Good...to go...

[vamshi]

Thanks to red....

There will be an end for camcorder revolution...or evolution.

Well if this camera supports.....the following features....then its a great camera

1. frame rates- manually adjustable from 10p to 100p.(must be progressive...no choppy choppy business)
2. resolution....beyond 16 mm camera atleast 2500 * 2500
3. supports...dv,hd,hd-sdi...any others
4. easily sits on shoulder mount
5. a good battery life
6. can fit any type of lens...from photographic to prime
7. anamorphic support
8. variable shutter speed
9. color rgb to yuv and an option to load other color profiles from computers into camera.
10. highly reliable in low lights.
11. support to all the leading editing suites.or softwares.
12. audio...dolby 5.1 to 7.1 , rechangeable mic..
13. adjustable zoom speeds..
14. able to sell body alone...without lens


i think these are my options...

i know these features costs the camera a lot...i feel the price should be 10,000 to 15,000 .

well lets wait and see how this camera....comes with new features.

good luck red

vamshi

[AuditoryVisuals]

1. Frame rates are fully manual. Record at any frame rate.
2. The resolution can go all the way up to 2540p
3. It does support HD (1080p, 1080i and 720p) and HD-SDI, but you need to down sample it in REDCINE to get it to DV.
4. RED-RAIL is your answer.
5. It most likely will, but I don't know.
6. Any lens that will fit a (super) 35mm or (super) 16mm will be able to adapt to the Red One.
7. I hope so too.
8. Yes.
9. I don't know that much about colours.
10. It has absolutley no noise, can see in the dark with full colour and picks up a lot of light.
11. Only if you down sample it. And if you downsample it to 480i, you can edit it in Windows Movie Maker. I'm not sure about editing in 2540p, but I know you can edit 4K with Avid Nitris.
12. I'm not sure about the mic.
13. I think it's manual zoom. But It might have adjustable electronic zoom too.
14. $17,500. But you'll need a recorder too. The lenses cost $4.5K and $9.5K.

[Jannard]

It is a great camera if it can record 4k images that look like film without grain. Everything else we include is gravy.

Jim

[donatello]

"12. audio...dolby 5.1 to 7.1 "

i just don't know about recording 5.1 !!!
seems 5.1/7.1 should be over in audio dept ( mixer/recorder)

[WarrenS]

It is a great camera if it can record 4k images that look like film without grain. Everything else we include is gravy.

Jim

That about sums it up in my book. I want that image first.

[luisbustamante]

Regarding audio recording capabilities I think they should include 6 inputs. I don't see a reason for using 4 instead of 6 and I don't think it would be overkill at all to add these additional channels.

Maybe the camera body could have 2 xlr and a breakout box (perhaps sold separately) with additional 4 xlr inputs, it could be easily mounted on the cage and the rail. The user should be able to selects how many channels to record.

For a microphone something like this could be used:

http://www.holophone.com/images/H3D_large.jpg

Just a thought...

[Greg Voevodsky]

yes, please or at least as an option, why not add a few options like a car company, standard Red 1, and with accessories... like 5 or 6 surround sound in its own modular component for $500 or $1000 more. I would buy it, record audio onto a separate, but same timecode, 4 or 8 gig flash memory if necessary.

I shoot nature dvds. I will be using the new Holophone.com mic or mics (please add 6 inputs as option - or beta test for me - collaborating with Holophone.com) -I would love 5-6 inputs and use the their cheeper mic, otherwise I'll be using their mini mic to down convert to 2 channel for RED.

[Jay A. Kelley]

Are you guys serious?

Ok Jim, if we're going to entertain options like this I would like to request Blue Neon Lights along the bottom, and also since there is software on board the camera, please include the editing system INSIDE the body, this will save time.. Of course we'll need ports for a dual monitor setup, keyboard, mouse, and wireless internet.

Sigh.. Look I want good sound on the RED as much as the next guy, but 6 inputs and a surround mic?

(thinking a moment) You know, I guess anything is possible, but personally if you are that serious about good sound I would recommend an AAton Cantor-X. This mixer/recorder is as good as it gets and is flawless with surround sound.;

Jay

[acrochordon]

I like my gravy lumpy, homestyle.
Hey Jay, don't be harsh on Greg. Check out the mic Greg is talking about. Tell me you don't want this. I do. Yummy.
http://holophone.com/products_h4.html
How do you like your gravy? 5.1 or stereo?

[acehole111]

Considering that a year ago I was ready to shoot 8fps burst on a DSLR to get the resoloution I wanted, The red cam has already pierced the stratosphere as far as requirements for digital cinema go.

My favourite quote from Enzo Ferrari, "You pay for the motor, all the rest is free"

[stevesherrick]

First and foremost, this camera should focus on getting the visuals right. Audio should be clean, good preamps, etc but I'm a firm believer that when you are trying to do sophisticated sound setups, i.e. surround or multiple miked talent, then a sound person is critical. And the best workflow seems to be to allow the sound person to control their domain, and feed the camera a very good downmix or guide track. A multitrack hard disk recorder is a beautiful thing, and really provides a lot of options in post. The downmix or guide track allows the editing team to do their thing, and then those extra tracks become a valuable component when it gets to sound. - Steve

[stevesherrick]

And when you are doing the one man show kind of scenarios, how many channels of audio are you recording? Most of the time it's a wireless lav or two, maybe a shotgun mic. Four good clean tracks seems plenty to me. Gives you potential to run a shotgun, some lavs, etc. - Steve

[luisbustamante]

The question for me would be: Why 4 and not 6 audio inputs? Is there a technical factor limiting this number? Bandwidth maybe? Or is the number being choosen arbitrarily or because it's the norm in current digital camcorders? If it's one of the latters I think RED should give more thought to the audio aspect of the camera. That way the revolution could extend beyond the cinematography and postproduction aspects of digital cinema.

The cinematic experience is the conjuntion of images and audio. How important is one in comparison to the other? I guess we could debateon this for days. Maybe I think of this things because I'm not a cinematographer exclusively, but perhaps it would do us good to stand back from our cameraman sit in the filmmaking process and look at the whole picture instead. Are things in the Film Industry the way they are because that's the better way to do them or are they like that because of longstanding tradition and common practices?

Regarding what Mr. Kelley replied, I believe that for a lot of people on-board surround sound would be a great feature to have in the RED camera. It just adds to it. It's not useless like having a blue neon light on it (perhaps RED, but BLUE???) or an unrealistic onboard editing system. Or perhaps there's something I'm not aware of. I would ask Mr. Kelley (with all due respect) to explain why 2 additional audio channels is nonsense as he implies.

Besides if the number of channels to be recorded on-camera were to be optional then the Cinematography Methodology Purists™ could live without any surround sound nonsense and us, the Longstanding Tradition Defiants™ could also apply the camera to more unorthodox uses (and, yes, we'll probably rott in Hell for that, but, really... is it not worthy?).

Perhaps with a solid budget it's really viable and practical to hire an additional Sound crew. That's the way we all do it. Sadly not all types of production have that kind of budget (or any at all sometimes!) and in my experience the first thing to be sacrificed is audio. Does it need to be like that?

Forget the set of your next blockbuster, imagine being at a desert, exotic island, just you and your RED. Capturing the beauty of nature at full 4k, with full surround sound. I just can't imagine the added value that 5.1 audio would bring to these images. The sheer beauty of it.

I'm I really not making any sense at all?

[luisbustamante]

That very same multitrack hard disk recorder you mention could be the camera. Why not? Is it "not possible"? For one it would rid the production process of a lot of syncing problems on set and later on.

Also, a setup for surround sound doesn't need to be complicated with solutions like holophone around (and what's to come).

Even multiple miked talent can be done without an additional crew member. I've been on situations in which 2 persons double as all the crew members and have it work flawlessly. Is it the best case scenario? sure not! But, oh boy! will it save money!

Somebody tell me: Am I crazy?

[Brook Willard]

If absolutely no imagery-based features or abilities are cut for audio's sake, I'll be happy.

[donatello]

ok - U crazy !!
at some point we have to admit that RED can't be/do everything ( camera, recording studio, cell phone , internet access etc) ...

[stevesherrick]

I think your idea of having additional audio capability in the camera is a valid one. For those who want to have an all in one solution that they can run themselves. I think this comes down to a lot of debatable issues. I've done location sound, camera operating, and I make my living as a staff sound engineer. So I'm seeing this from all perspectives. What I've seen is that often times, the camera operator and sound person feel tethered to each other, sometimes restricting them. So, I wonder if you add all of this audio capability to the camera, do you add to these restrictions/limitations. Obviously if the shots are locked down on sticks, this becomes easier to deal with, but try running around with a bunch of audio cables dangling from the camera - not fun. But if you are able to record to a seperate recorder and feed just a couple of cables/or wireless to the camera, frees the camera op and gives the sound person a lot of control over the audio. Especially in a feature film world. I think many location sound folk would agree on this. As for post workflows, things should get better in regards to syncing sound. NLEs will add more support for BWF files, and these issues will be worked out.

Steve

[luisbustamante]

can someone now explain why the addition 2 more channels of audio is "crazy"?

Is it that technically challenging.

Please note that I agree with all that you say, especially the last reply form steve: It's a burden to be tied to the sound man, but...

My point is why not have 6 channels instead of 4. The number seems totally arbitrary to me. That's all.

thanks for your patience.

[visceralpsyche]

Little known fact - surround sound is generally not recorded as such, but rather processed in post (from one track upwards) to be 5.1 channels. 4 channels to me sounds(!) like it covers 99% of users quite comfortably, and I say this coming from a sound recordist's perspective. Anyway, if you are really serious about sound then the onboard Red stuff won't cut it, being "only" 24bit/48kHz. HD audio will require 24bit/96kHz which is really best left to specialised devices such as the Sounddevices 744T (http://www.sounddevices.com/) etc which will have better DSP circuitry as well. As long as the camera has a way to easily sync audio and video across an external feed I'll be happy.

I know, not everyone will agree with this, but first and foremost Red One is a camera. As Jim says, if it shoots gorgeous, film-like 4K imagery, then everything else is a bonus. I mean, even now the camera already has so many features that make me realise how revolutionary it is. Even 4 channel audio seems like overkill (most cameras have 2 XLR inputs only). I have put forth my audio requests in other threads, but suffice it to say that with 4 XLR plugs and 24bit audio I am more than happy to use onboard sound unless I'm in a full cine situation, in which case the external sync will be all I need to make the post workflow top notch in both audio and video departments.

[stevesherrick]

Luis, I don't think it's necessarily that they can't do it, it's more about where to put the focus. Remeber having extra XLR inputs means less space for other video functionality. As an owner of the 744T, I concur with what Paul is saying. That device as well as the Devas and Cantars, etc are there to serve their purpose - record very high quality sound that can be utilized to full advantage in post. There was another camera which was boasting it would support 12 channels of audio at 24 bit/96K but I don't think it ever made it to production. - Steve

[luisbustamante]

yeah, I agree with visceral also on the 744T and the aspects of creating hi level surround sound audio. The process you both have outlined briefly is definitely the way to go in any case. The problem with it is that it cost a lot of money to be done right. I was just pondering feasible (at least for me) alternatives of sound aquisition.

And even now, after reading visceral's post and re-reading what you wrote I realize that 4 24/48 inputs should be more than enough to create an acceptable (poor man's) soundtrack. As visceral says, if you want to be serious about your audio the RED sadly won't cut it. I still think it could do it but as Donatello puts it, it can't do everything or fill everyone's needs.

I'll be in the lookout for some type of device similar in specs to the 744T that can record hi quality multi track audio and be small enough to be fitted to the rail or cage, to be used with one of the holophone mikes in a one man operation.

Perhaps I should have said this sooner but I'm planning on making a long trip through Mexico with my Red. I'd love to have my imagery accentuated by rich surround sound. Now I just hope I'll have enough money for a proper sound crew.

Again, thanks for your patience.

[donatello]

all the 5.1/7.1 surround sound you hear at your local movie theater = all audio during production was MONO .. the surround sound was/is created in POST not during filming ...

[luisbustamante]

all the 5.1/7.1 surround sound you hear at your local movie theater = all audio during production was MONO .. the surround sound was/is created in POST not during filming ...

i was actually talking pf something in the likes of the holophone mike.

[mike the beginner]

The Holophone mic is priced at around $6,000. HOW MUCH OF A BARGAIN are you guys looking for?

Having read up on audio (will i ever learn enough?) i think its great that there will be four xlr connections. If they can provide the same quality of pre-amp in the camera as fitted in the sound devices 744t then would that in itself not make Red a revolutionary camera in visual and audio.

For run and gun and one man operation situations it could avoid the need for mixers/recorders in some situations. Two lavs and a shotgun and a spare for ambient, can we possibly ask for more!! (all theory thinking from me).

Michael

[Graeme_Nattress]

The best place for a mic is as near as possible to the sound source. Holographic micing techniques can sound wonderful, but for specialist applications, not movie making. It would be like shooting a movie with a 360 degree fisheye, whereas we choose narrower lenses to focus the viewers attention - otherwise know as "directing". Similarly, microphones are are used to focus the audio to what you want the audience to hear.

Now, if you're recording a classical concert..... But we're not, we're making a movie.

[acrochordon]

My knowledge is puny compared to Graeme's and Jim's. Jim is marketing Red as a solution for most everyone (even photographers).
But we're not, we're making a movie. Graeme is indicating that the purpose is for making movies. I understand that you can't make something that is all things to all people.

Many people are interested if the audio portion of Red's development will push the envelope or be status quo.

I would like a flexible camera. I am my own one man company. I make nature movies. I don't have a sound crew or editing crew. I do everything myself. Something like the holophone would make things easier on me.

I understand production companies have all kinds of mics and record most of the sound in a studio during post production. That is not my world or my budget.


Holographic micing techniques can sound wonderful, but for specialist applications, not movie making.
Why exclude specalists, if that is what I am? Could the Red team add a sound expert to the team to work on the audio aspect of the camera? I don't know much about audio, but I would like a simple solution for recording surround sound (without a sound crew.)

Thankyou all for your input, especially Graeme.

Click the link below to see all the people that use the holophone. Are they all specalists?
http://holophone.com/action.html
If it is good enough for The Church of Scientology, it is good enough for me.

[AuditoryVisuals]

Well said Graeme. Not to mention the mass price increase of 7.1 recording.

[Jay A. Kelley]

That is a cool looking mic.. Now hook it up to a cool mixer.. Check this out:
http://www.aaton.com/products/sound/cantar/index.php (http://www.aaton.com/products/sound/cantar/index.php)

Jay

[zakforrest]

- otherwise know as "directing".

da ha

[Graeme_Nattress]

Why not go with a binaural system then, or a crossed pair, or tetrahedral arrangement, or spaced pair. You only need two mics for 3d sound. All of which you could record on the camera, or to an external box if you so want.

[luisbustamante]

Why not go with a binaural system then, or a crossed pair, or tetrahedral arrangement, or spaced pair. You only need two mics for 3d sound. All of which you could record on the camera, or to an external box if you so want.

As usual the man is right. I've been doing research all morning on surround sound field recording and that's where it led me too.

Thanks for helping me understand.

Cheers!

[brent@deadworkers.com]

Please don't add "features" to the camera that would just increase the price, increase the bulk and wouldn't be used by 95% of the users. Thanks!

[Josch]

(thinking a moment) You know, I guess anything is possible, but personally if you are that serious about good sound I would recommend an AAton Cantor-X. This mixer/recorder is as good as it gets and is flawless with surround sound.;

Jay

Recording a good usable 5.1 audio is quite an ordeal. Doing it with an on camera mike and expecting it to work would require a huge amount of luck.

Having said this (and thinking a moment): If the bandwidt provides space enough for 6 audiostreams in 24bit/48KHz when for example shooting in windowed whatever, then a breakout port with more audio inputs would be nice.

You would have to still be working with a soundguy, but he´d record not to the (hugly expensive) AAton, but directly to picture, facilitating a lot of things.

Of course, running around the jungle with six microphones attached to the camera would feel like playing the cello in a marching band (courtesy Woddy Allen).

Jochen

[omen]

Guuuuys!!!

The cam is supposed to be as light and as small as it can be, at the same time incorporating the most important functions. I know few things about audio and there is no way one could fit in surround sound at the same level of quality as the picture is.
I got the feeling the company is devoted to making the best camera, not mini recording studio.

4k digital cine camera is here.
Surround sound onboard seems to me as pushing it.

Dreaming is ok. This one is too far.
For now.

[Josch]

The cam is supposed to be as light and as small as it can be,

Yep. Hopefully it does NOT include a built in microphone.

My fear is: The specs state 4 audio channels in 16 or 24 bit. That´s cool, but if there are only 2 inputs it means that you are limited to 2 good outboard mikes plus the usual (in cannot call it anything other but) "built in stereo recording capability".

Again: Recording 4 audio streams is great. I´m quite satisfied with that - if I can access them.

Jochen

[Graeme_Nattress]

But for 5.1 sound you, theoretically, only need 2 mics and some nice processing in post/ If you want height information recorded also, you need 4 mics.

Even for 5.1 you'd never need 6 mics, as that .1 is just post added effects anyway, and even if not, it's derived from the main audio.

Remember how many ears we have :-)

Graeme

[AuditoryVisuals]

You know how stereo is on your TV, directly infront of you. Why not have 6 channels of audio directly in front of you. Sure, you have two ears. But know matter how many channels, you still hear it with two ears. Think of how many things make noise! That's a lot too. It doesn't have to surround you, it could be in front of you, to direct your attention.

I guess stereo will do for me though.

[Graeme_Nattress]

I think you need to listent to some goood binaural (dummy head) recordings on a decent pair of headphones. You'll hear sound from totally 3d aroundyou, only using 2 channels of audio.

Graeme

[OliverM]

My favourite quote from Enzo Ferrari, "You pay for the motor, all the rest is free"

Sadly, you could tell the difference between the motor and the free bits... :)

[luisbustamante]

After what I've been reading regarding surround sound field recording, If I were to request anything more regarding audio to the RED team it would be to make the 4 audio channels 24bit/96Khz...

I know, I know!! :)