Any official statement on REDCODE licensing or third-party support?

[Jeff Kilgroe]

This is directed at Jim and others at RED...

Is there any information or even an official statement that can be made on how REDCODE codec information, SDK, etc.. will be available to other software developers (Avid, Adobe, etc..)?

The questions keep coming up and continuously degenerate into heated discussions full of speculation. But most of us are eager to know if and or when this will happen.

[Kevin Halverson]

Jumping in and speculating may be the only form of exercise (perhaps short of jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions) that many here participate in. The only thing that could even remotely be described as something close to "official" that I have received was a reply by Graeme to one of my posts where he stated that they (RED) intended to support the "Three A's" of NLEs.

I know that this is a sensitive subject, but one where many of us have an interest, so something more "official" would certainly be welcome.

[Graeme Nattress]

It would be nice to give an official response to this, but we are working a increase RED support as best as we can, and for the most part, just need a bit of time for us to do this. We obviously can't talk about 3rd parties in public, as that's really not polite.

Graeme

[Bruce Allen]

Thanks Graeme! Kinda what we expected based on previous statements, rumors, etc (I mean if Red's gonna be used on 24, or any large TV show for that matter, they're going to have to figure out an Avid workflow...), but it's very nice to have official confirmation.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Edgar Pitts]

We obviously can't talk about 3rd parties in public, as that's really not polite.

But there is much talk about Apple and Assimilate... Are these not third parties???

[Rocco Schult]

I would say these are more like second parties...

[Anthony Gratl]

I would say these are more like second parties...

No such thing in this context. In this instance third party means anyone other than Red.

[jbeale]

Call it what you want, but I'd say there is a difference between another entity with whom you have an established relationship and have mutually agreed on specific publicity, and third parties where no such relationship exists.

I have no connection to Red or any of these companies, but as an outside observer, if someone says that Apple has something exclusive with Red, to me it's like saying the first 100 Red owners have an exclusive product. It may be true for now, but it doesn't mean there won't soon be more folks joining the exclusive circle. It's just that everything doesn't happen at once. Maybe someone just happened to be first in line.

[Jannard]

You can certainly work RED footage in Avid right now. It is just a slow process.

Jim

[RED,BLUE&GREEN]

Why Does a show like 24 need Avid? Final Cut 6.whatever.. is great!! and with FC Extreme just around the Corner...even better.

I say shoot the show on a new Camera system, Red.
Buy a new edit system! Like Apple say's " it's a Final Cut World!"

Ok, maybe easier said than done.

[Tom Lowe]

Adobe Premiere support is what's needed, my friends!

[Kevin Halverson]

Support is needed for all of the major NLE platforms; Adobe, Apple and Avid. Lets hope that RedCine and the Windows version of the Red Quick Time Plugin is just around the corner!

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Why Does a show like 24 need Avid? Final Cut 6.whatever.. is great!! and with FC Extreme just around the Corner...even better.

FC Extreme? You mean the magical product that was invented by the same geniuses who claimed RED would be $250,000? The same product that has already been confirmed to not exist?

...Sorry, just had to ask.

Anyway, I have to agree though. Final Cut rocks. I'm digging Premiere CS3 as well. Avid has its nifty features too and is an established platform that many have standardized on. Sometimes it's not so simple to just say "dump your current solution and switch to product-B".

[Dalibor Fencl]

Support is needed for all of the major NLE platforms; Adobe, Apple and Avid. ....

I wouldn't talk about Adobe but CineForm in this case.

[Kevin Halverson]

I wouldn't talk about Adobe but CineForm in this case.
CineForm is not an NLE, its a codec and enhancement to NLEs like Premiere.

While many may agree that it is a desirable piece of software, it is not essential for those that wish to use the Adobe suite of applications with RED originated material.

[BASSAM MSSALATIE]

I have to agree though. Final Cut rocks. I'm digging Premiere CS3 as well. Avid has its nifty features too and is an established platform that many have standardized on. Sometimes it's not so simple to just say "dump your current solution and switch to product-B".

THEY ALL WORK fine..i think its not a matter of what software we use
Its all about Editor .in my opinion all editing softwares will do the same result
which is cutting pictures together but all depends on (golden eye artistic editor)

[David Newman]

CineForm is not an NLE, its a codec and enhancement to NLEs like Premiere.

While many may agree that it is a desirable piece of software, it is not essential for those that wish to use the Adobe suite of applications with RED originated material.

We intend to make CineForm an compelling option for Red users, particularly under Premiere Pro.

[Kevin Halverson]

We intend to make CineForm an compelling option for Red users, particularly under Premiere Pro.


Hello David,

I have no doubt that you will accomplish your goal. I for one look forward to seeing what you come up with. The reason for my post was to clarify the relationship between the various products, it was not intended to diminish the contribution that CineForm will offer to a RED / Adobe solution.

Kevin

[RivaiC]

So that would means Cineform will not touch FCP then ?

[David Newman]

Who said that? We have FCP support now.

[RivaiC]

We intend to make CineForm an compelling option for Red users, particularly under Premiere Pro.

I'm just reacting based on your quote. But will Cineform for FCP support 4K ? Or it's still limited to 2K

[Daniel Gourley]

I'm just reacting based on your quote. But will Cineform for FCP support 4K ? Or it's still limited to 2K

I still don't understand why someone would want to transcode their footage...anyone?

[John Tissavary]

I still don't understand why someone would want to transcode their footage...anyone?

One reason is 2k realtime playback / ability to edit w/o offline/conform workflow. For short form material this is an attractive option, for sure. And I say that from personal experience working both ways.

Redcode playback in FCP is really not there yet, and I can play back 2k in realtime w/o any problems in Premiere Pro with Cineform. We're talking 4:4:4 here, and there's plenty of data there to do color, vfx, etc...

I'm sure Redcode playback in FCP will get better, but for now it's definitely sluggish.

cheers,

jt

[dino g]

Over the course of the last 2 months we have had the pleasure of working with our RED #0031 camera and with several other red cameras on some high budget projects, with big names and with some of the biggest post houses.

one thing is certain, at the highest rung of the content creation food chain, AVID is king. (period) AVID is in control of most every major post house/facility and the AVID systems cut most every piece of content you see on TV and in the movie theatres.

i am not saying everything, but i am just saying that at the very top top of the content creation vertical, it is all AVID, ALL the time. there may be "A" MAC at these post houses/production companies, but for the most part they are older g5's and they are stuck in a closet somewhere for "that one guy" to use.

BUT, we (current and future RED owners & users), represent the future. just like 20 years ago people were struggling with the concept of a NLE system, the AVID crowd considers FCP to be a toy that their sons use to cut skate videos. so continue to evangelize, it will eventually sink in and one would hope that FCP will continue to evolve as well.

I agree with most that think it is a good idea for redcode to be ported to AVID, but still that will not make believers of the embedded masses. moreover, many many many of the installed base of AVID in LA are old systems based on OS 9; "a much more stable platform" according to many award winning editors and post houses/production companies. so even if redcode is ported it doesn't mean that the pre-2002 systems will even work with it. the AVID folks do not upgrade every 18 months like the FCP group, they find something that works and stick with it...listen to dial tone...same thing.

on the flip side, remember FCP only 3 or so years ago was $1k and it worked great on what ever version of mac you had...now if you really want to be an fcp person, you must buy studio 2, and have an 8 core with 16 gigs of ram and a video card and this and that and 15k later you have a system that works in real time with 2k material. even though that 15k is still way cheaper than a 100k AVID seat (which is what it was when FCP was launched in 99), it is still getting pricey to use FCP in comparison to when it was conceived.

my point of all of this is; be cautious when you bash AVID because most of the editors that make a living (100k plus a year) editing content, do so on an AVID. and they need a real good reason to change and more importantly, so do the companies that they work for...

RED IS THE REASON!!!!

so dump that AVID and buy a FCP seat and pull off the rear view mirror and get ready for a fun ride....

[Blue]

Thanks

[GlennChan]

one thing is certain, at the highest rung of the content creation food chain, AVID is king.
Kosmos... is that in regards to offline editing, online editing, or both?

In my area (Toronto Canada):
For online editing, Avid has some strong competition from iQ, Mistika, Flame, Smoke, etc. etc.

For offline, I've seen mostly Avid with some FCP in the mix. One production has both platforms for offline (though they'd probably prefer to be on a single platform/FCP).

I'm not really seeing Avid dominating all areas of editorial.

2- I haven't played with Avid much myself so I don't know their products too well. But it seems like part of the reason people still use Avids is due to inertia... you can hang on to your existing Avid and you don't have to learn a new system. And if your system ain't broke, then there's no reason to fix it. The other aspect is that if you want good *experienced* talent, then chances are they are most comfortable with Avid.

3- I'm not sure if Avid has a compelling advantage over competing products anymore.

[dino g]

i agree, but but but, as bruce hornsby says, that;s just the way it is"...here in LA anyway...offline and online

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I still don't understand why someone would want to transcode their footage...anyone?

Cineform has had years to develop an extremely efficient codec. REDCode hasn't proven itself (or fairly enough disproven itself) to be of the same caliber as far as quality and performance yet.

If your NLE/Compositing Application/Grading Software can only render 1 redcode stream vs 3 Cineform streams there would be a pursuasive argument to purchase a seat of cineform for editing.

Testing of REDCode inside of popular post applications hasn't even really begun in earnest yet so there is a lot of crashing and failure yet to be discovered before the kinks are worked out. Cineform has been crashing and failing for years so there should be less suprises at this point;).

Mostly transcoding is a way to get RED footage into an existing pipeline. Most (and by most I mean pretty much the whole planet except for the RED Ninjas, offhollywood and the other first 100 camera owners) shoot mostly with other cameras and as a result have a workflow that has been polished and refined from software to hardware to procedure. REDCode does not work with these pipelines so transcoding fits a square peg into a round hole.

Oh yeah.. and some of us don't even come within 10 feet of a Mac most weeks. Extremely problematic right now in working with REDcode Footage.

[Greg M]

As the owner of a post facility I agree with Kosmos, Avids are far more common in our industry...and frankly there are many reasons. Avid editorial systems are superior to FC (we have both) and despite the fact that alot of the younger talent only knows FC, the majority of the top editors are Avid based.

...no need to "pull off the rear view mirror" Red will be integrated with Avid sooner than later.

[Anthony Gratl]

In my area (Toronto Canada):
For online editing, Avid has some strong competition from iQ, Mistika, Flame, Smoke, etc. etc.
Glenn, sorry I have to disagree with you here. Not sure where you do your onlining, but every major house in the city has Avid in their editbays. Strong competition? Don't think so man. Flame and smoke for finishing commercials, but for the rest of broadcast work, it's not even close.


For offline, I've seen mostly Avid with some FCP in the mix. One production has both platforms for offline (though they'd probably prefer to be on a single platform/FCP).
I'm not really seeing Avid dominating all areas of editorial.

Not sure what you mean by "all areas" of editorial? I thought this was about editing, which is mostly an off-line/online exercise.


I haven't played with Avid much myself so I don't know their products too well. But it seems like part of the reason people still use Avids is due to inertia... you can hang on to your existing Avid and you don't have to learn a new system. And if your system ain't broke, then there's no reason to fix it. The other aspect is that if you want good *experienced* talent, then chances are they are most comfortable with Avid.


People aren't using avids due to inertia, although if it ain't broke don't fix it rings true. Speaking as someone whose been in post for a long time, and for a while switched to FCP, and then back I can say that Avid is much more fluid and intuitive than FCP. So it's not a laziness thing, it's a process thing.
Or maybe I'm lazy 'cause I didn't stick it out long enough on the fcp. To all those people saying get on the final cut, I'm not feelin' it. And so far, there's no compelling reason too. Red ain't it. Sorry.

[Kevin Halverson]

As the owner of a post facility I agree with Kosmos, Avids are far more common in our industry...and frankly there are many reasons. Avid editorial systems are superior to FC (we have both) and despite the fact that alot of the younger talent only knows FC, the majority of the top editors are Avid based.

...no need to "pull off the rear view mirror" Red will be integrated with Avid sooner than later.

Gotta agree here. Avid is known and used by those that make their living as editors. FCP and Adobe seem to be used by those that are more DIY/hobbist level. If I were an editor, I would want to have as broad of experience base as possible and limiting ones self to FCP (or any single NLE platform) seems to be a poor career choice.

[Graeme Nattress]

Both Avids and FCP are used by pros and amatuers alike.

We're not limiting ourselves to a single platform, just ironing out the kinks in the platform we personally understand the best, first.

Graeme

[RivaiC]

Walter Murch is pro and editing Cold Mountain with FCP.

Please don't specify which software meant for which group :) It's not appropriate. AVID is more rock solid and stable as compare to FCP that i agree. And Adobe is used in high level productions too.

[Greg M]

I dont think anyone has implied that FC is not used by pros...it is. We use it everyday. The point is that Avid has a far larger user base, and is used on more high-end projects than FC. But absolutely, they are both professional tools.

[RivaiC]

---
FCP and Adobe seem to be used by those that are more DIY/hobbist level.
---

Of course i agree with you digitalfx. Avid has a large user based and more rock solid.

[GlennChan]

Not sure what you mean by "all areas" of editorial? I thought this was about editing, which is mostly an off-line/online exercise.
Offline and online editing are different beasts.


Not sure where you do your onlining, but every major house in the city has Avid in their editbays.
For online, Optix is all Mistika(3)+Jaleo last time I checked. They don't have an Avid for online anymore. For offline they have an Xpress (and 2 seats of Final Cut).
Creative Post has 2 Quantel iQs. I'm not sure what they have on the Avid front.

The speed and feature sets (e.g. some compositing tools, paint, etc.) of those two programs is pretty nice. Though I haven't really seen the equivalent Avid systems in action.

[Greg M]

They don't have an Avid for online anymore.
Well of course they do... Avid DS and Avid Symphony

EDIT- looks like I misread your post, are you speaking about a facility or in general?

[GlennChan]

Digitalfx, I meant the facility does not own a Avid for that purpose anymore. (Sorry, my post was ambiguous.)

[Anthony Gratl]

Offline and online editing are different beasts.

I disagree.....its a workflow of one type of beast. First you offline a project, then you online it.


For online, Optix is all Mistika(3)+Jaleo last time I checked. They don't have an Avid for online anymore. For offline they have an Xpress (and 2 seats of Final Cut).
Creative Post has 2 Quantel iQs. I'm not sure what they have on the Avid front.

The speed and feature sets (e.g. some compositing tools, paint, etc.) of those two programs is pretty nice. Though I haven't really seen the equivalent Avid systems in action.
I forgot about optix.....they're mostly commercials though no? Same with creative post as I remember (haven't been in either shop in ages)
Speed of Jaleo and Quantel has always been impressive. Their price tag was also pretty reasonable (i trained on a jaleo for awhile) compared to Discreet stuff. Equivalent would be Avid DS which I got my paws on for awhile, in a news production house actually.... and it was fast.

Anyway, my point as contrarian was only to say that most shops in Toronto are still offlining and then onlining on Avids. Which is to say long form narrative and doc stuff.

[GlennChan]

I disagree.....its a workflow of one type of beast. First you offline a project, then you online it.
My point is that you don't use the same product/editing system for offline and online. These are two different markets and there are different products targeted at those markets. e.g. Xpress / Media Composer for offline, DS / Symphony for online. iQ, Mistika, etc. are not systems you'd use for offline.
(Ok some facilities do offline/online on the same system. But that is for lower-end work.)

2- Optix does commercials and TV series (and docs and music videos). Some of the TV series were Big Big World, Wilbur, Meteor, Knocked Up, I Do Let's Eat, Harry and his Bucketfull of Dinosaurs, etc. etc. Lots of kids shows. Some of the offlines that are coming in are from FCP.

Creative Post I'm not sure about... I think they are doing commercials + longform work too.

2b- The Germany-based side of Optix mostly does commercials, and they have a lot of Discreet kit. Which is kind of weird, since Discreet is based out of Canada and SGO (which makes Jaleo+Mistika) is based in Europe/Spain.


Anyway, my point as contrarian was only to say that most shops in Toronto are still offlining and then onlining on Avids.
That's probably true and I'd agree with you there.