your own way to the revolution, evolution, or whatever this turns out to be.

[Fergus Meiklejohn]

rock on Gibby, I'm sure you'll knock them dead mate, but that's because you are a member of the "talented, IT-savvy, project hungry group of indie types"
I suppose.. I haven't had the pleasure of meeting ye :usd:

Man, in the mainstream over here there are a lot of talented people who will find it more difficult to master the medium:cold: And providing we can master it, I hope that will give us an opportunity..:innocent:

[Steve Gibby]

rock on Gibby, I'm sure you'll knock them dead mate, but that's because you are a member of the "talented, IT-savvy, project hungry group of indie types"
I suppose.. I haven't had the pleasure of meeting ye :usd:

Man, in the mainstream over here there are a lot of talented people who will find it more difficult to master the medium:cold: And providing we can master it, I hope that will give us an opportunity..:innocent:

LOL...actually I'm 58 years old, began in the imaging industry in 1969 with a Nikon F SLR, and just evolved with the film and television industry over the years. In age, I certainly don't fit the profile of the "talented, IT-savvy, project hungry group of indie types", but in mentality and approach to my work I probably fit that profile more than most of the industry veterans my age. I try to see both sides of the issues of the industry, adjust my work accordingly, and press on with seeking cool projects.

I haven't had the pleasure of meeting you either...but I'll look forward to it sometime when I'm in the UK.:wink:

[Tom Lowe]

I'm hoping for these things before next August:

1) More FPS in 4K REDCODE so I don't have to shoot my overcranked scenes tethered or at 1080 RGB.

2) Full support for Adobe Premiere Pro at 4K. Red? Cineform?

3) 4K LCDs for my computer, to edit in native res.

4) Rental houses in LA with lots of Reds available for my second camera.

5) More theaters with 2K and 4K projectors, especially arthouse theaters. I guess right now Landmark is the only group really doing this? It would also be nice is major festivals like Cannes, Toronto, Sundance, Venice, etc, had 4K projectors.

[Jay A. Kelley]

I expect #1 by end of year!
Jay

[Steve Gibby]

I'm hoping for these things before next August:

1) More FPS in 4K REDCODE so I don't have to shoot my overcranked scenes tethered or at 1080 RGB.

2) Full support for Adobe Premiere Pro at 4K. Red? Cineform?

3) 4K LCDs for my computer, to edit in native res.

4) Rental houses in LA with lots of Reds available for my second camera.

5) More theaters with 2K and 4K projectors, especially arthouse theaters. I guess right now Landmark is the only group really doing this? It would also be nice is major festivals like Cannes, Toronto, Sundance, Venice, etc, had 4K projectors.

Let me take a crack at those Tom:

1) I agree with Jay that we may see those frame rate upgrades quickly and maybe by the end of 2007 – but how soon is anyone’s guess and I have no direct knowledge of plans for such. You can shoot 2k RC RAW untethered at up to 60fps under the current spec.

2) I’d guess all those entities are working on RED 4k and REDCODE solutions

3) RED announced those at NAB. Timeline for development, screen sizes, etc. has not been stated

4) I would imagine that would happen real quickly with about 85% of the world’s entire entertainment media volume still being produced within a 50 mile radius of downtown Los Angeles.

5) I think that’s inevitable. Red’s 4k projectors, also announced at NAB, could play a part in that proliferation.

[Bruce Allen]

As a guy who does the old C++ thing every now and then, and has actually written assembly code, then let me just say that if they get 4K REDCODE at 60fps, it would be a major coup and a great programming achievement. It may be possible, on the other hand, it may not be. As a third possibility, they might have to dumb down the compression system a bit (so quality is a little worse for the given bitrate because half the number of CPU cycles are available to crunch the data).

...and while they're in the performing great feats of coding, let me put in my personal vote for 120fps REDCODE at 2k :)

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[GlennChan]

It sounds like they are going to be using custom hardware slash FPGAs to achieve that kind of performance?

[Tom Lowe]

You can shoot 2k RC RAW untethered at up to 60fps under the current spec.

Does this mean windowed? Would I be using my 35mm cine lenses? The reason I was planning on shooting 1080 RGB for my overcranked scenes was because I understood that it was a downsampled 4K image from the whole sensor, so the DOF and lenses would be the same as 4K REDCODE RAW.

[Bruce Allen]

It sounds like they are going to be using custom hardware slash FPGAs to achieve that kind of performance?

Yes. I heard FPGAs mentioned somewhere too. So, by definition of being field-programmable, there is hope ;)

But again, they can only do so much.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

4) I would imagine that would happen real quickly with about 85% of the world’s entire entertainment media volume still being produced within a 50 mile radius of downtown Los Angeles.

...and I live right in the heart of that, downtown near the Staples Center! I can hook you up! ;)

[number6]

L

about 85% of the world’s entire entertainment media volume still being produced within a 50 mile radius of downtown Los Angeles.



Not trying to start an US vs them argument here, but doesn't Bollywood crank out lots of new movies each year? I know you said "media", but I assume they and others also do lots of tv etc.

Speaking of which, I wonder if Bollywood won't be a huge market for RED once they move into High Definition?

[Fergus Meiklejohn]

LOL...actually I'm 58 years old, began in the imaging industry in 1969 with a Nikon F SLR, and just evolved with the film and television industry over the years. In age, I certainly don't fit the profile of the "talented, IT-savvy, project hungry group of indie types", but in mentality and approach to my work I probably fit that profile more than most of the industry veterans my age. I try to see both sides of the issues of the industry, adjust my work accordingly, and press on with seeking cool projects.

I haven't had the pleasure of meeting you either...but I'll look forward to it sometime when I'm in the UK.:wink:

Respect Gibby :biggrin:


((Paraphrased))

Governor Tarkin: Obi-Wan Kenobi?.. Surely he's dead by now.
Darth Vader: Do not underestimate the Power of The Force.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

Yeah but let's be honest, who watches Bollywood movies besides them? It's fair to say that almost everything that is distributed worldwide is made in the United States as far as films go, anyway. I'm sometimes shocked by the level of dominance. Basically any box office top ten in any country at any point is dominated by Hollywood movies. I've never seen Bollywood movies anywere, in any box office, besides their own. I'm sure it happens rarely, but that's not worth noting as far as I can tell. It's obvious, though, that if you have 1 billion-plus people in a country that their own entertainment industry is going to be very significant, at least to them, because there's just such a huge market.

About the only market where U.S. movies aren't as big is China, but that's just because the country has limited the number of Hollywood movies allowed entry every year. It's a rapidly growing cinema market, though going to see movies in theaters has never been a traditional Chinese activity so it's taking longer to become part of the culture. Moviegoing in China is expanding quickly; the only other country that comes to mind with such a growing interest in moviegoing is actually Russia, where the box office is growing at ridiculous rates each year.

All that being said, one of my favorite things is to see movies from other cultures because you just get sick of seeing the same stuff over and over again, and the most innovation often comes from either the indie market or foreign filmmaking. I won't say that I've seen a lot of Bollywood movies to be honest, but I try to see a wide variety of foreign films, from Korea, Japan, China, France, Mexico, Germany, Italy, etc. Lots of good stuff out there, sometimes hard to find it when video stores devote two huge shelves to Juwanna Man or the newest Amanda Bynes movie. ;)

[Daniel Sheehy]

India, the US and China have the three largest film industries in the world, in that order. (In terms of volume of work produced, and tickets sold)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinema_of_India

And both the Chinese & Indian film industries have large diaspora followings... You'd be surprised at who watches Bollywood movies. Anywhere you find Indian communities, you will find devoted fans of 'Bollywood'

I was very surprised to go to Kiribati for a shoot, and find that the video shops had equal #'s of Hindi movies, as English movies... and there isn't even a large Hindi speaking community there. They just like Bollywood movies!

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

That's very interesting. Yeah, I'd heard that before, of India's film industry, it just doesn't compare financially to Hollywood. It definitely produces more movies, though.

From what I understand there are a lot of incoming talented Indian filmmakers to Hollywood, though, too. I have a friend who uses this DP at his school who is basically considered a genius there, haha, he apparently has already made a bit of a mark for himself and I'm thinking if he isn't too big by the time I do my first feature, he might be a good option for my DP.

[Daniel Sheehy]

http://www.mpaa.org/International%20Theatrical%20Snapshot.pdf

Interesting look at the shape of global cinema.

[Steve Gibby]

Not trying to start an US vs them argument here, but doesn't Bollywood crank out lots of new movies each year? I know you said "media", but I assume they and others also do lots of tv etc.

Speaking of which, I wonder if Bollywood won't be a huge market for RED once they move into High Definition?

The statistic I quoted referred to 85% of the world's entire entertainment media being produced within a 50 mile radius of downtown L.A. That statistic encompasses all entertainment media lumped into one: film, digital cinema, television, video, CDs, DVDs, etc. With all those mediums lumped into one, the L.A. area is, and has been for a long time, the entertainment capital of the world. If you separate out the mediums or industries that RED One can be used in the production of, you're left with digital cinema, television, and video. I would guess that the aggregate volume of production in the primary genres and sub-genres within those three categories that is produced in the L.A. area would rank the L.A. area as the #1 area in the world for motion media production volume - even leaving film out, because technically nobody will ever "film" anything with RED One. They may "DC, record, or shoot" with RED One, and many will use film techniques, but they won't technically "film" with the camera.

Once the RED One cameras ship, and assuming they perform well, I do think Bollywood is a very good market for them.

I'm not into a U.S versus anyone argument. I've worked worldwide and I give respect to everyone. If RED One checks out well, I do believe it has the potential to be used almost anywhere in the world.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

L.A. is definitely the entertainment capitol of the world, there's no doubt about that. What is made here is shown everywhere, and in mass. That's why the top ten highest grossing movies at the worldwide box office every year are almost always U.S. productions.

As for Bollywood, no idea what they spend on movies, but even something like the RED would seem to be extremely expensive by their income standards. I mean I have done a lot of Web design with Indian companies, in other words they have designed my Web pages, and I was amazed how little money is a lot of money to them. I'd pay $500 for a project that took a small team a month to complete (not working non-stop, but working off and on, anyway) and I'd get really nice work on the graphics side. I've had mixed results with their ability to program, actually, some of the coding was completely horrible and has since had to be redone by a friend who is an expert in that. But the graphics work was well worth the price. I remember I offered them another $75 to do something extra for me and they acted like I just offered them a new Porsche or something. I was like come on, it's $75, I wouldn't walk across the street for $75. I wouldn't wake up 15 minutes early for $75. But these guys were busting their butts for that, haha, so I imagine a $35,000 basic RED package would be like the price of a city block in India. ;)

[goldyprog]

Enjoy celluloid... for now.

[number6]

The statistic I quoted referred to 85% of the world's entire entertainment media being produced within a 50 mile radius of downtown L.A. That statistic encompasses all entertainment media lumped into one: film, digital cinema, television, video, CDs, DVDs, etc. With all those mediums lumped into one, the L.A. area is, and has been for a long time, the entertainment capital of the world. If you separate out the mediums or industries that RED One can be used in the production of, you're left with digital cinema, television, and video. I would guess that the aggregate volume of production in the primary genres and sub-genres within those three categories that is produced in the L.A. area would rank the L.A. area as the #1 area in the world for motion media production volume.

Once the RED One cameras ship, and assuming they perform well, I do think Bollywood is a very good market for them.

Yeah, after I initially questioned whether LA does 85% of entertainment worldwide, I remembered where LA is located and realized it was right there in the name, the part I forgot about. Los Angeles, Calipornia! Apoligies for doubting you:

edit: Seriously, I get your point that though the entertainment is made all over the world, the actual product is pressed or recorded for shipment in the LA area. I'm not saying I agree because I figure you are not taking into account pirated versions and such. China, Latin America, etc. may be more than 15 percenters.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

LOL.

I know where all my favorite movies are made and it ain't L.A. It's close, though. It's called the San Fernando Valley. ;) haha, j/k

[number6]

LOL.

I know where all my favorite movies are made and it ain't L.A. It's close, though. It's called the San Fernando Valley. ;) haha, j/k

Is that where all those Art movies are made? (I think his name was Art)

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

Yeah, lots of great... avante-garde films. Really cutting-edge stuff. Unfortunately for some odd reason most of the viewers don't seem to pay that much attention to the actual production quality, which is (from what I've been told) because the actresses are so... captivating... that their "performances" overshadow production design, camera quality, pretty much everything. Hey, that's indie film for you! Crazy geniuses.

[Ramesh Jai]

Not trying to start an US vs them argument here, but doesn't Bollywood crank out lots of new movies each year? I know you said "media", but I assume they and others also do lots of tv etc.

Speaking of which, I wonder if Bollywood won't be a huge market for RED once they move into High Definition?
I've actually said somewhere that India is going to RED's biggest market and I'd hoped RED had also invited an Indian film crew to beta test RED.

Can't wait to see some ELECTRIFYING DRAMA, INTRIGUE, NON STOP ACTION and of course the usual DANCE SEQUENCE- RED HOT MASALA!

Oh and don't forget the Telenovelas...!!

[Ramesh Jai]

Yeah but let's be honest, who watches Bollywood movies besides them? It's fair to say that almost everything that is distributed worldwide is made in the United States as far as films go, anyway. I'm sometimes shocked by the level of dominance. Basically any box office top ten in any country at any point is dominated by Hollywood movies. I've never seen Bollywood movies anywere, in any box office, besides their own. I'm sure it happens rarely, but that's not worth noting as far as I can tell. It's obvious, though, that if you have 1 billion-plus people in a country that their own entertainment industry is going to be very significant, at least to them, because there's just such a huge market.

About the only market where U.S. movies aren't as big is China, but that's just because the country has limited the number of Hollywood movies allowed entry every year. It's a rapidly growing cinema market, though going to see movies in theaters has never been a traditional Chinese activity so it's taking longer to become part of the culture. Moviegoing in China is expanding quickly; the only other country that comes to mind with such a growing interest in moviegoing is actually Russia, where the box office is growing at ridiculous rates each year.

All that being said, one of my favorite things is to see movies from other cultures because you just get sick of seeing the same stuff over and over again, and the most innovation often comes from either the indie market or foreign filmmaking. I won't say that I've seen a lot of Bollywood movies to be honest, but I try to see a wide variety of foreign films, from Korea, Japan, China, France, Mexico, Germany, Italy, etc. Lots of good stuff out there, sometimes hard to find it when video stores devote two huge shelves to Juwanna Man or the newest Amanda Bynes movie. ;)
It is true, most of Bollywood movies are made for the Indian market. They are very melodramatic (with over acting, fake moustaches and ridiculous costumes and song and dance routies).

They also copy a lot of hollywood movies and music. Technically they don't come close to top Hollywood productions. But in their defence they satisfy a particular market well.

Low budgets (one of the main reasons) also prevent a lot of Indian movies from competing at the International level.

Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of talent in India and RED might just enable a new crop of producers and directors to showcase their talent worldwide.

If you do want to see good Indian movies, check with your Indian friends in LA. I think they are producing a lot of stuff in Hollywood.

[Tom Lowe]

Lol... what the hell happened to my thread... :)

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

There is probably more opportunity for talented people to exploit markets like that than there is the American market, that's for sure. There is immense competition in Hollywood for the American market because as everyone knows "American market" means worldwide market. If you make a movie that makes it big here, it's big worldwide, basically. That's why I think if someone is coming from another cultural background but bringing Hollywood-style skills to that market, there is a lot of potential there. Just because there aren't as many people who can pay as much money doesn't mean it should be ignored.

I know for us, my business partner speaks four languages and his connections are all to the Assyrian and Persian markets, so that's where we intend to start, partially because the quality of work being done in the Persian market or for the Persian market is nowhere near as high as Hollywood stuff, so it's an easier barrier of entry, and we at least feel that if we can make it there, we've made it somewhere, and the skills we have will transfer (to a fair extent) to our greater ambitions in the American market.

[number6]

There is probably more opportunity for talented people to exploit markets like that than there is the American market, that's for sure. There is immense competition in Hollywood for the American market because as everyone knows "American market" means worldwide market. If you make a movie that makes it big here, it's big worldwide, basically. That's why I think if someone is coming from another cultural background but bringing Hollywood-style skills to that market, there is a lot of potential there. Just because there aren't as many people who can pay as much money doesn't mean it should be ignored.

I know for us, my business partner speaks four languages and his connections are all to the Assyrian and Persian markets, so that's where we intend to start, partially because the quality of work being done in the Persian market or for the Persian market is nowhere near as high as Hollywood stuff, so it's an easier barrier of entry, and we at least feel that if we can make it there, we've made it somewhere, and the skills we have will transfer (to a fair extent) to our greater ambitions in the American market.

Sounds like a well-thought-out business plan. Luck!

[Ramesh Jai]

Lol... what the hell happened to my thread... :)
LOL! True...

Like Bollywood movies this thread has a lot of twists and turns! Anyone written a song about RED?

[number6]

LOL! True...

Like Bollywood movies this thread has a lot of twists and turns! Anyone written a song about RED?

Well, yes, actually. There are no words and no music, save for the beat of one drum. The beat is the same as you would hear played for oarsmen on a Viking long boat, or even for galley slaves. The beater is the spitting image of a Jim Jannard and the slaves... rather oarsmen, (political correctness, you know) very much resemble the RED team. And in keeping with the subject of this thread, they all have crystal balls... you know, as a talisman on a string around their necks.

[Julian Banos]

Getting back a little on track on the future of RED, but also mixing in 3rd World Cinema...
I have 2 reservations for Mexico and I attended the Film & Video Expo last week. In a nutshell: there are 20 reservations in Mexico City (that I know of), plus outside of Mexico City. This inlcudes rental houses, commercial makers and independent filmmakers.
Future in Mexico: The average cost of a feature here is: 1.8million USD, but a lot of people will cut lab and film stock costs and make their features with RED cameras, this will increase by 20% the output of features by 2008 and maybe 30% by 2009.
Telenovelas: The networks do everything in-house (Azteca and Televisa) and they both have shown interest in the RED but they shoot everything hard-lined EVF. So for now they want the RED for credit sequence and intros of soaps, but nothing really in the works for their full production (they usually shoot 30 pages of script a day!).
Music Videos and ads will create a huge demand for REDs in one year.

Conclusion: There are a lot of RED believers in Mexico, I know this because I spent 4 days talking to them non-stop. Then there is the non-believers (whom I have already challanged to a shoot-out against thier CineAltas, Varicams and maybe a D-20). Expect more films from Mexico a lot with new blood on them. Little from telenovelas and a lot of Video clips and ads.

This camera is going to do so much for Mexican Cinema its not even funny. We are very exited down here.