RED Officialy Shipping Next Friday -- thoughts? Any feelings?

I think that RED is a very big deal, technologically. And there are a lot of implications spinning off its availability.

But...from an Art Dept/VFX point of view, RED for lower-budget production sounds like a minor nightmare. HD is terribly, terribly unforgiving of even the most minor flaws in makeup, paint, finishes, etc - and frankly, we rely upon the fuzz-factor of film and SD, to gloss over backgrounds etc that are less-than-stellar.

RED's availability is a wonderful thing for lower-budget productions...but I wonder how happy producers will be, having to shovel extra $$$ in the direction of making sets, etc HD-worthy, after presumably adopting RED in order to save money.
 
Last edited:
I'm with you, Max. For Low-budget productions (1mil - 500k > ) it's an awesome tool. I was just talking about still aspiring to shoot on Film, because frankly... I still prefer the "feel" of film over digital.

No matter what you can do with the digital image... grade it to hell, post vfx, etc etc... it still rarely ever feels like film. I'll still aspire to reach a dollar amount that allows me to shoot on film, but until then all the cameras out are great alternatives.

Realistically, if DVX movies are good enough for projection when handled properly and an XLH1 (see: THE SIGNAL), an HVX's 1080 image is good enough if the budget only allows for such.

My Camera envy is slooowwllly faadddiiing.

Another note: in another conversation, an older friend of mines who's been working with film mostly bragged about how he got to enjoy it before the decline. It kinda made me sad! I can't really see myself aspiring to shoot a big project on a Genesis, Viper, or even RED ONE etc. It's always been stuck in my head that I have to get to FILM. So it's kinda strange. What will there be to aspire toward if film goes?
 
Last edited:
Sad Max said:
but I wonder how happy producers will be, either having to shovel extra $$$ in the direction of making sets, etc HD-worthy, after presumably adopting RED in order to save money.
Click to expand...

Ah, but that's precisely what's so appealing about Red. With the native shallow DOF of 35mm, the backgrounds will once again acquire that little bit of fuzz that's so important for turning a blah set into a believable set.

1/3" HD has been the worst thing for sets -- they just don't work anymore because everything is razor sharp. SD worked okay because nothing was razor sharp. Red should be okay because the subject will be sharp but the walls behind 'em should just drop off enough to mask any imperfections... I'm hopin'...
 
Well...we shot the last five episodes of "E-Ring" using HD-900F's...and we had to be damned, damned, damned careful what we let into frame...even with PrimoDigital lenses.

I'm not romantically attached to shooting things on film...I just want digital tools that provide an indistinguishable-from end product. Without having to finesse everything in front of the camera, to get it.
 
Sad Max said:
even with PrimoDigital lenses.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that's still 2/3" HD. Not 35mm DOF by a long shot. It's more akin to 16mm (which is of course better than 1/3", but not 35mm). Which is why such a thing as the Pro35 exists.

I'm totally with you on this; we did a Star Trek thing a couple of years ago and our set was foam core. Now, truth be told it looked fine for what we were doing because the set was supposed to look cheesy, but frankly it was amazing what those guys did with a few sheets of foam core, and if it could have been just a little out of focus I'm sure we could get away with murder. Like the old days... :)

I'm not romantically attached to shooting things on film...I just want digital tools that provide an indistinguishable-from end product. Without having to finesse everything in front of the camera, to get it.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And that's what the 35mm adapters promise, and what the Red is supposed to deliver on as well -- true 35mm DOF that will add just enough blur to hide a legion of errors and shortcuts on the sets. Of course, the makeup people and the actors are none too happy, but the 35mm DOF should help the set situation.
 
Abu Reno said:
You can't be serious? Unless you had a shoot ASAP.
Click to expand...

Red isnt for everyone. Not every production needs 4k. Alot of corporate clients, dont neccesarly want to pay for a set of zeiss primes everytime they wanna make a safety video.

Sad Max said:
I think that RED is a very big deal, technologically. And there are a lot of implications spinning off its availability.

But...from an Art Dept/VFX point of view, RED for lower-budget production sounds like a minor nightmare. HD is terribly, terribly unforgiving of even the most minor flaws in makeup, paint, finishes, etc - and frankly, we rely upon the fuzz-factor of film and SD, to gloss over backgrounds etc that are less-than-stellar.

RED's availability is a wonderful thing for lower-budget productions...but I wonder how happy producers will be, having to shovel extra $$$ in the direction of making sets, etc HD-worthy, after presumably adopting RED in order to save money.
Click to expand...

After shooting a bunch of Zerobudget stuff. i reallllly was thikning about becoming Artdirector/DP..... films look like crap unless you dress a set real nice.
 
Just like everyone else, I really like the look and feel of film...BUT...having watched quite a bit of newer and older films on 1080p HD-DVD, I see the inferiority of celluloid compared to high-end digital, ala Red.

Even the newest, best transfers of films shot on the latest stocks are quite grainy when viewed on a good 1080p HDTV. This is where RED will likely look superior; it'll be so much cleaner (most of the time) and yet give the cinematic feel of 35mm DOF...so you basically get the best of both worlds--believable film-like feel but without the grit.
 
All of the above sounds encouraging.

What was your Star Trek thing, Barry?

I missed working on the original trek (by about 30 years...) but on TNG and DS9, the sets (the standing sets, anyway) were feature-grade. Although one of my friends' father, was an Art Director and Production Designer on a number of trek projects (Joe Jennings) and he had wonderful stories about the cheerful cheapitude of putting the original show together (him and Matt Jeffries, another Art Director and creator of the Jeffries Tube...)
 
Those stills look great.

And everyone's even falling in the same direction!

Although I think there may have been some lens issues while you were shooting. Everyone's face is out of focus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top