ENG does not belonge here

[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!

[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.