Calculating price

[Christoffer Glans]

Hi!
I'm quite new to this forum but I have followed the development of the RED camera since I first thought it was a joke that someone would sell such a camera for such a low price :biggrin:

Anyway, I'm planning to buy this camera in a year or two, whenever I'm able to pay the price (in other words whenever I sell my car, my appartment, my self etc)
So, I'm trying to calculate just how much I need to spend/how many things I need to have to be able to go from A to B in the workflow. Currently I have the capability to edit 1080p footage at my home workstation. But if I'm going to do something in 2k or 4k I'm going to a postprod-house instead. So postproduction is not calculated into the price.
I just need to know what I need for production, not counting lightning equipment or sound.

What do I need except the RED camera to be able to go through a shortfilm production?

I have currently done this calculation of what I need:

1. RED ONE - $17500
2. RED ONE BASIC PRODUCTION PACK - $1250
3. RED ONE POWER PACK - $1450
4. RED LCD Screen (5.6") - $1700
5. RED DRIVE 320gb x2 - $1800
6. RED FD MOUNT (Canon) (EF if that's something that will happen) - $500

Now, I'm not sure what type of workflow I'm aiming at, but what I will do, when making my own movies is to shoot in 4k, convert to 1080p and edit in Avid, then burn to Bluray 1080p and keep a high quality master on three harddrives. Maybe the CF is a better workflow when shooting, I don't know.

What are your thoughts about this? Am I totally "out there" or is this the minimum of what I need to achieve my independent dreams?
Or is there something I don't really need?

Please answer, I can't get my head around this...

[Fergus Meiklejohn]

I would get the evf rather than the lcd, well actually I'll be getting both inshallah
And I think if you are planning to go out into the wilderness to film you'll need 3 batteries and three drives; can you imagine running out of either when there is stlll some great filming to be done?

And if you are going with canon lenses you'll need the Birger mount so that you can use the best L series glass. Otherwise Nikon will give you more options.

[Christoffer Glans]

Ok, three drives sounds good. As for the L-series I'm a still photographer, but the only L-serie glass I have is the 17-40. But because I use canon I need something that can make me use EF lenses.
So the Birger is the one that enables you to use EF lenses?

[Gregory Karydis]

I know I will be going for the Birger mount for my L babies and I plan to get the EVF along with the camera and maybe get the LCD a while later.
As for batteries I'll get the 2 battery + charger set since I don't expect to be shooting more than an hour every day (for my first project) and then I'll get more V-mount packs from a local supplier (I'm in europe)
I am hoping to afford the basics and not stray much over the 25-27K ballpark I have prepared for.
But I'd say 30K would be a bare minimum if you don't have any sort of glass.

[Charles Angus]

What about sticks and a head? Follow focus & matte box?

What are those going for these days? I'm assuming you would need something like a 7+7 for the RED, with some good aluminum sticks.

[Christoffer Glans]

The downside of the Birger is that it cost so much. I only have one L glass and a few regular canon glasses, so I wonder if it would cost me less if I choose the Nikon and buy some of their glasses just for this camera.

Followfocus would be nice, but a mattebox? I'll just use some blackwrap :D

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

I was hearing a good matte box for the RED would be like $3,000. There's another overpriced item. Should cost $20, actually costs $3,000. lol, j/k. ;)

[Christoffer Glans]

I'll still say blackwrap!
But a $20 matte box would be nice, any higher then that = blackwrap! :D

Still, except for the EVF instead of LCD, is there anything else I must have or is that kit all I need?

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

Am I missing something though about why a matte box would cost so much? I clearly don't understand why anything in this industry costs so much, I mean I get why a computer fully loaded could cost $15,000, and I get why a camera and lenses would cost $60,000 for a great RED package, that all seems reasonable.

Someone mind explaining why something as simple looking and basic as a matte box could honestly cost $3,000? I mean there's no way that thing is impossible to duplicate unless I missed it and there's some microchip hidden inside it or something. I don't get it?

I found a lot of posts on this on other forums, it seems I'm not alone in thinking something as simple as a matte box is again hideously and almost hilarious overpriced. One guy wrote that it's "...a piece of hardware which is only expensive due to the small audience it atracts. That is the only reason these companies charge so much. Its a small turnover so high cost. When you think you can go out and buy a cheap HDV camcorder for the same price as a well known brand Mattebox it makes me sick. We are all playing with high end stuff here and because of that we are expected to pay over the odds for add ons. ... Lets face it, its not exactly breaking technology you are making here. Its not the latest RED or SI camera now is it."

This was the best post I found, when someone asked if the matte box gives you film-like results with a digital camera: "Yes, an expensive professional mattebox is absolutely critical in achieving the "film look." A lot of people try useless techniques such as 24 fps for a filmic cadence, or progressive scan rather than interlaced, or a 35mm adaptor to decrease DOF, or smooth fluid-head tripod with sturdy legs, or great audio and lighting. But these are just old wives-tales, and do nothing to contribute to the "film look." A mattebox with French flag and barnyard doors is what gives film its distinctive look. A proper mattebox should be at least half the price of your camera, for professional results." lol

I will say it looks like there aren't that many good cheap solutions, because the ones that are cheap are just that... cheap. If the darn thing retains its value pretty well once you buy it, and it's a great matte box, I guess you can't really argue with that. *shrug*

[Charles Angus]

Just did some quick googling,

Sachtler 7+7 Studio II Head (my favourite) - $4200
Ronford Heavy Duty Tripod - $1950
Spreader - $289
Matte Box - $1500-$3000
Follow Focus - $1500-$3000

That's what I would consider acceptable for a camera in this weight range; you could get away with lighter gear, but I like the sturdy legs and the 7+7. Matte box and follow focus I would maybe go with a lighter model.

So add $9500-12500 plus tax/shipping on to your RED (unless you already own the gear...).

I suppose you could always rent your support and accessories, but isn't owning a RED about getting away from rentals?

There's been a couple of threads on support already, so this is a bit of flogging a dead horse, but my 2 cents - I've used the cheaper/lighter heads like the Cartoni Gamma on full-size Pana HD cameras/16SR's, and all I can think is "I wish I had a real head...".

Is there any interest in a total RED solution including support, matte box, follow focus? It's nice to have a single vendor, but on the other hand, heads are such a personal matter...

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

Yes head is a personal matter. I mean heads are, for tripods. ;)

So basically I need to set aside another $10,000 at least for those accessories, sweet, there goes another chunk of change. Well if I have all that crap and my eight lenses and my laptop for on-set capturing and a backup camera body and the LCD screen and the EVF, batteries, hard drives, etc. all I have to say is nobody is getting all that for cheap if they rent it from me. Now I see why rental companies charge what they do, actually, because everything they buy is expensive, professional equipment and if they don't pass it along to the client then what the heck is the point.

Thanks for that price breakdown, though, Angus, for some reason that was helpful just seeing it in one place. Everyone likes that Sachtler 7+7 it seems like, from what I've heard. At least a lot of people.

Apparently I just invested most of my available cash into some real estate deal, but I told my financial dude that I need to have about $100,000 cash available for when the RED ships to me (which I'm sure won't be before the end of this year) because basically that's what it comes down to, I mean with the lenses, the accessories, some cases for this stuff, etc. it's hard to think it'll be that much less.

[Mick van Rossum, NSC]

Am I missing something though about why a matte box would cost so much? I clearly don't understand why anything in this industry costs so much, I mean I get why a computer fully loaded could cost $15,000, and I get why a camera and lenses would cost $60,000 for a great RED package, that all seems reasonable.

Someone mind explaining why something as simple looking and basic as a matte box could honestly cost $3,000? I mean there's no way that thing is impossible to duplicate unless I missed it and there's some microchip hidden inside it or something. I don't get it?

There are expensive ones and not so expensive ones, the Arri's are beautifull and rent-proof and cost a fortune, but will give a smooth workflow for 10+ years; Ask a rental compnay about them and why they don't have cheaper ones. They are so expensive because there are so few made. If you don't want to spend that much money, go for something like na Vocas MB350 or 450, or even the smaller ones. Be advised that clip-on matteboxes in the end will ruin your lenses because of the weight hanging on the topside of the lens. The Vocas 450 (which is the big production mattebox) is 2750 euros (over here ) and the swing away option another 625. BTW I have no affilitions with the boys, however I do have a small one for a dv camera which is nice.
Good luck

Mick van Rossum NSC

[Craig Schober]

there is something to be said for low volume, custom made optics and accessories for the film industry but there is a point you cross over from supply and demand and into self-sustained elitism. i'm not trying to pick a fight here but when you have an industry that spends tons of money catering to stars, egos and overpaid executives you have to ask why. because they can afford to. studios can also afford to pay top dollar for overpriced equipment. it might be well made and last long but it mostly goes to inflate the director or producer or dp's ego. it's like using a limo for a taxi business. looks cool, rides well but doesn't get you there any faster. what it does do is make you feel more important than the low budget traveller stuck in a cab. the film industry (not even talking about unions) loves it secret handshakes, cute equipment nicknames and nepotism. i guess it helps keep the little guys out along with their competition.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

haha, that is true, it's a very tight industry actually and hard to penetrate in many ways, at least at the top levels, that is. The nicknames really annoy me, primarily because most of them are so stupid. I don't mind nicknames when they make sense, but Gary Coleman, Baby, Baby Junior, none of that makes any sense to me. Just call it the small C-stand, it's not like there are six different small C-stands on sets, and if there were, they wouldn't have one nickname for them anyway, the 1K, the 2K, it's much easier, it takes less time to say 1K than Baby, at least I think so, but then again I'm a more logical thinker and prefer to use technical terms for things not nicknames. I'd prefer to call something what it actually is rather than a nickname. I guess I just don't see what the need for all of it is, unless it's to make people feel like they're "in" because they know the lingo. Like a stinger, what the hell is with that? It's called an extention cord, the name doesn't magically change just because you're using it for the film industry. It's the same freakin' extention cord you use for anything else. That stuff kills me. Then what's really funny is if you ask someone, "Hey so that thing, does it have a nickname?" An experienced gaffer looks at you like, "Uhh... no. Why would THAT have a nickname?" Hell I don't know, everything else does, I just assumed it would too. haha

I heard great things about that Arri matte box, but yeah I'd be looking for something in the $3,000 range, I guess. Why not. I love handing my money over to these companies. But honestly I've just realized in the last week thanks to people here that I just don't care anymore, if I have to pay ridiculous prices that's fine, since everyone else in the industry loves this overpriced equipment, and they'll pay money to rent it, and they expect it if you're offering a camera with professional lenses, etc., then their wish is my command. I'll make sure they have their expected $12,000 tripod and their $3,000+ matte boxes and all of that. If that is what makes them pay me the money, so be it, I'll get my money back.

[Fix]

Well they did use matte box in "Saving private Ryan". But they dident use filters. So I guess they could have sticked to blackwrap for even 20 bucks. :-)

matte box - filters = blackwrap

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

They didn't use a matte box for The Blair Witch Project, so it's clearly an unnecessary piece of equipment if you can make high art like that without it.

Err... wait a second. Nevermind. I'll buy a matte box. ;)

[albert rudnicki]

Check them out for the accessories
www.redrockmicro.com

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

Nice, very nice.

[Adrian Correia]

The one thing I will not skimp on is a great head and set of legs. It just makes such a huge diffference to me in terms of operation. The mattebox and follow focus will most liekly be top shelf as well. I hate FF that have excessive give in them and I have been burned before on cheap matteboxes. I don't look forward to paying for it, but like Jonathan said, I'll get my money back.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

Yeah what can you do right? I've heard more horror stories about using crappy matte boxes to save money than I've heard great stories about affordable matte boxes for cheap or whatever. It seems like if you're going to get a $3,000 matte box and it lasts a long time, it works great, and you can rent it out to professionals who are appreciative of having the best tools, then if you ever did want to sell it you get most of your money back because it's still good equipment, it's really not a big deal. Whereas if you bought a $500 matte box that was crappy and breaks, you're out $500, nobody wants to rent your lousy matte box anyway, and they think you're an amateur because you have no idea what a good matte box is ;)

Still I know the biggest ouch for me is going to be seeing about $100,000 just drained from my account. This is making me really glad that I dropped out of film school because the $28,000 I saved pays for a significant enough portion of that so that the damage is lessened a little bit anyway.

[donatello b]

"Baby, Baby Junior, none of that makes any sense....the 1K, the 2K, it's much easier, it takes less time to say 1K than Baby"

1k isn't specific enough - is that a fresnel or open face 1k unit ...
do you want a baby or a baby baby ( both are 1k fresnel) placed here ?
do you want a Jr or a baby jr here ( both are 2k fresnels) ..
or do you really want a arri 1k fresnel ?
everybody lights different and prefers different units ..
i dislike mini moles, midgets are ok but i prefer 300 peppers = anybody in lighting will know EXACTLY my preference - if i state a 200 watt unit - then they only know the wattage which might work sometimes ...

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

Right, which is why I would prefer someone be very specific about what exactly they want. It just makes the most sense to me.

[Christoffer Glans]

I think we are forgetting something...
The RED camera is the price revolution of independent filmmaking.
I am actually planning to upgrade from my DVX100 to a RED, whenever I have the money needed. I don't think that kind of thing has ever happened before. A private person can actually buy a RED one, a camera that at it's specs is on par with the most high end cameras in the industry. This camera will most certainly revolutionize filmmaking, all thanks to it's low price.

Now, why not sell a RED matte box that is within the RED revolution pricelist?
Why can't they sell something for like $1000 - $1500?

If only the camera body has a low price, then the "revolution" will not have the great impact it's supposed to have.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

I've already realized a while ago that the camera body is basically an insignificant portion of the total cost of making basically anything.

By the time I figure in the lighting package I need, the various lighting accessories that come with that, a fully-loaded Mac desktop ($20,000), the software I have ($750 sound and music effects libraries, $1,400 Final Cut Studio 2, $200 screenwriting software, $750 storyboarding software, etc.), a large RAID setup, a MacBook Pro for on-set capturing and logging, an HDTV reference monitor for the set, a full set of lenses, a matte box, a nice tripod, a van for equipment transportation, and in the future perhaps a professional steadicam and dolly equipment (for now a basic dolly setup and no steadicam), the total price tag makes the camera body look basically like nothing. There's just a lot that goes into having your own setup, even without buying expensive daylight HMI lights ($8,800 at Studio Depot for the 1.2Kw one I was looking at) or any other odd specialty stuff.