HPX or RED- Vaporware no more, what is the consensus?

[SPZ]

I reserve comment until working with the Red, but let me just say one thing about the title of this thread: Red was NEVER "vaporware." Vaporware is a term that means a produc that's been promised and promised and promised but never comes out, and in fact never does come out.

Red met just about every deadline they ever set. They're basically the exact opposite of "vaporware". They announced it early and delivered it about when they said, so it's no more "vaporware" than, say, the XDCAM-EX or HPX3000. Both of those are announced products that haven't come out yet, but they're hardly "vapor". So let's please disassociate Red from the term "vapor" as it's really inappropriate.

Barry, the Red was always viewed by some in a skeptical way, during its planning and pre-production phase. And there were many delays in its development. If I recal correctly, the original shipping schedule was for last year.

Until actual shipping, skepticism was dominant. And it made sense. Panasonic, Sony or Panavision are established brands that had a proven background. But RED was a new hotshot company founded by the Billionaire owner of Oakley Sunglasses. So RED was most of the time associated with Vaporware, over here. It was only when first footage appeared, directed by no other than Peter Jackson, that skepticism started to disappear among the production masses. I personally know some big time producers over here (Hong-Kong) that were convinced by the Peter Jackson footage at NAB (and ordered the camera). Before that, however, you can't deny the skepticism on an unproven company.

And now that it finaly shipped, RED proved people that it is no vaporware. Its here, its working, and its shipping.

So I believe that the skeptical "Vaporware no more" title makes absolute sense- Now is the time when RED enters the World of the active players. And obviously when they announce the Mini Red, or any other camera, their new track record with the Red One provides a warranty of no vaporware.

 

[davhud]

The Red Forums are down. Doggone! I was hoping to get some feedback on the first gen cameras.

Anybody?

PS just did my first major shoot last week with the 500 and it went beautifully.

 

[vidled]

SPZ:

I think you need to look beyond simple specifications and price when comparing and deciding which of those two cams to buy (HPX500 or RED One).

They really are quite different in many other aspects, and the workflow and ancillary equipment is quite different between these two "SYSTEMS".

In the end, it's "just" a moving-image-capturing device, and the HPX500 is perfectly capable of doing that in great quality.
The RED One will do this in better quality, but at a higher overall cost, and likely needing a greater effort to do so (i.e. more crew, more computer power for post, etc.)

Simply put:

- HPX500: simple acquisition of great looking footage, perfectly acceptable quality for years to come, with [relatively] little effort

- RED One: more advanced and complicated acquisition of MIND BOGGLING quality, but requiring more effort and more cost

In the end, whether your business will really benefit financially from the quality superiority of the RED One over the HPX500 is IMHO somewhat doubtful (considering "personal filmmaking and tv commercial shooting").

Cheers.

(RED Reservation holder, # mid-900s)

 

[guerrillaindie]

I'm going to be highly technical here.

I vote RED.

-Tim

"It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the most responsive to change." Charles Darwin

 

[SPZ]

SPZ:

I think you need to look beyond simple specifications and price when comparing and deciding which of those two cams to buy (HPX500 or RED One).

They really are quite different in many other aspects, and the workflow and ancillary equipment is quite different between these two "SYSTEMS".

In the end, it's "just" a moving-image-capturing device, and the HPX500 is perfectly capable of doing that in great quality.
The RED One will do this in better quality, but at a higher overall cost, and likely needing a greater effort to do so (i.e. more crew, more computer power for post, etc.)

Simply put:

- HPX500: simple acquisition of great looking footage, perfectly acceptable quality for years to come, with [relatively] little effort

- RED One: more advanced and complicated acquisition of MIND BOGGLING quality, but requiring more effort and more cost

In the end, whether your business will really benefit financially from the quality superiority of the RED One over the HPX500 is IMHO somewhat doubtful (considering "personal filmmaking and tv commercial shooting").

Cheers.

(RED Reservation holder, # mid-900s)

Maybe, VIdled.
Its not the tool that matters, most of the time. I agree with that. The stuff that I do with my HVX looks better than some short films shot in 35mm and 16mm that go trough the festival channels. Properly post produced, 1080p or 720p footage can very well be distributed theatrically. But would that be the best way to tell a story?

Financialy, would a film I shoot be benefiting if I shot it in the RED, or just going HPX? What difficulties would I have shooting with RED, other than the camera starting price, the lens and heavier supporting gear?

Why would I need a bigger crew than the one I use to shoot a short with the HPX? I still need lighting, DP, SOund, IT management (P2 dumping changed to CF dumping), operator, and REAL TALENT, as well as gaffers and supporting staff.

An HPX production would need the same. I even adventure on saying that, due to the High iso capabilities of the RED, the amounth of light I needed for my short shot on the HPX wouldn't be needed for a RED shoot.

Question to you:

Would a film with the same crew and talented actors be benefiting from it being shot on Red vs the HPX?

I believe it will. Will my film be any better story wise, performance wise with the RED? No.

But will it have a better looking image? Yes.

First and foremost, I do not intend to buy it for "business". I work as a Director on a payroll doing comercials. I have a good salary, but, sincerely, in a big organization "Revolutionary" is not sinonimous to "secure", so obviously RED is something that's hardly ever come into my organization planning. However, personaly, as a storyteller, it makes much sense. There's no film industry here, so commercialy viable filmmaking is a concept that's practically non-existent. There are possibilities, and maybe, just maybe, a RED can help create something unique for this place. SOmething that would have a WOW factor comparable to overseas productions. This might be important.

You know what? The Red does make sense.

Why did you invest in one, and not HPX?

 

[Barry_Green]

So I believe that the skeptical "Vaporware no more" title makes absolute sense

Sorry SPZ, I can't agree at all. Yes there were skeptics -- does that make Red vaporware? No, it just makes the skeptics wrong.

The term "vaporware" originated in the realm of computer software. It came about because several products were announced that were supposed to be the greatest thing ever, but never ended up being released. Months and months would go by, then years would go by, and the product never came out. So instead of being finished "software", it turned out to be ethereal "vaporware" -- i.e., no more substantial than vapors.

Red was never vapor, and the fact that it is shipping today is rearward-looking proof of that fact.

Perhaps the term "vaporware" is being rewritten to apply to any unreleased product, but I think that would be a great disservice to the term.

Was the HVX200 "vaporware"? There were a great many skeptics to that, yet here it is. Was the DVX100 "vaporware"? Many people absolutely refused to believe that a $3995 video camera could do progressive 24p capture... yet it was announced, and delivered.

There is no substantial delay from Red's introduction to its release. I mean,

If I recal correctly, the original shipping schedule was for last year.

??? Red was ANNOUNCED last year! The earliest anyone ever dreamed of thinking that they might see one shipping was at NAB, and that was a pipe dream that didn't happen. But it is shipping four months later.

There was one delay, and only one delay, that I know of. An "engineering hold", which lasted for maybe two or three weeks. Other than that, they basically hit their schedule on each and every deadline they set.

"vaporware" means a product that is no more substantial than vapor -- a product that doesn't actually exist and never will exist. Red was never vaporware. It was a product that was pre-announced. Just because some people were skeptical, that doesn't translate into Red's product becoming vapor; it didn't need faith from other people to come into existence, it was going to exist whether those people believed in it or not (proof positive, as #'s 1-25 are now in end user hands).

Here's an example of vaporware from a major manufacturer: the JVC GY-HD7000 (or whatever the actual number was). JVC announced they were going to produce a 2/3" MPEG-2 camera recording true 1920x1080 @ 50mbps. Never came into existence and it got canceled. That's vaporware. And one that threatens to become vaporware is Thomson's Infinity -- it's about two years since it was announced, it's consistently failed to meet its announced deadlines, and people who've seen it demonstrated say that there's a good chance it'll never be released. It's way too heavy, too power-hungry, too hot, and frankly the market's leaving it behind. Remember when the Infinity was announced, what a breakthrough it was going to be? 2/3", 1080i and 720p, under $20,000. Doesn't seem like that much of a breakthrough any more, does it? Not when the HPX500 is 2/3", 1080i/1080p/720p, variable frame rates, and under $13,000! So the Infinity may turn out to be vaporware, even though it was from a large company. But it'll only be deemed vaporware after it's discontinued.

Red was never vapor, it was a preannounced product in development that met its deadlines and is now shipping.

 

[vidled]

Why would I need a bigger crew than the one I use...

Focus puller?

You know what? The Red does make sense.

It absolutely does, but "Is is NECESSARY?" is the question only you can answer.

Camera operation & workflow/post will definitely be more involved (read = more expensive) than aquisition on a HPX500.

If you can justify the extra cost and extra effort, go RED, as many others have too...

 

[SPZ]

Sorry SPZ, I can't agree at all. Yes there were skeptics -- does that make Red vaporware? No, it just makes the skeptics wrong.

Perhaps the term "vaporware" is being rewritten to apply to any unreleased product, but I think that would be a great disservice to the term.


"vaporware" means a product that is no more substantial than vapor -- a product that doesn't actually exist and never will exist. Red was never vaporware. It was a product that was pre-announced. Just because some people were skeptical, that doesn't translate into Red's product becoming vapor; it didn't need faith from other people to come into existence, it was going to exist whether those people believed in it or not (proof positive, as #'s 1-25 are now in end user hands).

Here's an example of vaporware from a major manufacturer: the JVC GY-HD7000 (or whatever the actual number was). JVC announced they were going to produce a 2/3" MPEG-2 camera recording true 1920x1080 @ 50mbps. Never came into existence and it got canceled. That's vaporware. And one that threatens to become vaporware is Thomson's Infinity -- it's about two years since it was announced, it's consistently failed to meet its announced deadlines, and people who've seen it demonstrated say that there's a good chance it'll never be released. It's way too heavy, too power-hungry, too hot, and frankly the market's leaving it behind. Remember when the Infinity was announced, what a breakthrough it was going to be? 2/3", 1080i and 720p, under $20,000. Doesn't seem like that much of a breakthrough any more, does it? Not when the HPX500 is 2/3", 1080i/1080p/720p, variable frame rates, and under $13,000! So the Infinity may turn out to be vaporware, even though it was from a large company. But it'll only be deemed vaporware after it's discontinued.

Red was never vapor, it was a preannounced product in development that met its deadlines and is now shipping.

Yes, when I said Vaporware, I intended to use it outside of the software and computing realm.
Vaporware is also sinonimous, in my belief, nowadays, to a certain fear of something not being released. Its because of the raise of online scams, the incredible marketing hype and promisses that the global market and online playfield open that consumers tend to be more and more skeptical about such things as revolutionary. The appearance of "Vaporware" on our industry (which you gave two excelent examples) is why I made this relationship of Vaporware and the RED.

In this era of Scams, of Big Corporations practically not allowing competition (crushing it), and of global marketing and branding, its very hard for a regular consumer to believe in revolutions in the market- of independents making cameras that can rival the big guns.

Red prove that there's still space for independents in the high end tech market.

And Vaporware it isn't, definetly. And will not be again connected with the word in the future. Was it connected with it before? In my view, the skepticism made a connection with it based on fear.Yes. Was I a skeptic? Yes, too. Now am I a believer?...

Yes.

And, just to save my @ss on some pretentious english I've probably written there... I'm not a native english speaker/writter, so pardon me for grammar mistakes here and there.

 

[SPZ]

Focus puller?



It absolutely does, but "Is is NECESSARY?" is the question only you can answer.

Camera operation & workflow/post will definitely be more involved (read = more expensive) than aquisition on a HPX500.

If you can justify the extra cost and extra effort, go RED, as many others have too...

Necessity...

 

[Blaine]

Hmmm. Let me see if I've got this right. If something new is announced and there is skepticism about it, it is vaporware until it finally hits the market. That pretty much sum it up? By your logic SPZ, since there are always going to be the skeptics, EVERYTHING is vaporware until it hits the market.

 

[Barry_Green]

That's kind of what I was getting at. You gotta earn the title vaporware, by missing deadlines and making promises that don't get kept, over and over...

 

[GaryinCalifornia]

Barry... when are you going to write the Red Book?

Just wondering if they asked or you could always offer...

 

[G.A. Kokes]

Focus puller?



It absolutely does, but "Is is NECESSARY?" is the question only you can answer.

Camera operation & workflow/post will definitely be more involved (read = more expensive) than acquisition on a HPX500.

If you can justify the extra cost and extra effort, go RED, as many others have too...

VidLED is absolutely correct. For our 35mm shoots we almost always have a focus puller. Even in controlled studio settings.

As for computers.... we have over $100K in computers, most of which will need to be replaced when our REDs get here in December.

We looked at the HPX500 and the investment was less then the REDs, especially when ALL things were considered. However, for OUR clients and our type of productions, we felt we would be doing more 35mm type projects then 2/3".

It just made better fiscal sense. The deliverables will still be standard def in 85% of what we do! That number is not predicted to change for a long time, even after our REDs are here.

That is what VidLED was getting at by asking "Is is NECESSARY?" (for your line of work)?

Cheers,
G

 

[Barry_Green]

Barry... when are you going to write the Red Book?

Depends on how much there is to know about it... my Red doesn't arrive until November so, we'll see after that...

Just wondering if they asked or you could always offer...

That's not how it works -- nobody pays me or commissions me to do these books; I write them on my own, finance the development of them on my own, and publish them myself. The books aren't done for any manufacturer, they're based on my own perception of how much need (and how much of a market) there is for each particular one.