Red One Vs Epic Vs everything else

[Rehan Malik]

I'm sure this topic has been done to death, but it's bugged me for a while. I was one of the first purchasers of the Original Red One camera when it came out a century ago. We made a few independent features, which launched a pretty decent career for me. I remember being blown away continuously by the quality of the footage coming out of the camera.

To cut a long story short - the years have gone by and in my work life I've used a lot of cameras (Alexas, Sonys, etc), but nothing has wowed me as much as the first time I saw the original Red One image. Don't get me wrong, they produce beautiful images, but there was something (AND I HATE TO USE THE WORD) "Cinematic" and special that hasn't been reproduced within that price point since.

I've kept up as a camera hobbyist/enthusiast and purchased/played with/and sold many cameras in the last few years, hoping to recapture the Red One magic, but nothing seems to match up. This bugged me so much so, that a few weeks ago, I spent a few LONG weekends comparing footage from the new FX9's, BMPCCs, Canons, Panasonics, etc. But each time, on YouTube/Vimeo, Red One footage really stands out. Is this just me (it probably is).

In fact, as my yearly camera buying itch came up, I decided to buy an old used Red One AND an old used Red Epic MX. Though again, the Red Epic MX doesn't seem to match the Red One footage - I'm waiting for delivery to compare the two. Am I right, wrong or simply going mad?

Your opinions will be greatly appreciated.

And if you agree, I want to petition Red to bring out a small form factor MX camera for the budget market! :)

End of essay

[Brian Timmons]

Rehan-
I couldn't agree with you more.
The Mysterium is still a great sensor and I think the OLPF, and lack of artificial sharpening in the RED ONE are also big parts of the equation.
I'm still shooting pretty regularly with my RED One MX.
Have to admit though that Komodo satisfies a lot of what you might want in a small factor MX and then some.

Brian Timmons
BRITIM/MEDIA

[Rehan Malik]

Thanks Brian. This might be a controversial thing to say. I do admire the footage that's coming out of the Komodo. But don't love it like I did the Red One. Perhaps it's because I'm just an old timer!

BTW do you see a difference between the Red One MX and the Red Epic MX - because I can, on the examples I have seen online. Red One seems more cinem****.

[Björn Benckert]

Thanks Brian. This might be a controversial thing to say. I do admire the footage that's coming out of the Komodo. But don't love it like I did the Red One. Perhaps it's because I'm just an old timer!

BTW do you see a difference between the Red One MX and the Red Epic MX - because I can, on the examples I have seen online. Red One seems more cinem****.

I think if you push dragon, monstro or Komodo a few stops and shoot with high compression you get that organic feel that the Red one came with. Basically that camera was less light sensitive and ran with quite high compression. Today all cameras shoot extremely clean and to me that makes the image feel dead in a way. Look at Roy Andersons work, he shoots all his filma on his old MX and he's has his own word for it: "Molerisk" in Swedish, I guess "Moleric" in English, Translated it would be something like "painted" or "structure of a painting".

You get that texture in the more modern cameras if you shoot something like 4000ISO and push the compression to 12:1 or such in Monstro. Looks fantastic for the right project if you ask me. The image should not be underexposed but exposed to the left when doing it to shine the best. You can do the same with with dragon but go less aggressive on the compression and iso. Dragon has a really nice noise structure if shot this way.

[Michael Hastings]

In the underwater world there were many that thought the original Mysterium was nicer than the MX version.

I was looking at some old Mysterium footage the other day of a black woman (not always the easiest to capture well) and the tonal quality was beautiful even though it was an old redcine basic grade.

[Rehan Malik]

That's amazing insight Bjorn. I've got to try that with a modern camera. I agree that in our rush for the next best thing, our new tech has surpassed the quirks of film which was organic and relateable to too crisp which is a bit more unsatisfying.

I'll have to look up Roy Anderson's work. Going to appropriate the word Molerisk. Thanks!

[Rehan Malik]

Michael, it's actually the old Mysterium that I've purchased. I was looking at old raw footage that I shot with it and it blew me away - how vivid and painting-like it is.

[Steve Sherrick]

Rehan, always good to see the R1 pop up in the topics. Out of curiosity, are you processing with IPP2 or do you use the legacy Redlogfilm workflow?

[Rehan Malik]

Hi Steve, I haven't received them yet! But I'm interested in IPP2. Will need to read up on it a bit more. What's your experience?

[Steve Sherrick]

Hi Steve, I haven't received them yet! But I'm interested in IPP2. Will need to read up on it a bit more. What's your experience?

It will put your R1 footage into the current color science. Now whether that is an advantage or disadvantage depends on the look you are trying to achieve. The good news is that it will be easy for you to compare once you get the cameras. Whether you are working in Redcine-X or Resolve, basically you can flip a switch and try out each and see what you like. I do think there was an improvement in terms of skin tones with IPP2 and R1 so it's worth a look. That's the beauty of RAW.