Red for ENG/EFP USE

M

mike the beginner

Well-known member
Hi guys. There is a thread started over at DVinfo titled "Red One for ENG/EFP"

I thought the comments (maybe apart from my own rumblings) were most revealing. I hope Jarred doesent mind me mentioning it.

Apart from the extra cost and weight factor on the proposed red zoom. Could these features be implimented and more to the point should they be? i quote some of my own thoughts on what i would like to see red do to make the red one a better ENG/EFP camera. I know a lot of you just want an excellent cine camera but Steve Gibby makes a few compelling facts with regard the likely work involved with the red one for most people. Sometimes it is easy to forget where the bread & butter comes from in amidst the goal of producing a great feature film.:)


By looking at what Sony and others have done and now evaluating what red have done some things become a little clearer (to me anyway).

Red for ENG and EFP use might have to up the stakes somewhat if they are going to advertise and sell it for ENG style use. For cine use it sells itself.

Quote from Blair:----------------------------------------------------------
I look forward to the day, hopefully not too far in the future, when a great lens for (nod to Gibby for the term) "convergence" shooters is available for the RedOne. It would offer a wide zoom range and the operational facilities that we all love when shooting EFP style and be switchable between full sensor and hitting just the center window via a toggle at the base of the lens similar to a 2x extender which it would act like anyway. I see weight as the biggest challenge but I am no lens engineer.

Exiting the blue sky froth of the magic lens that does everything (maybe a nice 2008 project for the Red Team)
____________________________________________

So we are now getting nearer to the real crux of the matter. Suitable lenses and not forgetting the lenses also happen to communicate with the cameras as well. Communicating with the camera is something that red have clearly stated will not happen (at least with red one). Built in NDs and built in extenders sound to me like very cool features indeed. The built in extenders in particular appear to be an essential ENG & EFP requirement. Fujinon have done their research and continue to expand their range of b4 2/3rd zoom lenses. The demand is clearly there so red could if they desired incorporate a built in extender for their new red zoom due out late next year. That feature coupled with the new focus assist that Graeme is keen to tease us with but also keen to keep it under wraps suggest to me it is something that will make the ENG/EFP guys sit up and notice!!

Blair's post mentions the windowing situation with the red one. I am praying (well maybe not but hoping) that red DO integrate this into a easy switch with one flick and you go from 4k to 2k or whatever. Lets say you figure you are most likely to require a windowed 2k whilst filming in 4k. You go into the menu before filming starts and select 2k as your chosen windowed mode should you wish to change during filming. You then film in 4k and when the situation warrants it you press a button or switch and bingo you are now filming on your selected windowed mode.

Conclusion: Red One with new focus assist.With button for windowed mode as described. Red zoom with built in 2x extender.

An 18-85mm zoom that can become magnified by a built in extender gives you an extended 170mm magnification PLUS at the flick of a switch (on camera not lens) extends that to 340mm in windowed 2k mode.

Thats just my thoughts and hell what do i know? But red might be considered a revolutionary camera for cine use but maybe it requires the above features to also make it a revolutionary ENG/ EFP camera as well. What do others think?

PS: Dont know what we would do without you Steve such great input and supporter other than cine use for red.

Michael
 
I have to admit I'm getting a little annoyed by the grouping of ENG and EFP. The only reseason these two acronyms were ever put together in the first place was that the DVX style Prosumer camcorders were designed for a mixed market of reality TV, low end news, corporate video and Indie film makers. Thus (Electronic News Gathering) ENG and (Electronic Film Production) EFP have become synonymous when they are anything but. The Red camera is an EFP camera designed specifically for cinematography and high quality acquisition. It may be possible to arrange it in such a way that one could shoot in an ENG style but there are many other products out there that are designed specifically for this and will probably do better in practical use. Now if you primarily shoot 24FPS narrative or documentary style content then the Red makes perfect sense, and if the opportunity arrises sure you could put on an ENG lens, switch into 720P/1080i and record all day to a Red Drive in Redcode. But lets be realistic, using Red for ENG is like using a HDW-750 (1080/60i only) for a narrative film. It'll work but it'll never be ideal.
 
Perfect insight Evin! There are several future RED shooters (Steve, filmmaker, etc) who claim this future use. I believe this is why they want an indie swiss-knife tool for all occasions vs. the cine-style goal (more suitable for the manistream). I am with these guys with (t)his/their aim. Mikko once made the distinction. Both (Steve and filmmaker) adhered to the EFP/ENG convention. But you're right, they are very different concepts even IF they have a special common meaning in 'indie language' -- that's for sure.
 
The RED ONE will be a very versatile tool... unlike anything before. 1st, shoot RAW (REDCODE) which gives you more flexible data and record to a small drive. More than 5 times the quality, depending on how you measure, than any ENG camera you can buy. Convert in REDCINE to anything you want. If you don't want the tremendous depth of field advantage of field of a 35mm sensor, shoot with S16 lenses and a cropped sensor area. You still have more info than any ENG camera. The RED ONE is light. And has more flexibility than any ENG camera. The ONLY exceptions are zoom control and auto-aperture. But we promise a magical focus assist and a histogram that is much more reliable than auto-exposure.

The key to the RED ONE is a better picture than any other ENG camera. That is the punchline.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Great Post Evin.. it will be interesting to see if ENG guys warm up to Red and how they adapt One to use in those situations.
 
Yes Jim, thanks for this info again and again. I see many people do not understand what the difference between a Red one and Sony XDCam HD is, except quality. Funny if people buy a Sony XDCam HD and put a very cheap lens on it !
 
evinsky said:
I have to admit I'm getting a little annoyed by the grouping of ENG and EFP. The only reseason these two acronyms were ever put together in the first place was that the DVX style Prosumer camcorders were designed for a mixed market of reality TV, low end news, corporate video and Indie film makers. Thus (Electronic News Gathering) ENG and (Electronic Film Production) EFP have become synonymous when they are anything but.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are being entirely fair here. EFP stands for Electronic Field Production, not film production. ENG is an application (subset) of EFP, ENG and EFP have been grouped together long before prosumer camcorders. The reason for the grouping in these posts is because although ENG is the more common term it is too specific and it doesn't describe how the camera is used it describes where it is being used. However EFP is a too generic term which covers pretty much everything from one person with a camcorder to a full on crew. ENG/EFP is a far from perfect term but I think it does have meaning which is distinct from ENG or EFP used in isolation.

evinsky said:
The Red camera is an EFP camera designed specifically for cinematography and high quality acquisition.
Click to expand...

The idea of a versatile camera for all applications was the slant that Red took right from the beginning and was always touted as one of the selling points.

Martin
 
Last edited:
Maybe, but it's roots and inspirations are deicedly Film and even pro DSLR still cameras much more than "Video" cameras. Ted would say that Red is the first true electronic cinema camera to get beyond the term "Video".
 
Last edited:
evinsky said:
Maybe, but it's roots and inspirations are deicedly Film and even pro DSLR still cameras much more than "Video" cameras. Ted would say that Red is the first true electronic cinema camera to get beyond the term "Video".
Click to expand...
I'm fairly certain EFP is a television industry term and not rooted in film. EFP focusses more on higher quality acquisition in the field whereas ENG is about quickness and agility in the field. They are both used in the same sentence often enough though. A good example might be an interview, a one on one with a celebrity in a hotel could be described as EFP, if the room is setup, lit well and with decent audio, in contrast an ENG interview might be in the middle of the street running alongside the person or filming at a press conference. The possibility with Red One is that it may well lend itself to both types very well and I personally don't see a problem with them being used in the same sentence together.
 
Homersapien said:
EFP focusses more on higher quality acquisition in the field whereas ENG is about quickness and agility in the field. They are both used in the same sentence often enough though.
Click to expand...
right.. me likes this thread..
 
EFP is decidedly not a film term - never ever was. EFP is Electronic Field Production - where what are usually multiple cameras are run through a central switcher and router for isolated and switched recordings [edit: outside of a proper studio]. Back when the term was coined, it was common to have scopes, routers, character generators, racks of preview monitors and so-forth crammed into road cases or into a trailer. Modern satellite sports trucks and AirFAX portable television studios are both examples of EFP.

There is no other proper interpretation of what EFP is, no matter how many ways you try to parse it. If you were taught that it has anything to do with film, your professor was confused.

EDIT: EFP, AS DESCRIBED IN WIKIPEDIA

With respect to RED, it is actually and ironically better set up for EFP than ENG out of the gate, with its studio use stylings (e.g., separated monitor, menu functions at rear, capacity for external CCU-style control).

Where it could use some bolstering is in ENG. Electronic News Gathering - which has decidedly more basis in film-based recording technology.

Cameras like the venerable CP-16, Arri 16S/B/BL, Canon Scoopic and Mitchell or Bell and Howell were utilized for news in the field through the mid to late 1970s. They were light, largely unblimped (unlike their studio counterparts) and easy to load and operate on the quick.

Gear was designed specifically to support ENG work. The crank-equipped Angeneiux 12-120 zoom lens was a favorite piece of kit - allowing an operator to grip the camera in his right hand and activate the movement and operate the lens with his left. Shoulder-pods, hip braces and other comparable modern products we have today are all derived from ENG production.

e
 
Last edited:
Stop bashing XDCam...

Stop bashing XDCam...

Continuing my rant.

As a DP who recently completed work on the first fully XDCam HD series for network (for TLC), I take exception at the constant and ill-conceived comparisons between RED and XDCam HD.

The two platforms could not be more disparate in their design and intended use. We all know what RED is and that it should be versatile enough to work across disciplines and markets.

XDCam HD requires precision purpose-built glass - either 2/3" adapted or using the new 1/2" Canon eSeries or Fujinon HD lenses - so you won't be slapping a $50 Nikon up-front. RED has gone to great lengths to prove in a substantive test that this is not only feasible with their camera, but the results are impressive. You still could not possibly use this in an ENG capacity. Period.

XDCam HD is under constant attack on this particular forum for no good reason. XDCam is a robust, inexpensive format suited to tapeless HD ENG production for broadcast. Unlike some products, XDCam is now, and was upon its release, fully supported across the most basic NLE Apple and PC applications. It actually works well in FCP - though not as well as within the Nitris. :)

For people who have scarcely spent an hour in a room with the Sony to come and lambast it here says a lot more about the experience level and professionalism of the poster than it does the XDCam format.

250 disk hours on XDCam HD and counting...

e
 
Last edited:
Emanuel,

If an insight is wrong, it's wrong. Perception, even when repeated loudly in mantra-like fasion with your fingers planted in your ears to block out the din of reality does not make it truth.

To say we're all entitled to opinion does a dis-service to people who come to the forum to learn. They're entitled to get good and accurate information. Calling a cow a horse doesn't educate, it serves only to confuse someone looking for good information. Besides, have you ever tried milking a horse? Not pretty.

e
 
No my friend.

Since my film school years where I could 'think' the "Citizen Kane" (as case study), I could learn how to (e)valuate, better than before, the range of a POV -- though my understanding on your point.

Emanuel :)
 
Last edited:
I'll be in UK, France and Spain in June. We can discuss this and other important issues over a café-crème or a pint of something else.

e
 
For sure! I'll be waiting your PM.

Emanuel :)

EDIT:
overlandfilms said:
His fingers are still in his ears.

e
Click to expand...
I'm sorry if I hadn't seen your answer before my prior post's editing but today is holiday here (day of the restoration of the independence -- 1640 after 60 years under spanish domain) and I'm @dial-up...
 
Last edited:
This is very educational indeed...I'm learning that internet forums are a place where people get angry and yell at each other over an electronic void.
That said, if EFP stands for Electronic Field Production and I call it Eggs, Fries and Pancakes, it's not just "a different opinion". But I know nothing about EFP or ENG, so it's all news to me anyhow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top