RED Fanboyism vs. RED FUD. [Archive]

I Bloom

06-18-2007, 08:33 AM

Yeah so I realized on a recent multicamera shoot that I'm a RED fanboy. After discussing camera purchasing choices with other shooters. It's interesting to me how many people think you should wait 2 years before you consider buying a RED, because as they say "there will be problems".

I also encountered this article which gives some insight into what fanboyism is really all about:

http://www.cooltechzone.com/Departments/Columns/The_Psychology_of_Mac_Zealots_200706182866/

Anyways I think RED fanboyism is an ok phenomenon but occasionally I think it gets in the way of some criticism that the RED guys need to/will benefit from hearing. And also may lead to some huge purchasing decisions being made for well, not the most reasonable of reasons.

So I wanted to open up a discussion about RED fanboyism vs. RED FUD.
What are the criticisms of RED that you have heard?
Are they valid?
Have we been overzealous about the bleeding edge?
What are the chances of RED being a poor investment?
If RED will still be awesome in two years, why not wait until its prooven?

Lets not talk about the technical specs here... we are all well aware. This is about considering the social, economic, technological aspects of adopting a new product and technology that is for all its virtues, untested.

IBloom

Noah Kadner

06-18-2007, 08:44 AM

Just curious in your Mac vs. PC analogy because IMHO it is not a fair comparison. In the case of RED- what is the FUD and who is Microsoft?

-Noah

David Mullen ASC

06-18-2007, 08:55 AM

Well, in general I think if one can wait, one should wait, but I think most of the people here buying a RED camera have plans to start shooting right away so that doesn't apply to them.

And I only say that because anytime I've waited to buy any electronic technology -- new digital still camera, new laptop, new hard drive, whatever -- something better and/or cheaper comes along eventually, always. This would be particularly true if you were buying prosumer video equipment -- wait until you need it to buy.

However, the RED camera is upgradable (and it's so darn cheap already compared to anything remotely similar) so this is less of a factor, and non-electronic things like lenses, matteboxes, tripod heads, don't really fall into that constant development and release cycle. So if you have the money for a RED package, it doesn't seem like much of a risk, buying early. For most people, early won't be early enough...

Since the camera isn't released yet, there isn't much criticism one way or another, just speculation. The only "criticism" I come across is the tired old "4K Bayer isn't 4K RGB resolution" argument that has been around since the Dalsa camera, to which my reply is "if it's sharp enough, I don't give a s--- if in theory, 4K Bayer is really more like 3K, whatever." We don't have a 4K RGB camera to compare 4K Bayer to anyway, and 4K RGB scans of film is almost an apples to oranges comparison, it's such a different imaging technology. At that point, you should really be comparing recorded MTF using the same lens on both cameras, not comparing pixels.

Ace

06-18-2007, 08:56 AM

I think that most users on this board are fans of their own selves first and foremost. I think the RED camera project brings out such a fervent passion in the so called "fan-boy" because of what it seeks to enable themselves to do and accomplish. People are more so excited about new doors being opened up to them than the piece of hardware in itself.

Why place such faith in an untested and unproven product? Because success is often inversely proportional to risk. If the camera and the company delivers on the promises, the risks taken by early adopters will pay off.

Clayton Harper

06-18-2007, 08:59 AM

Will Red be a poor investment?

I think it depends where you are already professionally. If you are hoping to springboard to bigger and better things, it may not do that, especially with a now compressed delivery schedule.

If you have enough work or are spending money on camera rentals, it could be a boon. Even, if I pay for half my package in the first year by replacing rentals, it will be good for me. I am lucky to have already had enough jobs this year to buy in cash.

I really hope that people on the lower end of the scale don't take on a lot of debt to make the purchase and then get burned if they are low on work/rentals. People should be careful and calculate a realistic cash flow for the camera that assumes a reasonable usage rate and weigh that against their interest rates costs.

Let's not have a bunch of people who ruin their credit over this dumb thing.

PaulClements

06-18-2007, 09:20 AM

How long will it last? A few things to weigh up:

1. As long as HDTV and Cinema require less than 4K resolution, shot at 2D - the camera ought to be capable of producing and telling a story well just as many other current cameras are and will be (Especially when teamed with good optics and accessories).

2. Being a modular design with an emphasis on upgradability it doesn't suffer the "Trickleware.. bring out a new camera to replace the last one with a couple extra features every other year" syndrome.

3. Reliability. It's Jim's reputation on the line if he produces a camera that only lasts 12 months and isn't durable for a great deal of shooting conditions. Whilst it doesn't directly impact on the creation of a camera, his other company Oakley and the dedication to produce some of the (If not THE) worlds highest quality glasses, bodes well for emphasis on quality of production at Red.

Even if bigger and better things come out, which of course they will eventually, the camera still ought to be capable of telling your story for years to come, just in the same way a 20 year old film camera is capable. It might not look and feel as good as the latest model but at the end of the day it's still got it where it counts (Disclaimer: This is of course as long as you are taking care of it!).

Ace

06-18-2007, 09:22 AM

I think you can pretty much apply this discussion to anything in life.. Hell, you can even apply it to relationships.

donatello b

06-18-2007, 09:40 AM

"What are the criticisms of RED that you have heard?"

until it is ships it doesn't exist ...

"Are they valid?"

YES from their POV . they can't shoot it , they can't rent it ... next camera

"Have we been overzealous about the bleeding edge?"

?? maybe ? maybe not ? won't really know till it ships and we see the final spec's , workflow ...

"What are the chances of RED being a poor investment?"

define investment .. or is this i bought camera for x$ and in 5 years it will be worth Y$ .. or it could be RED increased my income by S$ ... or one was able to bring in better work for more $$ ... any of those would be a good investment ... a poor investment if one buys it as only a investment and it doesn't bring in $$ and never pays for itself ... everybody's "good " investment will be different ... each person really won't know if it was a good investment till the end of 1 or 2 or 3 years ?
using the old capitalism investment standard of RISK vs REWARD .. i put out $1000 at no risk .. my reward will be $2500 off accessories ... looks like a good investment so far ...

"If RED will still be awesome in two years, why not wait until its prooven?"

i'm too old to wait .. i think it is awesome NOW ... i was only looking for a 2k camera with 35m DoF ... exceeds my wants ... i'm only looking 3 years out and i'll take the leap with RED ....

Steve Gibby

06-18-2007, 09:46 AM

I think David’s point about the modularity of RED one is very well taken. Since RED One will be modular and upgradeable, many lenses and accessories we already have can be used.

The outlay for the RED One camera body and a basic system is minimal to those who are used to the traditional prices of professional camera equipment. To me, that minimizes the risk involved in the investment.

I also think that Ace made a very good observation: risk and return are inseparably connected. Risk little (play it “safe”), and stand to gain little. Risk more, and you stand to gain more. It can be argued that the inverse relationship between risk/return puts you in a position to lose commensurately along the way. Every industry in the business world faces the same decisions about adopting the emerging technology used by their particular industry. If emerging technology ends up performing well in the workplace, then early adopters generally have a sizeable head start on their competition. If it doesn’t, then they have to hit the ground running, cover the fiscal loss, and seek other products. If emerging technology in a given industry does succeed in impacting a given industry, then late adopters have to scramble to catch up to their early adopter competitors.

Some personalities will always play it as what they conceive as safe and conservative. Other personalities will have more of a gambler spirit. How much gambler do you have in you?

I think the easy out for slow adopters of emerging technology is to comfort themselves in their decision by deriding early adopters as mindless fanboys who are somehow participating in lemming-like mass hysteria as they rush over a cliff into the unknown abyss. But if the technology adapted by the early adaptors succeeds well, then those late adopters generally have to scramble like mad to catch up - while usually pretending that they were on the bandwagon all along to save face among their peers.

Then there’s the non-adopters that resist change no matter what – the “I’ve always used this, and I’m going to continue to use this” guys. They had better be very right in their choice, or be near to retirement, because IMO they are taking the most risky position of all in any technology-dependent industry. If emerging technology turns out to be a solid success in an industry, it then exposes the non-adopters as being good candidates for “Ostrich Syndrome” – because they’ve had their heads in the sand like an ostrich.

All the argument in the world will prove nothing about RED One. What will prove whether the early adopters, slow adopters, or non-adopters are right about RED One is for the finished camera system to ship, be tested extensively in real world production scenarios over time, and either succeed or fail. Until then, threads like this are essentially a way to tread water, and will prove or solve nothing.

Life is full of choices, and so is business life. To each their own. I’ve made my choice as an early adopter of RED One and I’m happy so far with that choice. I won’t deride others who are slow adopters or non-adopters, and it would be nice if the same respect would be offered back by them to early adopters. We’re all part of the overall motion media family of production people. The less infighting, judging, and name calling the better.

No matter what course of action you choose in life or business, there will always be someone there to tell you that you are wrong. If you feel good about your choices, and believe in yourself, then the criticism of others should merely be like water off a ducks back.

Jonathan L. Bowen

06-18-2007, 09:49 AM

Sometimes I think people are so stuck on the fact that in the past, technology has always improved, therefore in the future it always will improve, they don't understand the flaw in that logic. I had this argument with someone over computer graphics effects years ago. They said that CGI effects will always keep getting better, and I said nope, that's impossible. When you achieve photo-realism, there is no such thing as better than that. When the eye believes what it sees is real, the only improvements from that point forward are from the developers' side, making their lives easier, improving rendering times, allowing for a quicker workflow, etc. -- all great advances, to be sure, but nothing the viewer really notices or frankly cares about since his ticket is the same price either way and he has the same experience. The point is, nothing can look any more real than real.

With the footage I've seen from the RED already, and what was shown with a Final Cut Studio 2 demonstration here in L.A., you just can't beat that footage. If they made 8K nobody could actually see that it was any better unless it was shown on a massive ten-story tall IMAX screen. So that's why when people say, well of course something better will come along than the RED, eh, not really. I mean, yeah, there will be improvements, but most of those will be designed around making our lives easier as filmmakers, IMO, not making the actual image quality better. Because frankly you can't get any better than some of the footage they've showed with the RED. Even with a perfect 35mm film print on the first time its shown in theaters, often that is just as good as it comes, you can't say, "Well one day that will be ten times as good looking!" No, even the RED doesn't offer that, it just offers a cheaper way to acquire a similar quality of footage, and an easier workflow, etc. It's more about the back-end at this point than what the end-user sees.

That's just my opinion.

Gavin Greenwalt

06-18-2007, 09:56 AM

Jonathan L. Bowen

06-18-2007, 10:05 AM

Yeah that's where we stand. David has an HDV camera that we can use, but basically we were sandwiched into this technology gap where we knew we need something much more professional than that, but the options available aren't as good as the RED, or even close, until you get to a price range we can't afford or don't want to pay, so then it just makes a lot of sense to wait for the RED and see if we can either: 1) Make do with the HDV cam for now, or 2) Rent equipment as necessary depending on the shoot and the budget.

If we had the RED right now, though, I'd be a lot more confident. The problem is for us, we're just starting out, and in the market we're trying to exploit we might not make more than $5,000 to $10,000 per music video, so if we had to pay even $1,000 for renting a camera and the necessary equipment for a day that basically is going to ruin our profits because by the time you factor in a location, hiring a DP, getting a few people for the crew, etc. you're looking at too much overhead. If I own the RED and all of the equipment I need in that area, I can tell myself, sure, I'm basically renting my equipment to myself for much cheaper than it would rent to anyone else, but I'm gaining experience and building a resume that makes this worthwhile. If I have to pay money to make someone else a music video, and don't even make a profit at all, then we may have problems...

That thought crossed my mind the other day, though, because if we do about 25 of these things and gain the experience necessary, and people aren't going to pay us at least $10,000 a video in this market (it's David who knows the market, not me), it's basically not worth it to me at that point, I'd be better off renting my equipment and sitting at home watching Springer than working my butt off AND making less money so I can make my 47th music video that really doesn't teach me anything I didn't already learn or give me much more marketable experience, since music videos aren't even really my interest but just a starting point.

That HDV camera can't give me the quality I want without too much screwing around, though, it has less to do with resolution, which is fine, than with its other shortcomings. If we got the right HDV camera and had a full set of nice lenses for it, and the other high-end accessories, I could probably make it do what I want, but I'm not really sure I want to screw with that when I have the RED stuff already on order. I'd just have to turn around and sell whatever I bought for the HDV cam.

kmikami

06-18-2007, 10:26 AM

There are plenty of ways to make the image better. High dynamic range imaging will be the future. And as data rates and storage capacities increase and big file sizes are no longer a big deal, cameras might as well capture more resolution to allow for re-framing in post, cropping to different aspect ratios, or fake pans & zooms in post. And why bother with unit photography anymore? If the resolutions get high enough you can simply pull stills from the movie to use at print resolutions!

Steve Gibby

06-18-2007, 11:04 AM

The only people rushing to the RED are people who are unhappy with their current choices. Hence: lower income DV/HDV productions = thrilled. Film productions: wait for the bugs to get beaten out by early adopters.

Unpublished quote from Ted Schilowitz, RED Leader of the Rebellion, given to me on 2/7/07 as I prepared a magazine article I was writing at the time:

“If you took a world wide poll on the most influential filmmakers, producers, directors, production companies, and asked them what is the camera they have the most interest in, and do they have reservations on that camera, it would be quite a long list. I won’t break confidences by revealing names, but if you’ve gone to the movies or watched any episodic television in the past year, you have definitely seen their work there, and a lot of them are standing by to use RED on their next project.”

Most of the “celebrity adopters” have chosen to remain anonymous, although Peter Jackson has been revealed, and in the television industry HDNet has stated in a press release that they are adopting RED One cameras. I produce/direct network television programs that air or are syndicated on several different broadcast and cable networks, and though I can’t reveal which ones are adopting RED One, I can say that several are, and several others are investigating the possibilities.

I’m curious why you would divide the motion media industry into just two categories, “DV/HDV productions” and “Film productions” while leaving out the entire EFP and television industries - probably the largest potential market for RED One. Nobody will “film” anything with RED One, so I assume you are pointing to feature films with your category of “Films”. I think if you're saying that early RED adopters are largely categorized as prosumer and low/mid level production people, and that the motion media industry elite levels (features and network television) are in a "wait and see" attitude, that is simply not accurate, as reflected by RED's own statements above, and the info I have from my network television contacts.

That's not to say that the reservation list doesn't contain a significant number of prosumer, low/mid level, and small indie production types moving upward in equipment. It obviously does. IMO the surprising thing about the demographic and industry profiles of RED One adopters is how broad the experience and industry range is. Then again, RED One is positioned as a scalable, flexible, modular camera system that is designed to satisfy a broad range of cine style and EFP style production uses, depending on how it is setup, so the wide range of experience and industry types on the reservation list shouldn’t really come as a surprise to anyone.

Craig Schober

06-18-2007, 12:35 PM

if we're really just talking about red fanboys then i think you can directly trace the proportionality of ones' red fanboyness to the amount of posts on this forum and other related forums. in other words, even though peter jackson has 5 reds on order and has already shot a short film with 2 betas, i don't consider him a red fanboy. he has not been vocal about the benefits or shortcomings of red and neither have hundreds of other reservation holders. conversely, there are dozens of redheads here that have hundreds and thousands of posts. i'm up to 120+ posts which says more about me than any single post. some are negative and some positive, some idiotic and some insightful but all are born out of the excitement for this product and team red's diligence in engineering and marketing.

Hrvoje Simic

06-18-2007, 12:50 PM

I think "fanboyism phenomenon" doesn't exist here.

It's just a bunch of creative people reacting on the exceptionally rear event in this industry. This is something completely unseen before and everybody is excited. Some more some less. That's it.
By witnessing something that might very well turn out to be a start of a revolution, people are confused, in disbelief, doubtfull, angry, happy, overwhelmed...you name it. It seems like they are grasping to anything, trying to define where are we and what is happening here by attempting to compare this with usual behaviour, usual buisness...etc...when it's everything else but usual. It is my opinon that people are giving this "fanboyism" too much attention with some sort of a wish of categorizing people.
"Who are you?" - "I'm A Fanboy." "And who are you ?" - "I'm The Hater". I don't want to offend anyone, but to me it looks like kindergarden "cops & robbers" stuff. Somehow a term "fanboy" to me doesn't go together with "mature" and "professional". It reminds me more of showbiz adolescent manias...

I don't like categorizing people in general, because it's subject to human subjectiveness, biases and perceptive limitations and therefore can never be exact.

Offcourse, there will be people who can be blinded by their over excitement. Cold business types will see this as: "Cool. A great camera for a great price". Artistic types are more emotional because true art depends on emotional sensibility and hence the more emotional responses. And that's it.

I consider myself a supporter of RED because of the ideology behind the project, market approach, style and goals, and I think buisness should be done in that way. I have so much to be thankful so I will try to give back as much as I can, in appropriate manner. I will be a proud owner of RED because of everything behind it, including the RED crew and all the brilliant creative people here. I would be a proud owner of RED stocks some day although I wish RED never gets on stock exchange market, contradictory as it may seem.
However, if anyone categorized me as a "fanboy" I would be insulted.
I never was, or ever will be a "fanboy" of anything.

Criticisms:
I would pay attention to the criticisms of the people who are proven experts and who gave opinion based on their experience working with RED. That should be enough.

The chances of poor investment:
I think most of it depends on each individual factor. If you're thinking about RED factors...there are always risks. How big ? You can calculate yourself with taking into consideration the right signs.

Dan Blanchett

06-18-2007, 01:19 PM

As others have said, the risk is probably minimal but it depends on your situation (financial and professional). For me, I have no immediate requirement to make money on my RED purchase, so the risk is even less than it would be for others. I may rent it out (with or without me) but it's not why I am getting it. It's primarily meant to assist in my own moviemaking endeavors, as an alternative to renting gear or buying a more expensive, yet inferior, camera. The upgrading nature of this camera makes it an easy choice.

As for fanboyism-- IMHO the word is probably tossed about too often, and I never really give it much credence. There is enthusiasm and there is hyper enthusiasm, but it's not like anyone is selling their first born to buy the camera (hopefully). Some people have a greater need to express themselves than others, and maybe it's as simple as that. And if you don't want to sing in the choir or pray at the alter you can just sit in the pews with the rest of us (nodding off).

Sam Druckerman

06-18-2007, 01:29 PM

even though peter jackson has 5 reds on order and has already shot a short film with 2 betas, i don't consider him a red fanboy. he has not been vocal about the benefits or shortcomings of red ........

Just in case you missed it....

Peter J did have some positive things to say about using the RED.

"If you shoot at 4K, but want a “film look”, then you finish at 2K and add some grain. It’s easy. It looks like film. However, if you finish and screen at 4K. the result is like shooting in 65mm, like the old epics used to do. It’s pretty exciting, and will have a major impact on indie filming – but we could see no reason why you couldn’t use these cameras for any type of movie. I’m seriously considering using RED for The Lovely Bones."

from this link...

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=48914#post48914

Craig Schober

06-18-2007, 01:29 PM

I think "fanboyism phenomenon" doesn't exist.

It's just a bunch of creative people reacting on the exceptionally rear event in this industry. This is something completely unseen before and everybody is excited. Some more some less. That's it.

but i think we have seen this before. i remember sony's vx1000, panasonic's dvx100 and even the hvx200. these are lower end prosumer devices and maybe that market more closely parallels the excited nature but can anyone recall excitement over dalsa or varicam? i never followed the development of those systems but i bet they had and still have their devotees. just not as many. it's a scaled thing. the lower the pricepoint, the more zealots, haters, skeptics, etc. you will have.

I Bloom

06-18-2007, 01:51 PM

Just curious in your Mac vs. PC analogy because IMHO it is not a fair comparison. In the case of RED- what is the FUD and who is Microsoft?
-Noah

I'm not sure I'm making an analogy to Mac users. But it seems like a Final Cut vs. Avid analogy or a Mac versus PC analogy would be appropriate. RED's Microsoft would be Sony, or Panasonic. Or any number of other companies who aren't giving filmakers what they've been wanting for so long. At Cinegear in L.A 2005. I was laughed at when I asked a Panasonic rep if they were thinking about making a single chip prosumer camera. At that point I didn't even think it could be Super35 size, I just wanted to reliably pull focus. I thought a 35 chip would remain in the realm of DALSA or etc.

I haven't met in person with many other RED fanboys, I didn't go to either NAB. As I said this came into sharp focus when I was on a shoot with about six units, all owner operators and I was the only one who had signed up for a RED even those who had seen the tests. I had another conversation with a very established much older DP, as he was waiting for me to vacate a telecine suite, and he told me flat out to wait.

I think Gibby is right in some ways, there is no way to tell:

All the argument in the world will prove nothing about RED One. What will prove whether the early adopters, slow adopters, or non-adopters are right about RED One is for the finished camera system to ship, be tested extensively in real world production scenarios over time, and either succeed or fail. Until then, threads like this are essentially a way to tread water, and will prove or solve nothing.

But for the most part I disagree strongly with your post. It is possible for RED to address many of the doubts by explaining how they will overcome them. You also don't need to buy a RED. You are still an early adopter if you rent a RED instead. I hope that in ten years I'll be in a similar position to Gibby and ready to invest in several cameras. But at this point my gamble on RED means I'm going all in. Maybe I'd rather be like David Mullen, who is, I think, not thinking about buying any cameras, ever. (David did you ever own a movie camera?)

If we have any model to go on when we are trying to predict the success of RED, I think the HVX200 is a good one to look at. It brought DVCProHD into the hands of many and was cheap enough to be a starter camera for many owner operators. I find its pretty ubiquitis now in low budget production. But people did have real problems with P2 in the first year. Most of the problems I think were with Apple and not with Panasonic as people struggled to use and transfer the footage they had recorded. It was a show stopper for some productions. I was lucky that I had a background in computers, I could figure out for example that the P2 importer on Final Cut will fail if you try to import a clip longer than 10 minutes to a FAT32 drive (still to this day it won't tell you why). I believe a lot of people were not so lucky.

I think the slow adopters are right: There will be problems. All software has problems when it is first released and RED seems to be about 50% software. RED is even running, I surmise, software that is compiled at the processor level, in realtime, likely coded in C (++ etc) which is the most difficult type of code to debug because it can use open "pointers". Compounding this difficulty is the fact that RED is not like other software; as far as we know it can't send crash reports back to it's developers, reports that might include valuable technical information that they can't get just from their customers observations.

I'm ready to dive into this camera because I feel like I can get close to figuring out the problems I'm having based on the symptoms. But I think my skillset is a little different than most.

I feel strongly that a discussion like this is not treading water. Some positive things that could come from a discussion like this is:

RED could talk more about their software developement process. There are lots of different approaches to making failsafe code, what method are they using? I think this matters.

RED could talk more about how they will collect information about their cameras in the field. How can I send you guys a core dump for example.

How hard will it be to get physical repairs done: will we need to ship it to California?

How long will it take to run REDcine on various systems: I think they have this information now. This is really important to the decision making process because it will determine whether owner operators will be able to efficiently hand off footage to their clients. REDCODE sounds great to me, but I'm not trying to become a REDCODE salesman, I'm trying to shoot and deliver with no strings attached.

Then next time I find myself fanboying it up on a set, I'll be able to shut down the naysayers with some real knowledge. I think it is not about who has the cajones to be an early adopter. It's about smart choices, timing, and about watching your back. Risk taking is a virtue only when the risks pan out.

IBloom

I Bloom

06-18-2007, 01:59 PM

but i think we have seen this before. i remember sony's vx1000, panasonic's dvx100 and even the hvx200. these are lower end prosumer devices and maybe that market more closely parallels the excited nature but can anyone recall excitement over dalsa or varicam? i never followed the development of those systems but i bet they had and still have their devotees. just not as many. it's a scaled thing. the lower the pricepoint, the more zealots, haters, skeptics, etc. you will have.

I was excited about the DALSA, way back when. It's just their business model that sucks. Too much data, too big, and too expensive. But if I had the budget, I'd take DALSA over RED any day. After all, all of the cameras now on Mars, were built by DALSA. They have an almost 40 year track record.

Antoine Fabi

06-18-2007, 02:46 PM

I have never been a fanboy of any company.

But, this is the first time i see a company with so much transparence with his customers.

...despite our little rebellion (frustration) inside “The” Rebellion last week...he hee...ooops…

Time will tell, but usually, when you keep your eyes open, you criticise (with respect), but then... you also have to do it with your family, friends, love etc...and business relations too! It's healthy as long as it keeps respectfull. It is essential.

OK, my humble opinion…

I think RED is a great company. It has a vision, energy, creativity.
I like the philosophy of these people. That’s all.

Poi Boy

06-18-2007, 02:48 PM

Eugene

06-18-2007, 08:58 PM

most users on this board are fans of their own selves first and foremost

So how many politicians are RED fanboys so far? Eventually they all will be.

http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/images/Rove-TV-camera.jpg

Joel Kaye

06-18-2007, 09:05 PM

So how many politicians are RED fanboys so far? Eventually they all will be.

Mercifully - the neocons would never shoot a camera called "RED". An ingenious move by Jannard to help prevent the "catapulting of propaganda" (http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/catapultpropaganda.htm) in deceptively beautiful form.

Greg Voevodsky

06-18-2007, 10:09 PM

I was excited about the DALSA, way back when. It's just their business model that sucks. Too much data, too big, and too expensive. But if I had the budget, I'd take DALSA over RED any day. After all, all of the cameras now on Mars, were built by DALSA. They have an almost 40 year track record.

Well, if price is no problem, why are you not a fan of IMAX and 70mm? Because they cost too much and they are hard to shoot and the mainstream audience (most will watch most or your work on DVD or Blu-Ray incoming years) does not care.

However, RED is the quality of 70mm and cheaper than HD and easier to shoot than 35mm... watch out! Much like 16mm went bye bye in news in th 70s... and film is almost gone in still photography, RED and 4k projection will be the end to film in the mainstream in the next 5 years. Avid killed editing in less than 5 years, here it comes again. I can't wait.

Oh, I was one of the Sony VX-1000 owners that took a shot at 3/4 and beta SP owners shooting special interest videos and DVDs at 1/5 the price. I am still making over $1000 a month from work I did back in 1999 from a $5000 camera. LOL. Note my editing system went from a 20 gig avid express for $100,000 down to a $10,000 Avid with 1 terabyte! So it's only time for RED to drop a 150,000 sony camera down to a $30,000 RED ultra HD camera!

RED is the VX-1000 for film, as the VX-1000 and DV took out BETA SP and 3/4 tape... I'd rather buy 1 terabye drive for $1000 over an HD tape and $50,000 tape deck by Panasonic or Sony any day!

I Bloom

06-18-2007, 10:42 PM

I'm anticipating that once the dust settles and red bugs are sorted out Dalsa really won't have any advantages to Red and may indeed be inferior to red if you take workflow into account. we will have to wait and see but I strongly suspect this will be the case.
Aloha
-A

Hmmm... I'm trying to avoid seeming like I'm a DALSA proponent because I'm not. But the Origin is still 16 bit raw, with a lot more dynamic range than RED is currently advertising. That means something to me. It means that in terms of bending the image in post, RED still doesn't stack up to a film scan or DALSA. There might also be something to say for DALSA's chip. They make a big deal about dissing CMOS in favor of a very simple CCD combined with a mechanical shutter. DALSA also reinvests all of its profits, into things like its employees, I always thought that was kind of cool.

But you are right about the workflow thing. DALSA should have realized earlier that lossy compression is really our friend.

I'll offer you a compromise, RED TWO will stack up to DALSA 100%. But it doesn't really matter, I think I'm playing devils advocate. In terms of the market, no one is going to care, and RED is going to kill DALSA.

IBloom

Poi Boy

06-18-2007, 10:56 PM

Jonathan L. Bowen

06-19-2007, 01:39 AM

CCD versus CMOS? I'm not a technology expert, but from everything I've read that's a disadvantage. Why would you want CCD chips like used in prosumer cameras in a high-end camera? From what I have read it's much better to have something like a CMOS sensor, but eh, whatever I guess.

From what I've read on both, the Dalsa Origin sounds awesome, but the RED still sounds better by a significant enough margin to call it definitively better. Anyway it's probably not even worth arguing about because as I understand the Origin is about $1,750 to rent per day and you can't own it...

I Bloom

06-19-2007, 01:41 AM

I don't think Dalsa has a lot more dynamic range, They say over 12 witch probably means 12.1, a wash with Red as far as I'm concerned. As far as the chip "they" make a big deal about ccd versus cmos, naturally.
They get major points for being the first and going to Mars (part of their high price ethos) but really I think the image quality difference is going to be extremely hard to see. I don't think we will have to wait for Red The sequel, Red one is going to be the shit. We will know very, very soon, exciting to say the least.
Aloha
-A

Naturally, I agree, no one will know the difference. But the 10 bit only in REDCODE is a needle in my side. Ten bits isn't enough. It's enough for an original image, but not enough for the kind of drastic post color correction I'd like to do. With 14, I'd be satisfied. Apparently DALSA is really only 14 since the last two bits are basically just noise.

IBloom

Ace

06-19-2007, 04:14 AM

Naturally, I agree, no one will know the difference. But the 10 bit only in REDCODE is a needle in my side. Ten bits isn't enough. It's enough for an original image, but not enough for the kind of drastic post color correction I'd like to do. With 14, I'd be satisfied. Apparently DALSA is really only 14 since the last two bits are basically just noise.

IBloom

Wasnt it 12 Bit for RED?

Rob Lohman

06-19-2007, 05:14 AM

Wasnt it 12 Bit for RED?

Yes, we are 12-bit.

RED could talk more about their software developement process. There are lots of different approaches to making failsafe code, what method are they using? I think this matters.

I think the end result matters. Do you know the software development process used for other video or photo camera's? Do you know this for other (critical) appliances?

How long will it take to run REDcine on various systems: I think they have this information now.

Sure we do. But it's not very useful since it changes weekly while we fine tune compression levels and optimize / change code. If you were at NAB you were able to see a REDCINE demo playing footage and an option was demonstrated where you could select the trade of between quality & performance.

This is really important to the decision making process because it will determine whether owner operators will be able to efficiently hand off footage to their clients.

How so? Again, stuff changes often here. This will also depend on such factors as :

1) hardware in your machine (cpu speed, number of cpu's, features available in the cpu, memory amount, memory speed, drive random access speed, drive throughput speed, front-side-bus speed, etc.)

2) what drivers, operating system and other background software you're running

3) what resolution and framerate you recorded at

4) what quality level & resolution you're decoding the footage at

5) what quality level, resolution and codec (compression) you're outputting to

We've always indicated that things will change, count on them. Performance and things like data rates INCLUDED!

The camera is not available yet and neither is the software. I would advice people to buy hardware / software when they need it, not earlier (or later).

What I can say is that more cpu's helps. Modern cpu's help tremendously. Features like SSE2/SSE3 support in your CPU helps A LOT. Higher FSB & memory speeds are good too. Make sure your drive system is not a bottleneck. Getting a system that does around 100 MB/s (or more) reliably is a good thing to have. A "normal" computer (with multiple cpu's) is probably better than a laptop for serious (not in the field) work.

In the end 4K is a lot of data to work with and process. Even with the tremendous power we have available today. At RED we've worked with 4K footage for over a year now and I'm not sure everyone fully grasps how big or how much data that is ;) I'm not saying it's unworkable, far from it, but it's not DV or HDV either!

Jonathan L. Bowen

06-19-2007, 05:32 AM

Yeah it'll be interesting working with 4K for sure...

Maybe we can hope Intel has a 16-core processor setup by that time? lol, like quad quad cores or something, or dual 8-cores, whatever.

Laco Zamba

06-19-2007, 05:38 AM

Thank you, Rob.
Can you say something more about camera GUI? Will it be similar to SI?

planet e

06-19-2007, 08:56 AM

...if you're happy with with what you have... why change?

The only people rushing to the RED are people who are unhappy with their current choices. Hence: lower income DV/HDV productions = thrilled. Film productions: wait for the bugs to get beaten out by early adopters.

i think gavin nails it. when RED was first released, i was thrilled at the prospect of getting cinealta-style performance out of a camera at this price. i think a lot of folks were comparing this camera and its feature set to the prices of cinealta or varicam and other high-end ENG/EFP options, and not film at all. heck, i would have been happy with a 1080p camera and 10-bit, 35mbps delivery at these prices. i would have been overjoyed. it took a while and a bit of listening to understand that 4K is a reality and even desirable, because, for the vast majority of my applications, it's overkill. now i think differently, and i'm thinking bigger, for the long run and with the amazing flexibility that 4K will provide.

but i think in the hierarchy of how we grasp the users, it gets broken out as film v. video users, but i find it equally meaningful to consider who is running their business well, period. i would put myself in the lower income DV/HDV ghetto, but i'm hoping to be able to land larger, more expensive projects with this camera without breaking the bank. if i can get my current crop of $9,000 worth of HDV cameras to pay for my $60,000 worth of 2 RED cameras and equipment that i will be purchasing over time, well, that's an excellent return on investment in those puny HDV cams. phenomenal, really.

you can have expensive cameras and a low return on investment, and you can have cheaper cameras and a high return on investment. making RED work is about how you make your cameras work for you, and not just about how you work your camera...

i wouldn't underestimate some of the folks making money and interesting projects with these so-called lower income cameras. if you can do it with a coupla HDV cameras and a lot of hustle and imagination, imagine the possibilities with a pair of these babies....there's making the right moves with your camera and making the right moves with your business, and when those two things align, the magic occurs and the fun begins.

Antoine Fabi

06-19-2007, 10:26 AM

"...They get (Dalsa) major points for being the first and going to Mars (part of their high price ethos) but really I think the image quality difference is going to be extremely hard to see..."
Aloha
-A

In my case, i'll probably use my camera on earth most of the time.:sarcasm:

I Bloom

06-19-2007, 06:58 PM

Hey Rob,

I appreciate your responses.

Yes, we are 12-bit.

Last I heard REDCODE, the wavelet compression, decompresses to 10-bit only. Straight raw is 12.

Will there eventually be a 12 bit option for the wavelet compression?

I think the end result matters. Do you know the software development process used for other video or photo camera's? Do you know this for other (critical) appliances?

I think process matters. I think the history of operating systems and software developement prooves that. I don't know of any camera's that do this. I know that third party code certification is an entire field, though it generally doesn't happen to consumer appliances. In any case. You are right, if the camera works, then you are good. The only purpose of talking about your process is to alay FUD. How something was made is often a selling point. It's rare to hear someone trying to sell something high quality and saying, who cares how we did it.

Sure we do. But it's not very useful since it changes weekly while we fine tune compression levels and optimize / change code.

Changes how much? Are we talking ballpark figures hear or down to the minute or second. Today it doesn't matter. The day before someone writes a check for 30-50 grande it does matter and they should have that information. It doesn't matter if things might improve in the future, or that different computers run at different speeds. I hope that you eventually publish benchmarks because this could be a very deep hidden cost that will effect the success of your customers.

IBloom

Jonathan L. Bowen

06-19-2007, 10:38 PM

In my case, i'll probably use my camera on earth most of the time.:sarcasm:

It's kind of ironic, if it's called the RED, shouldn't it be the one to film on the RED planet?! I mean come on. The marketing opportunities there are golden. ;)

Rob Lohman

06-20-2007, 02:33 AM

Thank you, Rob.
Can you say something more about camera GUI? Will it be similar to SI?

The GUI was visible at NAB and I think it has or will change a bit as well (not sure).

Most GUI's are sort of similar on camera's since you need to display a certain amount of information and access menus and such. SI has a touch screen interface which RED does not have.

Laco Zamba

06-20-2007, 02:41 AM

Thanks. I remember silver buttons in lower part of EVF view and fps, shutter speed, ... in upper part.
When will we see more?

Rob Lohman

06-20-2007, 02:47 AM

Last I heard REDCODE, the wavelet compression, decompresses to 10-bit only. Straight raw is 12.

You heard wrong :) We wavelet compress in 12-bits.

I think process matters. I think the history of operating systems and software developement prooves that. I don't know of any camera's that do this. I know that third party code certification is an entire field, though it generally doesn't happen to consumer appliances. In any case. You are right, if the camera works, then you are good. The only purpose of talking about your process is to alay FUD. How something was made is often a selling point. It's rare to hear someone trying to sell something high quality and saying, who cares how we did it.

I hope RED has proven by now that we are about quality. We've been very open about the (development) process in general. Everyone who's seen the camera's can attest they are solid build.

Obviously we are approaching the software the same way. The software (nor hardware) never failed while shooting Crossing the Line. Of course there were bugs, which we are fixing. It's extremely difficult to have no (obscure) bugs.

Jim has pledged that we will update firmware and software to fix things and add features. This is exactly what we're planning.

What exactly do you want to here about software engineering? What tools we use? If we use source control? Unit testing? Continues integration? Peer review? Which programming languages?

In the end there's a line between public knowledge and internal logistics. Now in the future when the camera is released we might write about the development process (in general). We'll see.

For now you'll have to take comfort that quality is extremely important to us. That's why Jim started this project and why people work at RED.

Changes how much? Are we talking ballpark figures hear or down to the minute or second. Today it doesn't matter. The day before someone writes a check for 30-50 grande it does matter and they should have that information. It doesn't matter if things might improve in the future, or that different computers run at different speeds. I hope that you eventually publish benchmarks because this could be a very deep hidden cost that will effect the success of your customers.

It can change little or much. Depends on what is changing. For example, wavelet decoding time can change a lot by how much compressed data it needs to go through. Since we're tweaking compression levels this obviously affects decode time.

Good news is that it will only get faster with every optimization and new hardware round. Hence: wait with buying you're hardware until you're closer to receiving your RED. There might be new hardware or new software optimizations that lower hardware requirements, etc.

We might publish benchmarks. I have no doubt that the first few RED reservation holders (like Offhollywood & Gibby) will test and publish there findings as well.

Rob Lohman

06-20-2007, 02:51 AM

Thanks. I remember silver buttons in lower part of EVF view and fps, shutter speed, ... in upper part.
When will we see more?

That's a Stuart question :shifty: I don't know....

I Bloom

06-20-2007, 07:39 AM

You heard wrong :) We wavelet compress in 12-bits.

Nice. Where did you publish that? It seems like a departure from the workflow diagram you used to have.

In the end there's a line between public knowledge and internal logistics. Now in the future when the camera is released we might write about the development process (in general). We'll see.

Reasonable.

We might publish benchmarks. I have no doubt that the first few RED reservation holders (like Offhollywood & Gibby) will test and publish there findings as well.
True.

Thanks.
IBloom

Rob Powell

06-20-2007, 09:55 AM

Being an early adopter is always risky. In my experience, new equipment is only slightly more reliable than used gear. I'm sure the same will be true of RED. We all know what the camera is supposed to do, but we will not find its limitations until it is in our hands.

You may want to stop envying the guys with the low reservation numbers. They will be the proving ground for the rest of us. We'll get a chance to read their posts about the performance of the camera before we have to dole out the full price.

I'm not sure waiting for two years is the right solution, but being near the back of the line feels OK to me right now. Don't get me wrong. I'm optomisitic about RED, but I'm not going to let my emotions cloud my judgement.

I've read several posts about shooting a feature or documentary right after the camera arrives. I don't know anyone with significant experience who would consider that a prudent plan.

Steve Gibby

06-20-2007, 10:39 AM

I've read several posts about shooting a feature or documentary right after the camera arrives. I don't know anyone with significant experience who would consider that a prudent plan.

Hmmm...then here's another one of those posts. I have RED #8 and I have a D-cinema feature and several HDTV series just waiting for #8. The features beta testing RED announced, and the testing of #8 in Los Angeles by a great team of industry professionals, should reveal the caveats and limitations my production crew will need to be aware of for our projects. With the beta testing refinements and team testing results in hand, we won't be the least bit afraid to plunge into production with RED One right out of the gate. Bring it on. Someone needs to do it, and I've waited 20 months for the chance....and you're right, the rest of you will benefit from what the early users report about our experiences.

David Mullen ASC

06-20-2007, 11:09 AM

I shot one of the first 24P HDCAM features in 2000 on the F900, while Lucas was shooting "Attack of the Clones", a little indie movie called "Jackpot".

It went fine, no problems in shooting. We had some issues in post getting up to speed on 24P HD post and audio sync issues. I think anyone who shoots a feature on the RED camera immediately will probably not have camera problems, but they will be spending some post time getting the whole workflow worked out as they do it, that's all, especially if they plan on finishing to 4K (even a 4:4:4 1080P post is not necessarily easy for an entire feature if you haven't done it yet.) You have to remember that the average indie feature shooting digitally often shoots 30 to 60 hours of footage, whereas the average indie feature shooting on film shoots more like 20 to 30 hours.

Remembering the problem "Superman Returns" had with their early Genesis cameras (the faint vertical lines that were hard to spot until the efx people noticed them), I think the key, if you are shooting on the RED right away for a feature, is to find a way of occasionally looking at selected footage in 4K, hopefully on a big screen (or magnified/zoomed into on a small screen), to look for problems.

Steve Gibby

06-20-2007, 11:38 AM

I think you raised an excellent point David. "A stitch in time saves nine" definitely applies to the concept of figuring out as much, if not all, of the post workflow before even beginning production. Obviously with a new camera system there will be workflow issues where how you acquire footage on the set or in the field will have a huge impact on the time (and thus expense) spent in post. I’m sure Stuart English (RED's Workflow Wizzard), and other RED Team members, have been planning for RED's recommended field and post workflows. I expect RED to come out with some well-defined workflow recommendations when they finalize the camera system specs. That said, there will be certain nuances that we can only uncover by actual use on the set. Then again, that's where the wisdom of the new beta testing program on features comes in. Hopefully those beta testers will uncover a lot of the caveats and recommendations for the system that we early users can then build upon.

Your point is also excellent for non-scripted genres of EFP production. With the data and storage requirements, guys who are used to shooting copious amounts of footage with video cameras, because tapes are relatively cheap and they store a lot, will need to re-think their approach to acquisition. Though I've worked a lot in unscripted television genres, my original film training has always helped me (and my crews) to save time and money by only pulling the trigger when it was a very good shot, and to think like an editor when we shoot. When you’re not shooting to a script, as in unscripted television, the balance point is to capture the essence of the event, doc, or whatever, because the story will be created and edited from the raw footage – without overshooting so that you inundate the editors with footage, and in the process create unneeded expense and added storage requirements.

The recommendation you made about periodically reviewing footage at full resolution to look for problems is also sage advice. Hopefully the line of 4k panels RED announced at NAB will get into development soon, and be affordable (something I'd expect from RED in view of their other product pricing). A small/mid-sized, battery option, portable 4k panel that is affordable would be mighty nice to have on the set of a RED One feature, or in the field with a RED One EFP production. Then perhaps a 4k EVF option would follow...but I have no knowledge of any plans for such.