RED used to shoot Cover of Esquire...

[Adam J McKay]

Some info can be found here on the blog of Chase Jarvis, the master of overexposure.

Turns out the RED one was used to shoot the cover of esquire magazine.

"It allowed her to act," Williams says. "She could run scenes without being reminded by the sound of a shutter every four seconds that I was taking a picture. As in still photography, a lot of it is capturing unexpected moments. This takes that one step further."


What do you think about all this? Move over photographers of the world, RED is coming through???

Kind of freaks me out.

 

[dougspice]

Greg Williams is terrific.

Why does this freak you out?

 

[ChipG]

Most photographers want to shoot in 24+ images a second for this very reason, when they are done they will also have a video.

 

[Batutta]

Red Camera + Megan Fox + Bikini = BOING! Who cares if she has toe thumbs. Here's the link to the video--

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/video/megan-fox-video

 

[Adam J McKay]

This was brought up a while back with the olympus I think it was that shoots 60fps and takes images before you press the shutter button. And it doesn't apply to Greg Williams because he is amazing, but it would seem like it takes far less skill to setup a video camera than to capture a single frame. It just seems like the art of photography is slowly being lost in a sea of technological advancements.

That said, the same argument can be said against digital photography as well.

The future freaks me out. I feel like an old man...sigh.

 

[ChipG]

Red Camera + Megan Fox + Bikini = BOING! Who cares if she has toe thumbs. Here's the link to the video--

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/video/megan-fox-video

Earlier I was in another thread talking about how still photographers are excited about the new VDSLR camera's for this very reason. Much lighter than a Red.

The last few seconds in the video of her moving on the magazine cover is going to be the next wave for e-magazine covers.

 

[KyleProhaska]

That is pretty cool...

I have a question though. How does a RED RAW Grab compare to a 12 Mega Pixel photograph in RAW? Apples to Oranges I bet but I figured I would ask.

 

[ChipG]

That is pretty cool...

I have a question though. How does a RED RAW Grab compare to a 12 Mega Pixel photograph in RAW? Apples to Oranges I bet but I figured I would ask.

99.999% of people would not be able to tell the difference after color correction / photoshop finnishing.

 

[Nektonic]

The last few seconds in the video of her moving on the magazine cover is going to be the next wave for e-magazine covers.

That is a big thing to think about, namely the eventual end or large decline of printed media (newspapers, magazines, and gasp even books/comics).

99.999% of people would not be able to tell the difference after color correction / photoshop finnishing.

Once everything is online you don't need a 12+ mega pixel image anymore because of computer screen resolutions, and once you add the factor of movement the loss of resolution/mega pixels is covered up by the motion. Plus, most pics posted online these days that were shot with a pro DSLR end up getting sized down to smaller dimensions anyways.

I think that for the near future photographers should learn how to shoot video, and video/film people should learn how to be take good stills, because print media will be around for a little while and people do still like photo albums and nice poster size prints for their homes and offices.

 

[ChipG]

That is a big thing to think about, namely the eventual end or large decline of printed media (newspapers, magazines, and gasp even books/comics).

You'll see cover girls actually flipping thier hair back and winking at you for the E-covers. I don't think it'll effect the print versions at all. Just helps the content get less lost in a world of e-crap.

 

[Nektonic]

You'll see cover girls actually flipping thier hair back and winking at you for the E-covers. I don't think it'll effect the print versions at all. Just helps the content get less lost in a world of e-crap.

I don't think print will die out entirely, or suddenly, but eventually it might get much smaller. The flip side could be that there will eventually be e-paper that will play videos and audio and will probably also have the ability to go online. The magazines of the future might exploit this if the e-paper becomes cheap enough.

Of course this might be quite a ways off. I wouldn't know when this will become a common reality when one walks into Barnes & Noble and picks up a magazine. Or maybe we'll all use an iPhone or Kindle type of device to get our newspapers and magazines on the go?

Bottom line for me is that with vDSLR's and the stuff Red is offering, I want to gain every advantage I can now by knowing and being able to do both videography, digital filmmaking, and photography. I'm just waiting on some sample footage from Panasonic's GH1 and to hear about the specs of a Nikon D400 before I decide on what to get this summer for a hybrid photo/video camera.

 

[dougspice]

This does sort of put to death the skill behind Cartier-Bresson's "decisive moment", which is one of the more difficult aspects of photography to master.

As with any other technological advancement, this will enable a small elite the opportunity to create some new, superior work – and at the same time opening up a flood of low-grade work from amateurs. But I certainly don't think most real photographers will change too much about the way they earn their bread and butter.