Is the RED Camera the Future of Independent Film?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yah but you see, ask yourself this why do you feel the need to grab their collars and throw their asses to the ground? Hollywood is doing something you could not hope too whatever the tech of your camera!

Your view of these cameras becoming toys in time is unfortunate, because i don't know anyone that treats former professional equipment as mere toys.

The point of Alex example was that video could compete with 35 in the hands of someone creative and when played in a circumstance that allowed it to shine hehe (probably a TV!)

I'm just saying without the tools that skill is worthless
Click to expand...

Without a camera you can't make a film? With any camera you can make a film... the affordability of technology has 'democratised' filmmaking so that many more can produce indy films.

Where the opportunity for future indys lie is in their ability to tell stories that absurdly funded mainstream films would not. Those could be indies dedicated to fanbases of particular genre (grindhouse! Horror!) or artier films that challenge the limits.

An HVX200 will never be seen as a toy... only a child plays with toys. Creative tools never become redundent. Even a fisher price pixie cam was used a couple of years ago for an award winning music video.

It sounds to me like those filmmakers eager to 'take on hollywood' through EMULATION wrought by the hilarious promise of technological parity suffer some kind of inferiority complex - that companies like RED play to with their promise of mega pixels.

Take your company Jason - how does your theory result in it being succesful against hollywood players?
 
Last edited:
Jason the point that you are making is true that if georgeX shoots red instead of an xl1 yes it will defenetly look better no doubt, the problem is that if georgeX has made crappy content all his life, the red is not gonna make him any better, I personally have shot red and all the way down to the dvx and I can tell you that I have seen some horrible stuff shot with the red, money wasted in other words and I have seen some stuff that sings with the red, take the movie with nicky cage "Knowing" shot 100% with the RED

http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/knowing/

its all about the painter and the tools he has access to
 
Yep likewise ive seen 35mm shot on very low budget films that was just terrible (and im astonished at how bad HD Cam, could look in the wrong hands. Studs who get to shoot with a nice HD Cam in their last year managed to reproduce video footage that would put a holiday consumer camcorder to shame hehe.
 
i think its also worth noting that Red is much more camera then the hvx - so a competent filmmaking with the HVX wont necessarily be competent with Red. You need a different set of skills and understanding and a greater technical knowledge. So the notion that Joe Blow shooting with RED will be better then Joe Blow shooting with the HVX is not really true.
 
inferiority complex lol, thats not it at all, its about knowing holywood is falling and having the balls to stand up knowing you can replace them and I can do better. its about not being comfortable where I am, not saying hmm this is good enough. when i know it can be better,

"The point of Alex example was that video could compete with 35 in the hands of someone creative and when played in a circumstance that allowed it to shine hehe (probably a TV!) "

that wasn't exactly his point, as typically the point comes at the end of a statment, read it again. but yea it was an important part of it, on an XL the guy was able to make images that look as good as 35mm when 35mm is put the SD video for tv broadcast. but take that same video transfer it to film and show it in a theater, much different.

the red has democrasize film quality film making, that is why its the future, it has put holywood quality in the hands of anyone who can come up with 20 grand. morgage your house make a hi production feature, when just 10 years ago, it was morgage your house make a hi production 5 minute short.

its the future because it get the quality in the hands of many many talented and creative filmmakers who never would have had that chance

and yes I plan on giving my hvx to my kids if I ever have them lol, hoping it will foster creativity. although by then the ew fisher price cam may be red quality lol. oh and in the early 90s Sadie Benning made her films with a fisher price camera it recorded to audio tape pretty cool actually.

as far as tools not being toys, the comador, or even an apple g3 is nothing more than a toy now. as is vhs, 8mm hi 8 d8 and dv is quickly becoming a toy, it still has life because SD is still big. and sd is sd, no matter what you shoot on ( se the 35mm videos above) lol.


as for your first line about what i could never hope to do, I disagree with you, as its exactly what I hope to do lol.


my company, well its not a company its me, i make films (Christian films from now on) and I shoot other peoples films., nothing major I use an hvx200, and while I do a great job, I know it will never be film quality, now I can give it film look, and when people see it on an hd screen or sd screen they may not even know the difference, but as soon as I transfer to film they will. and after all thats the point of indi film, theaters, other wise you're not indifilm you're indi video. indi broadcast, indi dvd what ever, and this is another reason why the red is the next step in the future of indi film. because its the first video camera that could truly achive this, lucas did it with the varicam, but ehh it had a video quality to it.
 
smelni, not really, I mean you have two learn the camera yea, but lighting framing, story telling doesnt change.

and yes I've seen 35mm that sucks as well, hell I've shot 35mm that sucked, and i've seen video that looks great, but it doesnt change things
 
Um well i think that was the point of Alex statement lol, i mean what deep meaning did you draw from his comparison of XL's and 35? That a 35 is always better than video? Er no... that its superiority rests with the skill of the user. That was the obvious point!

Anyway lets put that aside.


So you want to replace Hollywood... cos its falling... and cos you got the balls to do it? And how? With a Red - because its puts 'Hollywood quality' in anyones hands...

Er that statement would seem nuts to a lot of folk - i dont know anyone else think that? I don't think Hollywood is crapping their pants about microbudget/low budget film makers hehe who are saving up for a Scarlet!

//

Mini Dv a toy? Why think so negatively about equipment that still makes $$$. See it seems by your own admittion you just make films/ shorts yep? some free lancing etc/

I run a business and i can tell you, I made more last month from mini dv for straight to web vids than we did with a very nicely kitted HPX500. If my company is making thousands of $ with a fast becoming toy then i think your probably letting macho-tech marketing cloud your perspective of the living reality of how equipment affects business.

I've seen 35mm that sucks as well, hell I've shot 35mm that sucked, and i've seen video that looks great, but it doesnt change things
Click to expand...

Um yeah... in fact it changes EVERYTHING?

Jason these views are a bit fantastical - i mean i invest in technology for my company and to improve specific elements of aquisition (as fitting the planned distribution of my films/commercial material.) But this carte blanche attitude you have between 'a camera' and 'film quality' is a bit nuts to me?

Does anyone else agree with Jason? Im interested to hear the pov for future indy filmmakers.
 
jason - i have to disagree. It is more easy to be competent with easier to use technology - RED has much more complex technology. You take someone who has made amazing films with the HVX but never touched a more complex camera and they will have a learning curve on RED.

Yes of course lighting, storytelling remain the same. But there is a lot more to take care of with more technical solutions. To take the example further you could make a fantastic film without any lighting - if your story is compelling enough - but the fact that someone does that doesnt mean they will know how to light a scene when they need to.

my main point it that a good shooter with an HVX doesnt imply a good shooter with RED
 
Smelni do you think the learning curve is higher than film, part of making a film is knowing the tools you're using, i can't believe anyone would just go rent a camera theyve never used to make a film without learning it first.
 
I'm done arguing with you, I've made many perfectly valid points, one after the other and you strike them down with nonsensical retorts. and nothing I say is going to budge you from the little world you've createdfor yourself, and nothing you say is going to pull me down into your little world. I hope you have a nice life making your sd for youtube films, someday when i make it to the show, I'll write you.

(incase you don't know baseball the show means the big leagues)
 
Well I shoot with HD too, just saying mate so don't act like a gimp over it - you go where the money is, thats business - and you'll appreciate soon enough the benefits of a reality where the usefulness of technology can be found and refound for commercial intent.

My company won best video company of the year in the region of my country and a promo I directed came third in an international contest of 1000s of entries, for a FOX Television Competition... That and the fact i work full time managing a group of individuals who work in my company is testimony to two things that really helped me achieve that - humility and resourcefulness. There are loads here on the forum that are far more succesful than me (im only modestly so) I doubt they gained their success through macho muscle flexing :)

I'd consider a little humility with your goals and a dose of sceptism for those promising quick fit solutions ;)
 
Jason Miller said:
Smelni do you think the learning curve is higher than film, part of making a film is knowing the tools you're using, i can't believe anyone would just go rent a camera theyve never used to make a film without learning it first.
Click to expand...

my point is that you need more skill to use a more complex camera system. And to understand how lighting and other technical issues are informed by and inform your camera system,

I dont know if its higher then film - but its different and certainly as you move up in camera systems and have more controls you have more ways of screwing the pooch if you dont know what you are doing,.
 
Jason Miller said:
so you can make better films with a red than you can with an hvx.
as can I
as can anyone. this is my point,
Click to expand...
i've seen PLENTY of examples where the opposite is true as well.

for example... here is an HVX film, no adapter, that transcends all this camera BS.

http://thislovelymachine.com

can you seriously suggest this film would have been better in any kind of truly meaningful way if it had been shot on RED?

now i'm going to leave before i get sucked into this too deeply. :)
 
Last edited:
Its not much of a debate really though is it? I mean i always took it myself that this was common sense till i popped onto this thread!

I'll check out the link Zak cheers - hows that new Nikon going for ya?
 
Jason Miller said:
wow zac a lot of thing could have made that better, not much could have made it worse.
Click to expand...

haha! wtf is wrong with you? do you just go around taking huge sh*ts on everyone and everything you come into contact with? what a BIG MAN you are!!! is your ego really this whacked out? i've seen your reel, jason. it's not compelling in any meaningful way and it lacks the authenticity of a genuine cinematic experience. that's putting it nicely. but if you can dish it out, you should be able to take it as well. now i think i understand why you are so adamant that a professional camera would matter so much.

:)

with regard to Person of Interest, you are in the minority. again. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=122764
 
Commendations on Person of Interest - so the guy shot it without an adapter or nothing - its looking good, ill check out the thread Zak.

I think Jason is basically a noob full of ambition - nothing wrong with that - but you have to respect your peers and take a good of dose of humility!
 
wow you are a pompous ass, your avatar fits you well. I've been respectful to you, i haven't insulted you, until now, I've simply disagreed with you.

Noob? I've been making "films" for over 15 years since i was a kid.

all I've said is no matter how good you are your films will always be better with more resolution, you do not seem to have the mental capacity to understand that fact.

I've said that image quality matters, only a moron would disagree, and guess what you disagree.

you speak of humility yet show none, you feel I should respect you when you show no resect, you back it up by saying where you're from you're considered a good filmmaker, we you're from the UK, that isn't saying much.

Get over yourself.
Click to expand...

You yourself said you basically make some christian films, and by the way you were talking im sorry i dont think it came across to anyone as the opinion of some aged and wise veteran of cinema! No offence but after 15 years id hope to have a little more enlightenment and humility in my attitude. I'm not asking for respect, but i think insulting peoples work and the other fluff you've said is somewhat self explanatory.

Im not saying i am considered a good filmmaker - i wouldnt say that in fact! But sure i am pompous - and certainly that is because im British muhahaha

I just hope you can utilise my portrait to come up with just the right kind of speaking voice when your reading my posts muhaha
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top