RED Noob Questions

[FrankE]

Hey,

I was just wondering if anyone could tell me some of the major advantages to using the Red one for feature length films? I've read alot of specs on this cam, but what are the advantages say opposed to panasonic hpx500? Would the red one make a post production 35 MM film print of greater quality? Why should I spend about 30K on this number? I'd like to , but why?

Interested but not finding comparative answers. Please sway me.

[Michael Schrengohst]

You would still be spending around $25,000 on the HPX500.
The only PRO to the HPX is that it is here today.
If you are talking feature - go look at the RED.com site and
see who is shooting and will be shooting with the RED.
The RED due to the fact that you are shooting with a 4K
chip as opposed to the pixel-upresed HPX500 will give
you far better results going to a 35MM print. Just go look
at the RED specs. Redcode Raw shooting - as opposed to 8 bit
DVCPRO HD on the HPX....You could rent RED probably starting
in the fall and if you order today you are looking at March-April 2008
for delivery??

[Brook Willard]

Check out the FAQ in my signature. Also do some reading on RED's website.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

More Dynamic Range. More Resolution. Makes women or men depending on your desires want to have sex with you. More framerate options. IT based workflow. Better compression. 35mm DOF characteristics. Solves world hunger. Ability to use cinema glass. Costs almost exactly the same. Doesn't suffer from any prism induced abberations. Can be recorded to non-proprietary/inexpensive media. Viewfinder is probably better. 24 bit audio. HDMI/DVI monitoring. Doesn't run on the souls of freshly killed kittens. Real time LUT preview while recording flat. 4.5k sensor gives .5k overscan for easier camera operation. Might be upgradeable in the future as new sensor technology is released. Ability to shoot with 16mm glass if so desired. Includes powerful 'one-light' color correction and shot management software.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Makes women or men depending on your desires want to have sex with you.

This is why I'm buying RED. The thing is a total chick magnet.


Oh, yeah... My wife actually thinks I'm buying it for real work, so don't tell her.

[Tonaci Tran]

Here is a film vs digital thread you can read for an interesting discussion.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2111

"We may as well get this out of the way...

1. Cost of equipment- advantage RED
New 35mm film camera system= roughly $150K-$300K depending on model and accessories.
New RED ONE system= roughly $25K
Used 35mm film system= roughly $25K-$100K depending on age, model and condition

2. Cost to use- advantage RED
The RED camera is microscopic in costs compared to buying, processing and scanning film.

3. Dynamic Range- advantage 35mm film
Film is roughly 13 stops. The RED camera is currently 11.3 (although we are working on improvement in this area).

4. Resolution- advantage RED
Every industry expert I spoke with at NAB said that our footage was equal to or greater than 35mm film in resolution. If you want to hold this one aside until there are side by side tests... no argument from me.

5. Grain- If you like it, advantage 35mm film. If you don't like it, advantage RED

6. Convenience- advantage RED
Shoot a film load for max 10 minutes before re-load. Shoot RED for 2 hours.

7. Pulling a key- advantage RED.
The lack of grain makes it much easier to separate a subject from green or blue screen.

One of the biggest advantages that 35mm film had over digital was that it is "filmic". The biggest compliment that we received at NAB was that the RED camera was the 1st digital footage they saw that "felt right". I won't name names, but they are hard names to beat. And most did NOT have reservations.

Please be clear that we are NOT saying we are a film replacement camera. We are saying that we are a film alternative. Choose what you want based on which advantages matter to you.

Jim"

[Tonaci Tran]

Look at this chart:

http://www.red.com/skin/img/technology/1.jpg

Compare the resolution between RED's 4k and 1080p (which the hpx500 does). On top of this, I think the hpx500 upsamples/scales their 1080p output.

Lastly, getting fast 8gb compact flash cards is a hell of alot cheaper than p2 cards.

[J. Bernard Vallon]

I think to me the most compelling reason is the 35mm DOF. It is the only story telling feature that will never be lost no matter what happens to your footage. It can be shown on a crappy VHS copy on a B/W TV with a big magnet stain in the corner, your audience will still see the beautiful separation of subject and environment.

Back when i was a student, and I couldn't afford a decent film scan, and had to shoot with expired film to cut costs, my image would look like film because of the DOF. The color wasn't as cool as it could have been, and my shadows looked grainy because the film was old old old, but the DOF was still there, even if it was just s16.

If it came down to it, id rather shoot on a monochrome RED One than a HPX, simply for that reason (unless i needed needed NEEDED color).

[Keith Alan Morris]

Plus you get a camera that looks like something from the Terminator...

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

Lots of good reasons here, mainly that it looks like something from the Terminator, makes people want to have sex with you, solves world hunger, and doesn't require the souls of kittens. The rest, as far as DOF, resolution, etc. all just gravy, not really that important compared to the aforementioned qualities and advantages ;)

[I Bloom]

This is why I'm buying RED. The thing is a total chick magnet.

I think maybe you are joking... I'm not. Work twelve hours a day on a set, and where are you going to meet members of the opposite sex, on a set. And what are they going to be looking at? Your car!!??

IBloom

[Rocket]

I wrote an article on this (HD vs 2K/4K digital cinema aquisition), I think it covers a lot of the points already mentioned but maybe in a bit more detail. You can find it here: http://www.4khub.com/news.php?readmore=2

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I wrote an article on this...

For a moment there I really believed you meant finding members of the opposite sex while working 12 hour days on set. :D

[Rocket]

For a moment there I really believed you meant finding members of the opposite sex while working 12 hour days on set. :D

Hmm, that would have been a good article, anyone with experience is welcome to write one and I'll publish it, but nope. I'm married, so I'm out of that game. I did meet my wife while studying video production, that's not really on set though.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I think maybe you are joking... I'm not. Work twelve hours a day on a set, and where are you going to meet members of the opposite sex, on a set. And what are they going to be looking at? Your car!!??


Yes, I was joking... However, it's always possible to meet someone of the opposite sex, anywhere at any time. After all, they account for roughly 50% of the world population.

Oh, and don't ever drive a car that's better looking or more interesting than you are. :)

[chuck colburn]

"Oh, and don't ever drive a car that's better looking or more interesting than you are."

I drive a thirty year old truck and it's still better looking, more interesting and I think, smarter than I am. lol

[Rocket]

Oh, and don't ever drive a car that's better looking or more interesting than you are. :)

Damn, I drive a '67 VW, that can't be good.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

<--- 86 Golf


'Friend of the female pursuasion' of 4 years just let me know that she didn't think she was ready for any kind of a relationship now... or maybe ever ... with anybody. :|

So it was the car!

[John Wee]

which company produces a lanyard strong enough to hold the red one on my neck while I go to the GAP at the mall ??

[Jeff Kilgroe]

"Oh, and don't ever drive a car that's better looking or more interesting than you are."

I drive a thirty year old truck and it's still better looking, more interesting and I think, smarter than I am. lol

Hehe.

Of course I was just addressing ibloom's comment about chicks only being interested in his car.

OTOH, a good chick magnet car could be a good thing if you handle it right. I don't have any recommendations there, I've never owned one that's worked in that regard, or at least not the times I would have liked it to. I have a 1919 Ford touring T and a 1922 center door T. I always thought they'd be good at attracting hot chicks... Nope. Young women look at them with a confused expression. Especially the '22. It's more practical, so it can actually be taken out on the road if I feel crazy enough. Bad thing about it is the fuel tank sits right under the driver's seat and gravity feeds to the carburator (no fuel pump). If you need to drive up-hill for more than about 25 seconds, you have to do it in reverse. Anyway, rather than hot chicks, These cars tend to attract really old people. You'd probably like them, Chuck. Hehe. Heck, you probably own one yourself.

[Rocket]

I have a 1919 Ford touring T and a 1922 center door T.

Awesome! Did you restore them yourself? I assume so, I had a '54 Chevy Bel Air that I was building, then last year I got married and had to sell it (not even for a Red funnily enough, but for a diamond ring). No regrets though, at least I got my chick, I can relax now and not worry about the car, or stringing a Red One around my neck.

[Cail Young]

For what it's worth, the HPX500 will not be upgradable to use AVC Intra, the fancy new codec Panasonic is shipping for their P2 cameras. So, I would not purchase the HPX500 just yet... wait for the inevitable revision that supports AVC Intra.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Awesome! Did you restore them yourself? I assume so, I had a '54 Chevy Bel Air that I was building, then last year I got married and had to sell it (not even for a Red funnily enough, but for a diamond ring). No regrets though, at least I got my chick, I can relax now and not worry about the car, or stringing a Red One around my neck.

Actually, the 1919 touring car is all original, right down to every last nut and bolt, no restoration and still looks pretty darn nice. It belonged to a friend of my great grandfather. At some point after my great grandfather and his friend had passed away, my grandfather bought the car from his father's friend's widow.

The 1922 is all original except for the interior upholstery. My grandfather pulled a 1934 pickup out of the Blue River at some point and had it restored -- this was in about '79. He then traded it to someone for this car. IMO, it was a poor trade, but still a fun car to have around. I actually had to pull the carburetor apart and flush the gas tank a couple weeks ago to move the car as it's been sitting for several years. Unfortunately, mice had got inside and made a real mess... I'm going to try and clean the upholstery, but it may need to be redone, the carpet will definitely have to be replaced as the mice chewed and shredded it to make a nest. There's also a couple leaks in the radiator due to corrosion, even though it was always stored drained. But it's 85 years... Funny thing is after I cleaned the carburetor bowl and got the float un-stuck and flushed some clean gas through it and dropped in a new battery, the car fired right up. There was quite a bit of grey dust to blow out of the tail pipe along with some rust, so the first couple puffs of smoke were purple. It was kinda magical. :)

As for restoration projects, I have a 1919 White C-Cab truck that's in terrible shape. But my great, great grandfather was the original owner and he was still driving the truck the last time my father saw him alive as a boy. He was a coal miner and would use the truck to drive his coal into town. We have talked about restoring the old truck, but it's very far gone and would be a very time-consuming project. I've also got an old Indiana truck, about 1940 or so, IIRC and two '48 Ford pickups. The '48s are in rough shape, but one good one could be built out of the two pretty easily and they would make one heck of a nice street rod with that 1100HP flathead engine. :matrix: