RED CAMERA Prelim. Specs

[Jarred Land]

Here is what we know so far.. but these specs can all change in a moment.

Red's website : http://www.red.com

Here are some target specs:

-4k, 4520 x 2540 Mysterium CMOS sensor, true S35mm sized.

-60p frame rate at full resolution.

-Various Outputs. RAW 4:4:4 via Fiber, 4:2:2 HDI, or RED codec.

-Various Frame Rates. 24p, 30p, 60p and variable.

-Various Bandwidths. 100,80,60,50,25,19 Mbps.

-Custom lenses, or PL mounts. Red will be making custom glass, with switchable mounts for other lenses.

-Various Recording Destinations. External Drives, RED flash arrays, Blue Ray, tape.

RED also plans on making accessories.


Very exciting news.. I will update these Specs as they come out.

[razamalik]

wow :thumbsup: .... the future is red :grin:

[Terry_Lasater]

Wow, I feel like I've just been granted access into a secret society!

Red, eh? The specs look great!

[mikkowilson]

..as does the decor here at this 'special' corner of DVXuser..

- Mikko

[Shaw]

Indeed Mikko! I'm really digging the red.

[JoeNash]

its going to kill my wallet :(

[Jarred Land]

its going to kill my wallet :('

red-- blood-- kill :evil:

How much do kidneys go for nowadays? You might be able to leave your wallet alone :)

[Slimothy]

I thought this was a myth. They're really makin these things?

[Jarred Land]

I thought this was a myth. They're really makin these things?

well, i sure hope so, or Im gonna look like an ass in a couple months.

[mikkowilson]

...

[Filmjunkie677]

Blue ray???!!! Interesting.

[Luis Caffesse]

well, i sure hope so, or Im gonna look like an ass in a couple months.

A couple of months?
I'm sure you'll do something to make you look like an ass before then Jarred.
Don't doubt yourself so much.
:thumbsup:

[mikkowilson]

Luis wins...

[Luis Caffesse]

Luis wins...

Jarred owns this place...and the house always wins mikko.

[mikkowilson]

Yeah, but I still always bet on black! (sorry, but it's true)

[Slimothy]

I just read the other thread. I'm all up to speed now :thumbsup:

[Jarred Land]

A couple of months?
I'm sure you'll do something to make you look like an ass before then Jarred.
Don't doubt yourself so much.
:thumbsup:

oh dont worry.. i bet that will happen before midnight. :cry:

[Flintstone]

So, what's the price range on this "little" baby? A quarter of a million dollar? I think it's a tad above all of our budgets combined?

[thisiswells]

They'll probably sell the cameras at a loss, but don't worry, they'll make it up in volume!

[blckhawk542]

Thats crazy!!

This cam is gonna be a beast!!

...i wonder how it would do in a match against the HVX...hm....

[Jaime Valles]

So, what's the price range on this "little" baby? A quarter of a million dollar? I think it's a tad above all of our budgets combined?
Well, that's the real question. I'm sure the Viper, Dalsa, and Arri D20 all provide stunning imagery, but their cost is simply prohibitive. Might as well shoot on 35mm film to begin with.

I think what'll make this a winner will be an extremely lowball price. Say $15,000 or so. They're gonna throw this camera into the ring with the HVX, XL-H1, HD100 and Z1, and blow them all to smithereens (sp?).

[John_Moore]

If we're talking features, a feature I'd love to see is a realtime framerate adjustment.

For example, starting at start 24P, then shifting to 60p smoothly, so that when it was played back, it would result in a nice slow motion transition.

That's a feature I wish they'd have put on the HVX. Why not on the RED?

[235 Studios]

It's making me drool, that's for sure, but I want to see an actual camera, and actual footage- as of now, it is all hype ..... exciting indeed, but hype none the less.

[dvpixl]

what is that icon on their site a shape of? Is that hinting at the shape of the camera?

I rike RED.

[J.R. Hudson]

Can I get a Follow Focus built in? Or what?

Can I get the Magical Gamma of the DVX?

Can it feel like a movie camera?

Damn it

[urbanfx]

is this a christmas joke or something?

[Barry_Green]

Not a joke. This is the ultimate digital cinema camera being designed by a serious enthusiast who also happens to be a billionaire so he can afford to do it right.

Now, we have no indication of what the price might be -- might be $250,000; might be $100,000; we don't know. But it sounds like they're definitely doing it right, and the fact that they're reaching out to the users to get input on what they need to design into it is also most promising.

[shAi]

exciting.. ha!

[Policar]

John Moore, rack framerates aren't easy. You need to open the aperture at the same rate you shift up the framerate, so you'd need an extra stop to shoot 48fps, and maybe a stop and a half to shoot 60fps. Plus, programming the camera to do that can't be simple, either.

You'd have to open the aperture AS you overcrank so either the camera has to automatically do that, or you have to use a follow focus but attatch the gear to the aperture ring...except that only PL mount lenses let you do that. So it makes sense they left out this feature. Plus, you can totally fake it in post anyhow.

Oh, and my magic price fairies tell me they're shooting for between $25,000-$75,000.

[DanielG]

Not a joke. This is the ultimate digital cinema camera being designed by a serious enthusiast who also happens to be a billionaire so he can afford to do it right.


Yup.

In most of these cameras, there is about $100 of integrated circuits. Heck, maybe $200 in circuits. And hundreds of thousands of engineering hours getting it to work just right. If you spread those engineering hours out a lot of units, the cost can come down.

If there are a million people who want to buy this camera, it can be cheap (relatively speaking). But if it is going to be a rental house mostly camera, the number of units sold will many orders of magnitude lower and the price will be many orders of magnitude higher. You need to pay for those R * D hours somehow.

One of the design 'nodes' for video cameras has been tape transport. They have been organized around multiples of 25 Mbps. The HVX200 steps past that to offer recording to memory and Focus is offering harddisk recording via Firewire. Now that RAID is more common, the bandwidth that was available only on 100+ Mbps tape transport systems for big bucks is available for a lot less money.

Being a EE, I would like to know more about that Mysterium sensor. This is the interesting part. Other people have taken a shot at this stuff. Carver Mead (google that name) did the Foveon project and it hasn't taken off yet.

But more power to you, Mr. Jannard. While I think this camera will be out of my price range for the kind of shooting I do, I hope you pull it off.

[Luis Caffesse]

But if it is going to be a rental house mostly camera, the number of units sold will many orders of magnitude lower and the price will be many orders of magnitude higher.

This camera will not be a 'rental house' camera.
At least it seems clear so far that that is not the intention.

[J.R. Hudson]

-- might be $250,000; might be $100,000

Well don;t ruin the fantasy. I thought this would be for people like us.

That's be like pimping the new 2006 Porshe in the Hyundai forum.

[spencer]

It's times like these in which minimum wage is really a drag.

I was just calculating how long it would take me to get an HVX alone on my current hours, and then this info starts popping up, and i see prices higher than both the varicam and the cinealta.

Looks like it's time to start doing things robert rodriguez style: Sell myself to science!

[DanielG]

Here is the $100,000 question:

How much would you be willing to pay for this camera?

Body?

Good zoom lens start around $15,000. This guy is taking all the risk of doing a camera body and enabling a new generation of media capture, but if the body goes for $5,000, most of the reward will go to the lens maker. So, does that push the body out to $20,000? I hope not.

I'm thinking that $5,000 for the body, $3,000 for a RAID system based on laptop disks are about right. He could charge more than that, but it would reduce the number of buyers. The lens is the troublesome part. If he can get a usable zoom lens for $2,000, then he would get a lot of buyers.

[Luis Caffesse]

Speculation on the price is really just meaningless right now without any details on the camera (which hasn't been designed as of yet).

Why not discuss what options/features you'd like to see on it?
I'm assuming that if Jim is willing to take the time to post in here, he'd be willing to listen to whatever feedback they might get from potential users.

[J.R. Hudson]

$5000.00

Damn it.

This may be comical but I'm thinking of every low budget wannabe guerilla filmmaker out there. I'm thinking of every HVX and DVX owner.

[Policar]

John, I'm wishing the same thing, but it's clear that this isn't the same thing as the dvx. With a 35mm sensor and especially with 4k resolution, you need a whole camera crew to keep the thing in focus as well as an expensive monitor and a great lens. If it's five grand that's great, but that doesn't change the fact that a set of lenses for it is 20 grand for only decent glass.

The thing is, though, it will probably cost less than the varicam (and lenses will be cheaper) so SOME people will be able to afford it, and rental houses will be able to buy them like crazy.

Sure, I'm not going to be able to buy one (not for a long while yet at least), but I will be able to afford to rent one, and if they go for a few thousand a week with lenses, that means that you can shoot a feature with 35mm quality (better, since you can do a digital intermediate at 4k resolution) in a couple weeks with a smaller crew for 10-20 thousand dollars. You could make a short film in a weekend for a couple thousand. Sure that's not dirt cheap, but it's so ridiculously much less than the current cost, that it's next to nothing by comparison.

Still, I want to be proved wrong. If this thing is under 5 grand I'll take two.

[Graeme_Nattress]

I don't need a camera crew to focus a DSLR - who says you have to use the whole sensor or use the lowest f-stop? Glass - should be no more expensive than decent top end SLR glass for primes, a bit more for zooms. I'd say it's easier to make good glass for a big sensor than a small one!

Graeme

[Policar]

I don't need a camera crew to focus my dSLR either, however:
•It has autofocus, although I often don't use it.
•I can spend more than 1/24th of a second setting focus as things move and I typically shoot stationary objects.
•The camera itself is never in motion while I shoot.
•It has an optical viewfinder.
•Even with an optical viewfinder and a few seconds to set up focus, I still can't get precise focus at f1.4 100% of the time.

You AT LEAST need a focus puller and an external monitor. With fancy camera moves, you need an electronically controlled remote control focus thingy.

Also, I'm not going to argue that cinema lenses SHOULD be as cheap as SLR glass, but they are not. Furthermore, they're just bigger, are made in much smaller quantities, and must have focus rings and geared aperture rings, etc. which make them special order items and thus higher profit margins are needed and thus the absurd prices.

[DanielG]

Speculation on the price is really just meaningless right now without any details on the camera (which hasn't been designed as of yet).

Why not discuss what options/features you'd like to see on it?
I'm assuming that if Jim is willing to take the time to post in here, he'd be willing to listen to whatever feedback they might get from potential users.

I design microprocessor based systems, so looking at the cost/price issues is something I do. I look at what they are trying to do and see that it could be done in two custom circuits in addition to the sensor. I look at it in terms of a transistor budget.

As for options, since it will be a microprocessor based system, they can implement features very cheaply. What will they do? That is hard to say. Common business practices are to try to feature grade the market (good - better - best) to build in a desire to upgrade to the more expensive model. The truth is that they all cost the same to make. Are they going recognize that we understand how things are made and not try to move us up market from the CE to the LX, or from the LX to the LXE?

The one feature I would like is the abilty to set up the camera with a laptop. Trying to manage all of the set up items via the menu/joystick interface on the DVX100 was a pain. I was always clicking the thing the wrong way. I used the remote some times, but the ability to see such a small set of options at any one time was a limitation. I liked the 6 saved setups with the DVX100, but I would like to manage it from a laptop. I would like to have advanced logging to a laptop. I would like to have the information about a particular shot pulled into my NLE as additonal information.

I was at NAB a couple of years ago and mentioned the desire to have logging available via Bluetooth and the Panasonic guy said "Why would you want that?" Some of these companies are more concerned with selling what they have than listening to what people want to buy. And if you have already invested in the R * D for a product, you had better be selling what you have today, not what you may build tomorrow (see Adam Osborne)

[J.R. Hudson]

John, I'm wishing the same thing

Reality tells me it will be fun to speculate about (See the HVX threads) but in the end the price tag is going to make about 1% of the persons on this site be able to afford it

Let's hope when Mr Billionaire says 'We' (See his opening statement) he does not mean 'We millionaires..............'

:lipsrseal

[Luis Caffesse]

Let's hope when Mr Billionaire says 'We' (See his opening statement) he does not mean 'We millionaires..............'
:lipsrseal

Hahaha.

It's been said on this site that it will be 'affordable' and the goal is to hit a wide market, not just rental houses.

I think we might be surprised at the range which is eventually announced.
(though I think you can let go of the 5K dream John)

[Jannard]

John,

Please call me Jim. Someone posted earlier that if this camera was not targeted to this group I wouldn't spend so much time here. If only 1% of this group could afford our camera then we have failed. As for the "....aire" part, I firmly believe that a person IS what he DOES... nothing more or less.

Jim

[J.R. Hudson]

Damn it Jim!

That's exactly what I needed to hear.

Bring it on!

[Jarred Land]

That's be like pimping the new 2006 Porshe in the Hyundai forum.

sometimes John you say something so smart that I dont think you know it when you are writing it.. this is one of them.

[Daniel Skubal]

I'm pretty excited about this camera, but at the same time, I think I am going to boycott learning about it. I'm fairly certain that this camera is going to be WAY out of my price range, and therefore there's no point in drooling. It's like taking a steak that's tied to a pole and dangling it over a dog's head... it's a pointless chase.

[Luis Caffesse]

I find it really funny that when the thing that so many of us have talked about
actually looks like it's happening all we seem to be able to do is talk about reasons why it WON'T happen.
Or won't happen for us anyhow.

For years it's been said that the only way the floodgates for the independents were going to open was for a new company,
one with no ties and no upper market to protect, to give us a viable and affordable high quality camera.

Now here we have a guy who is obviously serious, dedicated, and passionate about what he's doing.
He's got the resources to make it happen and he's made his mission clear.

My question is, when someone presents you with an opportunity like this, do you want to tell him why it won't work?
Or how you won't be able to afford it (when everything he's said negates that)?

Or do you want to throw in your two cents, support the effort,
and hopefully have some input in the design of what could eventually be
the most revolutionary camera since we moved away from celluloid?

I'm going with the second option.

[Daniel Skubal]

Edit: I retract what I said. I hadn't read all of the posts.

[razamalik]

i'l go with the second option too Luis :thumbsup:

[razamalik]

hope no one minds me using RED's logo in my avatar.... :) seriously guys im dreaming RED :happy:

[DanielG]

My question is, when someone presents you with an opportunity like this, do you want to tell him why it won't work?


I don't recall seeing people say that it wouldn't work, just some apprehension about the probable price. Jim Jannand says

If only 1% of this group could afford our camera then we have failed.

That's the right thing to say and I hope he can pull it off.

One of the things that he needs to know is how much are willing to pay for something. That is part of his due diligence process. What is the threshold for making a purchase? Is it $5,000, $8,000, $10,000, $15,000?

With the HVX-200 and two memory cards listing at $10,000, that is the price point at which I think this camera will be listed. Is that too much money for this group?

[Isaac_Brody]

2005 was a good year for realistic pipedreams. A year ago no one thought we'd get the HVX featureset for under 10K. I hope 2006 yields some magic beanstalk beans. Go Jim go. :beer:

[Zach Lien]

i would easily sell one of my boys for this. and no, i dont have kids.

[pastywhiteboy]

Well, everyone seems to keep suggesting that the lenses are going to be sooooo expensive for this camera... did everyone forget who is making this camera? It seemed to be pretty much a given that Mr. Jannard would be making lenses for this seeing as how he stated "We want to know that we can record to just about any media. And use the lenses we have. Plus design some new ones we wish were being built but aren't."
I'm not saying the lenses will be cheap to produce, but I'm sure that Red will be incurring less expense on lenses than other manufacturers who get their lenses from a third party company.
Anyway, there really shouldn't be so much worry about pricing since there is no way we're going to know a price range until at least NAB.

By the way - thanks a bunch, Mr. Jannard, not just for taking on such an incredible project, but for making yourself available enough to speak directly with us on this forum, and thanks for valuing our opinions... it means a lot to us that you would do that.

-pastywhiteboy

[Gordon JL]

Well, sure, it looks to be a damn good camera. The specs are great. But how much does it cost? That's really the most important factor.

By the way, how do the specs compare to those of the HD cameras used on the Star Wars films or Collateral? I've read the camera used on Collateral has uncompressed footage.

And when is NAB 2006 (and don't say "in 2006"), because I can't wait to see what this camera is all about.

[MarcusX]

NAB: April 24 - 27, 2006 Las Vegas

Collateral was shot with a Thomson Viper Filmstream camera. Quick specs: 4:4:4 uncompressed 10 bit, max. 1080p at 25 fps.

Star Wars was shot on Sony CineAlta F900 & F950. 4:4:4 (2/3"), max. 1080p 30 fps.

The RED camera will have bigger (better) sensors (35mm), a higher resultion (2540p) and a higher framerate (60 fps).

[Mr. Blonde]

Red will be in the range of 40-50g's, and with these specs, I'd pay that money in a second for this cam.

[John C Lyons]

this is definitely going to be a badass cam, for someone to shoot with! oh well, i can read about it on here for free.

[DanielG]

Well, everyone seems to keep suggesting that the lenses are going to be sooooo expensive for this camera... did everyone forget who is making this camera? It seemed to be pretty much a given that Mr. Jannard would be making lenses for this seeing as how he stated "We want to know that we can record to just about any media. And use the lenses we have. Plus design some new ones we wish were being built but aren't."


Jim Jannand is a marketeer, not a researcher/inventor. I don't think that he is going to set up a factory to make lenses. There are a lot of companies making lens already and the factor that was a differentiator for lens making, precision, is far easier to attain these days than it was 40 years ago. I don't think that he has invented a new CMOS process for making chips. I don't think that he has invented a new sensor.

Jim Jannand is good at what is called "execution play" in the venture capital business. I think he will qualify a vendor for the lens, subcontract out the making of the chips (IBM had 100 engineers working on the CPU for the XBOX 360; I don't think that Jim Jannand is going to ramp up to that head count to make the chips). I think that he is looking at the packaging and ergonomics because that is the kind of thing he understands. The record shows that he is a "hands on" kind of guy.

The big design hurdle for this camera is the circuit design, and getting it down to a low power (battery) application. It takes a certain amount of transistors to do an encoder. I-frame only encoder takes fewer transistors than IBBP of MPEG2. The amount of data in a frame is substantial. 4520x2540x4 bytes is 45 Mbytes per frame. Crunching that amount of data takes a lot of bus cycles. The Foveon chip uses analog circuitry to perform a kind of compression and could halve that inital read to around 25 Mbytes per frame. Getting it down to 4:2:2 is pretty easy to do, but the Red codec? Dunno there. If they are rolling a new codec, something like a full frame wavelet encoder, they might get something that runs off a battery. I haven't kept up on wavelet based encoder silicon. Analog Devices has some chips that do that, but I don't know if anyone else has done work in this area. I think that running 25 Mbytes of data through a DCT based encoder is going to draw a lot more power than most camera batteries provide.

This project is doable, and I wish him the utmost of success. Depending on how many chips they do, the start up cost of this venture can easily top $15 million. If this turns into a $50 million / year business, that is a good investment. At $10,000, that is 5,000 cameras per year. How many units has the DVX100 sold? How big is this market? He understands how to reach the sweet spot in the market. Before Oakley, sunglasses were cheap and price was a point of competition. The Oakley glasses were expensive for the day, but people took better care of them because they were expensive and now $100 for sunglasses is not uncommon.

I hope that he pulls this off and makes an affordable, highly capable camera.

[zuvis]

Hi to all,

Not long ago I found out about Kinetta cam, got very exited, and later got to know that their project is in works for some time now and nothing is out yet.
Though I like the concept of pure eCinema cam very much and looking forward for RED cam as it fits in to that concept very well and it might be actually affordable..

As for a sencors: germans made one -

http://www.ehd.de/products/announcements/si1920hd.htm

It does all we need except its 2/3" sencor, though the price for that head is - EUR 4.558,00 - that price can put us in the perspective of how much can RED cam cost adding the rest of gear like other electronics and etc.

[its my thirst post so it got a bit messy, I promise in future Ill be more clear]

[mmm]

John Moore, rack framerates aren't easy. You need to open the aperture at the same rate you shift up the framerate, so you'd need an extra stop to shoot 48fps, and maybe a stop and a half to shoot 60fps. Plus, programming the camera to do that can't be simple, either.

You'd have to open the aperture AS you overcrank so either the camera has to automatically do that, or you have to use a follow focus but attatch the gear to the aperture ring...except that only PL mount lenses let you do that. So it makes sense they left out this feature. Plus, you can totally fake it in post anyhow.

Oh, and my magic price fairies tell me they're shooting for between $25,000-$75,000.

Policar,

I see no reason to not have ramping... lock the shutter speed to 1/60 (for example) and then there is no need to alter the iris. On a film camera this isn't possible because exposure depends on framerate, however, this ain't film.

I'm kinda thinking that 4K is excessive.

What does everyone plan on doing with a 4k film exactly!?!

Stick with 2K and save teh cash IMO.

[eqwalker]

Since Jim wanted to get feedback from people here on what they would like for it to be like, what about the size of the body? Should it be a shoulder unit (like the XL series) or handheld (like the DVX,HVX)? Could it even be that small with the size of the sensor, circuits, attachments, etc. that it would take to make it function? What would people prefer?

[Jarred Land]

about the ramping.. i agree with mmm.. for rampinng shoot at a higher speed and in post cut it down.

[Luis Caffesse]

Since Jim wanted to get feedback from people here on what they would like for it to be like, what about the size of the body? Should it be a shoulder unit (like the XL series) or handheld (like the DVX,HVX)? Could it even be that small with the size of the sensor, circuits, attachments, etc. that it would take to make it function? What would people prefer?


Personally, I'm with John - I like the Arri design more than the minima though (http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showpost.php?p=377275&postcount=1)

I see no reason to base this camera on any existing video camera.
I swear I'll run away screaming if come NAB we see yet another ENG BetaSP-type form factor.
ugh.

[athouguia]

Since Jim wanted to get feedback from people here on what they would like for it to be like, what about the size of the body? Should it be a shoulder unit (like the XL series) or handheld (like the DVX,HVX)? Could it even be that small with the size of the sensor, circuits, attachments, etc. that it would take to make it function? What would people prefer?

I see no reason to put such a beast inside a handycam body. In my opinion that's a limitation of the HVX200.

[spencer]

Red will be in the range of 40-50g's, and with these specs, I'd pay that money in a second for this cam.


Is that a quote based on the equipment it's going to use or from somewhere else?

I mean, it makes sense, and I suppose it would be very very VERY good when offering comparison to the fact that the cinealta costs just a little bit more and thompson's are about just the same.

Unfortunately enough, 40-50g's is something I like to call my college tuition, so I'm gonna stick to the ol' hvx until i get rich or become a giant hollywood filmmaker (optimism is such a let down, isn't it?:happy: )

Body wise, i think a shoulder mount thing would make sense, yeah. This things probably gonna be fairly big in comparison to most of the cameras being put out for "prosumers." The arri style looks cool becuase you can hold it and it also looks like you can put it on your shoulder; but it also seems small enough so that you could just carry it around, you know?

[Tim Miller]

Holy cow, I just found this thread, let alone camera. Consider my mind blown.

[pastywhiteboy]

Since Jim wanted to get feedback from people here on what they would like for it to be like, what about the size of the body? Should it be a shoulder unit (like the XL series) or handheld (like the DVX,HVX)? Could it even be that small with the size of the sensor, circuits, attachments, etc. that it would take to make it function? What would people prefer?
How about both... since this is not necessarily going to be based off of or limited by a current design, why wouldn't it be feasible to make a camera that can be used both on the shoulder and in the hands? Maybe have a removable/foldable shoulder mount that is included with the camera? Is it possible to have the best of both worlds or am I just dreaming? Then again, this camera sounds pretty dream-like already!

-pasty

[razamalik]

How about both... since this is not necessarily going to be based off of or limited by a current design, why wouldn't it be feasible to make a camera that can be used both on the shoulder and in the hands? Maybe have a removable/foldable shoulder mount that is included with the camera? Is it possible to have the best of both worlds or am I just dreaming? Then again, this camera sounds pretty dream-like already!

-pasty

Thats exactly what i was hoping for when Pany first announced HVX, in my opinion all handheld cams should come with a removable/foldable shoulder mount... its an essential in my case.... hey and i wouldn’t mind if manufacturers throw a sweet looking mattebox in the supplied accessories too :)

i know m dreaming too much here lolz but hey 4k @ 60FPS is worth dreaming about :cheesy:

[mmm]

A handheld/shoulder mount design would need a clever viewfinder... like attempted in the Z1 with the LCD. Any ideas guys?

[Luis Caffesse]

A handheld/shoulder mount design would need a clever viewfinder... like attempted in the Z1 with the LCD. Any ideas guys?


It's not that difficult.
Just look at the Arri 235 & Aaton Minima bodies that John posted pictures of.
Like I said earlier, the Kinetta has a very similar design.
For example, the handle atop the Kinetta looks like it came straight off the Arri.

I think this project would be much better off taking it's cues from film camera designs.
But I suppose that is just a matter of preference.

[pastywhiteboy]

A handheld/shoulder mount design would need a clever viewfinder... like attempted in the Z1 with the LCD. Any ideas guys?
Odd idea, but it just kinda popped into my head... what if there were a bayonette style lens hood included (similar to the Z1) that had a flip out LCD on the side of the hood. The bayonette mount that the hood would go onto would serve as a sort of "video hot shoe" through which the video signal passed to the LCD (would that be easy to do?). Being on the hood, the LCD would not be in the way of any buttons, knobs, lenses, etc.

The "LCD hood" wouldn't even necessarily need to be included with the camera, since not everyone uses an LCD, but it could be a pretty sweet accessory... selling it separately would also help bring the camera body price down. It'd probably actually be more like an "LCD matte box" than it would a hood.

Not sure if this idea even makes sense, but it's the first thing that popped into my head.

-pasty

[fomoDVXpal]

Thats exactly what i was hoping for when Pany first announced HVX, in my opinion all handheld cams should come with a removable/foldable shoulder mount... its an essential in my case.... hey and i wouldn’t mind if manufacturers throw a sweet looking mattebox in the supplied accessories too :)

i know m dreaming too much here lolz but hey 4k @ 60FPS is worth dreaming about :cheesy:



It would be OK, but not perfect because the weight distribution will still be landing on your wrist. Ever used the Canon XLx series? NEVER AGAIN. If there's gonna be a shoulder attachment let it have a compartment to put extra weight (e.g batteries etc) in it so the centre of gravity is directly on your shoulder.

thanks
Fo

[athouguia]

They could use a body like the HD100, it's still the better balanced and ergonomic among these light cameras. But I don't believe they will make a small and light camera, it will be a Cinealta style and will probably cost even more.

[razamalik]

It would be OK, but not perfect because the weight distribution will still be landing on your wrist. Ever used the Canon XLx series? NEVER AGAIN. If there's gonna be a shoulder attachment let it have a compartment to put extra weight (e.g batteries etc) in it so the centre of gravity is directly on your shoulder.

thanks
Fo

Yeah i know what you mean mate but no i did not mean a shoulder mount like Canon's XLx series they can kill your wrist. I was talking about something more like the DvRig Pro or the PAG Orbitor with a compartment for External FW or USB2 HDD or batteries etc.


They could use a body like the HD100, it's still the better balanced and ergonomic among these light cameras. But I don't believe they will make a small and light camera, it will be a Cinealta style and will probably cost even more.

Yes i must say i love the form factor of JVC HD100 its got the look and with some weight on the back it can balance nicely on the shoulder yet light enough to be handheld... but i will have to disagree about the size and price you mentioned.... from what i have read on this forum and on the RED webiste i truly believe it will be much lighter than CineAlta and priced much more reasonably... though they could probably sell it for much more than the price of CineAlta as from the specs it beats the CineAlta hands down on paper... but thats what this project is all about if you read Jim's posts here... its about making the camera affordable enough for US (DVXUSERS / independent/low budget film makers/enthusiaists/prosumers).

Thanks

[Petrus]

About lenses (and design): with a 35mm sized chip this new design needs 35mm sized lenses, exactly the same glass 35mm film cameras use, or 35mm slr lenses (used as primes mostly, as the slr zooms are short range and/or slow). This means that even if the sensor unit is small and cheap (?), the lens is not. This means you can forget all DVX100 -style design dreams, shooting handheld etc. And the $5000 price tag for a working unit. Just take a look at the cine lens price lists, pick a good zoom (weighing XX kg), add $xxxx to that. There is your final price.

I find it really funny that somebody would think that the electronics price/performance trend would also apply to "physical" things like optics. Why are the cars not capable attaining the speed of sound, weigh 10 grams, carry 1000 people and cost 10 cents. They should, if the car designers were as good as the electronics engineers... The same applies to the optics. Setting up a new factory is not going the change the laws of optics and the cost of making good lenses.

[zuvis]

thirst:


...This means that even if the sensor unit is small and cheap (?), the lens is not. This means you can forget all DVX100 -style design dreams, shooting handheld etc. And the $5000 price tag for a working unit. Just take a look at the cine lens price lists, pick a good zoom (weighing XX kg), add $xxxx to that. There is your final price...

That just confirms that camera head should be sold separately [and bundled with RED lenses, just to have a easy option if one wants everything to be from one vendor], that way I get chance to buy cheap 4k eCinema cam with possibility to rent cine lenses from my local rental or buy few later if my economy is getting better.

second:

It is absolutely very important that frame-rates are compatible with PAL and NTSC in one package. Just not to make the same mistake as panasonic with HVX. It sucks to sit here in europe and know that US/Japan are very happy HVX´ing and I can´t and have to wait. [24fps next to 23.98fps, and 25 and 50 - you know what I mean - 50hz and 60hz able cam.]

[Petrus]

One question comes to mind: How are we going to enjoy this huge resolution? Even the best LCD/plasma screens have only a quarter of the proposed RED resolution, and digital cinemas have and will have just the normal HDTV projectors? At least that will be the case for a long time. Why burden the whole system with 4X the data compared to what is going to be seen at best. Or is this just future-proofing to the extreme?

I am not against quality, but why bother if nobody can see it?

(sorry, I have not read thorough all the posts, maybe this has been answered already)

[toke lahti]

If you need a less expensive zoom, how about EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM?
It's in 2k price range.

[Pettersen]

Congrats, guys. You had me drooling.

http://aural-innovations.com/radio/drool.jpg

[toke lahti]

I am not against quality, but why bother if nobody can see it?

Read th the specs:
http://dcimovies.com/DCI_Digital_Cinema_System_Spec_v1.pdf

There are alreade 4k-projectors and more coming and they'll get cheaper fast when they hit the mainstream.

[zuvis]

Let´s say RED cam has a portatable storage system, you go to the field and shot your talent, of load files to raid or firewire external and make proxy copies of all files, lets say, in HD resolution [720p fror exp. - will be enjoyable on almost any lsd], then do your ofline cut, then go online, make final color timing, finally render and bring all to lab to print it to film. Then you will enjoy the full 4k resolution.

OH yes, forgot to add 4k projector option...

[Petrus]

Using SLR lenses means that there must be a way of adjusting the aperture via the "camera" module or an adapter, as modern SLR lenses have no f-stop ring on them. And they have no servo zooms. Using them on a great hi-rez sensor module to make movies is like using bicycle wheels on a BMW.

(terveisiä Espoosta...)

[Petrus]

Film transfer... yes. Actually the film prints shown on cinemas have less resolution than HDTV (normal second generation film prints from original film negs shown on a good projector is only about 1600*800 pixels)... The only way to enjoy the full rez of 4k digital seems to be 4k projectors, which are few and far between. Maybe in 2 or 3 cinemas at the moment. In the world.

But times change. I begin to understand that this might be reality in 4-6 years time. Maybe.

Great project, this RED.

But I do not need one.

[athouguia]

I think you folks are speculating something that will never exist, the best HD cam ever built affordable for the typical dvx user. That is not going to happen, this camera will certainly cost a lot more than any HDV. JVC will lunch their new HDV, the GY-HD7000 priced at $27,950 less lens. How can such a superior camera be cheaper then that? No way.

[mcgeedigital]

I think you folks are speculating something that will never exist, the best HD cam ever built affordable for the typical dvx user. That is not going to happen, this camera will certainly cost a lot more than any HDV. JVC will lunch their new HDV, the GY-HD7000 priced at $27,950 less lens. How can such a superior camera be cheaper then that? No way.

Boy I love it when people make predictions like this.

You, nor I know WHAT price point this camera will be.


Crass generalizations like that are pretty useless.

[GenJerDan]

I think you folks are speculating something that will never exist, the best HD cam ever built affordable for the typical dvx user. That is not going to happen, this camera will certainly cost a lot more than any HDV. JVC will lunch their new HDV, the GY-HD7000 priced at $27,950 less lens. How can such a superior camera be cheaper then that? No way.

It can be. The high prices comes from R&D, as stated elsewhere. That's not an on-going expense. If one chooses, one can just eat the R&D costs and sell the product for whatever they want. I do it all the time...but that's because, for me, the R&D is the fun part, and I'd feel guilty for being paid to have fun. :-)

I don't expect anyone else to do likewise, but saying the cam can't be cheaper than...whatever...is just wrong.

[Tzedekh]

I think what'll make this a winner will be an extremely lowball price. Say $15,000 or so.It seems that the major costs will be the CMOS chip, the lenses, and the storage. Right now, a UHD imager capable of 60p at full res probably costs several grand alone. And lenses can cost tens of thousands of dollars. The storage capacities necessary to hold 4:4:4 UHD data will be fairly expensive.

But imager breakthroughs -- permiiting higher definitions at lower costs -- happen regularly, and I'm sure that's one of Jim Jannard's main concerns right now. As to lenses, I suspect that even though his company intends to design and produce a matched set of lenses for the camera, lens prices won't be coming down much. By making Red compatible with existing S35 lenses, he is effectively externalizing the cost of lenses, which is a brilliant move. And as to storage, because Red will be storage medium agnostic, any of a host of technologies -- current and forthcoming -- will be supported. The cost, again, will be external to that of the base camera. And, again, brilliant. This allows Jannard to concentrate on making the Red camera itself the most capable and cost-efficient system possible, while supporting essentially open technologies and promoting user choice.

I expect the core system (sans lens and storage) to be under $20,000.

[DanielG]

It seems that the major costs will be the CMOS chip, the lenses, and the storage. Right now, a UHD imager capable of 60p at full res probably costs several grand alone. And lenses can cost tens of thousands of dollars. The storage capacities necessary to hold 4:4:4 UHD data will be fairly expensive.


I agree with you about externalizing the storage, but I think you should look at the Foveon chip. It has almost the same characteristics as Jim Jannard put up on his site and it is found in the Polaroid 530 camera, which lists at around $300. It becomes a matter of bus bandwidth. 4520*2540*10bits*3 is around 45 megabytes per frame. The Foveon chip uses a form of analog compression to cut that in half, but 25 megabites or 200 megabits per frame is a lot of data to move around. Look for wide buses to ship data around. Writing to flash would indeed take an array, because the only thing fast about flash is bulk erase. It is still EEPROM technology underneath the hood.

Thompson just released a camera with a pair of Analog Devices JPEG2000 chips. This is a full frame wavelet encoder. This camera will do HD, but not at Red resolution.

All that data moving around will require a lot of transistors. It think that heat in the camera will be a problem. Look for a camera with a heat sink on the outside.

I think that he will subcontract out the manufacture of a zoom lens and let people rent primes. A zoom lens will get people shooting and for productions, they will probably rent prime lenses. I'm hoping for a body, zoom lens and storage for shooting clips for under $10k. I think that the market will shrink if the entry cost is higher than $10k.

[athouguia]

Boy I love it when people make predictions like this.

You, nor I know WHAT price point this camera will be.


Crass generalizations like that are pretty useless.

You could share your opinion with us on your first post here instead of criticising others for their posts. Where is the constructive part on your statement? This is a very useless thread based only in predictions, but is always nice to read everyone's opinion about a product yet to be released. We know almost nothing about this camera, we can't do more then speculate.

I don't understand your criticism about my statement, of course I don't know what price range this cam will be in, but I know like everyone else in here that you have to pay for hi top quality products. There are no good cheap HD lens, no hi capacity cheap storage media and no big hi-res cheap sensors. This is a fact, not a prediction... just put all pieces togheter and try to make a camera with the same price point of a HVX200.

Maybe they can beat Sony's Cinealta offering a better and cheaper product, but I don't believe it'll be an affordable camera like a HDV. I'd love to be wrong, lets wait and see.

[bilgami]

is there any pics of this red cam?

[pastywhiteboy]

is there any pics of this red cam?
Probably not until NAB will we have an idea of what it will look like... even then, it'll still just be a body prototype.

[Tzedekh]

I agree with you about externalizing the storage, but I think you should look at the Foveon chip. It has almost the same characteristics as Jim Jannard put up on his site and it is found in the Polaroid 530 camera, which lists at around $300.Foveon chips are as yet unsuitable for HD video cameras, let alone UHD cameras like Red.

There are two models of Foveon sensors, the X3 4.5MP (a.k.a. Foveon FO18-50-F19) and the X3 10.2MP (a.k.a. Foveon X3 Pro 10M and Foveon F7X3-C9110). The 4.5MP, has a 4:3 aspect ratio and, you guessed it, about 4.5 million effective pixels (1,420 x 1,060 x 3 layers [R, G, B]) over an effective area of 7.1 mm x 5.3 mm (effective diagonal, 8.8 mm). The chip can yield this resolution, which wouldn't be adequate for 1080i or 1080p (especially the full 1,920 x 1,080), even at 7 fps; at 30 fps, resolution drops to 640 x 480. Also, greater light sensitivity can be achieved, but only by ganging pixels together, effectively reducing resolution at a precipitous rate.

The 10.2MP has a 3:2 aspect ratio and about 10.2 million effective pixels (2,268 x 1,512 x 3 layers) over an effective area of 20.7 mm x 13.8 mm (effective diagonal, 25 mm). Although this resolution is more than adequate for 1080i or 1080p (but probably not for 2540p without a lot of spatial offset), it can be sustained at a maximum of only 4.4 fps; at 25 fps, resolution drops to 576 x 384, which, oddly, is a lower frame rate/resolution combination than that of the 4.5MP. As with the 4.5MP, increased light sensitivity is achieved at the cost of resolution.

When a Foveon chip can be run at 2540p60 and 3 lux or so, then it will be ready for Red.

[DanielG]

Foveon chips are as yet unsuitable for HD video cameras, let alone UHD cameras like Red.

When a Foveon chip can be run at 2540p60 and 3 lux or so, then it will be ready for Red.

I thought I found a page on the Foveon web site that talked about chips that were very near in size and pixel count to the Red sensor, and now I can't find it back. I didn't do my home work about frame rates. The ability to clock data out of the chip is a function of many different things, often bus size and clock rate. I don't know what those are for that chip.

Doing a sensor is not child's play and I assumed that Red would would with a company that is already making sensors.

This is no easy task. 4500+ * 2500+ * 12 bits * 3 is a lot of data per frame.

[Boomerang]

I read if you pull the photos off the site it has an EXIF for a canon 1D.

[Luis Caffesse]

I read if you pull the photos off the site it has an EXIF for a canon 1D.

This has been brought up more than once.

Go back and look at the top of the page, it clearly says:
"Please note that the footage below was not shot with the Mysterium sensor"

And if you scroll to the bottom of the page it says:
"The above frames are to be judged for size comparison only"

So yes, the shot was taken with a Canon 1D, but it is being used to show you the relative sizes of 2540P, 1080P, 720P and 480P

[Boomerang]

Why would I care to see something shot by a 1D. I thought size didnt matter.

[Luis Caffesse]

Why would I care to see something shot by a 1D
Hmm, well, I guess you wouldn't.


I thought size didnt matter.
I'm sorry to have to be the one to break it to you, but someone lied to you.
It matters very much.

:thumbsup:

[pastywhiteboy]

I'm sorry to have to be the one to break it to you, but someone lied to you.
It matters very much.

They should make a pro cam that shoots in 320x240... it would be totally awesome for compositing. We wouldn't even have to worry about focusing, either... everything would look out of focus!

-pasty

[avery]

how much money we talkin here??

[Luis Caffesse]

how much money we talkin here??

What do you think? (http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=41627)
:)

[Isaac_Brody]

how much money we talkin here??

Better start selling your girlscout cookies.

[araujofh]

Wow, man!
Is this for real? I thought it was vaporware. So, it looks like it is going to be true.
I wonder where Panasonic will stand when this camera comes out. Just hope they come out with something similar, cause I really love Panasonic.

[Tzedekh]

I thought I found a page on the Foveon web site that talked about chips that were very near in size and pixel count to the Red sensor . . .The Foveon X3 Pro 10M does have a pixel count similar to that of the Red sensor. But those pixels are divided among the three (R, G, B) color layers.

[abeljerrod]

...this camera has got to make filmmaking as easy as it's ever been!..

(the above comment is based on the fact that the Red logo looks remarkably like an "EASY" button :laugh: )

[zem]

...this camera has got to make filmmaking as easy as it's ever been!..

if you really think that shooting in raw 4K 12bit is going to be easy (or cheap) in the next two or three years you'll be severly dissapointed.

zem

[Dabong]

I agree with you zem...

[proximity]

This is a joke.

[Luis Caffesse]

This is a joke.

Let's meet back here after NAB.

[zem]

This is a joke.

well, maybe it was, but the point was how everybody seems to be so terribly exited and guesses if it will be under 10'000, or maybe 15'000, that i just have to wonder how many people actually tried to manage a 4K workflow (and if they realize why over 90% of all feature finish on 2K).

persoanlly i'd prefer a 2K camera with better dynamic range, light sensivity, colours and less noise any day. give it a 35mm chip, make it record RAW at 12bit, and output 4:2:2 10bit 1080P over SDI, add a cheap, small, mag made of raid 2.5" disks (and mind the noise), and an interface for recording to external storage (2K raw is still 110MB/sec at 24fps, and 270MB/sec at 60p).

if it can be implemented easily, a full raster 4:2:2 1080p to disc recording with decent compression (say around 50MB/sec) would be cool too, as would a DVI out with zoom functions to hook up a high rez LCD for focus checks.

try to make this camera for 20'000 and you have the indie filmakers dream. specially those who know how to handle the postproduction workflow themself.
probably wont happen though, as everybody is nuts about pixel count and feature overkill without realizing the amount of extra time and money it takes to make advantage of it.

zem

[_MR_]

This is a joke.
If it is, then we will probably know by NAB. Why the pessimism?

[Digigenic]

You know, when my mind really gets to spinning on this issue, (I know, not a good thing) I begin to think it's a front for another major company like say, Canon, who is using this to facilitate their efforts in finding out what the people really want in a part of the market that they plan on expanding to, and definitely have the resources to do it. In a strange sense, these masked tactics are similar to how Panasonic created that silly little blog with that fake filmmaker, Tosch something or another to generate interest in the Panasonic HVX200. Even though we all feel empowered by rooting for the little guy, let's not forgot whose field this game is being played on.

[Jun Tang]

Or do you want to throw in your two cents, support the effort,
and hopefully have some input in the design of what could eventually be
the most revolutionary camera since we moved away from celluloid?

I'm going with the second option.

Same here. Because I think in the end...we win indirectly if not directly. Directly if you have the money to purchase this camera.

When Red comes out...it's either going to be cheaper than the D-20, Dalso, or Genesis...making it more affordable and revolutionary then the others to us lowballers. Or it's going to cost more then the other cameras....which we can't afford. And...it pushes the other companies to improve their camera specs or else Red is going to steal a huge market share.

...when the DVX100 24p camera came out...the competitors had to double down and ante up.

Either way...goodnews

[The Machinist]

You know, when my mind really gets to spinning on this issue, (I know, not a good thing) I begin to think it's a front for another major company like say, Canon, who is using this to facilitate their efforts in finding out what the people really want in a part of the market that they plan on expanding to, and definitely have the resources to do it. In a strange sense, these masked tactics are similar to how Panasonic created that silly little blog with that fake filmmaker, Tosch something or another to generate interest in the Panasonic HVX200. Even though we all feel empowered by rooting for the little guy, let's not forgot whose field this game is being played on.

Have you read Mr. Jannard's other posts in this section?

I think it's pretty obvious from his credentials and the backing of people like Barry and Jarred that he is in fact not a "front" for another company.

And as for playing on the field with Canon or anyone else. Consider the fact that he is not some independent upstart company, who is pushing its financial limits to fund their R and D. We're instead talking about an offshoot division of a very successful company with the coffers (and apparently the talent and know how) to not only realize their vision but i believe that Mr. Jannard will have the tenacity and savvy to take on the larger corps. who have been sitting high up in 'cameraland'.

Every now and then the landscape of most any scene (financial, political, cultural) needs to be shaken up and changed a bit. Maybe we're on the verge of one of those shake ups. You can't expect Canon, Sony, Panny, or whoever to always be on top. That's just not the way history works.

[thisiswells]

We're instead talking about an offshoot division of a very successful company...
Really? You sure about that? Red appears to be a different company started by the same guy who founded another company. I don't think you can expect the profitability (or non-profitability) of Red to have any impact on your Oakley shares. As an Oakley shareholder would agree, I'd be curious to know how the company intends to bill Red for the use of its high end machining capabilities... Hmm. Hope this is all above board.

[Digigenic]

Have you read Mr. Jannard's other posts in this section?Yes I have, as well as his other posts in the DVi Network. I’m very excited about this most sudden development. In fact, I have been in contact with Jim Jannard and written about RED in a small article waiting to be posted online through a reputable source pending the confirmation that I haven't written about a fictional company with a fictional product - it still hasn't gone live yet...


I think it's pretty obvious from his credentials and the backing of people like Barry and Jarred that he is in fact not a "front" for another company. Obvious? Okay


And as for playing on the field with Canon or anyone else. Consider the fact that he is not some independent upstart company, who is pushing its financial limits to fund their R and D. We're instead talking about an offshoot division of a very successful company with the coffers (and apparently the talent and know how) to not only realize their vision but i believe that Mr. Jannard will have the tenacity and savvy to take on the larger corps. who have been sitting high up in 'cameraland'. Successful companies, whether they’re offshoot or primary have a tendency to work with other successful companies. Sometimes they work together publicy, other times they work together privately. How much about this company and its dealings have been made public again?


Every now and then the landscape of most any scene (financial, political, cultural) needs to be shaken up and changed a bit. Maybe we're on the verge of one of those shake ups. You can't expect Canon, Sony, Panny, or whoever to always be on top. That's just not the way history works. I understand the laws of nature, Machinist. I also understand the proverbial passage, don’t believe everything you see…or in this case, read.
Btw, Mr. Jannard has said that even through expressing skepticism of RED, it would still serve as a motivational force for further improvement. So, in that regard, I’m just trying to help out.

[Zig_Zigman]

shizmo!! Just found this forum and read through all the messages....Mr. Jannard, you need to hire Hudson just to keep you pissed off so that the odds of success go straight up ;-)

Only the big guys will be able to afford the computer firepower to edit the raw footage - you are talking big post-budgets here. This isn't the young dude with a dream camera....There might definitely have to be "two levels" of camera, one with all the shtuff for 100k (not a problem for professional post and rental houses) and one with just the 2k and 1080p 4:2:2 output for...hmmm let's say 15g's.

I tip my hat to those with the will and $ to make it happen.

I hear some directing heavyweights want to beta test it already :-)

[Luis Caffesse]

I think I'm going to change my signature to:

RED CAMERA: You don't HAVE TO shoot 4K, but you can if you want to.



Everyone keeps mentioning how 4K is too much, 4K post will be too expensive....4K is too hard to store and move around.... etc.

4K is one option.
Options are the key here.

I suppose that the thought is that if RED releases a 4K camera, they could release a 1080P camera for significantly less. And that would be true, if this were Sony or Panasonic we were talking about. BUT, in this case, the people at RED seem to have a mission to release the best camera at the lowest possible cost.

My guess is that if the camera is mass produced, and acceptance is as wide as they hope it will be, that the difference in cost between a 4K and 1080 only camera woudl be negligable.

How much of the cost of a Viper is markup?
I know that the HVX is NOT a Varicam - but it costs 1/10th of the Varicam.
Having seen some of the footage, I don't think it's only 1/10th of the quality.

My point is, it does seem possible to put out a camera for a much lower price than is being done right now. But...if people keep urging RED to put out 2 or 3 or 4 different 'levels' of camera all they are going to wind up with is another Sony, or another Panasonic. Because what will separate these different levels other than price?

My thought? F' That.

1 camera.
All options.
Cut the margin as low as you can while making a profit.

4K, 1080, 720, 480 - all in one.

Can't afford to shoot 4K? Easy... don't.
I sure as hell won't be.

But it seems that the best way to bring the price structure crashing down is to get rid of the the class structure of cameras. As soon as anyone starts talking about different camera levels, all I can think of is.... and what will RED do when they suddenly find themselves with a highend product line to protect?

No thanks.

[Luis Caffesse]

Then again, they could always introduce a modular camera system.

:happy:

[abeljerrod]

if you really think that shooting in raw 4K 12bit is going to be easy (or cheap) in the next two or three years you'll be severly dissapointed.

zem

Zem...

Guess I forgot to include the "Sarcasm" icon :laugh: .... it was a joke regarding the RED logo looking like the "EASY Button" that all of the Staples Television ads are inundating us with.....

[zem]

Zem...
Guess I forgot to include the "Sarcasm" icon :laugh: .... it was a joke regarding the RED logo looking like the "EASY Button" that all of the Staples Television ads are inundating us with.....

ok, i guess the problem is that i dont watch tv then (that and that i live on thee other side of the pond... and that my english sucks :)
i should have realized its a joke anyway though, seeing that you're from abel and that you probably know your stuff ;)



I think I'm going to change my signature to:
RED CAMERA: You don't HAVE TO shoot 4K, but you can if you want to.

Luis,
the point is that a good 4K sensor is more expensive than a good 2K sensor, and that even regardless of money the best 4K sensor with 60p has less sensibility, more noise and other problems than the best 2K sensor.. hence my point of rather focusing on a a 2K chip with great performance than to jump for insane resolution that nobody can take advantage of. also, the internal processing power and bandwith is going to be much higher at 4K.. can you imagine the amount of processing needed to resample 4K raw to a great looking 1080p signal in real time? (i can't, but i know from others that debayering quality depends a lot on the method used). on the other hand, outputting 2K is pretty easy and the debayering could be conveniently done on a cheap pc offsite (of course i'd still want a live 1080p feed, but only for preview and editing).

anyway, i could be all wrong about this, but building a 4K camera and targeting for low cost filmmaking just seems a bit stupid to me.
zem

[Greg Lowry]

Don't forget that a single CMOS sensor camera using Bayer must use a sensor with a multiple of 2k resolution to achieve 2K resolution output. The ARRI D-20 sensor is 3k, for example, to achieve uncompressed 4:4:4 1080p. How the image is processed is very important. The Dalsa camera uses a 4k sensor, but the method for processing the image is quite cumbersome (it essentially has to be "developed" after capture). We don't yet have enough info to judge the merits, or otherwise, of the RED sensor and processing technique. But I do generally agree that many users would be happy with less spatial and temporal resolution in favor of greater sensitivity and dynamic range. I'm reserving judgement on RED's approach until the facts are in. That happens when we can see a video stream on a big screen. Everything else is speculation, but it's exciting to have another player in the market.

Greg

[toke lahti]

the point is that a good 4K sensor is more expensive than a good 2K sensor, and that even regardless of money the best 4K sensor with 60p has less sensibility, more noise and other problems than the best 2K sensor.. hence my point of rather focusing on a a 2K chip with great performance than to jump for insane resolution that nobody can take advantage of.

I think there's nothing insane in 4k. It is already in DCI specs and film scanners and printers with that resolution are coming. Not to mention the digital projectors for theathers. When RED camera will be selling (2007?), 4k will be normal thing for big budget productions.
By 2007 you will also be able to edit 4k material real time with normal work station.
Canon's still camera has already double the amount of pixels and still pictures are rarely shown in a size of a movie theather screen.
(Once again that camera is also feeding 70Mpix/sec so we just need to record that data...)

And it might also be that it will be cheaper to manufacture 100 000 identical sensors than design and manufacture 90 000 small ones and 10 000 bigger ones.
If you want to shoot 2k, you just use the center part of the sensor (easily done already with cmos cameras) and the pixel size is the same than with smaller 2k chip.
With having smaller area of the chip used, you can also use smaller and cheaper lenses.

[Graeme_Nattress]

Exactly, Toke.

And 4k bayer is about doable on todays computers too. 4k RGB is a bit tricky with the data rates though.

Graeme

[zem]

And 4k bayer is about doable on todays computers too. 4k RGB is a bit tricky with the data rates though.

errrm, 4K in 12bit RAW bayer at 60p is more than 1 GB/sec (read gigabyte per second - or did i mess up something here? 4096x3112x12/8x60 /1024/1024 =1094MB/sec). at 16bit RGB that would be 4.3GB/sec.
24p is still 440MB/sec in 12bit RAW.
how excactly this is doable with todays computers and how it should be affordable for the indie filmmaker in 2007 escapes me.
zem

[zem]

By 2007 you will also be able to edit 4k material real time with normal work station.
i strongly doubt that (see above)..


Canon's still camera has already double the amount of pixels and still pictures are rarely shown in a size of a movie theather screen.
.. and even cheap 35mm still cameras have had more than twice the image resolution as 35mm movie format. moving images need much less resolution than stills, if you try to make a 60x45cm print from a PAL originated image it looks crap.. but i've seen (and made) PAL film-outs on 10x6m screens and they looked surprisingly good.


(Once again that camera is also feeding 70Mpix/sec so we just need to record that data...)
?


If you want to shoot 2k, you just use the center part of the sensor (easily done already with cmos cameras) and the pixel size is the same than with smaller 2k chip.
With having smaller area of the chip used, you can also use smaller and cheaper lenses.
yeah, but you loose depth of field, light sensivity and probably other things in comparison to a full size 2K sensor.

personally i think that the D20 is prettty perfectly designed for high end digital film making, with 3K RAW... make a camera with the same features for about 1/5th of the price or one with slightly lower specs at 1/10th and you could have a winner.
and while you're at it, make a version with 1080p RAW on super16 sized chip for less than 10'000.. that's enough pixels for me ;)
zem

[Digigenic]

I agree, the D20 is very nice. The lenses make it even that much more buttery.
Here are some frame grabs of a test run of the D20 - from a recent
article by Stephanie Argy in American Cinematographer Magazine.
Curtis Clark, ASC used very few lights for the scenes.
In fact, the exterior scenes of the man walking down the street were
all shot using available light from street lights and street signs.
The salon scene used only two Kino Flo ParaBeams and one Pocket Par.
Clark was noted as saying that the camera was pulling details from shadows
that his light meter had indicated he wasn't.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/WICKEDPIXEL/video/ARRID20FRAMEGRABS.jpg

[Graeme_Nattress]

Sure it's doable. Didn't say it would be cheap, but 440MB/s is not impossible with a nice big fibre array. 8bit RAW would be withing the realms of what my edit suite could handle, or compressed RAW would certainly be, whether it be 8bit or 12bit. The jump up to 4k RGB is a large one though, and offers no quality advantages over RAW....

Graeme

[zem]

Sure it's doable. Didn't say it would be cheap, but 440MB/s is not impossible with a nice big fibre array. 8bit RAW would be withing the realms of what my edit suite could handle, or compressed RAW would certainly be, whether it be 8bit or 12bit. The jump up to 4k RGB is a large one though, and offers no quality advantages over RAW....

yeah, 440MB/s is doable, but not affordable for 99% of us, and not easy to handle on-location shots (power supply and noise issues)... 8bit RAW would be a complete waste in the first place (who would shoot 4K with 8bit precision?).
my understanding is that you'd want to edit with offline proxy files anyway, as editing with RAW files would be very processor taxing (at least thats my experience from RAW stills) and you'd still need a lot of fast diskspace, while DVCPROHD proxies could be edited on a cheap workstation and the original footage stored at a save place (says somebody who killed a full Raid0 the other day out of stupidity).

anyway, i guess the opinion differs on how this camera should be designed depending on how people wanna work with it. personally i'm a do it yourself for cheap kind of person, so i'd like a camera that shoots full raster 1080p or 2K and that i can record uncompressed to a convenient affordable medium, like a mag with four 2.5" drives.
others might prefer a 4K cam with dual HD-SDI out for recording to a HDCAM SR deck that hooks into their existing workflow, but costs 10 times more.

zem

[toke lahti]

i strongly doubt that (see above)..
Well, lets assume that this cheap indie production accepts 4k24fps for delivery format. So we need to handle that 440MB/s. By 2007 we can take 8 pcs of 1TB sata disks with $4k, make them raid0 and have 5 hours of disk space with enough bandwidth for realtime preview.
If camera would use 2:1 losless compression 4 disks would be enough.
Or we could implement mild visually losless 4:1 compression and with 8 disks we could get 20 hours of footage online, so there you can cut almost a full feature.



.. and even cheap 35mm still cameras have had more than twice the image resolution as 35mm movie format. moving images need much less resolution than stills, if you try to make a 60x45cm print from a PAL originated image it looks crap.. but i've seen (and made) PAL film-outs on 10x6m screens and they looked surprisingly good.
So all we need is fewer pixels in a sensor and more pictures out of sensor per second.
Dataflow from sensor is already fast enough.


?
Canon 1Dmk2N is pushing data out of sensor with speed of 70 megapixels per second. It can do so only little less than 3 seconds at a time, this limit comes from recording to CF, so once again dataflow from sensor is already fast enough.


yeah, but you loose depth of field, light sensivity and probably other things in comparison to a full size 2K sensor.
But if the option is 2/3" HD/2k sensor then the pixel size would be about same.
And you'd have an option to shoot 4k when possible.


personally i think that the D20 is prettty perfectly designed for high end digital film making, with 3K RAW... make a camera with the same features for about 1/5th of the price or one with slightly lower specs at 1/10th and you could have a winner.
and while you're at it, make a version with 1080p RAW on super16 sized chip for less than 10'000.. that's enough pixels for me ;)
zem
D20 with 1/5th of the price! That would be a perfect guideline!
And maybe with 1/10th of the price volumes could raise so much that it would be still profitable...

[Shiloh Arts]

-4k, 4520 x 2540 Mysterium CMOS sensor, true S35mm sized.

-60p frame rate at full resolution.



Well...here's the problem though, or maybe it's not a problem:undecided , however the camera only shoots 60P at full rez and not 24. This might change as development continues.

[Jarred Land]

no thats not a problem, its very easy to throttle down to 24p, 60p is much harder to obtain.

[Shiloh Arts]

Oh, and my magic price fairies tell me they're shooting for between $25,000-$75,000.

What is this now...were playing "The Price is Right"? :cheesy:

Well...The price is WRONG ...BOB!:laugh: (I had to say that sorry....to excited)

My guess with the amount of R&D cost and overhead I think it might end up being more like $25,000–$75,000 X 2. (Safe Guess Huh?:) )

Good point Jarred!

[Graeme_Nattress]

I think 60p is the max frame rate, not the minimum. I'll eat my hat if it doesn't do 24p.

Graeme

[Greg Lowry]

I think many here may find it instructive to read about the ARRI D-20's implementation of the Bayer mask technique for its 3k (2880 x 2160) CMOS sensor. Check out the link: http://www.arri.com/news/newsletter/articles/09211103/d20.htm

[Greg Lowry]

Well...here's the problem though, or maybe it's not a problem:undecided , however the camera only shoots 60P at full rez and not 24. This might change as development continues.

Of course 60 fps is the MAXIMUM frame rate of the sensor, not the only frame rate.

[MarcusX]

I just found this article: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0512/05121201new_chips.asp


Previous attempts to do this on-pixel conversion have required far too many transistors, leaving too little area to collect light. The new designs use as few as three transistors per pixel, reserving nearly half of the pixel area for light collection. First tests on the chip show that at video rates of 30 frames per second it uses just 0.88 nanowatts per pixel--50 times less than the industry's previous best. It also trounces conventional chips in dynamic range, which is the difference between the dimmest and brightest light it can record. Existing CMOS sensors can record light 1,000 times brighter than their dimmest detectable light, a dynamic range of 1:1,000, while the Rochester technology already demonstrates a dynamic range of 1:100,000

Much better dynamic range, more light and less power consumption. Maybe Jim can pursade them to make some 35mm chips :)

[Digigenic]

Whoa (http://www.red.com/format.html)
Res anybody?
Notice the Oakley crew in the background:laugh:

[Digigenic]

On second notice, at the bottom of the page, maybe this has already been addressed, but it says their full frame sensor is 24.5 x 13.5. I thought full frame sensors had to be 36 x 24. As a matter of fact, their sensor is actually closer to an APS size sensor, the type of sensor most commonly found in current DSLR models.

[Graeme_Nattress]

a 35mm motion picture frame is smaller than a 35mm stills film frame. The dimensions stated are correct (near enough) for motion picture 35mm film.

Graeme

[Digigenic]

my brain hurts

[Digigenic]

...it still hurts, yes...

[greeches]

WOW..... Def checking back!

[tpulling83]

Is there anything on the market now that comes close to supporting this camera? What kind of monster computer? How about Blue Ray? Wow, wow, wow.... Is there a magazine/trade article on this camera published yet?

[Greg Lowry]

There is no camera yet. It's in development. Preprototype at NAB.

[MDKfilms]

I love these discussions, so much intrigue and suspense, will they be cheap will they be expensive, what kind of lenses can I use, will it make me dinner? So many questions.
"Excitement hunh! Adventure, a jedi craves not these things."

I hope I can pick my own personal color, like cornflower blue.

The only thing that evil needs to flourish, is that good men do nothing.

You can swallow a pint of blood before you get sick.

Hey, is this the forum for the lowenstein wedding? Barb, are you in here?

[Greg Lowry]

Here's something to ponder for those dreaming of a $5k - $10k price breakthrough for the RED camera ...

The Dalsa Origin is the only 4K camera currently available. The camera head RENTS for $3,000/day. With a set of 5 primes, a recorder, and other basic accessories it's about $5k/day.

BTW, anyone curious about the signifcant challenges of 4k image capture, data transfer, storage, and workflow should check out the Dalsa site http://www.dalsa.com/dc/index.asp

I'm not affiliated with Dalsa.

[tpulling83]

Personally, I'd love to see Fight Club 2, but that's just not in the cards. Perhaps is could be done on a 4K? Perhaps that might be the weapon of choice in the battery arsenal - we can only hope.

[tktk]

all this sounds very exiting. It's indeed a dream camera. As for the price... I doubt most of us will be able to afford it. It will be cool to see such a digital cam be realized. Most of us have even a hard time affording a HVX or H1. Can't imagine this RED badboy being anywhere near that pricerange. WISHFUL thinking.. of course. Everyone makes really good points here as I have read through this thread. It will definately drive up competition and that is always a good thing.... On a side note... I always like it when the underdog (small/startup companies/individuals) trumps the overwhelming corporations. Good luck RED.

[MarcusX]

Here's something to ponder for those dreaming of a $5k - $10k price breakthrough for the RED camera ...

The Dalsa Origin is the only 4K camera currently available. The camera head RENTS for $3,000/day. With a set of 5 primes, a recorder, and other basic accessories it's about $5k/day.

That's the problem, you look at the prices of the Dalsa, Cinealta, Varicam etc. and that make you say "there's no way somebody can make a camera with this features for less money".

But when you make a list and try to find out what the parts of a RED camera actually cost you will be surprised.

The "big" cameras are expensive. But the people buying or renting these cameras don't care, it's just a small part of their budget. $6000 or $1000 a day? Who cares? They spend more money for feeding the crew.

[Greg Lowry]

[QUOTE=But the people buying or renting these cameras don't care, it's just a small part of their budget. $6000 or $1000 a day? Who cares?=QUOTE]

That's a myth. Ask the rental houses. A producer who spends $20 mil on a star will at the same time often nickel and dime the below-the-line items to an extent that would surprise you. There is ALWAYS budget pressure, no matter what size the production may be. At the same time there is an expectation of perfect, reliable performance from the equipment.

[joe 1008]

I was searching this thread and somebody mentioned the Foveon-sensors. On the Foveon site there is a link to the Hanvision cameras. Very interesting. Though they only shoot in SD (in higher resolutions they don´t get the framerates) they have an interesting feature: A nicon mount for photo primes. But the sensor is pretty small, rather 2/3" so there won´t be that big DOF-ahhh!!! But it shows, how the RED might look like: a black box where you can mount and plug everything you wish to add.

http://www.foveon.com/article.php?a=192

That brings up another question for a low-end user like me: Why can´t a Canon D5 shoot in VGA? For somebody who is just looking for 35DOF in SD that might be an alternative to a 35mm adapter.

[emereica_zr]

i wonder what we are looking at as far as physical structure? will it be a handle cam like the dvx/vx/hdr/or gl seies cam... will it be portable or tripod only... i wonder what they will look like?.. when are these cams supposed to be released? and how much will they cost.. probably not cheap but please feel free to answer an of the questions i stated

[jcsoc]

I'm thinking this camera will have a red body, but that's just a guess.

[roxics]

I'm hoping it will be all black. Matte finish. Hard angles. Like a F117 stealth fighter. With the word RED stamped in but not colored at all. Maybe the external LCD data display could backlight in red. If it has one. Yeah I'm dreaming. :)

[_MR_]

I'm hoping it will be all black. Matte finish. Hard angles. Like a F117 stealth fighter. With the word RED stamped in but not colored at all. Maybe the external LCD data display could backlight in red. If it has one. Yeah I'm dreaming. :)

Or one of those paint jobs which looks a different colour depending on the angle you're looking at it. Black one way, very deep red another.

:laugh:

Only problem then comes with re-painting the camera at the paint and panel shop after years of being scratched and bashed around.

[ddh]

I've been following this cam on another site for some time and over there, Jannard made it quite clear that this cam would be afforable for small producers, so, my guess is that he and his crew are putting out a cam for around $10,000 to $15,000! It's just a guess but Jannard made it clear that the pricing would delight the video/film community.

[Luis Caffesse]

This is the problem with telling people you're going to give them the world at an affordable price.

"Affordable" means different things to different people, and it always will.
A $50,000 Ferarri may be a more than fair price... but it's still not affordable to me.

I just hope people don't get dissapointed when the price is announced.
I know plenty of people who are hoping for a under 10K pricetag, and I just don't think that's realistic anymore.

[David G. Smith]

In one of the statements I read from Mr. Jannard, the words, "High end HD user" was used. If this camera comes in for less than $50K, I would be very, very suprised.

[Policar]

I think he also said "disruptive technology," though. With the viper infinity coming in at around $20,000, I wouldn't be surprised if the RED camera cost only slightly more.

Which would be an amazing deal given the larger sensor (and presumably better dynamic range, etc.)

Jim has to shake up the market somehow and I don't see $50,000 doing that. The other players are just too well established. The camera would be somewhat "revolutionary" but not enough so to make cinealta owners say "oh screw it, I'll sell my devalued cinealta set up and buy a totally new rig from a no-name company."

I'm saying $25,000. Still way out of my price range, of course. I'm praying for under $20,000. I need to rent this thing for two weeks in a couple years to shoot a thesis, and I want it to be under $2,000 a week by then since I am not exactly well off.

[David G. Smith]

Policar, I hope you are right, I am just not gonna hold my breath. I am definitly going to keep my eye on this thing though.

[David G. Smith]

Policar, I hope you are right, I am just not gonna hold my breath. I am definitly going to keep my eye on this thing though.

[David G. Smith]

Policar, I hope you are right, I am just not gonna hold my breath. I am definitly going to keep my eye on this thing though.

[sonisfear]

Hey Jarred, Have you locked down reduser.com yet?

I don't know how and I don't know when but I will be a red owner.

[toddgeer]

No recent updates to the web site - news, contact, etcetera. A camera like that would be nice, but I'm not sure I'm going to hold my breath. Seems vapor. And I'm sure that they will charge what it's worth, nowhere near the sub 4k level...

[bilgami]

Is there any pics of the cam yet?

[mmm]

Is there any pics of the cam yet?

I think we have to wait for NAB. That is RED's big day.

[John Rivers]

is this serious? I just stumbled upon this Red thing for the first time.

How much could this thing possibly cost????? 2540P?!?!? 35mm lens???

A company name with only one syllable?!?!?

[Daniel Skubal]

A company name with only one syllable?!?!?

LOL yeah, this thing is legit. It's supposed to be revealed at NAB

[Logan LeBlanc]

This thing sounds SICK!!! I can't wait to see the pics/reviews. RED'S MY FAVORITE COLOR!!!!! (I don't know why I shouted that or what that coincedence has to do with any of this, but I really like red. The End)

[Aaron Koolen]

I think, if it was even near the "budget" level of lots of us guys, it will be HVX price range. You know $10-15K, and maybe without a lens at that. Of course this would be phenomenal.

If they're making it modular, they can market kits as they see fit. i.e. For 10 k you might 'only' get 4:2:2 1080 (or even 720p) and can only use Canon or Nikon SLR lenses. For 20K you might get 4:4:4 at that res with proper lenses. And for 50k or more 4:4:4 at 2540P etc. Those numbers are just pulled out of my behind and don't necessarily bare resemblance to the real world, but I can see how, with smart targetted optioning it could be possible to cater to lots of markets.

[Larry Rutledge]

This thing sounds SICK!!! I can't wait to see the pics/reviews. RED'S MY FAVORITE COLOR!!!!! (I don't know why I shouted that or what that coincedence has to do with any of this, but I really like red. The End)

Orange is my favorite color...maybe they can make the camera body skinable like cellphones :thumbsup:

[joemiked]

is red even happening?
md

[Aaron Koolen]

Are you trolling? I ask because, if you've been following anything to do with Red, here or on DVInfo (And other places I imagine) then you'd know that of course it is. I doubt Jim Jannard would come here, blab out his arse about some camera he's making, putting his reputation on the line, and it all be a load of bollocks. Of course something might happen, he might become backrupt and it all goes la la, but until we here that, it is definately happening.

[joemiked]

hehe you said trolling!
does big red last
like chewing gum that has ever lasting flavor?
whats trolling? is it mystiruim?that tast so good?or is that big red?

[BigMike]

Okay. Here's ANOTHER reason for me to go to NAB!

Hope there's still hotel rooms.

[DavidBeier]

*sigh*

Now I have to wait for NAB before I can buy my HVX...

[J P]

Did they take down the Red website, except for the count down? I can't get any further than that.

[jelloshotsrule]

yeah, it looks that way. any of the links that i've seen that go "deeper" than the front page don't work anymore... guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[Jarred Land]

Mike.. you better be there.

[Danilo Del Tufo]

Any chance that Redcamera will be capable also of 120p? I'd like to switch between 60p or 120p, is possible adds this feature?

[Jarred Land]

we will know at NAB.. but Im pretty confident it will be somewhere higher than 60p... depending on what format you shoot at. If they can get 4k resolution recording at 24p, they should be able to burst 120p into a 720 resolution without much difficulty, depending on the imager. It shouldnt be a bandwidth issue.

[CORUSA Design]

I don't see the big deal. You already got Kinetta, and Sony with 4K Digital Cinemas that have been in the works longer than RED, and prototypes already released. Why is this "red" camera such a big deal?

I also think it is sad how far behind our community is from studio professional film makers. I mean they have been able to shoot in 300, 600 frames per second for 10-15 years, and we are jus tnot getting excited about 60p or possibly 120p? It makes me sad that is takes 10-15 years for the technology to trickle down to us.

::: Connor

[liquidigital]

I think the excitement is over the prospect that this system could be affordable, meaning within this community's reach. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

[DavidBeier]

I don't see the big deal. You already got Kinetta, and Sony with 4K Digital Cinemas that have been in the works longer than RED, and prototypes already released. Why is this "red" camera such a big deal?

I also think it is sad how far behind our community is from studio professional film makers. I mean they have been able to shoot in 300, 600 frames per second for 10-15 years, and we are jus tnot getting excited about 60p or possibly 120p? It makes me sad that is takes 10-15 years for the technology to trickle down to us.

::: Connor

You should know better than that.

The reason everyone is getting excited (don't know if their hopes are realistic or not mind you) is that Red may offer the equivelent of high-quality 35mm style images to the masses.

Image the ability to produce a 35mm calibur images digitally. Without having to worry about paying for film or carting around film magazines. Imagine being able to see what you'll get instantly on the monitor and not having worry that your light meter might be off or you entered in a number incorrectly. Imagine getting to work with all the flexibility of digital yet retain such a sharp image. And finally, imagine being able to do all this for an affordible price.

I don't know if RED can actually offer this but you'd have to be nuts not to realize why the prospect is so exciting.

[androbot2084]

And what Red quality means is the quality of 35mm film negatives which is 4 times the quality of a 35mm print which means a quality that few people have ever seen.

[CORUSA Design]

You should know better than that.

The reason everyone is getting excited (don't know if their hopes are realistic or not mind you) is that Red may offer the equivelent of high-quality 35mm style images to the masses.

IT is available to the masses. $60,000 for the Kinetta camera is nothing to pay for that kind of quality.

Think about it...so many people these days want a sports car, and a plasma TV, and the 6,000 square foot house, and the 4 car garage, and a car for every child, etc etc....well OF COUSE you can't afford it then...you have to pick and choose where to put your money. I guarantee anyone here could find a way to afford a $60,000 camera if they put their mind to it and wanted to...but most people want every other little gadget out there and they want it INSTANTLY...They aren't willing to actually work for a hard buck and oh..i dunno....perhaps...EARN IT? Yeah, and so they complain about not being able to afford it.

::: Connor

[Jarred Land]

They aren't willing to actually work for a hard buck and oh..i dunno....perhaps...EARN IT?
::: Connor

work? damn.. why didnt anyone tell me it was work. I have way to much fun doing this for me to call it work :)

[taubkin]

work? damn.. why didnt anyone tell me it was work. I have way to much fun doing this for me to call it work :)

Just woke up, and this made my day! :D

[CORUSA Design]

work? damn.. why didnt anyone tell me it was work. I have way to much fun doing this for me to call it work :)

I have fun everyday "working" on video production, etc...Why is "work" a negative word? I don't know about you, but I can have fun working. I haven't had a 40 hour week in years, but that's cause I love WORKING...always turns into an 80, 120hr week, which is fine with me.

::: Connor

[Jaime Valles]

IT is available to the masses. $60,000 for the Kinetta camera is nothing to pay for that kind of quality.

I don't think the Kinetta is available at all. If and when it becomes available, then we'll be able to see the difference in price / quality / features between the two.

[HenryK]

I don't think the Kinetta is available at all. If and when it becomes available, then we'll be able to see the difference in price / quality / features between the two.

Plus I don't think the Kinetta is 4K is it? I didn't even think it was 1080. Isn't it 720?

It kind of reminds me of a joke:

Dad, can I have 4K?

What, 3K?

What are you going to do with 2K?

Here's 1080, give 720 to your mom and give me the change.

[Jarred Land]

ha ha ha nice Henry.. i think you summed up the point of what RED is trying to do pretty well.

[tuface]

--"Why is "work" a negative word?"--

Because work is something you do because you have to, otherwise it's called life.

[androbot2084]

I'm not paying 60,000 dollars for this camera. If you think about it soon you can get a JVC GY-HD7000 3CCD 2/3 inch high definition camera for about $25,000. If Red uses 4 each of 2/3 inch CCD's to make its 35mm chip then the camera should not cost much more. If Red wants to be cheap or offer a lower cost model they can construct a battery of 8 each of 1/2 inch chips or even 16 each of 1/3 inch chips. One ultra high definition video camera was built using 16 chips in a split screen configuration with a row of 8 chips on the top and 8 chips on the bottom. The signals were divided into 24 each of 640 x 480 frames. If you can limit the bandwidth to 4 megabits per secound for each frame then the total bandwidth should be about 100 megabits per secound.

[Jarred Land]

multiple chips in an array is not a good solution. You not only get into troubles with seaming the chips, each CCD has it's unique characteristics that become evident after the processing.

[CORUSA Design]

--"Why is "work" a negative word?"--

Because work is something you do because you have to, otherwise it's called life.

Hmm, odd, I don't see work that way, but I guess if you have had bad/crummy jobs in the past you might see the definition of "work" like that.

::: Connor

[Nova Invicta]

Typical American specification, Panasonic has made huge errors with the Varicam because they only really though about the US market. Wake up the rest of the world is mainly PAL and 25FPS / 25P. Also 60 create sound issues in time code for the rest of the world.

[DavidBeier]

IT is available to the masses. $60,000 for the Kinetta camera is nothing to pay for that kind of quality.

Think about it...so many people these days want a sports car, and a plasma TV, and the 6,000 square foot house, and the 4 car garage, and a car for every child, etc etc....well OF COUSE you can't afford it then...you have to pick and choose where to put your money. I guarantee anyone here could find a way to afford a $60,000 camera if they put their mind to it and wanted to...but most people want every other little gadget out there and they want it INSTANTLY...They aren't willing to actually work for a hard buck and oh..i dunno....perhaps...EARN IT? Yeah, and so they complain about not being able to afford it.

Are you serious?

I don't know what kind of background you come from but my parents are teachers and I'm going through college on scholarships. Yeah, I guess if I asked my parents to morgage our house I could afford a 60k camera (selling all our cars wouldn't get us half there).

We don't all have a lot of money to throw around and despite what some may think, 60k is a hell of a lot of money to some of us.

[Aaron Koolen]

I agree with David, 60K is a lot of cash, but in reality I would think that RED will primarily be for those who work in the industry and earn reasonable cash. Therefore a camera will be an investment and so 60K or so is worth it to them.

For people like me who do camera/filmmaking stuff as a serious hobby (i.e. Don't work in the industry), we're more in the 5K cam range, and maybe HVX range if we were lucky. RED isn't for us.

[roxics]

I totally agree with you last two guys. The more I hear about RED and cameras like it the more the HVX starts to look really good. Even if I have to take out a loan for one. I was really hoping the base RED would be under $10,000. But I'm sure we can throw that idea out the window.

[Jannard]

I forgot... who said the RED camera was $60K?

[craigbowman]

Jim, I think someone in this thread made a reference to a prototype camera from a company called Kinetta and mentioned $60K. Next thing you know, someone else is connecting that amount with Red, which of course is erroneous.

Amazing how rumours and stories get all blown out of proportion.

As far as I'm aware, you haven't made any announcement on a price.

[Jannard]

I won't mind someone giving up on our project once they see what we are doing and have heard the price. Just hate to see people make decisions on something before they have the real scoop. There is so much speculation that I think some are believing the misguided guesses. I'm excited to show where we are on our progress. After Monday, many people will decide if they are "in" or not.

See you at NAB... Jim

[roxics]

Well Jim, I think it's great what you're doing. I probably won't be able to afford it and that's cool. I'm still excited as hell to see what you've got, even if it's not for me right now. I know I'll shoot with it one day no matter what it's cost.

I shot my last feature on an XL1 for $2000. I shot my last short film (released in a month) on a Canon Optura 20 for $200, and it looks better the the feature before it. Give me whatever you've got and I'll make a movie and I'll keep getting better and better. I'm working my skills up to a RED. I haven't earned it yet. :)

But I do hope that my next feature I have planned for production in two years is RED compatible. Because this story really deserves nothing less. But I'll shoot it with whatever I have if it comes down to it. We indie filmmakers stop at nothing, as you know.

[HenryK]

Hey Jim, isn't Jannard French?

The world's greatest inventors were French, looks like you got that in your blood.

Henry

P.S. Does kissing up get us a free camera?

[donatello]

whatever the cost of the RED camera - some will be able to afford it- some not. many will think the price is low , others too much $$ - just all depends where you are sitting today ...

kind of like the Kinetta camera which never had a set price but sort of a 30-60k price range - for many it was all too much and for others hey 60k is a great deal but that was 2 years ago .. today everything is changing between this week annoucements of Silicon Imaging SI-1920HDVR camera and next week RED spec/info release and who knows maybe a few other surprises at NAB ????

2006 is the year - there's a camera in every price range ...
the hand size hd cameras are all very good and the most bang for the $$ -choose the one that fits your project & budget ....

[HenryK]

kind of like the Kinetta camera which never had a set price but sort of a 30-60k price range

$1 for Kinetta camera was too much since it's the camera that never was.

[danny d]

what will be the cost of this revolution

[danny d]

if this camera will actually exist, damn at a good price, wow, i will have to take one over to Africa and start film industry there

[roxics]

The cost of every revolution is blood. That's why it's called RED. :)

[boo]

I won't mind someone giving up on our project once they see what we are doing and have heard the price. Just hate to see people make decisions on something before they have the real scoop. There is so much speculation that I think some are believing the misguided guesses. I'm excited to show where we are on our progress. After Monday, many people will decide if they are "in" or not.

See you at NAB... Jim

well, if it's no more than $15,000, hell, i'm in! anything lower than that, is just icing on the cake! and i will be that person who delivers that cake to you over at the oakley headquarters in foothill ranch since i'm only 15 minutes away from that grey dome...:grin:

[CORUSA Design]

Are you serious?

I don't know what kind of background you come from but my parents are teachers and I'm going through college on scholarships. Yeah, I guess if I asked my parents to morgage our house I could afford a 60k camera (selling all our cars wouldn't get us half there).

We don't all have a lot of money to throw around and despite what some may think, 60k is a hell of a lot of money to some of us.

what? lol, when did i say 60K was not a lot of money? All I said was that anyone who puts their mind to it can afford it...yeah it may takes 5 years of working 4 jobs a day, but if you want something bad enough you can get it.

60K is A LOT of money, but have you seen those people who live in run down $300 a month apartments in the gehtto, but they own a corvette, with a $15,000 stereo system installed...I think that is a waste of money since you cannot turn around and make your money back with it, but if you managed a $60K Kinetta camera, you could turn around and make it all back in a year with your curent client base.

::: Connor

P.S. - don't lecture me about money , i lived off ramen noodles for 5 years. breakfast, lunch and dinner. ;)

[stokestack]

$1 for Kinetta camera was too much since it's the camera that never was.

No doubt. I ran into the Kinetta guy as he was wandering around the NAB show floor last year, and actually held and looked through the mythical camera. As usual, he touted the camera's "sensor-agnostic" design. You can put whatever sensor you want in there, he says.

So of course I asked what the hold-up was. He gave the same answer they've been giving for years: "We're waiting for sensors."

logic = credibility = 0

[donatello]

and if you see Kinetta camera running around at NAB 2006 you again will hear "waiting for the sensor " same as 2005, 2004 ...

[Mike Krumlauf]

Looks like its going to be one hell of a camera! Wish I was at NAB this year!

[MachinePhilby]

Well, I've been in hospital for the last few months... and I come back to see all this...

WOW!!... Really!?

[Jaime Valles]

Well, I've been in hospital for the last few months... and I come back to see all this...

WOW!!... Really!?
Wow. Are you feeling better? And, yes, welcome to the wonderful world of RED!

[MachinePhilby]

Yeah thanks! Everything's picking up!

The wonderful world of RED... after everything I've read over the past few hours I honestly don't know what to say...!!! Everyone is excited... I don't ever recall seeing Jarred so excited about a new product like I have seen in some of his posts! (although I have been away :) )

Unfortunately like most people I don't get to visit events like NAB so I rely soley on the people in this community who contribute within these forums...

Having said that.. I'm excited to read about it all!!! Look forward to seeing how all this pans out, as is probably every single user in this place!!

WOOT!!

[Greg Lowry]

It's still impossible to make any comments about the technology of this camera concept, so the only thing that one can really comment on is the industrial design. I really don't like this form factor. A 4K camera means heavy lenses, follow focus systems, etc. In my opinion this form factor is not operator-friendly. It needs to be a shoulder camera. The self-consciously cool design leaves me absolutely cold and frankly hurts my eyes. Having said that, I support the effort but hope that RED goes back to the drawing board on the industrial design.

Greg Lowry

[taubkin]

I think it's going to get pretty front-heavy, once we put in the Lens, FF and MB. But with a Small prime and a clamp-on MB, it could be used handheld as a palmcorder.

I think it's a little too flashy, and would certainly prefer something more sober (wich I knew was not going to happen, considering Oakley industrial design). Still, Design is not going to get me to buy a camera. Sheer performance and useability will.

[boo]

yeah, but will it have that clunking sound? :grin:

[insanityfw]

I'll concur on the possibility of it being front-heavy, but from an accessory perspective I think the cage is brilliant?

[Everdene]

It's still impossible to make any comments about the technology of this camera concept, so the only thing that one can really comment on is the industrial design. I really don't like this form factor. A 4K camera means heavy lenses, follow focus systems, etc. In my opinion this form factor is not operator-friendly. It needs to be a shoulder camera. The self-consciously cool design leaves me absolutely cold and frankly hurts my eyes. Having said that, I support the effort but hope that RED goes back to the drawing board on the industrial design.

Greg Lowry

No camera is perfect, but I think you are jumping to conclusions about the form factor. It looks to me like there will certainly be shoulder "cages" and studio "cages" for heavy lenses and follow focus systems. The cages you have seen may hurt your eyes, but for many of us they are the beautiful future.

[Greg Lowry]

No camera is perfect, but I think you are jumping to conclusions about the form factor. It looks to me like there will certainly be shoulder "cages" and studio "cages" for heavy lenses and follow focus systems. The cages you have seen may hurt your eyes, but for many of us they are the beautiful future.
Everdene: I have no expectations of perfection. Everything is highly subjective in that regard. Trying to be all things to all users is a tough design challenge. I'm sure you're right that various other cages, including hand hend and studio configurations, are part of the plan. The design appears to allow for lots of flexibility. As I said in my previous post, it's impossible to comment on the technical aspects of the camera as it's still in development. I'm simply commenting on the industrial design. I'm personally not buying into the design concept at this point. Rather than looking like the future, it looks like a mechano set from my childhood. I'm sure that RED is using the NAB unveiling as an opportunity for feedback rather than expecting unqualified raves. Otherwise why show the product in this very early stage of development? Some market segments will be more enthusiastic than others. Until there's a functioning camera it's impossible to properly assess the suitability of the form factor. But that's what we've been shown. I don't like this form factor, but I'm reserving final judgement until I see the finished product.

[Everdene]

Rather than looking like the future, it looks like something from the past. I have a feeling that the pro community will be less than enthusiastic.

I have to agree with you that the current cages won't appeal to some in the pro community. But I don't think it takes a lot of imagination to deck out these early 3D renderings with a studio cage, matte box, follow focus, etc.

I obviously like the design approach. You can't easily take a 40lb studio camera out mountain climbing, but you can take Red mountain climbing and then bring it back to the studio. I guess someone will need to design a retro "cage" that looks like a Viper or Cinealta just to impress the pro community.

[Greg Lowry]

I obviously like the design approach. You can't easily take a 40lb studio camera out mountain climbing, but you can take Red mountain climbing and then bring it back to the studio. I guess someone will need to design a retro "cage" that looks like a Viper or Cinealta just to impress the pro community.
That's a cheap shot at the pro community. For pros it's all about day-to-day, day-in-day-out functionality. All existing cameras have shortcomings and those who use the cameras know that better than anyone. Just because RED has a new approach doesn't automatically mean it's a better approach.

[kikndrummer]

So far it seems like a killer camera package if it does everything they say it can....my concern is that when your paid for a job corporate or whatever this camera may take a little while before clients are comfortable hiring it for a job.

If the final price is near 20 G's and you still need other attachments to actually use it, I think I would at least for now until it has more time on the market, I would stick to a more traditional camera.

I'm interested in seeing how it operates...

[Everdene]

That's a cheap shot at the pro community. For pros it's all about day-to-day, day-in-day-out functionality. All existing cameras have shortcomings and those who use the cameras know that better than anyone. Just because RED has a new approach doesn't automatically mean it's a better approach.

No cheap shot intended. We all know, of course, that functionality is more important than the look. I was simply replying to your disparaging comments about the look. And all I did was comment on how it may be possible with the cage concept to create a look and form factor to keep people like you happy.

[Greg Lowry]

People like me? haha. Touché. Good one.

[Cine99]

Couldn't this highly reflective surface mess with your lighting? Besides that, I'd hate to have a brilliant actor in front of my camera and feel like they're not giving me their best because there's a big red dot and a chrome metal cage that looks like some kind of sentinel from the terminator staring them at them. It looks like if you pulled one of Hal's eyes out of the spaceship walls, this is what would be attached behind it. I love the idea of this camera, but it's about actors and what's in front of the camera, not cool looking gear or the ego of the crew. There is such a thing as practicality and the first thing I think a camera should do on a film set is not call attention to itself. I just shot on 35 with the arri bl2 and the thing is pretty big, but it was definitely black and I think there's something to be said for having a very flat, non-reflective surface on a piece of equipment that might find itself a few inches from an actor's face.

[boxsocial]

there's a big red dot and a chrome metal cage that looks like some kind of sentinel from the terminator staring them at them.

hahahaha, I had the T2 theme song in my head when I took a look at that

[Joe Taylor]

This is my first post here. Looking forward to more.

As for the RED, I've been counting down the hours so see this thing and all I can say now is, "uh?" Is this thing for real or is what they are posting more of a concept camera? It looks like it was designed by the ertyl toy company. I get the same feeling when I see a concept at a car show. Sure, it looks special on it's red velvet pedistal, but out in the real world it will never fly. I certainly won't knock it's performance, but when I look at the thing, I can't tell top from bottom, left from right. For some reason, the second I saw this on the RED website, I got the feeling that they are still leaving us in the dark. That this really isn't their product.

[Aaron Koolen]

Joe, do you really think it's going to matter. $17,500 for a 4k cam....It could look like a damn pineapple for all I care!

[slinks]

mmmmm ...pineapple

[Cheesesailor77]

not to mention, once again, we knew they were going to show a non working prototype, theve said this from the begining.

and also, while its hard for me to get excited by the pics of the camera, That's obviously not what it will look like when u use it. That, with lens, recorder, viewfinder, and lcd will look much more familiar.

[dalen7]

That's a cheap shot at the pro community. For pros it's all about day-to-day, day-in-day-out functionality. All existing cameras have shortcomings and those who use the cameras know that better than anyone. Just because RED has a new approach doesn't automatically mean it's a better approach.

The varicams,etc are eye sores...this is welcome relief.
Someone said it would distract the actors...once the lens is infront, etc., highly doubt it.

Its just years of thinking the same...old grey, bulgy, boxes are very distracting...Red, although it may not be to everyones taste, actually has style. (Im sure more people would have opted for the Canon Hd feel, but the point is what the camera does...its light weight, affordable and can do more than the monster packages its replacing...)

Peace

dalen

[Jarred Land]

Couldn't this highly reflective surface mess with your lighting? .

The camera WILL NOT be chrome or shiny.. it will be a matte color, probally available in black or some other color.. but it wont be reflective.

[erdiaz]

Well all about it, but I´m curious about how to edit what I supposs to be a very big amount of data.

I think this device and tech are not for indies (am I wrong?)

In my experience, moving to the HVX200 was not cheap, it costs to me more than US$ 25.000 (Camera, P2cards, HD video card, HD Monitor, software Avid xpress pro HD 5.2.3, Sata raid disks, and other aditions to my non linear equipement, not counting the FS100 or Cine porter wich I will have to get soon)

So This new camera, I think, is going to be spensive

Sorry about my english, I´m spanish spoken person

Erdiaz
www.imaginartdigital.com

[Joe Taylor]

Aaron,

I know what you're saying. What I am saying though is that this might not be what the RED team is really selling to the public. From what I've read, others agree. My biggest concern now is, "does it come in black?" A working professional is not going to use a chrome camera for obvious reasons. I'm sure others are going to retort by saying that it will not be chrome, but look at the pictures. That's a chrome camera. Somebody else said that at NAB they had a none working model. That's what I mean. It is not done yet. I really don't think it is going to be that far out. It is still in the concept stage.

[Greg Lowry]

When a prime lens is (nearly) as big as the camera body and may even weigh as much, a radical rethink of ergonomics is in order. I don't see evidence of that.

[Simon Wyndham]

Yes, I would agree. If you measure the size of the lens attachement hole on those prototype pictures and compare to the size of a 35mm lens attachment you can get a good idea of just how disproportionate the body of RED is compared to the lenses.

Okay, here's my rubbish Photoshop job!
http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/redlens.jpg

How do I post pictures properly in these forums??

[Greg Lowry]

Forget about the 300 mm telephoto for the comparison (that's a special purpose lens). Prime lenses of average focal length are about 2/3rds the size of the camera body. That'll make it very front heavy, even with a recorder of some kind mounted behind the body.

[Everdene]

Yes, I would agree. If you measure the size of the lens attachement hole on those prototype pictures and compare to the size of a 35mm lens attachment you can get a good idea of just how disproportionate the body of RED is compared to the lenses.

Okay, here's my rubbish Photoshop job!
http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/redlens.jpg

How do I post pictures properly in these forums??

I think some of you are missing the points that have been made. The Red team is basically showing the heart of the unit or the core. The whole "body" will be a bit flexible using the cage systems. I mean, this modularity and cage concept is one of the most exciting things about the whole NAB announcement.

Maybe it just takes some imagination to see how everything can look once you've got it on a tripod with the appropriate cage, storage devices, lense, matte box, etc. I can picture it.

[Simon Wyndham]

Everdene, yes I can see where you are coming from. After all the pictures that exist are only of prototypes, and I doubt that the final version will look anything like that.

I do have confidence that the RED team will listen to all inputs to make sure that they make a camera body that is the perfect usable form factor.

[masada1903]

Everdene, yes I can see where you are coming from. After all the pictures that exist are only of prototypes, and I doubt that the final version will look anything like that.

I do have confidence that the RED team will listen to all inputs to make sure that they make a camera body that is the perfect usable form factor.

I have a feeling that the design shown at NAB is probably pretty close to what they will release in the end. Of course, that's just a gut feeling -- mere speculation on my part -- but speculation is so much fun! :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

If you look at Oakley designs, I think you'll agree that it's pretty similar in the aesthetic dept.

I personally like the design, simply because it's so... weird. I'd get a real kick seeing this attached to a third-party 35mm lens. I imagine it'd look something like Frankenstein's monster. ...a very futuristic Frankenstein's monster.

[stokestack]

I think some of you are missing the points that have been made. The Red team is basically showing the heart of the unit or the core. The whole "body" will be a bit flexible using the cage systems. I mean, this modularity and cage concept is one of the most exciting things about the whole NAB announcement.

Absolutely. It's just weird how people keep overlooking the storage device. Remember how a lot of Sony cameras had BACKS that you bolted on, which held the recording device? The cage idea, with its numerous holes for mounting things, lets you attach devices, braces, and counterweights if you want.

Oh yeah, not to mention BATTERIES. Man, what are people thinking?

[monday1313]

yeah, once you put all the accessories on it, it'll be like the death star in the final phases of it's construction...in fact, if you can find Endor, it's in orbit there. you just need the code for the forceshield or a bunch of ewoks...

seriously though, it's bizarre, but in a good way.


you could bolt several together and spin them around or something, kinda like they did in 'the wall' when pink was in the pool... or roll them down a hill...

carefully...

really frickin' carefully...

[slinks]

speakin of ewoks...they speak tagalog, a filipino language. haha I guess they didn't want to try making a new language for them fur balls.

Anyways, I think the cage idea would be great. I've never liked the basic camera handles and grips. maybe with the cage and some attachments you wont need things like the figrig.

....do not fear evolution my friends.

pretty soon our cameras will be transforming and fighting decepticons.

I'm still going to stick with my dvx for sometime though, that camera is still the most amazing thing since spam.

[dudadoubt]

ok here's an ewok reacting: we got excited here in the philippines before red announced their target price of $17,000... the cost is still for big film companies in our country and for us indie filmmakers, the hvx202 and everything under that will still be the tool... luckily, winning the prime awards in international festivals recently for some filipino independent films made with the dvx100, implies its still the story that matters more than the technicals, specially for a third world country like ours