Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: Panavision videos...

Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 25 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 241
  1. #21  
    I am just a bit concerned over the confusion. Seriously, the biggest challenge I have in introducing the Red One to the South African rental market is to dispell the myths people have. The resistance to this camera and the technology is enormous.

    I've got an idea, Jim why don't you start selling shares to red owners, we are a loyal bunch, with the capital raised you buy out Sony. Problem solved. It's now not small fish big fish, Red is then the big fish... or maybe a shark, a great white with big teeth. I'd be first in line to help the cause.
    Richard Lackey

    www.dcinema.me
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member Jochen Schmidt-Hambrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    South of Munich, Germany
    Posts
    1,085
    There are 1500 + Reds out there. Only a few months (weeks?) ´till everybody has seen finished productions shot with RED.

    That will be the real impact.

    Jochen
    --------------------------
    www.jochenschmidt.de
    http://imdb.com/name/nm0773276/
    twitter: josch11
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Senior Member Harry Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,766
    Hey guys, stop and think for a minute.
    Why does Panavision (or Sony or Kodak for that matter) have to "lose" for us to "win"? Red One is a fantastic camera and we'll all use it whenever we can. If certain production requires film, or an HVX, or whatever, will you all stubbornly "push" your Red One? Yes, Panavision is biased. But aren't we too? Good DPs use what tool best serves the project. Just sayin...
    I agree with Jim that misinformation is bad. And we SHOULD call people on it. And Panavision not renting lenses without a camera (if that's true) is pretty petty, but then again, it's their company.
    But if Panavision abandoned the RGB stripe and came out with a CMOS 4K sensor, or an 8K sensor, would you all turn around and say it's great? Or would we just bash them for some other reason?
    They make FANTASTIC lenses, guys. And the film cameras are pretty good too! ;) It's true that they've been on top of the pile for a long time and sometimes have a bad attitude; but let's not stoop to that too.
    Wait, give me a minute to put my Romex suit on...
    Harry
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    160
    Quote Originally Posted by Jannard View Post
    Panavision's Chief of Technology is John Gault. Ours is Greame Nattress. I'll take Graeme.

    Jim
    Sure - but in my book Panavision is a lens company. They did not get into filmmaking, and there should be no need for them to make the electronic replacement for film.

    If I were a Panasonic shareholder, I would have wanted them to concentrate on their core business. More high-quality digital cameras means more opportunities to make money on lenses.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    REDuser Sponsor Gunleik Groven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    13,344
    Harry: Agree...

    Old: Guess you mean Panavision...

    There's a multitude of factors that applies for me personally for jumping on the RED ship. As price is one of them, my choices are limited. I feel only fortunate that I'm now not currently shooting a 2100 with AVC-I board, even though I'm likewise certain that that would have served a lot of my needs.

    I am a digital dude by nature and virtue. Not because I think that is always the best, but it's where I decided to learn and hope to become slightly useable. I don't despise film for that reason. I just don't use it...

    RED, thus - opens up some of the more sexy aspects of filmproduction for me, thus far unachievable. I couldn't rent any of the other 35mm digicams here anyway, so they're kust not an option without moving to another country. With 2,5 kids and a wife, that's not on the near horisont...

    Does this make me unhappy with the RED?

    Not at all. Couldn't be happier. But I'll get an EPIC when it's available.
    Life is good. So is RED...


    http://quine.no
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Senior Member Steve Sherrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    7,040
    If you go by the numbers (specs), each camera will have strengths and weaknesses. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, the bottom line is what looks good to an audience or client and can you achieve your artistic or commercial intent. Resolution is not the final answer there. A lot of variables will contribute to whether the content is deemed enjoyable and effective.

    What's important for RED's future is that we all use it well to tell stories and shoot beautiful pictures. That's what people will remember, not the actual digital resolution numbers.

    Having said that, the Panavision videos were worth checking out. That filled my geek boy quota for the day.
    Steve Sherrick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member Radoslav Karapetkov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sofia, Bulgaria [EU]
    Posts
    2,406
    Our two-year old David is waking up the haughty Goliaths.

    Now they'll have to move their a$$es and try to deliver better, in terms of quality and price.

    Good for us customers.

    Right now, The Force is with RED...
    EveryOne is the One...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by NERVOUS PANAVISION WEBSITE
    . . . A so-called “4K camera” that has an imager with only 8 or 10 million photo sites but outputs 25 or 32 megapixels is interpolating data without adding any image performance. Moreover, it creates a four-fold increase in post-production digital data to be stored and processed that is both unnecessary and expensive. . . . . By contrast, Genesis has a 12.4 million photo site sensor, produces content superior to what is commonly called a “4K” camera, but through “super-sampling” our final output which is only 6 megapixels (or an 8 megabyte DPX frame). In other words: Same or better picture quality with far less overhead.
    hmmm. Now I wonder who they are talking about when they say "a so called 4K camera" ???

    Sounds to me like someone's seriously concerned about the future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    ashland, oregon
    Posts
    2,588
    Quote Originally Posted by harryclark View Post
    Hey guys, stop and think for a minute.
    Why does Panavision (or Sony or Kodak for that matter) have to "lose" for us to "win"? Red One is a fantastic camera and we'll all use it whenever we can. If certain production requires film, or an HVX, or whatever, will you all stubbornly "push" your Red One? Yes, Panavision is biased. But aren't we too? Good DPs use what tool best serves the project. Just sayin...
    I agree with Jim that misinformation is bad. And we SHOULD call people on it. And Panavision not renting lenses without a camera (if that's true) is pretty petty, but then again, it's their company.
    But if Panavision abandoned the RGB stripe and came out with a CMOS 4K sensor, or an 8K sensor, would you all turn around and say it's great? Or would we just bash them for some other reason?
    They make FANTASTIC lenses, guys. And the film cameras are pretty good too! ;) It's true that they've been on top of the pile for a long time and sometimes have a bad attitude; but let's not stoop to that too.
    Wait, give me a minute to put my Romex suit on...
    Harry
    Priecesly...

    PV has and is a very important entity in the motion picture field. And like Kodak they will adapt to the times. I never wanted to work for them myself and in fact curtailed an interview about half way thru because the person doing the interview had his head so far up his ass I found it astounding that he could breath. lol None the less, what they have achieved is amazing.


    CHUCK
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member Dominic Cochran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by oldphart View Post
    Sure - but in my book Panavision is a lens company. They did not get into filmmaking, and there should be no need for them to make the electronic replacement for film.
    What do you mean they did not get into filmmaking?
    Director of Photography, Partner: Ahptic Film & Digital
    www.ahptic.com
    www.facebook.com/ahptic
    www.citycenterstudios.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts