Liam Hall
Veteran
Hmm...
Colours look well wacko to me. Look at the skin tone at 34 seconds. Just doesn't look real IMHO...
FS7: Red Raven and FS7
- Thread starter Gene Sung
- Start date
Hmm...
Colours look well wacko to me. Look at the skin tone at 34 seconds. Just doesn't look real IMHO...
Liam Hall
Veteran
Yep, I'm a feww £££s more than that, so Raven looking very attractive to me.
Matthew Quinn
Active member
It IS true the camera gets more expensive than $10k
First off I already own an extra Red Mini Mag.
The Package does not require anything other than a battery to be shooting away from a plug in the wall.
HOWEVER
you can take it as far as you want to go, the package for $10,000 from red Deff gets you shooting, and this list could be trimmed down a lot and not necessary for a lot of shooters, but here is a list i have made that i want as far as accessories: (I already have an extra hybrid studio base plate i will use)
MOVCAM DOVETAIL + SHOULDER PAD : $271
MOVCAM CONTROL HAND GRIP: $144
Control Cable ARRI TRIGGER: $250
MOVCAM ROSETTE HAND GRIP : $76
TILTA EXTENSION ROSETTE PAIR: $80
WOODEN CAMERA CROSSBAR: $250
WOODEN CAMERA TOP PLATE RAVEN: $599
WOODEN CAMERA EASY RISER: $160
WOODEN CAMERA LW 15mm bracket RAVEN: $140
RED DSMC2 Lemo Adaptor B: $195
NOGA Cine Arm DG Hold-it Arm: $129
ET WEAPON mini Side Plate: $150
OFF HOLLYWOOD Hot Tap D-tap Splitter: $299
You prefer crappy looking test footage from cameras?I don't know but all these test are the same coming from RED. Get an attractive model who is covered in make-up and create some amazing lighting. Wouldn't any of these new S35mm cameras look just as good with the same set up? It sure looks Hollywood but I'll wait for some real world tests shot with real people by the targeted buyer.
It will be more than enough of that later.
Im more interested in the possibilities of the camera, than what your average joe can pull off.
Compared to the FS7 promo film (Japan themed), I think the Raven footage looks a lot more "meaty" for a lack of a better word
Ben Scott
Veteran
I don't know but all these test are the same coming from RED. Get an attractive model who is covered in make-up and create some amazing lighting. Wouldn't any of these new S35mm cameras look just as good with the same set up? It sure looks Hollywood but I'll wait for some real world tests shot with real people by the targeted buyer.
I want to make amazing footage with amazing lights and amazing models. I'm not interested in another shitty jerky handheld video on L glass of someone out in daylight not crafting a shot in any way.
Far more interested in what they've done, and show me one single FS7 clip that is anywhere near the image quality of that.
Also couldn't give a crap about the 'targeted buyer'.
We can all mangle a piece of marble with a hammer and a chisel. I want to see what a sculptor does with it.
To be honest I think it's pretty disingenuous to start making out that footage is not pretty spesh for $10,000 worth of camera.
Erik Naso
Veteran
I don't know but all these test are the same coming from RED. Get an attractive model who is covered in make-up and create some amazing lighting. Wouldn't any of these new S35mm cameras look just as good with the same set up? It sure looks Hollywood but I'll wait for some real world tests shot with real people by the targeted buyer.
I don't get this idea. It's a cinema camera not a event camera. I appreciate seeing this type of footage. Yeah it's highly produced and the lighting is great. Thats a good sample to me. Would sample footage of the camera in bright contrasty sun without any scrim or lighting be a better way to shoot test footage? The idea that "any" camera would look as good as this in the same situation is wrong.
Maybe next time RED should shoot some cats running around Jarred's Ferrari or on the coach playing with cat toys all in natural light. That would really show the Raven's image quality.
JackCarter
Well-known member
People defending a camera like it's a family member, and they have not even used it yet.
It's the same test every time, some model who is covered in make-up with nice lighting. It's almost like a Michael Bay film. I personally think this test is boring, smoke, hairy arms, fake skin tones, small breasts, a cum bath and some slow motion walking. It's almost as if the film is an advert for someone's girl friend, hey look who I bang every night!
I never said the footage was bad (it's amazing), I am simply pointing out that I would like to see what the camera can do in the hands of people who don't have a Hollywood budget behind them as that is the targeted buyer.
Point taken, this is a camera that is designed for creating cinema, but I'm sure even Hollywood films out on location in the real world.
I'm not trying to start an argument, I just want to see more and not just the same old thing.
It's the same test every time, some model who is covered in make-up with nice lighting. It's almost like a Michael Bay film. I personally think this test is boring, smoke, hairy arms, fake skin tones, small breasts, a cum bath and some slow motion walking. It's almost as if the film is an advert for someone's girl friend, hey look who I bang every night!
I never said the footage was bad (it's amazing), I am simply pointing out that I would like to see what the camera can do in the hands of people who don't have a Hollywood budget behind them as that is the targeted buyer.
Point taken, this is a camera that is designed for creating cinema, but I'm sure even Hollywood films out on location in the real world.
I'm not trying to start an argument, I just want to see more and not just the same old thing.
Ben Scott
Veteran
People have a go at the camera and underlying tech and saying there is no footage of it to judge it...
Some great footage of it comes out and people complain that it looks too good and that you want to see someone doing a worse job with it to see what it can 'really' do.
People are never happy. I hate the internet.
Some great footage of it comes out and people complain that it looks too good and that you want to see someone doing a worse job with it to see what it can 'really' do.
People are never happy. I hate the internet.
Ah, but where would you be without it?
In any case, I agree with Jack Carter. This says nothing about the camera itself. These days, an ideal test would have to reveal the dynamic range, the low light capabilities, the resolution - not as important lately but a quick chart shot would do the trick ... ditto for the DR - and the skin tones. This Red video does nothing of a kind for any of the pertinent criteria.
PS. Phil Holland did some more "scientific" tests for Weapon and were far more useful than this.
PPS. This doesn't man that Sony's own sample clips don't suck.
Ben Scott
Veteran
All of that information has been freely available for ages. All the weapon dragon 4k clips you want are available to pixel peep. I've downloaded .r3d files of 4k 120fps 13:1 from reduser. All of that is there.
This was a bit footage from some employees told to go have some fun.
Of course this says something about the camera. It say that in the right hands it can make some very pretty pictures, but then I kinda knew that already.
This was a bit footage from some employees told to go have some fun.
Of course this says something about the camera. It say that in the right hands it can make some very pretty pictures, but then I kinda knew that already.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
+1 well said.
Matthew Quinn
Active member
exactly, is why i pre-ordered one first week it came out. didn't take a rocket scientist to know this camera was gonna be killer
Matthew Quinn
Active member
this comment is not appropriate, and what was this Hollywood Budget you are talking about?
Raven cameras (came from red)
DP: $0 Person works at red every day
GAFFER: $0 person works at Red every day
PRODUCTION DESIGN: $0 person works at red every day
HAIR & MU: ? dunno might be a friend, or maybe they spent $500
Models: dunno might be friends or maybe they payed $500 a piece
POST: prob did in house
the lenses they use cost $1000 a piece..
your right tho, it WAS shot in hollywood
Ben Scott
Veteran
Let's just say that they chose to go with a stylized piece.
Personally, I agree that it's a bit like trying to ascertain the quality of skin tones from a Tim Burton film, minus a plot.
But then again, I have never been a fan of seeing the powder on an actor's skin.
AS such, I don't think they give a crap about such an objective measure as skin tones.
They want a film that markets some kind of image they want to project of their company.
So be it. I'll take this over their hard on for the military any day of the week.
Personally, I agree that it's a bit like trying to ascertain the quality of skin tones from a Tim Burton film, minus a plot.
But then again, I have never been a fan of seeing the powder on an actor's skin.
AS such, I don't think they give a crap about such an objective measure as skin tones.
They want a film that markets some kind of image they want to project of their company.
So be it. I'll take this over their hard on for the military any day of the week.
Ben Scott
Veteran
So you can't bring yourself to say it looked good? Like not even at all? If that had been shot on a BM camera people would be exploding with excitement.
I don't think anything they put out under the Red banner would make you happy.
I'm still yet to see anything at all from an FS7 or from the BM cameras that everyone keeps telling me are the new Raven killers that is even vaguely in the same ballpark. And believe me I've tried!
The 4.6k Ursa Mini footage that people are going into meltdown over looks like DSLR footage to me and one the two clips I'd seen were released last week were just blown out with nasty pushed skintones and the other was a shaky jerky beach thing that also pushed the skintones but the other way.
https://vimeo.com/146086078
https://vimeo.com/146814797
And then you have the other offering.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mh8_L4I5o0
Which one of those videos do you think pushed a camera to see what it could do most?
I don't think anything they put out under the Red banner would make you happy.
I'm still yet to see anything at all from an FS7 or from the BM cameras that everyone keeps telling me are the new Raven killers that is even vaguely in the same ballpark. And believe me I've tried!
The 4.6k Ursa Mini footage that people are going into meltdown over looks like DSLR footage to me and one the two clips I'd seen were released last week were just blown out with nasty pushed skintones and the other was a shaky jerky beach thing that also pushed the skintones but the other way.
https://vimeo.com/146086078
https://vimeo.com/146814797
And then you have the other offering.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mh8_L4I5o0
Which one of those videos do you think pushed a camera to see what it could do most?
Matthew Quinn
Active member
Funny part is its in my best interest to let all the people out theere invest in BMD.. makes renting my cameras easier.. so funny how "you can lead a horse to water...."
I just got slammed for stating the Red dragon sensor is superior to BMD sensor on nofilmschool..
these people love BMD for some crazy reason. I pray for them
Lenilenapi
Carbonite Member
Well I for one am pretty damned impressed - though you never know what an FS7 or 55 would look like in the same situation. Very well produced, directed and shot. Wish I had the dough for another camera. but will keep it in mind. The FS7 is still better for my general work, which is largely doc but......
For now I'll wait to see what the market says about people wanting to use it.
For now I'll wait to see what the market says about people wanting to use it.
Ben Scott
Veteran
It's bizarre although I suspect and understand many people championing a workflow they have invested in as they have stepped up when they might not have had to use those tools in the bigger arena with more expectation.
That said, a lot of the car stuff I do the comments are similar. I'll do a shoot on a Lamborghini and hundreds of people who have never even seen one let alone driven one will argue about which has the best gearbox between that and an R8, another car they have also never driven or been in.
Just on that note this same piece it made me laugh the VO said '0-60 in around 3 seconds' and immediately after it went up the comment was 'STOP LYING IT DOES 0-60 IN 2.8 SECONDS' . Despite the fact we'd actually been driving it.
In summary: People are weird. Also there's no accounting for taste.
Grug
Veteran
Footage looks great, just as you'd expect Dragon too. I don't understand the hate/criticisms - it isn't a 'camera test', it's 'sample footage', those are two very different things.
a few things give me pause with Raven:
- EF mount
- Slightly awkward sensor size
- Sensitivity (I don't like pushing Dragon beyond 500 ISO, especially at higher compression ratios, and that requires larger lighting packages)
Those aren't insignificant gripes to contend with, but image quality is nowhere near that list.
a few things give me pause with Raven:
- EF mount
- Slightly awkward sensor size
- Sensitivity (I don't like pushing Dragon beyond 500 ISO, especially at higher compression ratios, and that requires larger lighting packages)
Those aren't insignificant gripes to contend with, but image quality is nowhere near that list.