Red posts zone plate chart of 7D

shaocaholica said:
Just because something is wasted doesn't mean it should change or is a failure.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I'm simply saying that in the specific realm of the DSLR - a device which has been created for the sole purpose of taking photographs - the vast majority of users are just that - photographers. There is a contingency which uses it heavily for video, but I don't see a majority of photographers suddenly petitioning Canon for better video capabilities like XLR inputs, level controls, faster sensor readout, etc.

I think REDs mindset has been different from the moment they conceived of DSMC. Hopefully other companies will embrace that mindset. And whether or not they do, I hope they make some really great competing products.
 
Yep, i am one of those still to video converts.

I have been writing for years, and a hobbyist photographer for years. And im a HUGE lover of film. (from the 30s to today)

I recently switched over to a DSLR 2 years ago with the Nikon D50.

After seeing the footage on the D90, i switched to that and made 5 short films and a documentary in the proceeding 6 months. After reaching the limitations of non-manual control i switched to the 7D, and now im writing for a major short project that plans to hit the festival circuit hard. Im also going to be performing as the DP once shooting gets underway (probably this summer)

Its just how it evolved. Im sure there are tons like me.

Video is a nice way to blend my love of writing, and of photography into one activity.
 
Michael Olsen said:
...but I don't see a majority of photographers suddenly petitioning Canon for better video capabilities like XLR inputs, level controls, faster sensor readout, etc.
Click to expand...

Thats the thing. It doesn't take a majority to get their attention on these issues. If you break down the different avenues of photography (landscape, studio, portrait, street, sports, macro, etc), you get a whole bunch of small groups who want different things. Each of their voices is small compared to the whole of "photography" but each of them gets through eventually. I'm sure the high profile use of DSLR video will no doubt raise ears over a Canon.
 
Barry_Green said:
Well, to be fair to Red -- their plan was to make a less-costly alternative that didn't involve huge compromises in the footage. They go toe-to-toe with cameras costing 4x to 10x as much, and while they don't do many things those others do, at least the resultant imagery is comparable.

But with the 7D, 5D, 1D, GH1, etc... that is not true. The resulting imagery is occasionally comparable, and occasionally hideously worse.

If the DSLR was always comparable, I'd say your point is very valid. But it's occasionally so much worse that it's actually comical, and so therefore I do see Red's point in trying to point out the difference.
Click to expand...

Barry-

I know what you mean- but I never really said the DSLRs of the world are 100% comparable with RED. Sure they can be made to look terrible- compromised codec, line skipping, skew, the list goes on and on. But they can also be made to look indistinguishable from RED footage say on a 42 inch plasma with a DP/colorist who really know their stuff. But all that was not really the point I was making.

The DSLR cameras have two huge advantages over Scarlet at this particular moment in time- affordability and presently available. Now when Scarlet actually ships the quality difference will be just that much more apparent.

But we don't expect folks like Canon to sit still in the meantime. They'll have released their 24p update to the 5D by then- which gives you a full frame sensor 24p body ready to shoot save for a lens for about $2,500 They might just release the mythical RAW capture module as well, which obliterates the codec complaints. And perhaps they'll figure out a way to combine those traits into camera bodies with all the features movie makers want.

So for RED to compare their future product to their competitor's shipping product is sort of setting themselves up for a tit for tat arms race down the road- because most other technology companies play their cards a lot closer to the vest. I.e. a product is not even discussed until it's ready to ship out the door.

RED should focus on what they do best and realize that for a *lot* of scrappy filmmaker types and in this crappy economy, the DSLRs out there represent a 'good enough' revolution. I.e.:

WIRED- When Cheap and Simple is Just Fine

For everyone else- sure RED is the best of the best. I mean heck I have access to pretty much every camera out there from RED on down any time I want to go shoot. But half the stuff I actually take is on an iPhone 3GS or a 7D or an HMC150 or an EX1. Of course we bring out the RED when it's game time for the high end clients but that's not always.

And at the end of the day- what really matters most? That you shot something that has a perfect zone plate test frame or something that looked good for your client and you didn't lose your shirt producing?

-Noah
 
Ryan Paige said:
Well then, they probably did it just to annoy you.

But I still say it's because they view the "brain" to be different than a "body" as I explained.
Click to expand...

They're just getting carried away IMO with their marketing lingo. Some of it is cute I admit but I think "brains" is just too tacky and unnecessary. For me, brain means sentient, autonomous, decision making logic, zombies, etc. I can't attribute any of those to describing what a RED brain does. I can even think of better terms other than "body" that could have been used but whatever. Its set in stone now. Brainsssssss!

Ryan Paige said:
but when I bought my Canon AE-1 body back in 1980-whatever, it held the CF equivalent of the time - a roll of film. I didn't have to buy a separate module for the film, nor did I have to buy a separate module for power or for a viewfinder or a separate module that included the dial to turn to the various camera modes, etc.).
Click to expand...

You do realize there are SLR bodies with removable viewfinders. They cannot operate without them. They also have removable film magazines (cannot operate without) and removable power winders and extra battery "modules". Those were still called "bodies". Nobody back then thought it would be a good idea to start coining new terms because the idea didn't change. Thats just SLRs, medium/large format is all sorts of modular stuff.
 
Last edited:
Michael Olsen said:
I totally agree. I'm simply saying that in the specific realm of the DSLR - a device which has been created for the sole purpose of taking photographs - the vast majority of users are just that - photographers. There is a contingency which uses it heavily for video, but I don't see a majority of photographers suddenly petitioning Canon for better video capabilities like XLR inputs, level controls, faster sensor readout, etc.
Click to expand...

Ahh but you're missing my point. I didn't say they were photographers. They're into photography but they don't take pictures. They like data, charts, and cool things.

If there's going to be 11 million DSLR's sold in the US this year, shouldn't there be more amazing photographs all over the place? Any DSLR can take award winning pictures. Most of the users are not into the art, but the gadget. I'll bet 75% or more of the buyers are men.

I'll grant you, they probably take vacation snaps, etc. But wouldn't you want video too for your trips? And if you need 25 MP for vacation snaps, it stands to reason that you'll settle for nothing less than raw, unaliased HD video. At least.

And you, my talented cohorts, who produce actual work, will be the beneficiaries. That's my new theory anyway, nuff said.

Edit: I'd just like to point out that my wife spends at least 10% of her energy trying to talk me out of useless gadgets :)
 
am I the only one that looks at the picture posted and thought it was some sort of acid trip?! Everything they talked about sounded like gibberish
 
NoahK said:
WIRED- When Cheap and Simple is Just Fine
Click to expand...

Interesting article, this passage is especially relevant to what we're seeing right now.

There comes a point at which improving upon the thing that was important in the past is a bad move," Shirky said in a recent interview. "It's actually feeding competitive advantage to outsiders by not recognizing the value of other qualit ies." In other words, companies that focus on traditional measures of quality—fidelity, resolution, features—can become myopic and fail to address other, now essential attributes like convenience and shareability. And that means someone else can come along and drink their milk shake.
Click to expand...

We may have higher standards for our tech, but the people we create content for don't and that's who pays the bills. And those are the people who have no idea what a zone plate is.
 
Isaac_Brody said:
We may have higher standards for our tech, but the people we create content for don't and that's who pays the bills. And those are the people who have no idea what a zone plate is.
Click to expand...

I wonder what the break down is here on DVX between hobbyists and working pros? Surely not everyone here is relying on this tech to put food on the table.
 
Ryan Paige said:
But I don't think a "brain" is quite the same as a "body"

A Canon 7D body includes a CF card slot and battery slot, viewfinder and camera controls, etc. You just stick a lens on, insert a CF card and you're ready to go.

A RED brain is just a brain. Stick a lens on it, and it still doesn't work. The capture device is separate, the battery is separate, the viewfinder/LCD is separate and even the bulk of the camera controls are separate.
Click to expand...

The other difference is that I've been using a 7D for literally the last 6 months and so far a red 'brain' is just vaporware with not even a working prototype in sight.

I love how people talk about Scarlet like it already exists. Believe me, no one is looking forward to the next cameras as much as I am but this whole thing is so boring. We've flayed a dead horse into dog food twice over on this subject.

Am I going to trade my 3 7D cameras and oh, let's see about $25,000 for a Red One body with mysterium X that I can use today so that I can get paid the same base wages? No.

Would I trade all three of my 7Ds +$4000 cash for one $8,000 system that records high color depth video (be it 1080p or 3k) on a super35 approximate sensor, without line skipping and allows me to use PL mounted or canon/nikon lenses?Absolutely.

I remember a year ago trying to convince clients that we could do a shoot with a 5D Mark II instead of an EX1. Now it's almost harder to convince people that the HDSLR's can't do everything. Of course what this does is bring the market value down for all of us, just like Red did when it came out. People who are willing to rent a Red One with operator for $100 or $200/day make it hard for the guy who might not have that package but have 100x the skill and experience.

I can't even imagine trying to start out as a cinematographer these days without either:
A. Owning your own small package
or
B. Spending a :furious3:LOAD of money to either go to a proper film school that helps you build a reel or rent equipment and produce your own content to build a reel.

Cinematography really is a serious investment if you are trying to make a career of it. Whether its in time or money - you will pay.
 
shaocaholica said:
I wonder what the break down is here on DVX between hobbyists and working pros? Surely not everyone here is relying on this tech to put food on the table.
Click to expand...

I am.

I still hold a Hollywood Local 728 lighting card, but I'll be damned if I get much lighting work these days.
 
i just love doing it. I do make money off of it, but i'm going to school for marketing.

Will I sell my 7D and $4000 to upgrade to a higher camera? Probably not
Will I have fun going out and shooting movies? Hell yeah!
 
shaocaholica said:
I wonder what the break down is here on DVX between hobbyists and working pros? Surely not everyone here is relying on this tech to put food on the table.
Click to expand...

Obviously not, but does it really matter? If you are working and your client likes the image from a 7D/5D and is happy then you've done your job. If you're a hobbyist and perfectly content with a Flip Ultra at the end of the day then there's no difference.
 
Dan_Kanes said:
Cinematography really is a serious investment if you are trying to make a career of it. Whether its in time or money - you will pay.
Click to expand...

I know a lot of talent who work completely digitally and you can still prove a lot of cinema skills without stepping into the real world on a $1500 or less computer. Think of all the digital focus pullers and lighters and DPs at Pixar who don't ever touch a real camera (granted they probably have a traditional film education but there are upstarts who don't).
 
Ryan Paige said:
I just resent the whole "if you're not renting a Red One" then you're not serious about filmmaking aspect of the whole thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they didn't make their case well. Jim Jannard ended the thread with a comment of the form ''good enough' just doesn't seem professional', and I understand what he's trying to say, but part of being a professional DP, director, or producer is making the tough decision about what's good enough based on your budget.

I feel that if you're doing a feature with a budget of over $100,000 - which assumes about 25 days of shooting for an average of $4000 a day - then you should seriously consider renting or even buying a Red One. And in 6 months or a year, they'll have an even more compelling argument with Scarlet. If we say a base 2/3" Scarlet system costs $7,500 (the brain plus necessary accessories) then it should be a serious contender for any budget above $35,000...basically I'm saying that a low-budget production should be willing to drop about 20% of the budget on the camera.

But no more, because you still have to feed people, secure locations, and pay your actors and crew. I get very irritated when I see Craigslist postings inviting people to work for free, but they're using a RED. Sure, sometimes they have that camera for free through a friend or so, but equipment won't shoot your movie for you, people do. It sends a bad message before you even begin shooting that you want a top-end camera but you don't consider your cast and crew worth even minimum wage.

On the other hand, the small DSLRs are an absolute godsend for smaller productions. I just finished a feature shot with the GH1* and found it very refreshing - occasionally frustrating or inconvenient, but then the same is true of any camera (ever tried putting a 35mm film camera on your shoulder? Ouch). The image quality is not outstanding, but it is good, and whichever DSLR yo employ will get better results by a small amount of pre-planning - avoiding wardrobe or set dressing with too many narrow stripes, managing your exposure carefully, and so on.

* Can't post footage right now, but we used the kit lens sometimes and mostly Nikon 35mm primes via an adapter.

Image quality matters, but so do your sound, art direction, cast and story (not necessarily in that order). Comparing zone plates with the 7d and the Mysterium-X is just daft and makes Red look silly - considering the 10x price difference between a R1 and the 7d of course I expect Red to look better. Now if speculation is true and the t2i video is fundamentally the same as or very close to that of the 7d, Red has put themselves in the position of comparing a ~$20,000 camera with one that costs $800...idiotic. What they need to do is post some footage from the 2/3" sensor showing pretty depth of field and nice dynamic range with practical lighting - I am sure that when they do, they'll win the sensor argument easily and wallets will open faster than you can say 'action'.

By contrast, comparing the M-x with the Sony F35 is an excellent idea and shows what good value and technology Red actually is. I am not hating on that platform, I think it's absolutely awesome and fully expect to buy or rent Red Cameras on any production with a suitable budget.
 
I'm the one that mentioned the similarity to RED'S brain concept, and those that are arguing about it I think are missing the point. Yes for stills it is a fully contained body, and all you need is lenses, but for video a lot of guys on this board and others are kitting them out with rails and shoulder pads, hand grips, matte boxes, monitors etc. Not to mention building a quality set of lenses one at a time.

When it is time to upgrade to next years better model, all you have to trade is the body, all the other stuff for your make-shift digital cinema rig should still be viable. When the s35 scarlet ships, if they still release the canon mounts, then you can move your lenses, and probably most of your accessories with you.

If you invest $5000 or more in a prosumer video camera, everything is proprietary. It may in fact take better video, and if this is your business, that is important. But if you are a film student or just want to make some shorts, or are a scrappy independent who wants to make feature with a hollywood look for no money, these cameras right now are revolutionary.

Most importantly, if you aspire to RED and s35mm sensors, these things are the bomb for learning how to compose with certain focal lengths and keeping things in focus at f2. There is a huge learning curve for those moving from 1/3" point and shoot to 35mm and real lenses.

A film student, or someone with no industry contacts has no business trying to own a red. Get a t2i, or a 7d, gh1/2, go on ebay or craigs list and get a set of manual nikon primes, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm. These focal lengths cover probably 90% of the shots in a typical movie. Learn what they look like and how to use them. You don't need f1.4, you can get 2.8 for around $100 for most of these.

If it were to ship right now the 2/3" scarlet would probably still be my dream cam. I have a 16mm Eclair NPR, and love the look, I don't need super shallow DOF. However, the fixed lens model really reminds me of a prosumer camera, without the prosumer functionality. Don't get me wrong, raw is ideal for certain applications. But for a lot of guys that want this for their primary camera, it needs a low bandwidth codec to shoot events with. If red doesn't throw in something like h.264 that can record for an hour on one card, I think they are really missing the market for that camera.
 
people, who cares? its just a zone chart

its just another red PR blunder – part of their loveable charm really

Barry Green did zone charts for 7D, GH1 months and months ago

lets move along 2 something constructive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top