RED Cameras?

I've got it, yes.

It's a serious cinema production tool, no doubt. I've never been able to fathom people who think that it's in competition with the other products that we talk about here on DVXUser though. This thing goes toe to toe with the F23, F35, Arri film cameras, etc. And the cost is in an entirely different league. I mean, the cheapest decent tripod (that can handle its weight), the O'Connor 1030HDS, costs *more* than an ENTIRE EX1. Just for the tripod! The viewfinder for the Red costs more than an entire DVX100. I got lucky and found an old Cooke 20-100 zoom lens, and the lens itself weighs more than an entire HPX500 PLUS LENS AND BATTERY. And it's only about a 4.5:1 zoom ratio, so people who complain about the 10:1 on a DVX or the 13:1 on an HVX... hah! Y'all don't know how good you got it. (plus the lens cost about as much as an HVX200 with the free 16GB P2 card -- and that was pretty much the least expensive PL-mount lens I could find in the nation!) Mattebox? Filters? A mattebox that will accomodate this lens will cost more than an HVX200. An individual filter is around $400. There are no ND filters in the Red One at all, so you pretty much need at least $1,200 to $2,000 worth of ND filters right off the bat.

But it's slick and awesome. The whole package is serious as a heart attack, this is a major professional production tool. This is for healthy-budget productions. One doesn't cheap out with a Red; I'm scared to even add up what I've spent so far, I know it costs more than my and my daughter's cars combined so far... if you don't have $35,000 you shouldn't even think about a Red. But if you do have $35,000 I can't think of a better cinema tool to spend that cash on.

We shot a little scene here with Obin Olson's team, they had trouble lighting it because they couldn't create enough contrast. There was so much dynamic range that we had a full chinese lantern in the shot and it didn't even blow out -- yet we couldn't get a deep shadow anywhere. Too much range! :thumbsup: Of course you just pull it in RedCine and stretch and shrink and twiddle with it any which way to create as much contrast as you want, but it'll be a challenge for a video shooter to learn how to light effectively on the Red. I've got a good light meter but I'm thinking I may need a new light meter, a Sekonic 758, because it can profile to your camera. A waveform is of limited use with a Red because the output isn't "video," it's raw, and that's a whole different ball of wax or can of worms or whatever other colloquialism you'd want to use. A properly tuned 758 might just be the right thing. Of course, monitoring is a whole other ball of worms or can of wax -- you can't just use a straight HD-SDI monitor or you won't get the menus and graphs and focus assists. And the Red LCD gives you that, but it's $1700 for a tiny 5.6" LCD you can't use for anything else other than a Red. I got an HDMI->DVI converter and tried it with my Dell 2405FPW, and that worked pretty well, but that's not exactly the most convenient monitor to haul around. I think the solution for the operator is the Red EVF, and for the crew who need to see info you'll need some manner of HDMI monitor. Computer monitors are relatively inexpensive and seem to work well enough; you don't need ultimate color accuracy because you're not getting color accuracy in the recorded footage anyway! The Red records raw; any color changes you make are not recorded, they're just suggestions that get stored in the data file and when you get to post you then have to apply your color and gamma and whatnot and you may decide to go with something very different than what you set in the field. It's a different concept but an interesting one... what you shoot in the field doesn't necessarily have any bearing on what the footage will actually look like once you process it. And you MUST process it. It's not video, the Red doesn't shoot video AT ALL. It shoots raw. You do not shoot on a Red and then hand footage to a client! You have to use an entirely different workflow, a film-based workflow. In film you process the film and then have a colorist paint the footage as you transfer it to video or whatever your working format is. In Red you have to have that same colorist step and, instead of processing the film, you have to "process" the footage by de-mosaic'ing it and turning it into workable footage files. It's very much analogous to the film workflow.

Red really creates a totally different market, an electronic film market. To use a "vehicle" analogy, the HVX200 is a pickup truck and the Red is an 18-wheel tractor trailer. They're totally not in competition with each other, and my HVX isn't going anywhere anytime soon! But when we've got a crew and the time to set things up and do it right, no doubt the Red is the "A" camera.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
I've got it, yes.
Click to expand...

Congratulations! Thanks for the info.

Barry_Green said:
I've never been able to fathom people who think that it's in competition with the other products that we talk about here on DVXUser though.
Click to expand...

Me neither. I can't count how many times I've seen people post to the tune of - "you're spending ~10K on an EX/HVX/HPX? Dude, you might as well get a Red!" Err, no.

Barry_Green said:
We shot a little scene here with Obin Olson's team, they had trouble lighting it because they couldn't create enough contrast. There was so much dynamic range that we had a full chinese lantern in the shot and it didn't even blow out -- yet we couldn't get a deep shadow anywhere. Too much range! :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Holy cow- I love this.




So, will the inaugural major production with the camera be your feature with JDS?
 
Barry_Green said:
I've got it, yes.

It's a serious cinema production tool, no doubt. I've never been able to fathom people who think that it's in competition with the other products that we talk about here on DVXUser though. This thing goes toe to toe with the F23, F35, Arri film cameras, etc. And the cost is in an entirely different league. I mean, the cheapest decent tripod (that can handle its weight), the O'Connor 1030HDS, costs *more* than an ENTIRE EX1. Just for the tripod! The viewfinder for the Red costs more than an entire DVX100. I got lucky and found an old Cooke 20-100 zoom lens, and the lens itself weighs more than an entire HPX500 PLUS LENS AND BATTERY. And it's only about a 4.5:1 zoom ratio, so people who complain about the 10:1 on a DVX or the 13:1 on an HVX... hah! Y'all don't know how good you got it. (plus the lens cost about as much as an HVX200 with the free 16GB P2 card -- and that was pretty much the least expensive PL-mount lens I could find in the nation!) Mattebox? Filters? A mattebox that will accomodate this lens will cost more than an HVX200. An individual filter is around $400. There are no ND filters in the Red One at all, so you pretty much need at least $1,200 to $2,000 worth of ND filters right off the bat.

But it's slick and awesome. The whole package is serious as a heart attack, this is a major professional production tool. This is for healthy-budget productions. One doesn't cheap out with a Red; I'm scared to even add up what I've spent so far, I know it costs more than my and my daughter's cars combined so far... if you don't have $35,000 you shouldn't even think about a Red. But if you do have $35,000 I can't think of a better cinema tool to spend that cash on.

We shot a little scene here with Obin Olson's team, they had trouble lighting it because they couldn't create enough contrast. There was so much dynamic range that we had a full chinese lantern in the shot and it didn't even blow out -- yet we couldn't get a deep shadow anywhere. Too much range! :thumbsup: Of course you just pull it in RedCine and stretch and shrink and twiddle with it any which way to create as much contrast as you want, but it'll be a challenge for a video shooter to learn how to light effectively on the Red. I've got a good light meter but I'm thinking I may need a new light meter, a Sekonic 758, because it can profile to your camera. A waveform is of limited use with a Red because the output isn't "video," it's raw, and that's a whole different ball of wax or can of worms or whatever other colloquialism you'd want to use. A properly tuned 758 might just be the right thing. Of course, monitoring is a whole other ball of worms or can of wax -- you can't just use a straight HD-SDI monitor or you won't get the menus and graphs and focus assists. And the Red LCD gives you that, but it's $1700 for a tiny 5.6" LCD you can't use for anything else other than a Red. I got an HDMI->DVI converter and tried it with my Dell 2405FPW, and that worked pretty well, but that's not exactly the most convenient monitor to haul around. I think the solution for the operator is the Red EVF, and for the crew who need to see info you'll need some manner of HDMI monitor. Computer monitors are relatively inexpensive and seem to work well enough; you don't need ultimate color accuracy because you're not getting color accuracy in the recorded footage anyway! The Red records raw; any color changes you make are not recorded, they're just suggestions that get stored in the data file and when you get to post you then have to apply your color and gamma and whatnot and you may decide to go with something very different than what you set in the field. It's a different concept but an interesting one... what you shoot in the field doesn't necessarily have any bearing on what the footage will actually look like once you process it. And you MUST process it. It's not video, the Red doesn't shoot video AT ALL. It shoots raw. You do not shoot on a Red and then hand footage to a client! You have to use an entirely different workflow, a film-based workflow. In film you process the film and then have a colorist paint the footage as you transfer it to video or whatever your working format is. In Red you have to have that same colorist step and, instead of processing the film, you have to "process" the footage by de-mosaic'ing it and turning it into workable footage files. It's very much analogous to the film workflow.

Red really creates a totally different market, an electronic film market. To use a "vehicle" analogy, the HVX200 is a pickup truck and the Red is an 18-wheel tractor trailer. They're totally not in competition with each other, and my HVX isn't going anywhere anytime soon! But when we've got a crew and the time to set things up and do it right, no doubt the Red is the "A" camera.
Click to expand...

Hi Barry:

Thanks for the update. Your post echoes what I have heard from numerous RED users. I am amazed at how many RED users seem to be "unqualified" to own one, I have spoken with several that barely know how to use it or what it can do. Now that's successful hype, if you can get people to pay tens of thousands of dollars for a tool that they don't have a clue as how to use...Now for the difficult questions...

1. Did you buy your RED as a business investment? Or as a really expensive cool toy? Assuming you bought it as an investment that will pay off, how are you marketing it? Are you marketing as a Director/DP with RED package or as a company that has a RED to rent or?

2. Can you really be totally functional for $35,000.00?

3. Is it true that the RED is a really poor choice for EFP? I have shot film but most projects I do these days are much more documentary/EFP style and while I sometimes have a DIT, it's not often. If you are shooting RAW, why do you need a DIT? Media management?

4. Other than people who know for sure that their project will one day go to filmout or digital projection, why would anyone else care about 4k? I assume that since the end user markets are so far behind in even making the transition to HD, 4k, other than for theatrical release or large screen projection is kind of a waste? I know the camera is very usable at less than 4k resolutions but it seems like most users are shooting 4k?

Your opinions would be valuable.

All my best,

Dan
 
puredrifting said:
1. Did you buy your RED as a business investment?
Click to expand...
Yes.
Or as a really expensive cool toy?
Click to expand...
Er, I'm neither that insane nor that rich! :thumbsup:

Assuming you bought it as an investment that will pay off, how are you marketing it? Are you marketing as a Director/DP with RED package or as a company that has a RED to rent or?
Click to expand...
Marketing hasn't begun until I know it inside and out. At that point I'll be offering it as a complete package, I will be the technician who makes all your problems go away, the "living owner's manual", etc. The insurance policy, taking all the risk out of going Red. Plus I have several other plans for it.

As a straight rental? People thinking they're going to do that are probably insane. :) That market has maybe six weeks left in it, after that the Red Ones will be at nearly saturation point and any rental house that wants one will have it. Individual owner-ops will find out very quickly that nobody's going to rent from them if they could instead get it from Panavision or Fletcher or Claremont or Bexel or BandPro or Joe Dunton or any other place like that. And the first time it comes back scuffed or (worse) broken? Or, when it fails in the field, and a rental house would get a replacement out within an hour, what are you gonna do? Have a backup body just sitting in your closet for just such a circumstance? Look, you're either in the rental house business or you're not. If you're in the rental house business, BE in the rental house business. Have all the gear and all the toys and proper insurance and billing and all that in place. If you're just Joe Blow? You're not in the rental house business, so don't go spending $35,000 you don't have on something you don't need.

It's just like any business: you'd better have a solid business plan in place before you spend dime one.

With that said, I was a first-adopter with the HVX and I paid it off in the first month I owned it. Early Red users got that same kind of deal, but that window's closing fast. Only the first 100 owners got that free ride of "it's new, I gotta have it, let me rent it please!" That market's already disappearing or disappeared. Now the grunt work begins, the low-hanging fruit has already been picked.

2. Can you really be totally functional for $35,000.00?
Click to expand...
Depends on what you mean by "totally functional". Do you mean, can you have a camera, tripod, and lens system that is prepared to go into most any conceivable shooting circumstance? At $35,000? With professional lenses that someone would actually want to hire, and not showing up to a professional shoot with some Nikon still-camera lenses? Hmmm... no, not really. If you went with the Red 18-85 zoom you'd be at about $40,000; if you instead went with the Red Primes, you'd be at about $50,000 and that's without a tripod or matte box or follow focus, so add another $10,000 to that. A complete, workable, functional Red One with real cine glass (even the inexpensive Red glass), configured for shoulder-mount and tripod use, with an appropriate tripod and the EVF and LCD... yeah, that's about $50k to $60k.

Forget about finding cheap PL lenses, I probably got the last one in America! :thumbsup:

So to be a be-all, end-all one-stop shop that can serve any Red renter's needs, no, $35,000 ain't gonna get the job done.

If you want to be Mr. ultimate Indie Cheapskate using only Nikon lenses the cost comes down somewhat; a bare stripped Red One with what you need to actually shoot would be about $22,500 plus glass; consider a set of Zeiss ZFs at 25/35/50/85 will add another $3,000 so that's $25k, and then for a tripod you *might* be able to get by with a lesser tripod, maybe something in the $5,000 bracket so: yeah, for a stripped-down indie package $30,000 might get it done. That's using only Nikon lenses, no viewfinder, no rods or rails, no mounting plates, no mattebox, no filters at all (don't know how you're going to plan on shooting outside with that configuration!), no Red Drive, just two compactflash cards. You could do it. You'd probably *really* wish you'd spent more and gotten the gear you NEED, but you could limp along and do it. Filtration and ND would probably be the worst part; you'd really need to solve that.

So yes, it's a lot of money. But then again, if you got in good with an ad agency who wanted to rent over and over, it would only take about 20 to 30 days of work at $1,000 per day for your camera package and $500 per day for your services before you had it paid off. But you'd better have that plan in place BEFORE you buy, and you'd better be knowledgeable/dependable/valuable enough that they'd want to hire you and have you around on the set!

3. Is it true that the RED is a really poor choice for EFP?
Click to expand...
No, I wouldn't say that. EFP = electronic field production, it's fine for that -- as long as you have a crew and budget and understand that you're going to have really big, really heavy equipment to move around, etc. If you've got five on your crew you could do a decent EFP with the Red, no problem. If you're trying to one-man-band it? That's crazy talk.

I'd say it's probably a really poor choice for ENG, yes, but EFP can be done fine. I can't fathom why someone would want to try to shoot ENG on a Red One, that would be absolutely entirely the wrong tool for the job.

The Red One is designed as a digital cinema camera and that's what the thinking behind it was when they gave it the features they gave it. Would I use it instead of an F900 on a high-budget lawyer commercial? Absolutely, in a heartbeat. Would I use it instead of an HVX on a local carpet store commercial? Not a chance -- too much hassle and extreme overkill for that target market.

Let's put it this way: if film would be a reasonable choice for your project, especially 35mm film, then the Red makes tremendous sense. If it's a project that you never would have even considered film for, you're going to have to carefully consider why you'd want to use a Red instead.

The Red is a KILLER digital cinema camera. It hit its target market squarely in the forehead. It does its target job very well. It is a precision instrument, like a jeweler's screwdriver. Just don't try nailing nails with it, because that's not the kind of tool it is. And don't try to go shooting ENG or one-man-band TV commercials with it either, that's just crazy.

(and yes, I know there are certain individuals who will challenge me on this and bluster this way and that about how Red's perfectly suitable for those jobs. Let me just say: you're wrong. There are *much* more suitable tools for those jobs. And let me link you to this article where Road & Track drove the Yukon Trail. In a Corvette. Sure, they did it, but that doesn't mean it was a good idea!)

I have shot film but most projects I do these days are much more documentary/EFP style and while I sometimes have a DIT, it's not often. If you are shooting RAW, why do you need a DIT? Media management?
Click to expand...
For the first 12 months, I can't fathom someone renting a Red without having an expert technician with them. This is bleeding edge, guys. There have been 14 releases of the operating system already, and at least three more are scheduled (the final build 14, the beta build 15, and the final build 15). And there may be more after that. Shooting Raw is unlike shooting film or video, it takes a different skillset to get the most from it. Media management is a small part of the job but it's part of the job. Babysitting the client and assuring them that all is well will be part of it. But mainly the DIT job isn't going to be so much on managing the technical aspects of the image, it's going to be shepherding the producer, director, DP, and editor through an entirely different workflow than they've experienced before.

Red ain't video, folks. This is not a video camera, it doesn't shoot video, it doesn't record video, and what we know about video doesn't necessarily apply. It's a whole 'nother thing. But the end results are well worth it, at a lower cost than 35mm film.

4. Other than people who know for sure that their project will one day go to filmout or digital projection, why would anyone else care about 4k?
Click to expand...
4K isn't the only thing it does. It does 3K and 2K also.

4K exists for theatrical projection, or for maybe corporate videos like at booths at NAB, wherever something needs to be shown "big." There's lots of that work around, and 4K would be great for that. For TV there's not much point; 3K will probably give you the most highly-detailed 1080P you've ever seen, and 2K mode should probably deliver a very high-quality detailed 720p. But 4K is the only way to use the full sensor and get 35mm DOF.

I assume that since the end user markets are so far behind in even making the transition to HD, 4k, other than for theatrical release or large screen projection is kind of a waste? I know the camera is very usable at less than 4k resolutions but it seems like most users are shooting 4k?
Click to expand...
Lots of people are shooting 4K for a couple of reasons: it doesn't take up THAT much more space because of the efficient compression, and using 4K lets you use the full sensor, so you get the FOV and DOF of 35mm film.

I said months and months and months ago that I'd be plenty happy if it just did 1080/60p at 4:4:4. Well, with the 3K mode that's pretty much what you get. And that's pretty darn cool.

Keep in mind that you don't get 4K of resolution in 4K mode, you get a 4K frame size that's populated with about 3K of resolution. 3K mode probably delivers about 2.2K (or so) of resolved detail, and 2K probably delivers about 1.4K of resolved detail. If you wanted the most highly-detailed super-lush 1080p you could get, the Red in 4K or 3K mode should be able to match or exceed anything else, perhaps including the $48,000 HPX3000 or the $350,000 Sony F35. That's pretty cool.

Shooting 4K for practical applications? Other than theatrical, not much. BUT: there's reframing and punching in, which David has been doing a ton of on our next training DVD. We shot greenscreen for that and he's able to "invent" camera angles and reframe all over the place because the frame is so large. The same image can be used for wide-angle and telephoto all in one. Also, shooting in 4K mode and downconverting to 1080P should deliver 4:4:4... 3K might even deliver a full 1080p 4:4:4... how cool would it be to greenscreen full-frame 1080p at 4:4:4? Pretty cool indeed.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the persepctive Barry, what you say about the DIT makes sense as does everything else.

Can't wait to see a fully realized project from you and your RED.

All the best,

Dan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So when is Barry gonna do a head to head shootout comparison writeup of Red to Sony F35? I know he enjoys those, after the great feedback he got when he did the HVX200 vs the Canon A1. Yeah, apples to oranges along some dimensions, but we don't care about that - there'll still be plenty to argue over when it comes to those things that can be compared between the two. I can't wait for the huge fight over the results :)
 
That'd be nearly pointless... how could the Red lose? Even if the F35 was dramatically superior, it's still 20x the cost so -- as long as the Red stays in the same ballpark, it wins no matter what! And I have no doubt it'd stay in the same ballpark.
 
I'm predicting a RED Book coming up...Barry, your opinions in this thread would round up in a pretty nice hands-on article. Can you compile this in such a way? I believe many dvxusers have a lust/passion for RED, and this could be a myth buster for everyone.

This thread has been very insightful. In fact, these last couple of posts answered many questions I never saw answered in reduser!
 
Great idea Sergio.

Barry I've got no chance (except lotto on Saturday) of owning a red but I'd buy a book for sure just to understand the workflow (and all the ins and outs of course!).

We have 2 names on the petition.
 
I don't want to "bust" any "myths", I'm just laying out what I'm experiencing. I know there's a lot of "DIY" mentality on DVXUser, born of necessity, and I accept that, but... folks, anyone going into a Red shoot with a DIY mentality is going to find themselves booted off the set faster than Bill Clinton can make up an alibi.

People who are going to be hiring a Red are going to expect you to be a professional, with all the professional gear and all the proper professional equipment and all the knowledge to make sure that they have no problems.

It is an absolutely amazing tool. But not for tinkerers. Not for the home depot worklight crowd. :)

As for a Red book -- yes, definitely, no question. But I don't know how soon it would happen. The Red's already a pretty wild ride, but it changes so fast. I've been following loosely through the first year, but truth be told I didn't pay THAT much attention to all the early speculation because things changed so quickly that it seemed like wasted effort -- as soon as you learned something, within a week it'd be obsolete and replaced with something else! Even now things are changing so quickly that someone committing to a book or DVD would be crazy. I mean, within two days of the time I received mine, they launched Build 14 and added a whole new recording mode (3K) and they added a new level of compression (RedCode 36). What's going to happen in Build 15, a month or so from now? They're promising "landmark" changes...

So, yes, I'd love to be involved in doing a book and DVD and workshops on the Red One and the Scarlet.

I mean, check this out: a Red One has 9x as much resolution as an HD250. It's three times as wide and three times as tall as a 720P camera. How can you not love that?
 
Barry, I disagree with your price add-up.

For someone that has a reservation, you could get going for much less.

$18000 - Camera + CF Module
$400 - 2x CF cards
$500 - Nikkon mount
$1250 - Production Pack
$950 - Battery + recharger/AC power
$1750 - Red LCD
-$2500 Acc allowance
=$20350 from Red.

+$350 - 3x Manual Nikkons (24mm, 50mm, 85mm)
+$600 OConnor 50 with sticks
=$21300 Indie Red Setup.

Pretty? Nope. Functional? Very.
 
How many people are using Nikons on RED ONE for serious work? I'd be interested in that figure.
 
Re the book and the fact that the system is constantly changing, it would seem to justify a subscription based electronic publishing model. As new articles/chapters are published they would be added to the library. Sort of a lynda.com for Red.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top