Why are RED Cameras Industry Standard?

You mentioned the workflow of RED but since the RED ONE, they have upped the Resolution to from 4K to 5K,6K, and 8K. How do production (especially if they are doing Network TV or Feature Film which typically finish in 2K or 1080p) justify shooting in those resolutions when most computer requires workstation CPU and Graphics Cards but to handle 4K.

So why not choose a camera that shoots 4K or 5K since that's the big requirement for sites like Netflix.
 
Last edited:
Depends on which kind of format you're working with.

A $200 laptop from Best Buy can easily handle a Sony a6400's 4K, but not REDCODE RAW or CRL, etc.

Any network TV or real feature film production can easily handle any of it. And finishing in 2K was very popular, but you'll mostly see 4K finishes moving forward as time has moved on. It's basically the same 'updated' cycle every few years:

Shoot HD --> Finish in SD (sometimes...not as popular as the next option)

Shoot 4K or close to it (ARRI) --> Finish in 2K (or 1080p)

Shoot 8K or 6K --> Finish in 4K
 
NorBro said:
Depends on which kind of format you're working with.

A $200 laptop from Best Buy can easily handle a Sony a6400's 4K, but not REDCODE RAW or CRL, etc.

Any network TV or real feature film production can easily handle any of it. And finishing in 2K was very popular, but you'll mostly see 4K finishes moving forward as time has moved on. It's basically the same 'updated' cycle every few years:

Shoot HD --> Finish in SD (sometimes...not as popular as the next option)

Shoot 4K or close to it (ARRI) --> Finish in 2K (or 1080p)

Shoot 8K or 6K --> Finish in 4K
Click to expand...


Thanks but then why don't production use either Canon C700 which shoots 5.9k or Sony Venice which is 6K (I know the Venice is a newer camera)
 
achieply said:
Thanks but then why don't production use either Canon C700 which shoots 5.9k or Sony Venice which is 6K (I know the Venice is a newer camera)
Click to expand...

Hollywood uses what's proven and convenient, which is why it's so difficult for companies to break through.

Top Gun: Maverick used the VENICE and that's as big as any movie can get. It's indeed a new camera, which is also why I mentioned earlier in the thread that we should watch its progress (since this is the one that can break through).

Sadly, the C700 has an uphill battle for various reasons. Having high-resolution will not help it.
 
NorBro said:
Hollywood uses what's proven and convenient, which is why it's so difficult for companies to break through.

Top Gun: Maverick used the VENICE and that's as big as any movie can get. It's indeed a new camera, which is also why I mentioned earlier in the thread that we should watch its progress (since this is the one that can break through).

Sadly, the C700 has an uphill battle for various reasons. Having high-resolution will not help it.
Click to expand...


What has been the problem with the C700? I know the C500 had the issue with needing the a external device to record 4K.
 
Top Gun (2020) and Avatar 2 are using the camera because the front detaches into a small head, smaller than Red or Arri M. That allowed for optimal placement of cameras in the cockpit, and for Avatar it allowed for light weight handheld 3D rigs (or whatever tech they are doing these days)

Claudio really pushed the Sony Venice. Some hard lit scenes show they didn’t hold back.
 
Last edited:
achieply said:
What has been the problem with the C700? I know the C500 had the issue with needing the a external device to record 4K.
Click to expand...

The simple answer is it's unwanted.

On paper, it sounds like a dream but if no one wants it then the specs don't matter.

A camera needs traction, hype...sex sells. A big name needs to shoot a MCU movie on it and then perceptions will change. You can also argue the image quality is less superior to the ARRIs and REDs, but the camera has so much post potential that I'm not sure that reasoning is justifiable.
 
jcs said:
The account was created June 2018; starting this thread was 1st post.
Click to expand...

Yeah, surprised after a year, this is the first post, and in the wrong subforum. Haha. All good though. People love talking about Red, good or bad.
 
James0b57 said:
Yeah, surprised after a year, this is the first post, and in the wrong subforum. Haha. All good though. People love talking about Red, good or bad.
Click to expand...

My apologies I didn't know which subform was a good place to post I was trying to get some insight and information since this has been on my mind for a while.
 
achieply said:
What has been the problem with the C700? I know the C500 had the issue with needing the a external device to record 4K.
Click to expand...

I've been quite surprised by the lack of love it's received. The original C700 just came too late to the party, without offering anything that the F55, Varicam etc. hadn't been offering for several years already. The C700 FF though offers a full-frame imager, without any expensive additional licences to access the full sensor (or an anamorphic crop of it), and the C700 has all the features you'd want in a high-end machine - for SIGNIFICANTLY less than the Venice, Monstro or Arri LF models run.

I would have though (on price alone), it would have become quite popular among working-stiff owner/operators moving up to full-frame cameras from the S35mm world. But it wasn't to be.

It really is a nice camera though. The weight and balance is great, the cheeseplate built into the top of the camera saves a bunch of weight that you have to add to other cameras for rigging accessories, it's got a good number of internal NDs. The only real downsides to it are the length (once you add the raw recorder to it) and the menus (which are a bit of a mess).
 
C700 FF is $33,000. Codex Raw is another $7,000. The EFV is $6,000 more. That adds up.
 
Grug said:
I've been quite surprised by the lack of love it's received. The original C700 just came too late to the party, without offering anything that the F55, Varicam etc. hadn't been offering for several years already. The C700 FF though offers a full-frame imager, without any expensive additional licences to access the full sensor (or an anamorphic crop of it), and the C700 has all the features you'd want in a high-end machine - for SIGNIFICANTLY less than the Venice, Monstro or Arri LF models run.

I would have though (on price alone), it would have become quite popular among working-stiff owner/operators moving up to full-frame cameras from the S35mm world. But it wasn't to be.

It really is a nice camera though. The weight and balance is great, the cheeseplate built into the top of the camera saves a bunch of weight that you have to add to other cameras for rigging accessories, it's got a good number of internal NDs. The only real downsides to it are the length (once you add the raw recorder to it) and the menus (which are a bit of a mess).
Click to expand...

On the list of priorities for a DP of the kind of large scale productions, the camera is rarely the biggest deal. In fact, if they go Alexa then they have one less thing to worry about. Not a lot of these DPs advocate for different cameras either, when you're being relied on and are responsible for a big budget movie you'd rather go with something you know works and focus on the things you're not sure about (usually to do with schedule, production design and budget).

On top of this, if you wanted to shoot a feature with C700s, presumably you have an A and B Cam, plus a backup camera on the truck, and worst comes to worst you'd expect the rental house to have another one in their inventory. Not a lot of rental houses have 4 C700s, most of the big ones have a lot more Alexas and REDs than that.
 
I posted this somewhere else, but since were are talking specifically about C700 and Red right now, here is a video where all the films were shot on the same lens set, but only one of them uses Red, and the others use the C700. I think it is the C700FF, but not sure.

 
Last edited:
Grug said:
I've been quite surprised by the lack of love it's received. The original C700 just came too late to the party, without offering anything that the F55, Varicam etc. hadn't been offering for several years already. The C700 FF though offers a full-frame imager, without any expensive additional licences to access the full sensor (or an anamorphic crop of it), and the C700 has all the features you'd want in a high-end machine - for SIGNIFICANTLY less than the Venice, Monstro or Arri LF models run.

I would have though (on price alone), it would have become quite popular among working-stiff owner/operators moving up to full-frame cameras from the S35mm world. But it wasn't to be.

It really is a nice camera though. The weight and balance is great, the cheeseplate built into the top of the camera saves a bunch of weight that you have to add to other cameras for rigging accessories, it's got a good number of internal NDs. The only real downsides to it are the length (once you add the raw recorder to it) and the menus (which are a bit of a mess).
Click to expand...



You mention the Varicam and F55 was there a reason they never took off. I know things have changed a little with the Vaircam being used on a handful of Netflix show and a few feature films but it's still relatively small compared to Red.
 
achieply said:
You mention the Varicam and F55 was there a reason they never took off. I know things have changed a little with the Vaircam being used on a handful of Netflix show and a few feature films but it's still relatively small compared to Red.
Click to expand...

I'm on my fourth series with the Varicam, plus two pilots. I prefer it to the F55 but have shot a fair amount with that also. I shoot plenty with Alexas, but very often I'm in a position where I can squeeze that much more out of the camera budget if I go Varicam vs Alexa, plus I really love the dual ISO capability of the Varicam and take advantage of it often.
 
Here is a fund comparison of cameras. The 5d2 (top) vs Venice (bottom):

48665191078_327010b754.jpg


48665693232_7af687077a.jpg


48668193682_b17c2f5d70.jpg



48665693142_352789d3af.jpg


48665693132_2a1288e3ab.jpg


48665533991_f517a63d7b.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top