Is the RED Camera the Future of Independent Film?

Status
Not open for further replies.

BROKEN2005

Well-known member
Hey Everyone,

Below is a great article on the future of the RED camera. I was just at RED headquarters yesterday. As I sit here wearing my RED camera T-shirt I just purchased I have to confess that I have drunk the RED camera Kool-Aid. My company post/vfx company Numb Robot (www.numbrobot.com) has gone full force towards the RED camera workflow nad as of today has done over 15 feature, shorts, and television project on the RED.

A word of warning to ALL indie filmmakers thinking of using the RED camera, it is not a toy! It's not a Panasonic DVX or HVX! It is a real motion picture camera and it should be respected as such. You can't pull it out of the box and shoot with it. You need to have professionals around you who understand it's workflow and a DP who knows how to shoot it. Just because you might have an experienced editor, post supervisor or DP on your team, it does not mean that they know what to do with the RED.

I have seen countless filmmakers come through my doors crying because of all the $$$ they lost in post or on prodution because they didn't have experienced RED people with them. I write this not to scare you but to warn you. I am a indie filmmaker as well an know the feeling of having your baby hurt by inexperienced people.

Enjoy the article below. If you have any questions I am available. Please check out our new RED Camera Color Correction Reel at: http://www.numbrobot.com/color.html

We also give a 15% DISCOUNT OFF OF POST PRODUCTION SERVICES IF YOU MENTION THIS POSTING!

Best,
Alex Ferrari

Numb Robot
http://www.numbrobot.com
info@numbrobot.com


Editorial • Color Correction • Visual Effects
RED Camera Workflow Specialist

***********************************************************************************************************************************

The post production industry, the RED camera & the future for film & television
By Thomas Urbye

I’ve just read today that Jim Jannard of Oakley sunglasses fame, and now CEO of the RED camera rebellion, has sold his sunglasses business for $2.1 billion. This spells to me that he really is keen to follow his new camera through more than ever, selling your own business that you have grown for decades must be the hardest thing in the world - but this shows that he has a new project that has taken hold of him.

For those of you that do not follow the technical side of film making, the above mentioned Jim put his neck on the line a few years ago and said he would successfully bring to market an HD camera capable of resolutions higher than even 35mm film can produce - and do it for only $15-25k (plus lenses). The industry was in outcry, such technology should be $150k+, with many people dismissing his vision as farcical, and not feasibly possible with the technology available at this time.

But now they are silenced. A recent short film shot by now legendary director Peter Jackson was very well received in Las Vegas in April by thousands of people who had already laid down a $1000 deposit for a camera they’d never really seen any images out of. The power of hype marketing had finally hit our industry, and it certainly had been the most successful campaign we had ever seen from a manufacturer.

So what effect will that RED movement have on the wider industry? Well, it comes down to a much wider debate than that really. Coming from a post production viewpoint this industry is now going through a massive change - so much so, that I wonder whether there will be much of a post production industry as we know it within five to ten years.

Up until recently, a lot of programmes, films, promos, commercials etc. had their post production handled by specific companies dedicated to offering that kind of service. However, technology has moved so fast now, that many production companies have now purchased their own post production equipment and are completing their conforms and online’s (and even grades) on Final Cut Pro from Apple in their own production offices. So powerful is the available toolset onboard the latest version (Studio 2) that it really is a post house in a box, and for less than £1000, add the hardware, monitors and video cards and you could have a nice setup for between £5-15k depending on your video storage requirements. Suddenly, all that money you spent in Soho can be taken by the production company to do what they like with. Does it matter that everything takes ages to render and that you’ve hired one person to do the jobs of many - if you’re saving money and no one watching TV notices why worry?

What does this mean for our industry? Well, in the short-term we will see the demise (for now) of the need for documentary, low-end drama and general television production work to have to use any experienced post house to ‘finish’ their project. So many production companies or small post houses will have their own 5 - 10 FCP suites with editors who not only cut the programmes, but also online, add titles and grade the piece that there will be a halt to that revenue arriving in Soho. Thus, I believe we will see the slow demise of many post production companies that rely on this area of the industry for their revenue.

Certainly in post, I believe we will experience a ‘bathtub’ phenomenon, where only large and small facilities survive, and anyone in the middle will dwindle because they cannot adapt to change quick enough, can not survive on small revenue streams, but also don’t have the very best talent (and there is more ‘talent’ available than ever). Larger companies will survive through their sheer financial reserves, the best talent, and probably their complete dominance of the commercials and high-end features & drama work (the only area of the industry where everyone takes a decent wage). For us at the ’boutique’ end as its known, we will have to survive on repeat business from well paying clients, we in turn have to offer a personal high quality service that is not seen anywhere else, the best operators but in an environment with fewer runners, less staff, less designer sofas, but all the very best equipment. We’ll see how The Look gets on with this tactic over the coming years.

The big buzz at the start of this decade was DI (digital intermediate) for movies. When I first joined MPC in 2003 we were one of the first people in town to offer a DI for a movie (in basic terms colour correct film images digitally). The price to the studios was well into 6 figures, and the investment for MPC (and CFC) was huge. However, other facilities soon realised that there could be money making potential in the area of feature film grading and online (bolted on with revenue from visual effects). However, by the time I started The Look it was possible to get a whole DI done in town on a movie for less than £50k. The cost had more than halved through the saturation of the market, even though the delivery requirements and technology costs had increased.

As a quick note to those that think £50k seems like a lot of money, here is the cost of setting up a DI facility for features stated here (in very very rough terms):

Grading systems: £250-600k
Arri Laser film recorder: £250-350k
Film scanner: £200-1million
Digital high-end HD projector: £50k
Data storage: £25-50k
Film calibration hardware and software: £10-20k
HD deck: £50-150k
Staff: £20-30k per month.
Premises per month: £4-10k per month
N.b. the average DI takes 4 to 5 weeks to complete, is susceptible to multiple rescheduling changes due to editorial/vfx issues and escalating costs due to tape stock and 35mm film output. In short, the DI feature market at this rate is a loss leader, used only now to support the VFX department within a facility, £50k a movie doesn’t pay the bills. Supply quite simply does not meet demand.

So that aside, what of the future of this industry as a whole? Well, I do believe that we will see the complete demise of 16mm film as a major option for television (and even features and promos) with the arrival of these excellent new HD cameras (RED, SI2K, Viper) etc. and it will leave just 35mm & high-end HD cameras to fight it out (its worth me mentioning here that I truly believe 35mm is still superior to any HD camera I’ve seen). Unless for artistic reasons, the move from 16mm film (and even 35mm) to HD will be swift, and it will come down to who can handle these new flavours of HD images in the post environment, those companies that stayed in SD (standard definition) television post production will suddenly be left behind and facing liquidation.

While we may all be moving towards shooting in HD (even at home on new HDV & AVCHD camcorders) the question has to be whether we will ever see any of this HD quality in our homes? When ofcom make the call this year on the future of television will they opt for more standard definition channels (do we really need more ‘2 pints of lager and a packet of crisps’) or whether the bandwidth will be reserved for freeview in HD. Otherwise, anyone wanting HD will be subscribing to Sky or someother similar subscription service. Is the BBC finally taking a back seat and focusing their funds on their online business? Could this deliver HD content (via H264) to screens around the globe?

Im not going to go into the future of broadcast, thats not really my concern, whether its down a phone line, or down a satelite beam, its irrelavent to me. The key thing as someone who has invested in the best possible equipment at a price tag 10 times that of FCP is that it is clear that advertising and high-end features work will be the only area where we can all make sizeable revenue and ever hope to pay for all the equipment and the skilled staff. With the RED camera and its HD competitors it opens up new doors of opportunity for those of us passionate about high quality work, working with the best talent in the industry & utlising this new technology to bring images to the screen (and sound) that will make a huge impact on the viewer in every sense. Its the reason I decided to work in this industry when I was in my early teens - and I hope Im still around working on great films, commercials, music promos and television for many years to come. Whether shooting on these cameras and saving on film stock will mean more money for the rest of the production, or if it will be an excuse to reduce budgets even more is yet to be seen.

Its a tough time for everyone in the industry. Budgets going down, delivery formats going up. Why this is, the answers are probably to complex to answer here fully. But the internet and the powerful marketing that it can produce is a major suspect.

So, here’s to quality across the board! Before everyone just switches off and watches YouTube all day!

Happy viewing…..
 
And referring to the HVX as "a toy" is moronic at best. After all, it's "a toy" that's helped me make quite a living.

The problem with all the "this is the future of…" jabber is that the future never really arrives. I deal in the present, and at present, my HPX170 is just fine thank you.

Now, when Scarlet finally launches…

:D
 
hvx "Toy" ?? you need to look at the history of the hvx and what it did to the industry when it came out, I guess I just feel a little offended when someone talks down the hvx :) after its made me such a good living, I swear by it
 
I really dont think thats what was meant.

Thank you. I meant no disrespect. I have shot both with the HVX and DVX, they are good little cameras. The RED, Sony F-23, 950, Viper, Dalsa, etc are large, more professional, high resolution cameras that need professionals to work with them. They are not prosumer cameras. You can't just pull it out of a box and shoot. I was just warning filmmakers that might be under that assumption because of it's size and price, that is all.

Just trying to help and start a discussion.
 
No worries. But the fact is that the kind of shooting I do for a living would be impossible with any of the cameras you mention. And even the "prosumer" designation is questionable. True, you can pull the HVX out of the box and start shooting, but in my opinion, it takes every bit as much talent and skill to get truly great images from an HVX/HPX as with any other camera.

In fact, since it's often a one- or two-man crew working with the smaller camera, it may take more talent.

The RED has a market, just like the EX1, HVX/HPX and Viper. It's just a market I don't currently live in and have really no desire to move into.

And as many have said over the years, a talented artist can make a great film with whatever tool he has. Calling anything "the future of…" this or that implies that the camera is the limiting factor in creating art, when the artist is the limiting factor and always has been.

Cheers!

SM
 
This has been discussed ad nauseum - the comparisons between these entirely disparate cameras is ridiculous.

RED needs to compete with F23 / CineAlta (the real cameras like the F900), Thompson Viper, Genesis, Arri Digital series and film. The reliability, ergonomics, workflow and upgrade capacity are all part of keeping RED in the game.

The HVX and other prosumer 1/3" cameras really shouldn't enter the same conversation. Unless you want to point to the thousands of broadcast, documentary and feature film hours of content they continue to acquire quietly and without too much fanfare.

I read this article a while back and it's easy to get sucked into the enthusiasm for the concept. A long-view, consistent product that really delivers on that euphoric promise is where we are now.

e
 
HAHA, personally I have shot with the red and well I admit it takes a pretty picture it is still video, very good looking HD video, a different animal to the other cams you mentioned
 
LOL..
here we go again.
They're all video cameras. It's the operator that's key to his imagination.
 
This has been discussed ad nauseum - the comparisons between these entirely disparate cameras is ridiculous.

RED needs to compete with F23 / CineAlta (the real cameras like the F900), Thompson Viper, Genesis, Arri Digital series and film.
Disagreed.
 
I'm doing that thing on Monday in VistaVision on a rig I "borrowed" when I left Kerner Optical. I don't think it records sound though, so I'll have to double system it and blimp the entire location.

As for Caesar, I'd love to know exactly where you think RED fits into the market if it isn't prosumer and it is being used in place of Panaflex, ArriCam, Genesis, Dalsa or Thompson? I would say RED is squarely aiming for the theatrical, scripted episodic, commercial, music video and other historically celluloid-based segments of the filmed entertainment market?

I don't see any REDs on the reality shows I shoot, though I see plenty of 1/3" and 1/2" and 2/3" cameras from every manufacturer who is really in the game.

But I'm intrigued, what are your thoughts on this?

e
 
Red isn't the future of independent film,

Red is like a pair of sneakers with air pumps. They can't make my films more entertaining, more interesting to watch, more beautiful, my characters blah blah u get the idea right?

The future of independent film lies in our ability to tell stories that can entertain and enhance people's lives - that can transcend the limitations of huge budget mainstream films, and the affordability of better technology will help. It will help in so much that we can reach a better level of delivery and credibility in comparison to the technological level of mainstream films - but not supercede it.

Red is a joke...
 
The future of independent film lies in our ability to tell stories that can entertain and enhance people's lives - that can transcend the limitations of huge budget mainstream films, and the affordability of better technology will help. It will help in so much that we can reach a better level of delivery and credibility in comparison to the technological level of mainstream films - but not supercede it.
Red is a joke...

see I think ignoring the tech behind it is forgetting history,

Johny Cage, Sadie Benning, Yoko Ono, were all "filmmakers" in the 60-80s, there were probably th most famous indies out there, ever here of them? with the exception of Yoko, probably not unless you took tones of art history classes. All there "films" were interesting, all could hold attention, and yet you haven't heard of them why? because the video equipment they used was sub par, but back then all video was sub par.

now granted they were not really story tellers, but that time had a lot of story tellers outside of hollywood who were lost in time because of tech issues.

My point is if you do not adapt to the tech you'll be left with a few art house showings,

"hey Joe lets go watch the latest holomovie at the holocinima"

"no Caral, I have a better Idea, lets go to the firehouse tonight I here lawriejaffa made a film on an hvx200 and they will actually be projecting it on a screen"

"on a screen? eww, and whats an hvx?"

"oh its an old video camera, recorded in a formatt called HD, I used to have one but I gave it to my grandson as a toy"

the red is not the future it is the now, so is the hvx, howevr the red has opened the doors to the future much wider than the hvx.
 
Yeah right, trust me thats just what any cam marketing exec wants you to think Jason.

Come on...

When was the last time you gave a crap over whether a movie was shot on s16 or s35... or whether it was HD 1080 or 720.... or standard def video for that matter?!?

Who sat through 28 Days Later going Ewwww if only this could be shot with a higher resolution of 'video camera.'

Who sat through Dog Soldiers and said oh this s16mm blow up is killing me.

*drum roll*

Now for the bitter pill... Do you think your zero budget feature is gonna look any less zero budget just because you can capture its fiscal mediocrity with a more detailed level of high def image. Will your actor with additional pixels act better?

Have you ever heard anyone complain that the one thing their favourite movie lacked was a higher def video image?!?!

No...

The Red and any cam relying on such hype are just out to make more money out of saps whose movie budgets will usually be less than the cost of their camera... in the mistaken belief they will MAGICALLY become 'REAL' moviemakers... with toys just like the REAL guys. Great if our basis of judgement lies withn the superficial realm. (NB. If it does, then your movie budget will most likely blow away the need for a mere RED anyway... pm me when Michael Bay uses one!)

I mean no offense Jason, but your post betrays a naivity that is quite astonishing - i mean think about it - only tech nerds stare at the pixels - our audiences enjoy stories and marketing reps wanting you to measure your camera manhood every morning want... profits.
 
Last edited:
to add to this, actually the red cam never stood a chance compared to any other camera,
the stutter motion,
being a few stops darker than any other camera,
and noise even in bright situations,
low light is a disaster with the red camera,
nearest clipping point in a camera,
the out of focus part of the image is the worst possible i have ever seen, even compared to (i think it's redrock adapter on dvx200),
color shift,
a closer field of view compared to cameras with 35mm adapter,
overall it can't even beat ex1 or ex3 or hmc-150 in any test, and people are comparing it to f900 and vipers and arri-d21, come on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top