Saw images from 6 cameras today...

Status
Not open for further replies.
evinsky said:
I'm guessing here.

Camera body only.
6.Viper $60K
5.D20 Not available but probably $135k
4.F950 $90K
3.Dalsa I have no idea but lets say $100k+
2.35mm $135K (for an Arricam ST since you can't buy a Panavision)
1.Red, if you don't know by now you're on the wrong forum.
Click to expand...

Well, in 35mm you can buy a way cheaper camera with good lenses and still have the same quality as the Panavision. An old BL2 or Arri 3, even an Arri2C give excelent images. That's one of the advantages you don't have to change the camera that often if ever.
 
I liken the anti-Red sentiment to the anti-Final Cut folks. "How can a tool that cheap, possibly compare to my $150,000 Avid? And besides, I still have along way to got pay this off, so no way I'm switching to something cheaper." And earlier than that when the first Video Toaser arrived in 1990, then again when QuickTime started to mature and become a powerful tool for real production work.

Disruptive technologies are always met with extreme skepticism by old schoolers. The rest of us just jump right in and profit from their hesitation.

Avid users: I'm not trying to start a platform war, or rag on you (okay maybe a little bit), just trying to make a point.

Jeremy
Red One #68
 
pablovi said:
Well, in 35mm you can buy a way cheaper camera with good lenses and still have the same quality as the Panavision. An old BL2 or Arri 3, even an Arri2C give excelent images. That's one of the advantages you don't have to change the camera that often if ever.
Click to expand...

Of course you can buy a cheaper 35mm camera but the one I mentioned is comparable to the one used in the side by side test. Also the lenses they used were very expensive Zeiss primes.
 
donatello said:
anytime you have a profession that uses expensive tools ( which become elite) and only few can get their hands on it to use/learn, that when a new product that is good becomes available at a price that persons in/out of that profession can buy -those in that profession do not take kindly.
one goes to work - uses a 150k camera or down the road a RED - they worked their way up the ladder over many years as AC/operator/DP - drives home and see the kid next door in his/her garage with a new RED ...

..
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100%. but i dont think it will be "kids next door" it will be small production comapnies, that used to produce $30,000, Small HD Spots, and could never afford film, will suddenly be able to produce TOP quality images. the market will flood with Talent and guys at the top stand to lose ( a little tiny bit) of their "stable" work to smaller companies that can now produce on that level.

i unfortnatly cant affrod a red camera now. but i do love cinematography, and if my career picks up the way we ALL hope our careers will, i will certainly take that step.
 
evinsky said:
However the Red footage stayed fresh in my mind as I watched the ASC/SMTPE screening at the Pickford center and I couldn't help but think OH MY FCUKING GOD! is this really it.
Click to expand...

Evan, the Red footage, by comparison, was not passed through the very unkind workflow done by the fellows at Disney. It really is apples to oranges. I don't think any manufacturer was particularly pleased by the way in which their footage was treated, other than Kodak (who probably shouldn't have been). quickie LUT, DNxHD, down-rez then up-rez..etc!

I was happy to hear comments from all those in the know- questioning the thought process and post workflow of the test. The same phrases I kept hearing uttered after the screening (in several different variations) was "That test wasn't fair to anything, including film." and "Impossible to draw any conclusions, other than a blatant bias towards film."

My schedule is really tight right now, as there are a couple big projects prepping this month. However, when things slow down around the Christmas holiday, I'll try to arrange a screening for a people who saw the shootout this week and now have a distorted impression of what 4K images from the Origin (and perhaps other d-cinema cameras) look like. I have the ability to show captured and processed footage in a more ideal manner. With everything we have going on, the only real issue I have about setting it up is time.

I.
 
evinsky said:
Of course you can buy a cheaper 35mm camera but the one I mentioned is comparable to the one used in the side by side test. Also the lenses they used were very expensive Zeiss primes.
Click to expand...

Hi,

The point is, a properly maintained $700 Konvas with a PL mount will give an identical image to an Arricam. Its down to lens & filmstock.

Stephen
 
Maybe at 24FPS MOS. But that hardly works as a viable A cam for feature film production.

This argument is noted but the cheapest 35mm sound capable camera is probably an Arri BL1 or Blimped Arri 2C both of witch will cost you $10K plus.
The Red offers significant advantages in almost all areas for a very insignificant amount of additional dollars.
 
Illya Friedman said:
Evan, the Red footage, by comparison, was not passed through the very unkind workflow done by the fellows at Disney. It really is apples to oranges. I don't think any manufacturer was particularly pleased by the way in which their footage was treated, other than Kodak (who probably shouldn't have been). quickie LUT, DNxHD, down-rez then up-rez..etc!

I was happy to hear comments from all those in the know- questioning the thought process and post workflow of the test. The same phrases I kept hearing uttered after the screening (in several different variations) was "That test wasn't fair to anything, including film." and "Impossible to draw any conclusions, other than a blatant bias towards film."

My schedule is really tight right now, as there are a couple big projects prepping this month. However, when things slow down around the Christmas holiday, I'll try to arrange a screening for a people who saw the shootout this week and now have a distorted impression of what 4K images from the Origin (and perhaps other d-cinema cameras) look like. I have the ability to show captured and processed footage in a more ideal manner. With everything we have going on, the only real issue I have about setting it up is time.

I.
Click to expand...

I fully recognize that the test was flawed. I've shot the Viper, F900 Varicam and 35mm and I know that there are many things in that test that were not done well. However the Red screening also was shot on an uncharachterized sensor, using a very rudimentary demosaic and Gamma curve/LUT so even though I did say the comparison was "Apples to Oranges" it's not as far off as you make it sound. All the cameras in the various tests were handicapped in some way yet some significant charachter was dicernable from all. Except maybe the Viper which I have seen much, much better results from in other real world productions.

So I will happily attend any screening you conduct and update my opinion as such.
E.
 
evinsky said:
This argument is noted but the cheapest 35mm sound capable camera is probably an Arri BL1 or Blimped Arri 2C both of witch will cost you $10K plus.
The Red offers significant advantages in almost all areas for a very insignificant amount of additional dollars.
Click to expand...

Hi.

I bought an Ultracam 35 with 5 Zeiss lenses & 3 mags for well under $10,000. (20db if you believe Leonetti) The camera was advertised on CML, so anybody could have bought it!

Stephen
 
Congratulations... You'll forgive me if I don't cancell my Red reservation and start hunting for a Russian Wundercam.

I just think this whole argument is counter productive. Film is not dead, but it is in a vegetative state hooked up to life support.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stephen,
If you can shoot 35mm so cheaply at such a high quality, then what are you doing lurking around this forum?

We all understand the quality and cost of 35mm. I myself used to own a very nice Arri 35-3 system. I sold it when I got the HVX200. The world is changing and as beautiful and nostalgic film might seem it is becoming less and less viable from a real world production point of view. Almost all media is now being delived digitally and very soon all movies will be too.

But have fun with your Ultracam and if you come by another one give me a call. It sounds like a great addition to my collectable camera shelf.
E.
 
evinsky said:
Stephen,
But have fun with your Ultracam and if you come by another one give me a call. It sounds like a great addition to my collectable camera shelf.
E.
Click to expand...

Hi,

I've actually got 2 of the 15 made, so I maybe in touch!

Stephen
 
evinsky said:
All the cameras in the various tests were handicapped in some way yet some significant charachter was dicernable from all. Except maybe the Viper which I have seen much, much better results from in other real world productions.
Click to expand...
The only one I haven't seen much of is the D20. I agree that certain characteristics shined through despite what was done. However, a DP I was speaking with after said that the test said it should have been called "How well do images hold up when we do this, and this, and then this."

We can both agree that the showcase wasn't ideal. Optimizing each camera to look it's best, or perhaps matching every camera exactly to an extremely high detail, high dynamic range reference frame(s) could have been more telling. So declaring a winner feels to me like lining up 5 funhouse mirrors and saying, "this mirror makes me look the least distorted."

I understand that RED has yet to characterized their sensor, and using a non-final de-bayering. However, at the RED presentation RED was in control of what was presented, and how. At the other screening, a 3rd party producing and presented the test, all the other manufacturers didn't have the equivalent luxury.

2007 is shaping up to be a big year for High End Cinema Cameras. As always, when new cameras are release, there'll be many, many more tests to look forward too.

I.
 
Originally posted by evinsky
Red reservation holders rejoice, this battle station (Ahem) this Mysterium sensor is now the ultimate power in the universe, I suggest we use it!
Click to expand...

Even though I am not a reservation holder, that quote made my day man. I can't get enough of those good ol' Star Wars homages!
 
Heh. RED coming out reminds me of when FCP made it's debut to the professional market. You have to admit, most AVID users/producers/directors hated FCP. It was talked down upon etc etc... Walter Murch cuts Cold Mountain with it and suddenly it was accepted and respected. Hopefully RED takes the same path of the underdog, and come out accepted as well.
 
I think once people see the footage from it Red will be accepted far quicker than FCP was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top