Bad RED footage...

[Kjetil Haugen]

He doesn't even try to hide the increased depth of field of the 2/3" CCD camera.

That's right. He choose HD specifically because of the increased DOF. It's part of his "look at the city" thing. Backgrounds are important to him. I'm a big fan og Mann, but I remember watching MV at a time in my life when I really wanted HD to prove it could stand up to 35mm. I ended up drinking pretty heavily that night....

[Bachman]

David, I agree. The grainy night scenes to me were most definately a deliberate Homage to Television reality drama.

48 Hours After was a way better example of grainy film look than MV. And that was shot DV on XL1's

[Ace]

Jim, you know, I came away from NAB astounded at how well RED had thought everything out, from acquisition to post and even eventually display. Your question makes me realize the gaping hole in your master plan - the cinematographer. Or are you actually setting us up for introducing "The Missing Link" in the plan:

The RED Fully Integrated Field Upgradable Cinematographer Microchip Brain Implant, or RED FIFUCMBI!

Please, say it ain't so! We promise, we'll continue to hone our craft and never ever release footage from our REDs that isn't up to snuff! Promise! Don't make us go under the knife!

It's like having children; at some point they are released into the world and they're on their own. RED can make the best camera possible; the rest is up to us.

Actually, maybe hiring one of the best cinematographers to write a RED user guide might not be such a bad idea. But this will happen anyway as this RED online community matures.

Im not sure if the current Canons have this, but the first film SLR I ever got to play with (owned by my dad) was a canon T-90, (beautiful machine). Anyway, they came with like a 120 page booklet on how to take great shots, including lighting, framing, composing.. It was like a classroom in a book to accompany your newly bought camera. I remember learning quite a bit from it as a child. Do they still do this?

[Ace]

48 Hours After was a way better example of grainy film look than MV. And that was shot DV on XL1's

Thats the whole point, it wasnt meant to resemble "film look". It actually looked like part of an episode of "COPS", which served the feel and story of the movie quite well. A very intellegent semiotic reference.

[Tony Lorentzen]

I guess what I'm saying is that if bad RED footage is posted... it is not our fault... :-)

Jim

I was under the impression that the RED would make me a better DP! JIM... You promised!!!!

[Matthew Verkler]

On a serious note, what we do is completely subjective. Who knows what people will shoot with RED, but I am sure that enough high profile stuff will be properly shot that nobody will blame RED for the questionable stuff. I knew a DP that made 35 look like really bad 16, but nobody blamed that on the film or the camera.

And artistic choices and compromises will be made. I suppose someone could look at Barry Lyndon and say that it was poorly lit and that it was grainy. That would be a narrow view and would be completely missing the point. Or someone could say that Southern Comfort looked dirty and wasn't "beautiful". As long as the choices we make support the story, everything is on the table as far as I'm concerned.

Don't worry so much - the camera and workflow will prove themselves. Yes, we need to do our part. Yes that is a concern for you because you want your babies to do well in the world. Unlike Oakley, where you can control every aspect of the product with your incredible attention to detail, making a camera for sale means you have to let go. Frustrating, isn't it? Knowing your product is out in the world on its own. After sale, all you can do is have faith in the RED users. And do your best to support our activities and art with continuing education and advise from RED. The rest is up to us.

I say this with the utmost respect for you, Jim, and what you've accomplished, as well as the RED team.

[feb31films]

In defense of Michael Mann and "Miami Vice", it's clear when comparing that movie to something like "Zodiac" ... that Michael Mann is not even attempting a classic film aesthetic.
He's attempting to discover a unique "digital aesthetic" in which the artifacts of the medium are enhanced and exaggerated, not hidden in an attempt at a film look.

Great point, David. Sometimes Directors and DP's actually do things on purpose!

I think one of the real tragedies of the advent of Digital Cinema is that so many people have tried to bend the digital tools to "copy" a film look. I applaud Michael Mann for doing what he did in trying to discover the new aesthetic. Whether or not he succeeded is up to the individual viewer, but the fact that he made the effort is worthy of note. The tools are evolving so rapidly now with new exciting options, yet it seems most people are just trying to do exactly what they have been for years, only cheaper. I remember back in film school watching cinema from the late 60s and early 70s. SO MANY people were experimenting, pioneering new techniques and discovering new aesthetics. Digital cinema (and distribution) is affording us a new opportunity to experiment and create and push the boundaries. I truly hope more of us take advantage of that.

[peter roehsler]

8. bad framing?

The english word for the device at least is finder, while the german word for finder is `seeker´ (sucher) - some shooters take this verbally, with their cams running.

[dalen johnson]

I guess what I'm saying is that if bad RED footage is posted... it is not our fault... :-)

Jim

- mini collection of a red video gallery can offset any claim like that...which has already been started

- as silly as it may sound to some of the 'pros', seeing that red is going to enter a new market - it would be great to see something like what Lynda.com does...video tutorials on using the red and 'videography'/cinematography in general. Again, this might seem like an odd concept to some, but its not far fetched at all. - :)

Peace

dalen

[Gunleik Groven]

I guess what I'm saying is that if bad RED footage is posted... it is not our fault... :-)

Jim

Yes. Ultimately you are. Of course! -;)

Hey, you lured and tricked us all to believe that the camera is actually a real thing - with your beautifull images, so you, Sir - must take personal credit and resposibility for every frame shot with a Red -;)

Gunleik