Forget about RED....Check this out!

[dan6470]

I don't know why theres so much hype about RED when it's already been beat. You should all take a look at booth C10225. A company called Vision Research has a 4k digital cinema camera designed to model 65mm film at almost double the framerate. Better yet, they have a working camera in the booth!


Edit: I've got my hands on the spec sheet they are giving out on CD's at their booth!!

[Filmjunkie677]

Already been beat, huh?

Sure. Right.

[onetrackmind]

and how much would that camera be ?

[dvpixl]

yeah, let's see it.

[lecterj2]

I don't know why theres so much hype about RED when it's already been beat. You should all take a look at booth C10225. A company called Vision Research has a 4k digital cinema camera designed to model 65mm film at almost double the framerate. Better yet, they have a working camera in the booth

is this a joke!!!!

[BillP]

Found this...


http://www.visionresearch.com/


-BillP

[Fugitive]

Very high frame-rate (1000 pictures per second) but not 4k. Maybe somebody at NAB will tell us what this is about.

[dan6470]

I don't think the camera is on their website....but the camera at NAB is definitely 4k

[B.Ng]

If it costs $10,000 then we're talking.

[tak1108]

Is this similar to what they use on Myth Busters? What do they do for their slow motion?

[lecterj2]

don't know why theres so much hype about RED when it's already been beat

No offense, But if frames per second is what the advantage is over red, then perhaps. But this cam doesn't seem to be catering movies, but I could be wrong. However Red beats this camera to a duble pulp in sheer resoluition alone, sorry to burst your bubble, man. Nice specs but as it not a match for red.

[dan6470]

No...this is strictly for digital cinema

[dan6470]

No offense, But if frames per second is what the advantage is over red, then perhaps. But this cam doesn't seem to be catering movies, but I could be wrong. However Red beats this camera to a duble pulp in sheer resoluition alone, sorry to burst your bubble, man. Nice specs but as it not a match for red.

What resolution are you basing this on?

[lecterj2]

Btw Red can handle ABOVE 4k, It can handle sigle increments framerates at 4.4.4 or 4.2.2.

[dan6470]

Someone at NAB has to look at this camera for themselves...I don't have the exact specs

[lecterj2]

What resolution are you basing this on?
4k, 4520 x 2540 Mysterium CMOS sensor, true S35mm sized.

Check Red website, all the imfo is there
cheers

[lecterj2]

The cam certainly has great specs. But then it cannot ve v.9 showned in there site. Its undered spec to compete, however They have uncovered another cam that its not post it in there site, then I sure like to know more about it!!!

[Fugitive]

If this camera really does 4k, and is under 10k, its going to Rock. Red is an excellent camera, but for those who want to make film "now", we need something now, and at an affordable indie price.

[dan6470]

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

Check Red website, all the imfo is there
cheers

I meant the resolution of the other camera....how do you know RED has it beat

[lecterj2]

If this camera really does 4k, and is under 10k, its going to Rock. Red is an excellent camera, but for those who want to make film "now", we need something now, and at an affordable indie price.

Not arguing there! I'm with you brother!

[dan6470]

If this camera really does 4k, and is under 10k, its going to Rock. Red is an excellent camera, but for those who want to make film "now", we need something now, and at an affordable indie price.

Well, all it looks like RED has is a clay model at this point. The Vision Research camera is already being demoed in their booth

[lecterj2]

....how do you know RED has it beat

According to their latest version (v.9) It only handles 1600 by 1200 and close to 2 millon pixels
cheers

[dan6470]

But thats not the camera.....the NAB camera isn't on their website

[lecterj2]

However the ability to record 1000pps is something to be hold

[lecterj2]

.....the NAB camera isn't on their website Now we are getting somewhere. I just mentioned that before

[lecterj2]

If anyone can post more details, then indeed welcome, since currently dissapointed with the hvx!

[Fugitive]

Lol. Looks like everybody's so goggle-eyed at the "red" booth that they dont have time to post anything about anything else.

[dan6470]

I know someone who will be at NAB tomorow....so I will definitely send him over to see what's up

[lecterj2]

The SI-1920HDVR captures full resolution, 1920 x 1080 progressive-scan 12-bit raw images
I think this could be the camera you were taking about. theres more info on the other camera section.

[lecterj2]

they are refering it as the red killer.

[Fugitive]

The SI-1920HDVR is made by Silicon Imaging, whereas the camera Dan is talking about is made by Vision Research. They are different cameras.

Dan, ask the guy you know to ask about both the cameras will ya. It would be nice to know our options.

[lecterj2]

Sorry you are right

[dvpixl]

I'll pay 17k if i had the money for the sheer fact that RED just has the better design. I haven't seen anything else yet but RED's got it going.

[dan6470]

I'll see what I can do!

[dan6470]

Have any of you guys been to NAB yet, or plan on going?

[Fugitive]

If we were (or could), we wouldnt be stuck here posting... :(


@DVpixl: "If i had the money". I think that is they key isnt it. "If". Unfortunately we are indies and we dont have the money. Besides, honestly, for the me the time-factor weighs too much. A camera in hand is better than wishing for RED. Once Red comes out though, it will be another story altogether.

[lecterj2]

No man I'm stock in new York!! bummer!

[They are Them]

[QUOTE=we wouldnt be stuck here posting... :([/QUOTE]

no sh*t :(

[Cheesesailor77]

I could probably work out 17k, its not if i had 17k, its if I had 30k after glass, recording, storage, editing, nessicary accesories.

give my the whole package for 17k and im in. cheaper than that even better

[Cheesesailor77]

oh and btw, phantoms are the cameras they used to get the slowmo stuff in that car crash music video posted in the cafe last week.

[brutan]

The Vision Research cameras are highly specialized while the RED ONE camera is allegedly being designed for more universal studio and field acquisition.

Also, vision research is a manufacturer for cameras in the advanced imaging/machine vision industries not television and film...so the formats and system configurations will be very non-standard for our fields.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't dream of using specialized cameras, just do your homework before you buy or rent...

Check out Advanced Imaging Pro magazine for more insight into that other world of imaging technology:

http://www.advancedimagingpro.com/

[coolguy007]

I'll pay 17k if i had the money for the sheer fact that RED just has the better design. I haven't seen anything else yet but RED's got it going.

Red may look cool, yet if this vision research cam is better or as good as red, and cheaper, well then frankly i dont care how it looks, it could look like a tin-can with a string out the back and i would be proud to have it on my shoulders (and anyways, red is just a concept, like a concept car, a whole lotta talk/not that im doubting anything, im totally for it if everything they say is true, i just think that it is good to be skeptical)

[dan6470]

Brutan, while it's true Vision Research's cameras have been very specialized in the past, the camera they are showing at NAB is definitely specifically designed to cater to cinema. It's definitely worth taking a look at.

[coolguy007]

have you seen it yet?

[Jarred Land]

guys... vision research is the company I worked with last year to do all the purposelabs.com stuff... trust me, the new Phantom is not gonna be 17k.

[JasonFox]

guys... vision research is the company I worked with last year to do all the purposelabs.com stuff... trust me, the new Phantom is not gonna be 17k.

Oh, 17.5k then? Shoot. I was *this* close to cutting a check, too. ;)

[lecterj2]

Oh, 17.5k then? Shoot. I was *this* close to cutting a check, too. ;)

I think you get Jarreds point!

[Fugitive]

No I dont. He means its going to be darn expensive? Whats the point? There are already really expensive cameras that do just about anything out there by companies that have been at it for years. What we need is an indie camera that can do it all.

[Solomojo]

Should I spend 17k on Red to get 4k or 3 HVX for 16k or Vision for < 17.5k with unknown k res or Andromeda with DVX100b for 6k and get 2k res. I want the best k for my k...mmm'k?

[Fugitive]

Lol. Same here. I am sick of all this "K" stuff too.

[oldboy]

Hey everyone, while I admit that we're all guilty of day dreaming about owning some of these super cameras that promise and do big things, we are indie filmmakers and while we're busy dreaming, others are out shooting on cameras some of would consider "crappier". Remember "28 days later" was shot years ago on a Canon Xl1s. Granted they had the post budget to make it look nice but still. "Breaking the waves" was shot on a lesser camera years before that. It's the story and the execution that matters. Remember great directing, editing, sound and great acting will save a "poorer" looking image any day.

Go out and shoot your stories and make them look as good as they can be with the equipment you already have. There are people making great looking films with the dvx100 (not a or b, but the original one).

Thumbs up to y'all!

PS: Having said all that if I could grab an HVX for a bargain price of under 4k, I would :)

[Everdene]

Red is looking hot. I have to admit, though, that it has made Andromeda look even more attractive to me (as something to tie a DVX user over until Red is out and tested). I'll be watching Red and watching for more Andromeda reports (and Andromeda support for Windows).

[Fugitive]

@oldboy: Yeah, but in that case I would go for the FX1 since its in the same price range as the Canon XL. I would rather go for HD than not. The fx-1 seems to be the best image-for-money deal for indies yet.

[peter orland]

Remember "28 days later" was shot years ago on a Canon Xl1s. Granted they had the post budget to make it look nice but still. "Breaking the waves" was shot on a lesser camera years before that. It's the story and the execution that matters. Remember great directing, editing, sound and great acting will save a "poorer" looking image any day.


Lars von Trier's Breaking The Waves was shot on super 35mm Kodak by Robby Muller. I agree with your sentiment though.

[The Machinist]

Dancer in the Dark was shot on DVCAM that's what you might be thinking of.

Also i believe Manderlay was shot on HDV.

[dan6470]

Hey guys....heres the spec sheet that Vision Research was handing out on CD's at their booth!!

[redindian]

..and when u asked for the price what did they say?

[Drew599]

Man, 1000+fps. Now that would eat up a lot of my time blowing things up and shooting guns.

[Erik Olson]

I'd love to see some pictures if someone can swing by that booth?

e

[lecterj2]

Well the Phantom is certainly a good competition to the red. The flash card hot swap sounds very much like panny. Based on specs it sounds just a bit behind red, but at those res specs I hardly believe would be much of a difference. However there were no mention of compression if any, is it 4.4.4. or 4.2.2 etc. It seems incomplete info to me. Price anyone?

[Jim Arthurs]

Guys, I'll swing by the booth tomorrow and check it out. I'll report back on Thursday if no one beats me to it. With pictures if allowed...

Regards

Jim Arthurs

[Emanuel]

Also i believe Manderlay was shot on HDV.CineAlta's F900

[TC]

I got some shots of the Phantom for you guys. The image quality was amazing.

293

294

295

296

297

[hemophilia]

No word on price?

[TC]

I cannot for the life of me find the paper work that I got on it, I'll keep looking though. Luckily Jim will be going by the booth tomorrow, so I'm sure he'll be able to fill you in on it.

[Ari Presler]

Why not consider the Silicon Imaging SI-1920HDR Remote Head camera for $12.5k which you can use a modern dual core computer to capture, record and edit over gigabit Ethernet?

[lecterj2]

Why not consider the Silicon Imaging SI-1920HDR Remote Head camera for $12.5k which you can use a modern dual core computer to capture, record and edit over gigabit Ethernet?


I personally saw the footage of this camera on their site. I particularly liked it more than the hvx and was compressed demo. I'm one of the few that likes film grain and the demo shows a very film like grain. I don't like noise less images ( depending on the noise type though) The color reproduction although a bit oversaturated however gave a pleasing image to me.

Actually considering it.

[Tzedekh]

I got some shots of the Phantom for you guys. The image quality was amazing.
Am I the only one who thinks this camera looks very large?

[Erik Olson]

So what's the street on the Phantom 65 then? Is there a chance we could lavish a little attention on this already here device before NAB ends. I'm curious about:

AUDIO (single or double system?)
RECORDING FORMAT(S)

e

[rcorlan]

So what's the street on the Phantom 65 then? Is there a chance we could lavish a little attention on this already here device before NAB ends. I'm curious about:

AUDIO (single or double system?)
RECORDING FORMAT(S)

e

There seems to be some confusion about the phantom hd and 65. There are two variants of this camera: the 65 is 4k (4096x2440 max), 125fps max, using 65mm lenses. The HD is 2k (2048x1152 or 1920x1080), using 35mm (PL) lenses.

The image format from both is 16-bit RAW (Bayer), uncompressed.

The cameras don't record any audio. They handle more like film cameras than video.

Radu

[mjeppsen]

Ok you guys, I did some checking on the two cameras being shown at NAB by Vision Research, and they are BRUISERS (and come at a bruising price too).

Two models, the Phantom 65 (65mm full frame CMOS) and the Phantom HD (35mm full frame CMOS). FYI, the Phantom 65 model is 4096x2044, 1-125fps, 14-bit, removable flash mags, etc. TONS of high-end features, including the ability to setup frame-rate profiles. The Phantom HD sports a PL mount, and has mounts available for other lenses too.

The whole enchilada at FresHDV (http://www.freshdv.com/2006/04/freshexclusive-vision-research-unveils.html), where I've got a pretty detailed rundown of camera specs, as well as base pricing. This is all direct from one of the founders of VR...so I'm pretty sure this is the real deal and accurate.

[Cheesesailor77]

$190k-$220k

...ouch

lol anyonestill interested in talking about this?...

I'm going back to the SI thread

[Simon Wyndham]

I'll take two.

[Cheesesailor77]

can I borrow ur second one?

[Simon Wyndham]

Nah. I need that one for shooting birthday parties and council board meetings.

[masada1903]

Nah. I need that one for shooting birthday parties and council board meetings.

Don't forget to buy a third one for your coffee table. That'd spawn all sorts of interesting conversations. Just remember to include a "DO NOT TOUCH" sign, and a touch-sensitive alarm. :)

[Simon Wyndham]

I hadn't thought of that. I have a door that keeps closing too due to a misaligned hinge, so I'd better buy a fourth as a door stop. ;-)

[PhillipJantzen]

Simon,
the

[PhillipJantzen]

ok, that last post didn't work very well...

simon,
you could use it as a hammer too if you like, it's built just as sturdy as all of our other cameras which typically get smashed into walls by the automotive industry, and thrown into pits where they test large caliber artillery rounds by the military...the only moving part is the cooling fan, which is field replaceable.

so yes, they are bruisers =)

but seriously, what would everyone like to know about these two cameras?

these are really built to compete with 35mm film cameras, not the lower end of the field.

I do plan on creating a document which will outline the costs of shooting 4K images (with any camera system), and comparing them to 16mm, 35mm, and 65mm film. It should demonstrate that 4K imaging, no matter the inital cost of the camera, is still not for the small budget project. its really the storage space required that is the largest cost, at least long term anyway.

Jarred, isnt that shot that you have posted of yourself a test shot from a Phantom V5.0? I told you I had something coming, its been a busy year =)

more to come...
Phil
VisionResearch

[ovjamaica]

Hey everyone, while I admit that we're all guilty of day dreaming about owning some of these super cameras that promise and do big things, we are indie filmmakers and while we're busy dreaming, others are out shooting on cameras some of would consider "crappier". Remember "28 days later" was shot years ago on a Canon Xl1s. Granted they had the post budget to make it look nice but still. "Breaking the waves" was shot on a lesser camera years before that. It's the story and the execution that matters. Remember great directing, editing, sound and great acting will save a "poorer" looking image any day.

Go out and shoot your stories and make them look as good as they can be with the equipment you already have. There are people making great looking films with the dvx100 (not a or b, but the original one).

Thumbs up to y'all!

PS: Having said all that if I could grab an HVX for a bargain price of under 4k, I would :)

THANK YOU!!! I saw this thread and thought "Holy @&%&!#$, people can't even be satisfied with a DVX anymore". What is wrong with everyone? Drooling over 4K as if sensor size and crazy image quality can magically make your films for you. If you're not going to work to make a film with a DVX then what is a RED going to do for you? RED can't be your DP or AD or anything to help you make a film. So quit whining about this 'need' for all of us 'indie' filmmakers to get a 4K camera. Why the heck do you need 4K? Most of us right now can't even STORE 4K, let alone edit it. I'm all for the RED, don't get me wrong, but it's people that whine and whine about not having some sort of miracle camera to shoot with that never go anywhere. Shoot what you can with what you have. The DVX is STILL an amazing camera, whether it's HD or not. Don't get so caught up in competing with the 'Jones's' that you forget what the goal is.

[dan]

Shoot what you can with what you have. Don't get so caught up in competing with the 'Jones's' that you forget what the goal is.
..............Words of wisdom..............(repeat!)

[Cheesesailor77]

Shoot what you can with what you have. The DVX is STILL an amazing camera, whether it's HD or not. Don't get so caught up in competing with the 'Jones's' that you forget what the goal is.

lol I'm sick of hearing this. DUDE! This is a NAB board. We're here to drool over new toys. I don't remember anyone spouting how crappy the DVX is. If we didn't like the DVX we wouldn't buy one. Now pleasetake a step to the left so I can continue to fetishize these cameras some more ;)

[ovjamaica]

Hey, I'm out man. I don't need to stay and ruin the fun. I just think it's really annoying when people say they NEED some sort of all encompassing solution for indie filmmakers. 4K?!? For an indie film?!?!?! WTF?! Anyway, feel free to drool away. I'm out of it.

[JavaDog]

these are really built to compete with 35mm film cameras, not the lower end of the field. [JD - Emphasis mine]

Phil
VisionResearch

Oh, BURN! :laugh:

[Fugitive]

Ok, I'm dizzy...what was the price again? 120K or 120 dollars?... I'm outta this one. Silicon Imaging anyone?

[Erik Olson]

Phillip,

I'd love more information on your digital cinema cameras as you continue to move them forward. I'm a Persol man myself, whatever that means.

e

[lecterj2]

Well, If red becomes tangible and does perform accordingly by its specs. Phantom has to lower their price tag. But even by lowering their tag it will still be to expensive I bet. which it will leave them to cater to those that need high picture quality at high frame rates.

But at the end of the day they will start loosing bussiness share since their are not the top performer on specs sheets.

[Erik Olson]

Let someone else make an image before predicting the end of the world, huh?

e

[ovjamaica]

But at the end of the day they will start loosing bussiness share since their are not the top performer on specs sheets.

Well, that's a bit overstated. There are many cameras that still thrive despite not being the top performer on the specs sheets. It's not all about specs. If this camera can shoot the stated resolutions at 1000fps then it will certainly have uses to those who can afford it.

[lecterj2]

If this camera can shoot the stated resolutions at 1000fps then it will certainly have uses to those who can afford it.
True to that, but it would be a lower margin after all. However sliced in price rage the pahantom is just to forbiding

[lecterj2]

excuse my grammar here!

[Jim Arthurs]

I cannot for the life of me find the paper work that I got on it, I'll keep looking though. Luckily Jim will be going by the booth tomorrow, so I'm sure he'll be able to fill you in on it.

Sorry folks, I didn't get by the booth... or have the time to meet up with anyone I promised to... sigh... first one day trip to NAB ever, show floor time wound up being a small fraction of that day, unfortunately.

Regards,

Jim Arthurs

[masada1903]

you could use it as a hammer too if you like, it's built just as sturdy as all of our other cameras which typically get smashed into walls by the automotive industry, and thrown into pits where they test large caliber artillery rounds by the military...the only moving part is the cooling fan, which is field replaceable.

I knew we were forgetting something! I do need a new hammer...


I do plan on creating a document which will outline the costs of shooting 4K images (with any camera system), and comparing them to 16mm, 35mm, and 65mm film. It should demonstrate that 4K imaging, no matter the inital cost of the camera, is still not for the small budget project. its really the storage space required that is the largest cost, at least long term anyway.

That would be pretty nice to have.

Personally, I'm not sure why everyone is so hung up on shooting 4K -- or the 'impossibilities' of shooting on 4K -- when a few weeks ago, people were trying to figure out how to afford storage for 720 and 1080. 4K is something I'd like to ramp up to eventually... someday... but if I'm not shooting a feature, I'll stick with 1080 at the max. Either way, I need a new hard drive(s)...

[Kubrick71]

Hey, I'm out man. I don't need to stay and ruin the fun. I just think it's really annoying when people say they NEED some sort of all encompassing solution for indie filmmakers. 4K?!? For an indie film?!?!?! WTF?! Anyway, feel free to drool away. I'm out of it.

I don't see anything wrong with using the best possible tools to create an independent movie. An independent movie doesn't imply it's low budget, or let alone any other quality besides its independent funding. I don't think you should get "really annoyed" just because someone feels they need something which you do not.

[Fugitive]

Besides, technology is getting cheaper all the time. I know my PC today can do much more than a super-computer could twenty years ago, and at a fraction of the price. Why cant i expect the same from cameras?

[lecterj2]

[QUOTE]Besides, technology is getting cheaper all the time. I know my PC today can do much more than a super-computer could twenty years ago, and at a fraction of the price. Why cant i expect the same from cameras?
[/QUOTAgree on that one!!!!

[dan]

Besides, technology is getting cheaper all the time. I know my PC today can do much more than a super-computer could twenty years ago, and at a fraction of the price. Why cant i expect the same from cameras?
We all expect the same thing every day from every product (but, like you said, it takes a while to actually happen) and it will! Is only a matter of time.

[PaPa]

you know what i say?

FUCK THE RED, FUCK THE OTHER DUDE. Lets all rally together ,and as we did for the 35mm adapters, lets make our own cameras!!! w000000 PARADE

[chrallyo]

http://www.freshdv.com/2006/04/freshexclusive-vision-research-unveils.html

quick search found this info mind boggling numbers!! unfortunate mind boggeling price as well.

[Jarred Land]

lol yeah we all know about the vision research, great camera, just a little pricey.