ENG does not belonge here

[Bruno Solaja]

RED 1 Was not the tool for this job... Cinema grade camera
EPIC is a way off... Cinema grade camera
SCARLET ( EPIC s ) ... Cinema grade camera

RED stated that they are a cinema grade company...

So, what do you think ?

[Bruno Solaja]

Remember this ?


"Proxy Module... – 04-10-2010, 11:53 AM

RED is increasing the workflow flexibility on Epic and Scarlet with Proxy Modules… the first of which is an H.264 Module.
This module encodes a 1080P stream (high quality scale from full frame) and records to Compact Flash in a rear module. The module also offers secure password protected streaming over dedicated WiFi and ethernet to iPhones, iPads, laptops as well as broadcast to the internet.

This will be beneficial for on set viewing, instant dailies, offline editing, easy file transfer to remote locations, dailies review and collaboration services with such companies as Pix, or live broadcasting for realtime media distribution.

The modules will also support full metadata and XML for editorial.

Availability will be September 2010 and the price will be $2500.

Jim"

[David Battistella]

Yes.

It's true.

News organizations did not flock toward buying RED cameras. I've always seen it as a replacement for 35mm film never for Electronic News Gathering.

I'm happy about that. Plenty of cheap video cameras are made for news gathering including the iPhone 4.

David

[PatrickW]

In terms of video work, its not great for news. But if your a photojournalist, it is amazing.

A camera is a tool. DSCM is a very versatile tool, but its not a do everything tool.

[David Mullen ASC]

Steve Gibby has eloquently expressed the place of Red cameras in the ENG/EFP market, and there is a place for such a camera, and even more so with the DSCM concept. Sure, I don't see the nightly news shooting on a 4K RAW camera, but other than that, there is a WIDE variety of projects that fall under the ENG/EFP and documentary label that can use a higher-quality image and 35mm optics and don't need to turnaround an HD image immediately for delivery, nor stream live HD for hours straight. A "Planet Earth" type series is an obvious example. And many ENG/EFP projects have a mix of material in them, from talking heads to landscape shots or beautiful product shots.

[Johnny Friday]

I think for the most part you are correct. HOWEVER, in some and a variety of situations....it can and i do use it as ENG style camera for doc work and when shot well results are extraordinary. Additionally.....to add to your point...it is not a run and gun camera as i've found since 2007.....under a variety of situations. WOULD LOVE to have seen Scarlet fill that gap with small sensor and push auto focus one touch....but keep manual most of time....small sensor; fixed lens....YEP, not for cinema, but GREAT for nature/doc work where all or most work is sent out 1080p and where RAW just plain RULES.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Problem is that you guys are seen the ENG/EFP as news cameras type only, were in truth it represent such a much wider range of users projects, and I have seen the R1 and now the Epic M,
and I'm more then sure will see plenty of Scarlet cameras too... ;)

The DSMC represent a much better camera system then the ones so far used, less cumbersome, more options, moire configurable to meet the user needs, and so on,
more importantly they can become smaller and lighter when needed!!

[Rob Gardner]

Well, Gibby not withstanding, what is happening is the non-fiction film and television world is on a budget slide downhill, which means more and more demand for one-man crews and fast delivery and smaller and smaller per-hour budgets. Production value is less and less important. Red is really about production values and image quality, meaning higher end work—specials and personal projects where time can be taken and a reasonable crew can be budgeted.

The truth is that you are not seeing a lot of high production values on cable television reality shows or documentaries.

Carefully set up, I think the Epic could be a pretty good personal camera for run and gun, but not ideal. And with these budgets there is a point of diminishing returns using a camera like this under these conditions.

[Stuart English]

Steve Gibby has eloquently expressed the place of Red cameras in the ENG/EFP market, and there is a place for such a camera, and even more so with the DSCM concept. Sure, I don't see the nightly news shooting on a 4K RAW camera, but other than that, there is a WIDE variety of projects that fall under the ENG/EFP and documentary label that can use a higher-quality image and 35mm optics and don't need to turnaround an HD image immediately for delivery, nor stream live HD for hours straight. A "Planet Earth" type series is an obvious example. And many ENG/EFP projects have a mix of material in them, from talking heads to landscape shots or beautiful product shots.

Agreed. I'd just suggest we delete "ENG - Electronic News Gathering" and constrain our discussions to "EFP - Electronic Field Production"; we are NOT an MPEG-2 LONG GOP / DV compression based news camera and we never will be. However all of the applications David lists here and Gibby has pointed out previously are perfectly valid use cases for either camera.

[David Battistella]

Stuart.

This is why I suggested ENG and excluded EFP. There's lots of EFP applications for red cameras.

But news gathering is in iPhone land now.

David

[Philippe Van Horebeek]

Stuart.


"news gathering is in iPhone land now."

David


I like that ! That is absolutely right and well said. ENG is all about news value and no production value, due to more and more tight budgets (like Rob said) and the changing (iphone, ....) world. When it is not used for cinematic projects, Red can only show its true value in the EFP world.

[Philip Powell]

To me, the distinction between ENG and EFP, has always been a bit silly. ENG is EFP. EFP can potentially BE ENG. (i.e production done for news.) Mostly these terms came about to help describe whatever was not film more than anything else. I think back in the day, these terms were a way for textbooks to help catagorize the three main styles of production at that point in time, Film, News (ENG), and everything else that wasn't those (EFP). A very tiny slice of the production pie back then. In my mind, the terms EFP/ENG doesn't really fit well anymore. (Especially the word electronic as it kind of implies analog) Things have changed a lot since 1978. But back to the topic, personally I can't ever see Red cameras being used for news, but EFP, sure depending on the project.

[Rob Gardner]

I think Stuart and David are missing a point here. Of course you can use these cameras in a documentary situation (meaning smaller or nonexistent crews and non-cine lenses). But for the great majority of non-fiction cable-fodder that is being made, there is no reason to. If you have a personal project in which you can spend the time and the quality of the image is very important to you, then this is a great camera. If you are doing documentaries for theatrical release or high-end documentary specials, with significant budgets, where production quality and image quality is very important, then it is a great camera.

If you are a one man band in tough production circumstances, or if you are just grinding out footage for low-end productions on the cable systems for a low budget, then I don't see any advantage to a Red system and in fact I think in many cases it would be a burden.

With all due respect to David, he doesn't make non-fiction films. It seems to me that Red made an important decision when they created the Scarlet with the price-point and features that they did, a parting of the ways, if you will. This is a professional camera. If you want to shoot run and gun low budget films with it, God bless you, but there are easier and cheaper ways to do that. That's all I'm saying. And I agree that the EFP/ENG term is really dated and actually has no meaning any more. Hard news is showing up shot on iphones after all (perhaps not by choice but there it is) and the ability to shoot anything in the field electronically has been the situation for a long time.

I love Red cameras and we own two of them, but they require special treatment (and introduce limitations) fi you are going to use them on the cheap.

[Steve Gibby]

Thank you David, Stuart, Rob, and other experienced industry veterans on his thread for your comments...

At the top of this forum there has been a sticky I wrote way back in 2007 explaining the difference between EFP (electronic field production) and ENG (electronic news gathering), and defining the strengths and weaknesses of Red One for each of those types of production. In that sticky and ever since I've emphasized that Red One wasn't a good choice for ENG - primarily because of time pressure in the field, and the quick turnaround nature of news work. Sure, the terms EFP and ENG are dated, but then again isn't the term "film" also dated even worse? Tons of people on Red User continually say they're going "film" something with Red One and Epic - but they just use that anachronistic term because it has had such a common and descriptive use in the motion media industry. For the same reason the terms EFP and ENG will continue to be used - but as with the anachronism of using "Film" to describe a shooting style, EFP and ENG also now describe shooting styles and equipment setups rather than their original meaning to describe separate industries.

Its really surprising how many people in the motion media industry, particularly those who haven't worked in the EFP and ENG industries, that erroneously lump all no-cine production into the catch all moniker of "ENG". EFP styles of shooting and ENG shooting have historically shared many equipment and camera setup commonality - but with its longer turnaround times for programs, and generally longer time and care put into image acquisition and editing, EFP work is very different than news gathering.

Lets talk about Red One. The camera obviously was designed to be a modular digital cinema camera - but it also has EFP industry features (zebras, RS422, support for EFP/ENG zoom lens servos, etc.). Why are features like that included in Red One? Because as Red has said from the beginning - including Jim Jannard, Stuart English, etc. - Red One was secondarily designed to be used for mobile EFP style work - and thousands of EFP professionals (myself included) have done just that since 2007 - used Red One for mobile EFP work.

Is Red One ideal for mobile EFP work? Yes and no. If someone knows what they're doing, realizes that mobility requires minimizing weight, and thinks their way through their camera setups, yes, Red One can be excellent for mobile EFP work. For me, even though I tested out 2/3" EFP/ENG zooms on R1 clear back in 2007, for resolution, weight, and image purposes I settled on using a range of Nikon (and one Canon) 35mm still lenses on R1 - exposing quickly via zebra (and histogram) and eye focusing quickly by operator using image magnification. For lack of a better term I labeled that approach "mobile hybrid EFP" = the hybrid meaning the use of 35mm still lenses, some cine style techniques, and many traditional EFP style techniques. Horses for courses...

The list of mobile hybrid EFP style genres of production Red One (and now Epic) have been used for is exhaustive - documentaries of various kinds, alternative sports, adventure travel, food, cultures, home improvement, wildlife, outdoor, nature, music, corporate - IE a huge range of cable network television programs.

So what about Epic? Being smaller, with a wide variety of frame rate capabilities, and having multiple EFP-friendly features (zebras, various outputs, Genlock, etc.) Epic is IMO a significantly more capable EFP camera than Red One. Again, mobile hybrid EFP users of Epic are opting for lightweight setups, Canon lenses (and Nikon when the mount is available), mostly no matte boxes (screw on filters or clip on MB), using image magnification to eye focus by operator, and exposing quickly using zebras and histogram.

So what about Scarlet X? I'm still analyzing the specs and haven't used one, but from the specs I'd say Scarlet X may be a reasonably good mobile hybrid EFP style camera - unless you shoot in EFP genres which frequently need higher frame rates (sports, wildlife, etc.). But for documentary work setup with Canon or Nikon lenses, a small on-camera light, a short shotgun, and a dual wireless receiver on a L-bracket, Scarlet X could be a good choice - depending of course on the experience and skill sets of the user.

What about the 2/3", 3k raw shooting, high frame rate, fixed 8x Scarlet that was canceled? IMO it would have been far and away the most mobile EFP capable camera from Red. For the work I do, which by choice is about 85% mobile EFP work, the Scarlet Fixed would have been used extensively by myself, my crews, and thousands of other mobile EFP professionals. I completely understand Red's strategy in creating Scarlet X to compete in the mid-cost s35 cine style industry. That said, I'm quite unhappy that Red didn't simply choose to stratify their products by offering Scarlet X AND Fixed Scarlet. In my opinion Red could sell 100,000+ Fixed Scarlet in the short term.

End note: I've found my friend David Mullen to have a vast amount of technical and creative knowledge in both the cine-style industry and even in the EFP style industry. My friend Stuart likewise, with the added bonus for this forum and thread that before coming to Red he had a distinguished career with Panasonic developing lines of EFP cameras, including the Varicam. Rob Gardner has a long and solid background in field production. Each of these guys has very experienced opinions as a veteran - and I do to.

In the end the terms EFP and ENG won't be disappearing, just as the term film hasn't. Those terms are part of the overall fabric of the comprehensive motion media history. The bottom line for each motion media professional (or aspiring pro) is to closely analyze what genres and styles of production your passion lies in - then to pick the field production equipment that satisfies your particular needs. There are no perfect camera systems out here - but there are camera systems which can be adapted widely for many genres and styles of production - and among them are the cameras that Red offers.

[Emanuel A.]

I completely understand Red's strategy in creating Scarlet X to compete in the mid-cost s35 cine style industry. That said, I'm quite unhappy that Red didn't simply choose to stratify their products by offering Scarlet X AND Fixed Scarlet. In my opinion Red could sell 100,000+ Fixed Scarlet in the short term.And it will sell in the due time, Steve. First, it is necessary to sell the S35 offer to the crowds. Same DSLR clientele who will probably buy a more affordable 2/3" later for certain kind of work, not for everyone. But don't quote me on that please (E :-)

[Luc Bouvrette]

Thank you David, Stuart, Rob, and other experienced industry veterans on his thread for your comments...

At the top of this forum there has been a sticky I wrote way back in 2007 explaining the difference between EFP (electronic field production) and ENG (electronic news gathering), and defining the strengths and weaknesses of Red One for each of those types of production. In that sticky and ever since I've emphasized that Red One wasn't a good choice for ENG - primarily because of time pressure in the field, and the quick turnaround nature of news work. Sure, the terms EFP and ENG are dated, but then again isn't the term "film" also dated even worse? Tons of people on Red User continually say they're going "film" something with Red One and Epic - but they just use that anachronistic term because it has had such a common and descriptive use in the motion media industry. For the same reason the terms EFP and ENG will continue to be used - but as with the anachronism of using "Film" to describe a shooting style, EFP and ENG also now describe shooting styles and equipment setups rather than their original meaning to describe separate industries.

Its really surprising how many people in the motion media industry, particularly those who haven't worked in the EFP and ENG industries, that erroneously lump all no-cine production into the catch all moniker of "ENG". EFP styles of shooting and ENG shooting have historically shared many equipment and camera setup commonality - but with its longer turnaround times for programs, and generally longer time and care put into image acquisition and editing, EFP work is very different than news gathering.

Lets talk about Red One. The camera obviously was designed to be a modular digital cinema camera - but it also EFP industry features (zebras, RS422, support for EFP/ENG zoom lens servos, etc.). Why are features like that included in Red One? Because as Red has said from the beginning - including Jim Jannard, Stuart English, etc. - Red One was secondarily designed to be used for mobile EFP style work - and thousands of EFP professionals (myself included) have done just that since 2007 - used Red One for mobile EFP work.

Is Red One ideal for mobile EFP work? Yes and no. If someone knows what they're doing, realizes that mobility requires minimizing weight, and thinks their way through their camera setups, yes, Red One can be excellent for mobile EFP work. For me, even though I tested out 2/3" EFP/ENG zooms on R1 clear back in 2007, for resolution, weight, and image purposes I settled on using a range of Nikon (and one Canon) 35mm still lenses on R1 - exposing quickly via zebra (and histogram) and eye focusing quickly by operator using image magnification. For lack of a better term I labeled that approach "mobile EFP" the hybrid meaning the use of 35mm still lenses, some cine style techniques, and many traditional EFP style techniques. Horses for courses...

The list of mobile hybrid EFP style genres of production Red One (and now Epic) have been used for is exhaustive - documentaries of various kinds, alternative sports, adventure travel, food, cultures, home improvement, wildlife, outdoor, nature, music, corporate - IE a huge range of cable network television programs.

So what about Epic? Being smaller, with a wide variety of frame rate capabilities, and having multiple EFP-friendly features (zebras, various outputs, Genlock, etc.) Epic is IMO a significantly more capable EFP camera than Red One. Again, mobile hybrid EFP users of Epic are opting for lightweight setups, Canon lenses (and Nikon when the mount is available), mostly no matte boxes (screw on filters or clip on MB), using image magnification to eye focus by operator, and exposing quickly using zebras and histogram.

So what about Scarlet X? I'm still analyzing the specs and haven't used one, but from the specs I'd say Scarlet X may be a reasonably good mobile hybrid EFP style camera - unless you shoot in EFP genres which frequently need higher frame rates (sports, wildlife, etc.). But for documentary work setup with Canon or Nikon lenses, a small on-camera light, a short shotgun, and a dual wireless receiver on a L-bracket, Scarlet X could be a good choice - depending of course on the experience and skill sets of the user.

What about the 2/3", 3k raw shooting, high frame rate, fixed 8x Scarlet that was canceled? IMO it would have been far and away the most mobile EFP capable camera from Red. For the work I do, which by choice is about 85% mobile EFP work, the Scarlet Fixed would have been used extensively by myself, my crews, and thousands of other mobile EFP professionals. I completely understand Red's strategy in creating Scarlet X to compete in the mid-cost s35 cine style industry. That said, I'm quite unhappy that Red didn't simply choose to stratify their products by offering Scarlet X AND Fixed Scarlet. In my opinion Red could sell 100,000+ Fixed Scarlet in the short term.

End note: I've found my friend David Mullen to have a vast amount of technical and creative knowledge in both the cine-style industry and even in the EFP style industry. My friend Stuart likewise, with the added bonus for this forum and thread that before coming to Red he had a distinguished career with Panasonic developing lines of EFP cameras, including the Varicam. Rob Gardner has a long and solid background in field production. Each of these guys has very experienced opinions as a veteran - and I do to.

In the end the terms EFP and ENG won't be disappearing, just as the term film hasn't. Those terms are part of the overall fabric of the comprehensive motion media history. the bottom line for each motion media professional (or aspiring pro) is to closely analyze what genres and styles of production your passion lies in - then to pick the field production equipment that satisfies your particular needs. There are no perfect camera systems out here - but there are camera systems which can be adapted widely for many genres and styles of production - and among them are the cameras that Red offers.

Thanks for sharing your knowledge and wisdom, Steve. Much appreciated.

[Peter Chang]

What about the 2/3", 3k raw shooting, high frame rate, fixed 8x Scarlet that was canceled? IMO it would have been far and away the most mobile EFP capable camera from Red. For the work I do, which by choice is about 85% mobile EFP work, the Scarlet Fixed would have been used extensively by myself, my crews, and thousands of other mobile EFP professionals. I completely understand Red's strategy in creating Scarlet X to compete in the mid-cost s35 cine style industry. That said, I'm quite unhappy that Red didn't simply choose to stratify their products by offering Scarlet X AND Fixed Scarlet. In my opinion Red could sell 100,000+ Fixed Scarlet in the short term.

Great post, Steve! Long live Scarlet Fixed! :biggrin5:

[Hrvoje Simic]

+1

ENG has no place here. EFP does.

[Gunleik Groven]

Thanks Steve for making some sensible comments about the fixed 2/3"

I am not disappointed with the Scarlet-X, but i wanted the 2/3" for all that is different from Epic, not what is similar.

RED will probably never release a sub 4k cam now. Even though I see Scarlet-x as just that for many applications.

But resolution osn't all for all situations, even though it's kinda pretty important when doing landscapes and cityscapes in cinemas... :)
The popularity of te 5D is much from closeups and shallow DOF in traditional FF, a situation where you don't notice the underfed pixeldensity as much, but your eye is drawn to other aspects of the image.

And the Scarlet 2/3" fixed had te attraction of the inverse 5D. The antidote to that camera.
Lots of resolution and framerates.
Relatively small and lightweight.
Easy and relatively affordable to mounnt n high-risk situations.
Newsfriendly (actually, I think so for interviews etc in a more general way than the R1/Epic...)
Holidayfriendly... :)
Shooting RED RAW

That were my main reasons for desiring it.
NOT resolution or pinultimate glass. Rather the oposite, in many ways.

I post this here, instead of in any of the many Scarlet - bashing threads, because I don't see any reason to bash it. It in the middle of the F3/Canon cinema & DSLR/Alexa debacle and it will bite well ad furiously in that segment methinks.
But I already have two cams in that segment...

Cheers

G

[Liam Hall]

I think we should rename this section "documentary". It could then be a place to discuss both the technical and practical aspects of all types of field production where you carry your kit.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

While "ENG" is not a great fit for the RED cameras, they are excellent for many EFP tasks. I would say that half or better of what I shoot falls into the realm of EFP. As noahvolek pointed out earlier in this thread, these cameras are amazing for photojournalistic work -- EPIC absolutely shines here. The EPIC is awesome for many documentary style tasks.

The 2/3" fixed Scarlet held a lot of promise as an ENG tool... Alas, it's no more.

[Michael Brennan]

In my UK/Oz perspective, ENG can be regarded as a subtype of EFP.
Other subtypes for EFP are doc, docu drama, magazine, current affairs and reality.
So we could delete it from the heading but continue to include it and all the other subtypes in discussions.
Or you could add "docs" to the heading to spread the butter a little more evenly.


Again from UK/oz perspective the terms "Hardlined" and "Non hardlined" are esoteric.
In Uk/Oz the long established terms of "Outside broadcast" and "EFP" adequately describe the key points of difference between truck based productions and autonomous, mobile units.
However language is evolving, a producer asked me recently to shoot with "full focus" :)


Mike Brennan

[Michael Brennan]

I think Stuart and David are missing a point here. Of course you can use these cameras in a documentary situation (meaning smaller or nonexistent crews and non-cine lenses). But for the great majority of non-fiction cable-fodder that is being made, there is no reason to. If you have a personal project in which you can spend the time and the quality of the image is very important to you, then this is a great camera. If you are doing documentaries for theatrical release or high-end documentary specials, with significant budgets, where production quality and image quality is very important, then it is a great camera.

If you are a one man band in tough production circumstances, or if you are just grinding out footage for low-end productions on the cable systems for a low budget, then I don't see any advantage to a Red system and in fact I think in many cases it would be a burden.

With all due respect to David, he doesn't make non-fiction films. It seems to me that Red made an important decision when they created the Scarlet with the price-point and features that they did, a parting of the ways, if you will. This is a professional camera. If you want to shoot run and gun low budget films with it, God bless you, but there are easier and cheaper ways to do that. That's all I'm saying. And I agree that the EFP/ENG term is really dated and actually has no meaning any more. Hard news is showing up shot on iphones after all (perhaps not by choice but there it is) and the ability to shoot anything in the field electronically has been the situation for a long time.

I love Red cameras and we own two of them, but they require special treatment (and introduce limitations) fi you are going to use them on the cheap.
+1
There are exceptions but craft is less appreciated in docs these days. As with using number of setups a day in drama, "shot gathering" is the measure of efficiency in docs and a short zoom compared to a 2/3 inch with 11x and availability of a lightweight 22x are serious drawbacks to shot gathering. But I'd include the current Scarlet in the kit for narrow DoF interviews if production can cope with mixed formats.
Scarlet with 2/3 inch or 1 inch +3k sensor with 120fps, good audio, viewfinder, replay ect would have made a worthy doc camera, but now others are rolling out 120fps (Sony HDC 2500 does 12bit output and 120fps @720p) so no doubt it will be available for other cameras eventually.



mike brennan

[Jack Cooper]

RED 1 Was not the tool for this job... Cinema grade camera
EPIC is a way off... Cinema grade camera
SCARLET ( EPIC s ) ... Cinema grade camera

RED stated that they are a cinema grade company...

So, what do you think ?

Bruno.

In pondering your question, I thought "what would we be taking away...?" The spirit of this board has always been "inclusion" as opposed to "exclusion". As such, I have learned alot about various topics from Gibby's experience and his willingness to share with the community.

Had your point-of-view been previously executed, myself, and possibly many others, would not have this wisdom.

Semantics of acronyms aside, one of the only reasons I come to this forum is to learn from the experience of others, literally around the world.

As such, as long as topics are fairly well organized, I support even a greater range of coverage areas. For one, our firm shoots HD AND RED, even though the networks barely require an HDV post-production format for our shows. Thanks to Gibby and the other 1000s of posters who give to the community. We value this exchange.

[Freya]

Steve Gibby has eloquently expressed the place of Red cameras in the ENG/EFP market, and there is a place for such a camera, and even more so with the DSCM concept. Sure, I don't see the nightly news shooting on a 4K RAW camera, but other than that, there is a WIDE variety of projects that fall under the ENG/EFP and documentary label that can use a higher-quality image and 35mm optics and don't need to turnaround an HD image immediately for delivery, nor stream live HD for hours straight. A "Planet Earth" type series is an obvious example. And many ENG/EFP projects have a mix of material in them, from talking heads to landscape shots or beautiful product shots.

Wow, my mouth fell open with severe cultural shock!

Here in the UK we would never consider documentaries like Planet Earth to be anything like ENG!
It's a massively seperate thing!

We have news, which is very different to documentary which is again considered very different to Reality TV.
These are all considered totally apart.

Live/Event broadcasting would be the one considered to closest fit into the ENG area.

To refer to David Attenborough in the same breath as ENG type stuff, especially to throw it in with the news, would be considered massively insulting and kinda disrespectful. I'm personally not bothered by it myself beyond the shock of it! However I'd never say something like that as it would be considered quite rude!

Stuff like planet earth is held in VERY high esteem! Reality TV quite the opposite although even that would be thought of apart from ENG.

I couldn't believe at first that you meant the same planet earth but then reading the thread more I realised you must do!
It would be a hugely contentius idea over here!

The BBC specs have all sorts of exclusions for stuff like varicams because the nature teams felt they needed them. Thats the kind of weight they carry. Even high end drama doesn't get that kind of deferance.

love

Freya

[Freya]

I think we should rename this section "documentary". It could then be a place to discuss both the technical and practical aspects of all types of field production where you carry your kit.

er Yeah! I know what you mean!!!

Wow!

love

Freya

[Steve Gibby]

Freya,

I'm sure you simply misunderstood David's comments. ENG (electronic news gathering) was not what he was lumping Planet Earth into. His reference to "EFP and documentary" just before he mentioned Planet Earth is the obvious category he placed the series in - and rightly so, because Planet Earth was shot in a mobile EFP style, using primarily EFP camera systems, and was a natural world documentary - mobile EFP (electronic field production) is exactly what was done on Planet Earth. I assure you Dave knows perfectly the difference between ENG and EFP, and also knows (like he expressed) that Red cameras have been, and will continue to be used widely for EFP work.

But all EFP work is not shot in a documentary style. Tons of non-documentary productions using EFP equipment (with no MB or FF), and shot using traditional EFP techniques (eye focus, zebras, etc.) are shot worldwide each year.

On this thread myself, Dave Mullen, Stuart English, David Batistella, Jeff Kilgroe, and others have emphasized that Red cameras are not well suited for ENG (electronic news gathering), but depending on how they're accessorized, and the skills of the operator Red cameras can make very good mobile EFP (electronic field production) cameras.

Some in this industry are fond of characterizing all mobile EFP work as being low production values and shot in a hurry like ENG (news). Simply put, that's a crock of crap perpetuated by elitist attitudes among portions of the motion media industry. I assure you almost all of my ASC friends like David Mullen, Peter Collister, etc. have deep respect for professional EFP shooters - and the feeling is mutual in return. We all need to give respect, and expect respect in return - its a two way street.

IMO most of the same guys who want to criticize EFP work somehow think they're a better camera person based on the niches or styles of the motion media industry they work in. Its usually not the true professionals, but rather the mid-level pseudo-pros with a chip on their shoulder - and their wannabe/sycophant/newbie followers who feel they need to impress the biased veterans they work with by adopting the same myopic view of the motion media industry.

The terms ENG and EFP are not synonymous and they will always be with us in this industry - just as the word "film" and "filming" will always be with us. How many people do you see daily here on Red User who say they "filmed" or are going to "film" something? Lots. Where do you put the film into a Red camera? Ah...nowhere because in technology Red cameras are most like a DSLR, next most like an EFP camera, and only faintly like a film camera. That said, I think I'll go out today and "film" something in "mobile hybrid EFP style" :-))

So why get all hung up on a quest to somehow do some revisionist history on the motion media industry and expunge the legacy, contributions, and term of EFP? Let's all quit quibbling over semantic terms, check our egos at the door, give each other respect, and simply go out and shoot some good images!

This "EFP/ENG for Red" forum has been right here on Red User since 2006. The title of the forum was chosen by Jarred at the very beginning I would guess to give a place for those who are interested in discussing EFP (and yes some limited ENG) possibilities with Red One. I wrote the sticky (March 2007) at the top of this forum on EFP and ENG definitions to help others who are new to Red cameras, and also new to the EFP industry to understand the difference between EFP and ENG, and the difference between mobile EFP and studio EFP. Now after all these years of this forum being here, and all the informative posts by others and myself, its really ludicrous that a thread was just posted here titled "ENG does not belonge here"!

I think this thread shouldn't have been here in the first place, is divisive to the diverse Red User community, and should probably be closed at this point.

[Terry VerHaar]

Oh - and next we are going to get rid of people under 5' 6", blondes, those with Restless Leg Syndrome, and anyone whose last name has fewer than 7 letters... just because. :sarcasm:

[Steve Gibby]

Imagine the nerve - those pesky EFP and ENG underlings just won't go away, so:


:emote_hanged: :party:

[Freya]

Steve, I think it is you misunderstanding me! I have never ever hear the term EFP used in the UK ever! The concept is in itself kind of alien. I have no problem with the term per se or the ideas, it's just that they are very, very alien over here, so it comes as a shock.

For example you say:



"Some are fond of characterizing all mobile EFP work as being low production values and shot in a hurry like ENG (news). Simply put, that's a crock of crap perpetuated by elitist attitudes among certain individuals and portions of the motion media industry."


That kind of idea doesn't exist over here. I can't explain it to you very easily because the things I'm saying to you are as alien as the stuff you are saying to me is!

I'll try and explain:

I've never heard the term EFP used.
ENG is not that commonly used a term either in some ways but it would never be discussed alongside the stuff you call EFP, ie there would not be any kind of catergory of EFP/ENG because they would never be considered together.

Natural History isn't even considered to be quite like other documentary formats. It is held in VERY high regard and considered over stuff like drama. So the idea that cinematic/drama people would look down on natural history, er no! You have to understand it is very high status, commands huge budgets and is prime time tv.

Natural History would never be considered along stuff like News and Sport. Completely different worlds. Same for event programming like concerts etc.

It's just a different way of looking at things and a big culture shock for me because I'd never even considered the possibility of a world where it might be different like you are describing. It's shaken me up because I realise it's one of those things that is there in our society and I'd never questioned till now.

I don't mind the idea so much, I'm not worried about offending David Attenbrorough (or I would call him Sir David Attenborough, he has been knighted by the queen don't you know!) but it's strange sometimes to realise how caught up you are in a certain way of thinking, and you don't even know it!

love

Freya

[Steve Gibby]

Freya,

Thanks for that added information - I understand you much better now. Yes, Red cameras are used around the world, and there are definitely different terms used in certain regions. I have a very high regard for natural history production! I've done a lot of it over the years, I still do a lot of it, and many years some of the categories I judge for the Emmy Awards are the natural history (wildlife/nature) categories. A few months ago I served as an invited judge for the Jackson Hole Wildlife Film Festival - one of the world's premier natural history festivals. Red One has been an excellent natural history camera, Epic is even better for it, and I'm sure Scarlet X will be pretty good at it to - except when you need high frame rates, which is quite often in natural history shooting.

News and most sports programs are way different - in production values, quite often in camera setups, etc. When I judge the Sports Emmy Awards, a lot of the camera work and editing sequences are absolutely incredible. Hundreds of mobile EFP sports productions of alternative sports are done each year. The challenges and technology advances in sports shooting are incredible. Some of the sports documentaries I've seen are stunningly good. Studio sports production is chock full of challenges too - but its a different gig than mobile hybrid EFP sports production. I've done a ton of sports production over the years - both mobile and studio (truck remote).

Electronic field production (EFP) is a very descriptive term - its done using electronic motion cameras, its work out in the field (especially with mobile EFP), and its obviously production. Electronic news gathering (ENG) is exactly what the name implies. The two industries have historically shared similar technology and equipment, but the big difference comes in when camera techniques are analyzed. Modern mobile EFP shooters, especially with Red cameras, use a hybrid equipment mix - some from EFP industry, some from 35mm still industry, and then some techniques from the cine style industry. We only put on the camera what needs to be there to get the shots we're after - and camera techniques are honed down to just what we need to do to get the images we're after.

So what are some of the mobile hybrid EFP style genres of production, which may or may not be shot using documentary techniques? Alternative sports, adventure travel, mainstream travel, tourism, food, corporate, hospitality, cultures, wildlife, music, outdoor, nature, and many many more. I'd invite anyone who looks down on these genres of production to come on out into the field with a mobile EFP crew and experience the challenges overcome, technology maximization needed, advanced camera techniques frequently employed, and the overall difficulty involved.

This whole thread is symantic gymnastics - the misapplication and misunderstanding of technology and technique terms that have been around for decades - but I certainly understand the geographical challenges of the terms used in the overall motion media industry.

BTW - Sir David Attenborough has been one of my heroes for a long time :-)

[Freya]

It's just different cultures! Heres more stuff! The Natural History Unit would never have had the opportunity to use the term EFP because they always used to shoot on film! The whole varicam thing is really new, and it was chosen because it was closest to the film based culture they had there till recently. They still shoot 35mm sometimes in fact but theres a big move away from Super16 at the BBC for various reasons.

Even more freaky when you talk of productions shooting without matte boxes and follow focus, well they used to shoot drama on video like that sometimes here in the UK! It's gone out of fashion more recently as drama productions are trying to be more cinematic.

I guess it's a bit like the whole thing of Americans shooting sports on film! People over here are a bit like wha...??? in relation to that.

Different cultures with different ideas about status!

[Freya]

BTW - Sir David Attenborough has been one of my heroes for a long time.


Ah yes he was great in that amazing natural history film "jurrasic park"!

(ouch, I've edited it now, I'm glad you know who I meant! ...and that's another thing about the UK...)

[Steve Gibby]

Since we're talking about the Emmy-winning series Planet Earth, here are the cameras used for that series:

Panasonic AJ-HDC27 Varicam was the primary camera used. That's an EFP camera
Sony HDW-750 HDCAM was the next most used camera used. That's a EFP camera
In the sequences shot in Antarctica, because of weather extremes and camera simplicity, 35mm and 16 mm film cameras were used
Bottom line: Approximately 90% of Planet Earth was shot using EFP cameras

I was originally scheduled to direct and shoot some sequences for National Geographic's "Great Migrations" series - but schedule conflicts kept me from it. Many friends and associates of mine worked on the series though. It just won an Emmy Award for cinematography - and it was shot almost exclusively with digital cinema and EFP camera systems. Great Migrations was thus shot with a mix of digital cinema and EFP cameras - both electronic and no film used.

The last National Geographic natural history documentary I worked on as an executive producer and EP ('Icy Killers") was shot using a Sony HDC 1500 cameras in a Cineflex (boat and helicopter), Sony f900 HDCAM for some land shots, Red One for some land shots and all underwater shots (except a few EX1 polecam shots). No film was used at all. The show was this shot with a mix of digital cinema and EFP cameras, with the largest percentage being EFP camera footage (HDC1500). I'm not at liberty to divulge the budget for Icy Killers, but suffice it to say it was a multi-million USD special.

In all the above natural history programs and series, do you think they were shooting remote with EFP camera systems with cine style accessories, techniques, and crews? No - they were almost invariably shooting mobile EFP style, with the cameraman doing his own focusing by eye, exposing via zebras and histograms, and having as little equipment on the cameras as they could get away with - frequently no matte box and no follow focus.

Is it just low budget indies who are shooting mobile EFP style? No. Take the case of "Planet Earth" and its accompanying feature film "Earth". As I remember the production budget for Planet Earth was around $32M USD, for Earth around $16M USD, and the combined gross revenue for both Planet Earth and Earth combined (all revenue sources) has been a staggering $422M USD

Shooting "cinematic" images doesn't necessarily require the older film style equipment and techniques. A matte box and follow focus don't automatically create cinematic images. If someone shooting mobile hybrid EFP uses traditional film-style camera techniques, knows how to use screw-on filters effectively, and is skilled at eye focusing the camera himself - guess what, the images are quite "cinematic". Obviously many other factors contribute to "cinematic" shots with a raw shooting camera - lighting, camera movement, composition, curves and color work in post, etc.

With cine & mobile EFP cameras systems now available like Red One, Epic, etc. its way past the time to set aside old pre-conceived notions of what constitutes a "good" camera when creating "films". The largest challenge with Epic is for the user to have broad enough skill sets and an open enough mind to fully maximize what the camera is capable of.

[George Butterfield]

RED 1 Was not the tool for this job... Cinema grade camera
EPIC is a way off... Cinema grade camera
SCARLET ( EPIC s ) ... Cinema grade camera

RED stated that they are a cinema grade company...

So, what do you think ?Yup, I use it only for long and short narratives etc. I even hope the don't hold back on motion capabilities to do R&D on still capabilities.

[Johnny Friday]

Been using R1 on multiple wildlife projects since 2007. Agreed it's not always the right tool. But chosen properly it's like building a house with nail guns vs hammer and nails.

[Steve Gibby]

Well said Johnny. BTW, in case forum members don't know, Johnny is a great in-water cameraman who owns and uses Epic and Red One. In fact he was one of the underwater cameramen who shot some amazing shot sequences for the Emmy-winning (for cinematography) Nat Geo "Great Migrations" series I mentioned above, and also shot some incredible underwater sequences for our Nat Geo "Icy Killers" special. I don't want to embarrass John because he's a humble guy, but IMO he's one of the best in the business - and he naturally goes with a "horses for courses" mentality when choosing camera equipment for each production.

BTW, John shoots really well out of the water too...

You owe me one for the pat on the back Johnny...but I'm quite serious in what I said :)

[David Battistella]

You know. I have skipped all these terms altogether and I just always say I am making a film.

I like the aesthetic that the term carries. I don't say its electronic or production. I don't need to classify it as TV, NEWS, DOCUMENTARY, SHORT, FICTION. I just use the term film universally as a standard for production values. Its fine to say EFP.

EFP happens with RED's around the world every day.

I just try to always bring the aesthetic of shooting a FILM to everything I do. Makes everyone happier.

Just a thought.

David

[Freya]

Since we're talking about the Emmy-winning series Planet Earth, here are the cameras used for that series:

Panasonic AJ-HDC27 Varicam was the primary camera used. That's an EFP camera
Sony HDW-750 HDCAM was the next most used camera used. That's a EFP camera
In the sequences shot in Antarctica, because of weather extremes and camera simplicity, 35mm and 16 mm film cameras were used
Bottom line: Approximately 90% of Planet Earth was shot using EFP cameras



Wow I had thought that Planet Earth was nearly all video! Are you sure that there were 16mm cameras used? I know the BBC mandated HD and 35mm film only and were really funny about the varicam and they had to have special dispensation. Perhaps the 16mm came in under the amount of footage they were allowed to have on lower formats? I've also heard it said that all of the land based stuff was shot on varicam, but I'm not sure what they mean by land based, maybe Antartica doesn't count?

It's cool that they still got a little bit of film in there. I quite like productions that mix it up a bit! ;)

The kind of cameras you call EFP are more the kind of thing we would traditionally use for lower end drama etc over here, so it's quite a revolution having these cameras with a more cinematic look in that context. For Natural History, it always had that kind of cinematic look so it's less of a shift.

There doesn't appear to be quite such a history of these cameras are for this and these cameras are for that over here, beyond the idea that you might have studio cameras and portable cameras and the line between those has been becoming blurred for a long time.

In fact, over in singapore I know that the varicam was considered the go to camera for digital cinema stuff until recently! For a long time over here in the UK, virtually EVERYTHING was shot on digibeta unless it was considered very special and often, not with large crews or anything either.

love

Freya

[Bruno Solaja]

Bruno.

In pondering your question, I thought "what would we be taking away...?" The spirit of this board has always been "inclusion" as opposed to "exclusion". As such, I have learned alot about various topics from Gibby's experience and his willingness to share with the community.

Had your point-of-view been previously executed, myself, and possibly many others, would not have this wisdom.

Semantics of acronyms aside, one of the only reasons I come to this forum is to learn from the experience of others, literally around the world.

As such, as long as topics are fairly well organized, I support even a greater range of coverage areas. For one, our firm shoots HD AND RED, even though the networks barely require an HDV post-production format for our shows. Thanks to Gibby and the other 1000s of posters who give to the community. We value this exchange.


Jack, I did not wanted to actualy remove anything.

I just wanted to hear other peoples opinion about ENG place in industry and here.
First I apologize for my English and gramar,since I am from Croatia.

Maybe I could have named the thread differentialy and avoid miss understanding,sorry for that.
On the other hand,it seeams to me that it did provoke some constructive reaction and opinions.

When RED declared itselve as a Cinema grade company I was somehow shocked,
because I did not see it coming... But did it not stoped me thinking about it.

When my first betacam sp came, it was world wide acceptable format for news but also for
many more shooting styles including short films etc. Things change.

The format chaos started, and then came REDs "absolence absolite". It sounded wery promising...
Redcode and wawlet compression blow my mind with possibilytes and off course I hoped
that a sistems builded around that technology could be applicable in my line of work and be
competitive in other fields as well.

That hope did not die yet. Alas, It is up to RED to make bussines decisions and they did.
I respect that.

REDs vision and philosophy, this fast growing comunity of expirienced people , gave me a new pace
in my learning curve. It kept me nailed to a computer screen for a long time now.
For that, I am truly gratefull.

I wanted to keep a little pressure and keep a discusion alive about ENG as a potential market.
It would be a dream for many of my colleagues to be able to have a camera sistem capable to do
intensive day to day news jobs and at the same time be able to use that same camera for more complex
needs.

Personaly, I have a huge respect for a every day news shooters around the globe. I know how it feels
and what it takes to be amonge the best (not that I think that I am one of them).
I also know that people who think that an Iphone is good enough for the job are way off the base.
Those people need a robust and reliable sistems that performe in all situations and enviroments.
Those same people are doing other things as well, like shooting a comercial video,industrial video, music videos
docu work,experimental films,shorts.....

If you are a freelance cameraman and have a need to own a camera that can fulfill up to date specs
for different lines of production, news included...what are your options today ?
How many of these people are there ? I belive many.

So, there is no "one camera to rule them all" but for a "moment" RED had potential to do something
quite close to it. At least in my imagination.

It was a nice thought

In a couple of days after a news job...we are going to shoot a short commercial for a same company on RED1
Renting and post production cost are qite high, not so easy to find a backup camera if something goes wrong.
Not knowing a camera to the last bit, can also be a drawback.

It would be nice to pop the button and be able to use a power of RAW when needed and at the same time be able
to shoot in a quick turnaround and deliver.

News on the other hand, has more and more became infotainment busines and has a need for varius styles
of shooting where you have more time for doing a report and more editing time. You could use high fp/s and hdrx mode
alot in these situations,low light performance is also important...but the main advantage would be that you do not need
to change sistem every two or three years.

Long story short, those things were on my mind and felt like sharing it here.

Best regards to all redusers...

[Joe Pontecorvo]

I think it's clear from this discussion that RED cameras, especially the Epic and now Scarlet, have the ability to cut across many different style of digital capture.
I will be using an Epic to shoot my next wildlife documentary. This will be my first time shooting with RED on a major documentary.

For me, the greatest challenge for wildlife is focal range. Using 2/3 inch cameras with ENG/EFP style zooms like the Canon 28-500mm F2.8 -2x extender gives you a lot of flexibility in a pretty small light package, especially for wildlife shooting.

Using DSLR lenses is a bit more limiting in terms of focal range, and requires a slightly different approach. Just as PL mount Super 16mm lenses did.
My Epic may not be the primary camera for all the projects I do, but it is the right choice for the next two projects, as they were specifically crafted for this camera from the treatment up.

In the natural history world we are always striving for the best image quality. When the BBC switched over to video, it really moved our who industry over from film. It was not any easy adjustment for me. Until RED I really missed the image quality of my Super 16mm camera shooting 7245, but I liked the flexibility of video (now even that's an old term).
I think the Epic/Scarlet is pretty exciting for Natural History filmmakers, especially because of the high speed capture (that we had on Super 16mm), HDRx, RAW format (the idea of having a negative again is really exciting), and the compact size. For me, the challenge are mostly focal range, and managing all that data in the field. But I'm also really excited by the whole thing. We just finished color grading a NH show with a really great colorist, but I know we were both thinking it... too bad it wan't shot on RED :)

[Steve Gibby]

Joe,

You'll find both Epic and Red One to be very potent wildlife cameras when set up and accessorized correctly. As you know bulk and weight in a rig decrease mobility, which in turn limits the type of shots you can get in a dynamic environment like wildlife production. As I mentioned in a previous post on this thread, I've done extensive wildlife production with Red One since 2007, and then with Epic since early this year.

Yes, when you go to 35mm still zooms for wilddife production its hard to get the focal range you're used to with B4 2/3" HD EFP/ENG zooms. With my Red cameras my solutions for long focal length zooms have been two vintage 35mm still zooms: a stock Canon FD 150-600 f5.6L zoom with Century PL mount conversion (mount only), and a Nikon 50-300 f4.5 AIS zoom with the Nikon mount. The Canon is hard to find stock, but the great advantage for wildlife shooting is that it has a sliding knob on the lower lens case that you push forward to zoom in, and pull back to widen out. you simply twist the same knob to rack rack focus. The lens holds focus throughout a zoom, and the action is smooth. There's a still shot of me using that lens for wildlife shooting in Alaska in my Redconnector profile link below in my signature, along with lots of low resolution wildlife clips in my Artbeats stock footage collection link.

Another excellent zoom for shooting wildlife with Red cameras is the Sigma 120-300 f2.8. Its crisp and clean, and add in a 1.4x and 2x and you have lots of focal lengths to choose from. With Epic and the new smart Canon mount you should be able to also use some of the electronic features of that lens too - something I had no option to do with the Canon 150-600 or the Nikon 50-300 because they're both manual lenses.

Good luck with your wildlife production! Feel free to contact me via my regualr email address and I'd be happy to answer other specific questions you may have about wildlife production with Red cameras. Email: steve (at) cut4 (dot) tv

[Steve Gibby]

Bruno,

Thanks for explaining that. I think now everyone understands better what you meant.

[Joe Pontecorvo]

Hi Steve, That's great advice. I've been to Artbeats before on a stock footage search, really beautiful stuff! Great to finally meet you, at least virtually. I actually have a Canon 150-600mm century conversion (PL mount). I used with my Super 16 camera in the day, but I thought I would give this new Canon mount a try (if it arrives in time- fingers crossed). My 35PL collection is only that one lens, everything else is Super 16, so I thought I would try going with the EOS mount. The Sigma 120-300 f2.8 sounds like a good option.

I'd really like to work out something with the range of my 150-600mm. I have a 70-200mm Canon and a 100-400mm (just not sure how the 100-400 will hold up on the Epic).
If you don't mind I might run some lens question by you in the coming days and get your feedback, if you have time. Thanks again your post has been very helpful.

[Johnny Friday]

Steve, thanks to be sure my friend......you know what they say yes? Even a blind dog can find a bone every now and then. Just lucky to have been a part of a LARGE crew on the migrations segments....and around some extremely talented and hard working folks.

this said.....i'm quite happy with RED/EPIC in natural history genre about 85% of the time.....now running around with the red 1 in 2007 in africa vs. a sony ex1 and trying to shoot quick action.....the ex1 ruled. But sitting in the bush waiting for a lion to pounce on prey at 90fps......i like RED. Although....in 2007 i recall Zebras and Giraffs (with their color and stripe patters) used to send the R1 into shut down mode.....

[Freya]

Steve, thanks to be sure my friend......you know what they say yes? Even a blind dog can find a bone every now and then. Just lucky to have been a part of a LARGE crew on the migrations segments....and around some extremely talented and hard working folks.

this said.....i'm quite happy with RED/EPIC in natural history genre about 85% of the time.....now running around with the red 1 in 2007 in africa vs. a sony ex1 and trying to shoot quick action.....the ex1 ruled. But sitting in the bush waiting for a lion to pounce on prey at 90fps......i like RED. Although....in 2007 i recall Zebras and Giraffs (with their color and stripe patters) used to send the R1 into shut down mode.....

This is sooooooooo true! It's about the right tools for the job! Planet Earth used all that Varicam footage, which people can be sniffy about with its 720p and all, but hey, it looks great really and that's what counts! (I'm not sitting there counting pixels!) The Red One might be less than ideal in some situations but I'm suspecting that the EPIC and Scarlet cameras with their smaller profiles, may really start to find a solid niche. Maybe they will be more zebra friendly too! ;) The Ex1, still has life in it as well! Really kinda small but with quite a punch, especially with a Nano/Hyerdeck/Ninja/Kona etc. I'm also curious to see what might come from the HPX250 ("new" Panasonic, basically a HPX370 in an EX1/HVX200 kinda form factor, looks like maybe a great match for Natural History)

I'm pretty sure the new red cameras are going to have an impact on the natural history world but there will be other cameras too, even in the same film and personally I wouldn't want it any other way. I expect we will continue to even see the Varicam around for a while yet because it does it's own thing too. Mix it up I say! ;)

love

Freya

[ERIC PECK]

Has anyone tried this on the RED One or Epic? http://www.abelcine.com/store/HDx35-B4/PL-Optical-Adapter/

I'm interested in seeing the possibility of using a B4 canon zoom lens on an epic or scarlet, would make a rather interesting camera for ENG and documentary applications.

[Nick Gardner]

Hey Joe, On the same note as above, the Ang. 12-240 with a doubler covers the Red and gives a pretty huge range (24-480mm) in a small package. With Red's 800 iso, the stop loss is no big deal for most exterior work. That lens looks pretty damn good stopped down a bit. Just a thought. If I had to go shoot in the bush, that's what I'd take.

Cheers,

Nick

[Rob Gardner]

Interesting thread

[James Brundige]

Joe,


Another excellent zoom for shooting wildlife with Red cameras is the Sigma 120-300 f2.8. Its crisp and clean, and add in a 1.4x and 2x and you have lots of focal lengths to choose from. With Epic and the new smart Canon mount you should be able to also use some of the electronic features of that lens too - something I had no option to do with the Canon 150-600 or the Nikon 50-300 because they're both manual lenses.
Email: steve (at) cut4 (dot) tv

Big Africa shoot coming up, so I'm franticly gearing up. Shooting test footage of cows and horses, easy to find here. (though we had a bobcat in the yard last week - the day before Epic arrived - damn.)

I've been quite happy with the 150-600 you suggested three years ago, but I'm trying out some new setups for Epic. The form factor is so much better; everything gets smaller, tripod , batteries, media. So I'm looking for a lighter alternative to the big Canon. Canon 100-400 is sharp, but a little lacking in contrast. How's that Sigma on contrast? Build?

For DOF, I might even try 3K. That would make a 120-300 a really nice wildlife range. Any wisdom there?

I'm testing a couple Canon primes, but I find they're a challenge when stuff starts to happen quickly. I'll try the Nikon 200-400 if the mount comes out in the next month, but mixed reviews there, and very $$$.

PS. Hi, Gardners. Family still working together?

[Steve Gibby]

Hey James,

I haven't used the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 on Epic yet - but I have read some reviews of the lens from still shooters and they were really positive. The reports were that the build is solid, contrast is very good, the lens is quite crisp. It is wildlife and sports shooters who wrote the reviews. The lens costs $3,200 on B&H. Link: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/755328-USA/Sigma_136101_120_300mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html

The lens weighs just 6.5 pounds and is only 11.4" long.

Add in a 1.4x and you'd have a 168-420 f4 zoom (on FF35). Add in a 2x and you'd have a 240-600 f5.6 zoom (on FF35).

I've been thinking of testing out the above on Epic for sports and wildlife shooting for months now - but haven't gotten around to it.

As I remember, Red has tested out many Sigma lenses on Epic and entered them into the Red database. You might just check with Red to see if they've tested the Sigma 120-300 on Epic.

I've been using Miller tripods since August 2007 with my Red cameras. I'm now sponsored by Miller, so for mobile lightweight Epic tripod setups, I use the Miller Compass 25 head, in tandem with the Miler Solo 1505 spreader-less CF legs. The head has excellent action, the combo weighs just 13 pounds, and the head will support up to 31 pounds. We tested a Compass 25 head with Epic M 0008 clear back in March, using Ketch's spreader-less Gitzo legs. The results were excellent.

Miller Compass 25/Solo 1505 CF combo link: http://www.millertripods.com/product_details.html?camera_brand=&camera_model=&type=&system=2&application=&series=&id=258&back_url=%2Fsystem-packages%2F100mm%3Fsystem%3D2%26page%3D3

Hope the above info helps you out...

[James Brundige]

Thanks, Gibby, very generous with your advice as always. I've been using the Miller solo legs for a while - easy and light. I have 75mm and 100mm bowl versions. Sachtler heads, but that's my history showing. I might give the Sigma a try, but I'm a little nervous because Sigma is the only lens to die completely on me - in the central Amazon. Luckily, I had Nikons to cover.

Do your teams ever shoot 3K, or only 4? I'm wondering if that's a viable way to get a little more reach and DOF. That and f/8 when critters are running fast.

[Steve Gibby]

Happy to help James. Yes, those Miller Solo legs are great for mobile work. I've had pretty good luck with the Sigma lenses I've used.

Even with RedOne we've shot a lot of 3k for sports and wildlife when we needed higher frame rates to overcrank shots. With Epic we've been shooting 5k when its needed, 4kHD for most everything else, and some 3k when we wanted/needed even higher frame rates. As you know, most wildlife and sports motion sequences, where the subject is moving moderately fast to fast, are shot around f8, so DOF is deeper. If your finish is for HDTV, then 3k is more than enough resolution - Graeme's 85% after debayer leaves 2.55k, which downsamples to 1080p very well. Then again, you may want to shoot most of your Africa program in 4kHD, then just go to 3k when you want to seriously overcrank some action shots.

[Joe Pontecorvo]

Thanks Nick and James for the lens advice. I've been playing around with the idea of shooting with PL mount, but just feel for what I am doing the lighter DSLR lenses are better suited, at least for this shoot.
I ordered a Nikon mount as well as the Canon mount, but still waiting on both.
On the Canon mount for the Epic the current firmware does not support extenders from what I hear, but this would not be a problem with the Nikon mount. The Sigma 120-300mm and the Nikon 50-300 sound like good choices. Right now I am doing all my testing with my Sony F3 and Nikon mount.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Extenders will currently work on the EPIC Canon mount... They're just not firmware supported to be properly recognized and to relay lens communication. So using an extender makes your electronic "smart" mount into a "dumb" mount. Currently the only Nikon mount available for the EPIC is the Optitek one. It's great, but it's a "dumb" mount with no electronic communication or lens control. RED should have their own electronic "smart" Nikon mount here soon.

[James Brundige]

Sorry to have drifted the discussion into lenses, but always good to hear Gibby's advice.

Back on topic. IMHO Red has one great weakness for EFP. Audio implementation is still poor. The Pro I/O is a chance to fix that, but without good meters (higher rez than the viewfinder versions) and pots (physical gain control), my EX-1 is still better. In fact, I shoot most interviews (unless it's a really complex background) on the Sony. I'm working on a Sound Devices rig that I hope will fix that problem. My background is in audio, so I'm pretty picky. (in the small world department, my last audio job was for Rob Gardner in Antarctica 1995)

I understand Red's focus on cinema. Audio comes later, hopefully soon. Epic now only takes audio at 24 fps, so I'll be shooting double system for 30 fps American TV. And interviews on the EX-1. It's a pain to carry a separate camera system, but for long interviews, I like having greater compression and not the huge files to manage in the field. I have a wallet of SD cards that holds 28 hours of XDCAM.

That's why I think Red pulled back from the 2/3 Scarlet idea. There are lots of good cheap solutions in that niche.

As far as EFP imaging goes, Epic is amazing. It fixes all the shortcomings of the Red One, and and takes it to a new level. The form factor is much more portable, and battery and media options that much better as well. I haven't done a big remote shoot yet, so still curious about how much data we'll have to manage in the field. Hoping for a Thunderbolt Red Station option to help laptop storage solutions. I sprung for 4 256 Gb Redmags, and hope I can keep up on long shooting days. I'll post my new backpack rig when the battery module (the last key piece) arrives.

[Will Keir]

I agree. I am happy to see the Epic put to use making films. For news footage, I am perfectly happy with anything of clear watchable quality. The News uses camera shots as a part of their vehicle for telling the story. The R1/Epic IS the vehicle for telling stories.


Yes.

It's true.

News organizations did not flock toward buying RED cameras. I've always seen it as a replacement for 35mm film never for Electronic News Gathering.

I'm happy about that. Plenty of cheap video cameras are made for news gathering including the iPhone 4.

David

[Steve Gibby]

Will,

If you read through this entire thread basically everyone on it agrees as follows:

Q: Red One, Epic, and Scarlet for ENG (Electronic News Gathering)?
A: Not a highly practical choice for a variety of factors (see my Sticky post at the top of this forum)

Q: Red One, Epic, and Scarlet for EFP (Electronic Field Production)?
A: Definitely a good choice, and has been used widely for EFP work.

Q: Red One, Epic, and Scarlet for cine style production (making "films" even though obviously no film is used)?
A: Definitely a good choice, and has been used widely for cine-style work.

End notes: Some don't like the traditional terms ENG and EFP when reference is made to using electronic cameras like the Red cameras (which technology is an outgrowth of electronic EFP and DSLR camera systems) - but they're curiously quite happy with using an even more anachronistic term of "film" when describing their work with these electronic Red cameras.

Everybody doesn't make "films" with their Red cameras - in fact a huge percentage of Red camera users make television programs, and other forms of motion media projects with Red cameras. Its a very diverse industry now - and thus there's a great diversity of valid approaches to using these modular and adaptable cameras made by Red.

[Martin Stevens]

Will,

If you read through this entire thread basically everyone on it agrees as follows:

Q: Red One, Epic, and Scarlet for ENG (Electronic News Gathering)?
A: Not a practical choice for a variety of factors.

Q: Red One, Epic, and Scarlet for EFP (Electronic Field Production)?
A: Definitely a good choice, and has been used widely for EFP work.

Q: Red One, Epic, and Scarlet for cine style production (making "films" even though obviously no film is used)?
A: Definitely a good choice, and has been used widely for cine-style work.

End note: Some don't like the traditional terms ENG and EFP when reference is made to using electronic cameras like the Red cameras (which technology is an outgrowth of electronic EFP and DSLR camera systems) - but they're curiously quite happy with using an even more anachronistic term as "film" when describing their work with these electronic Red cameras.

Thanks for summing up.

Great work!

[David Rasberry]

I still long for a more field practical higher than 2k resolution S16mm format option from Red. The 3.3u pixel format of the 2/3" Scarlet would support 4kHD 3840x2160 in an S16 sized sensor.
There are many of us who would prefer this over 35mm with higher frame rate performance, 60fps @ 4kHD and 120fps @ 3k like the original Scarlet spec for general production work even if it cost the same as Scarlet-X.

[Steve Gibby]

With its many proposed EFP-friendly features (internal ND, powered zoom, etc) the 2/3" Scarlet Fixed would have been far and away the most EFP-capable camera Red has ever built. The originally planned 2/3" Scarlet detachable lens version, with S16 zooms, would have also been a potent EFP camera.

Though I own and totally love Epic cameras, I was very sad the day the 2/3" Scarlet cameras, with their original specs, were cancelled - and I'm still am sad about that, along with many others here.

The above said, Red did what they felt they needed to do, and I certainly understand that. There were undoubtedly factors involved in the 2/3" Scarlet cancellation which none of us here know - or will ever know. It is what it is...

[albert rudnicki]

+1 Gibby
Sad day it was when 2/3 was terminated.

[Ron Reddick]

My 2 cents,
My red 1 was lighter then my old Digi Beta rig, lugged it across afghanistan as did a few others, shot doc work, ENG for yes, news, quick feed from ProRes and they were happy, and sell plenty of stock 4k Afghan footage. Now the Epic is lighter, has been to Kabul twice and I love it for that, paired with my Optima Zoom and Red bricks and it rocks, light, easy to use and stunning pictures. The news will air what it gets, and if the best shoots are from en iPhone for the event, that airs, but I never have had anyone turn down Red footage

My opinion is it is a great ENG and EFP camera, and I lone gun a lot of the time out there with my camera and external audio into a cantor X, never a problem with weight.

Ron

[Rob Macey]

At network news, I use my F900 and HDX-900 for NBC-Dateline, Today Show and Nightly. At CBS News, XDCAM.
I've been a tv news photojournalist for 18 years.

TV news is a freight train when it comes to equipment. Slow to change. Lowest of budgets and prorities when it comes to gear.

Shooting with my R1 "ENG" style as a splinter crew or OMB works perfectly depending on what's needed for any other genre other than news. But, using it in the day to day news ops would be impractical for many reasons. In the time it takes my R1 to boot up, the live shot and package have already aired.

However, using RED for net news specials or doco's, instead of the daily grind, is completely possible and has been done, if everyone is on the same page from pre to post. In tv news, we're always on the same page;)....At NBC, it was only a year ago that post could handle footage from a 5D card... So, I think R3D files shouldn't confuse anyone at the bureaus;)

[Nick Morrison]

I agree that ENG shooting on the RED is totally possible. Here's where recording AVID DNXHD proxies on a PIX 240, Atomos Samura, or the BM Hyperdeck Shuttle (http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/hyperdeckshuttle/models/) makes total sense. They are 10bit 422 Avid files, perfect for broadcast. If they want to invest and REALLY grade the piece later, they can always go back to the RED files. Easy to do if all the metadata matches.

Another plus is how small the Scarlet/Epic is, which is helpful on doc shoots.





(http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/hyperdeckshuttle/models/)

[Robert Knoll]

I support the tool box line of thought. I have Red, Canon, Sony Altcine XDcam and the list goes on. In any situation I can make most of them do what I need but some are more of a challenge. A good shot is a good shot regardless of the device or the target. As creators I would not want to be restricted. I have read some great articles posted here from youth thinking out of the box and have been blown away by their output. I could say I would never do that but sometimes we can wow ourselves. Yes, I do run and gun and the Red is a pain for that but who says life is easy? Does eng need a controlled depth of field or 4k res? Maybe it does these days.

[Curt Pair]

I'm new to Red. I've just purchased an Epic M (#565). One of the reasons I always "stayed away" from Red was that I heard it was big, cumbersome and not user friendly. This was supposed to be exaggerated in run and gun situations.

What brought me to the Epic was that it was MUCH smaller than the Red One, lighter and easier to manage. I built my entire package around the idea of using this camera for ALL of my clients: high end (indies, commercials, big budget corporate), and broadcast (TV shows, specials, opens/promos, even feature pieces). I decided I needed a Red Clutch for this kind of work early on, and I'm glad I bought it! I'm here to tell you, that this is a WONDERFUL camera for ENG work! I'm NOT doing "nightly news" type pieces with it... however, I am doing feature pieces for sports programming, special news programming (that airs say... on Sunday mornings...), and corporate work.

The goal of video since its inception has been to replicate the look of film. Most of my clients want that shallow depth of field look. The Epic can truly deliver that, and in a codec they can use! As others have stated... I'm using a Pix 240 for FCP & Avid based clients, and I'm using a nanoFlash for Sony XDCam HD based clients/workflows. I also roll in 5K. If the client wants or needs offspeed footage or HDRx footage, I transcode that later. However, for most of my clients, the Pix or nano are perfect.

I own several PL mount lenses, however I've found for more run and gun situations, if I stay with PL, the Red Pro Zoom 17-50 is the lens of choice for me... it's light, fairly fast, and looks great. I've recently purchased an Optitek Nikon mount too. This will be my new standard for run and gun situations! The lenses are just as fast, even lighter and have great quality. I do know that the focus pulls are harder, but it's something I'm willing to work with.

I think the most ironic thing about this particular discussion is how closed minded so many people are! Isn't that what Red prided themselves on in the beginning? They thought out of the box! Then I notice Red reps on this site aren't in favor of their cameras in this vein. (I'm not advocating the Epic for use in reality TV... and let's hope that trend goes away soon! ) I believe I'm carrying the true pioneer spirit of Red by introducing their products to clients that NEVER THOUGHT they could use these cameras! They love the footage. They love the look. I think the Red Epic is the closest camera I've EVER used in terms of color reproduction that duplicates what my eye sees. It's totally amazing. That's the main comment I hear over and over... "Look at the color!" Sure, it may have something to do with my "look..." and I saturate the colors fairly heavily, but the fact that the camera has that ability is remarkable.

I brought SD and HDV clients to XDCam HD years ago with this same school of thought... introduce them to the camera, provide the footage they way they want, and in time, they'll want to cut with that original footage too! It worked very well... my clients all loved me for it. Now, they're even happier!

[Steve Gibby]

Curt,

From the outset in 2006 Red has said that Red One wasn't necessarily designed for ENG (electronic news gathering), but was definitely designed and intended for EFP (electronic field production) and cine style work. Where a lot of people run into misunderstanding is when others lump all non-cine work into an erroneous collective term ENG. ENG is just that - news gathering. My Sticky post at the top of this forum, which I wrote clear back in March 2007, and Jarred put up as a Sticky, very clearly defines the difference between ENG and EFP work. In that Sticky post I mentioned that Red One isn't well suited for news gathering work because of the quick turnaround and editing needs, and the need for more ENG friendly features on the camera. News B-roll and peripheral segments not under a hard news time deadline are something Red One definitely has been used for. Epic is even easier to use for that than Red One, being smaller, thus more mobile, and having the availability of smart mounts.

But for EFP work, especially for mobile (non-hardlined) EFP work, Red One can be a great camera for the right productions and in the right hands. I've been making EFP friendly camera feature suggestions on the old DVX User Red forum since early 2006, and here on Red User ever since it first opened in December 2006, and I'll continue to. I'm one of the original pioneers of EFP work with Red One cameras. In September 2007 I was already testing out B4 2/3" HD zooms on Red One 0008. As soon as the Nikon mount was ready I was among the very first to setup Red One with Nikon lenses for mobile EFP work on all my Red One cameras. My setups with Red One were all about mobility for hybrid mobile EFP production - no matte box (screw-on filters), no follow focus (hand racking of lens barrels by operator) no AC (all focusing by eye by operator), quick EFP style exposure via zebras, 35mm still lenses even with some using custom rocker servo zoom units adapted from B4 2/3" lenses, and on and on.

Since Red cameras first delivered in August 2007 ENG use of Red One has been very limited, but EFP use of RedOne has been widespread. Fast forward to Epic. Its smaller, lighter, has a smart Canon mount, and a smart Nikon mount on the way, and a smart Red mount and Red Electronic Lenses on the way - and all of those things are way EFP friendly. The Epic camera itself also has many more EFP friendly features than Red One. All that adds up to a fact: Epic can be an incredibly good mobile EFP camera when setup, lensed, and accessorized for such work - and when used by experienced EFP shooters with open minds. No amount of elitist rhetoric from other portions of the motion media industry can negate Epic's mobile EFP utility and versatility. Some portions of the motion media industry look down upon someone being so "rude" as to actually use Red cameras for what in their elitist minds they perceive as inferior motion media work - namely EFP work. Many of them have minds so narrow that if they fell face first on a pin they'd put out both eyes ;). I consider an attitude like that to be their problem - and I never let it be mine - proverbially "water off a duck's back".

The "big budget corporate and broadcast" work you described is non-hardlined EFP work - not ENG (news gathering). That's my zone too: mobile TV productions in the genres of alternative sports, adventure travel, wildlife, documentaries of various kinds, cultures, lifestyle, nature, high end corporate, music, some commercials, stock footage, etc. - not reality work, but rather high production value mobile EFP documentary work.

I think you and several other innovators and freethinkers on this thread made some very good points - ones I've agreed with since 2005 in relation to Red One, and now even more so with my Epic cameras. The hard thing about using Epic is for the user to have broad enough skill sets, and an open enough mind to fully maximize what the camera itself is capable of.

Epic is all about flexibility, modularity, and adaptability - unfortunately many Epic users simply fail to see or utilize those capabilities.