Why F3 over Red One ?

[eddavid]

I must ask this question: What is the difference in production workflow between the F3 and RED?

The F3 is only 4 Inches shorter than the RED. If four inches of real-estate is saving the production, cool.

The F3 still takes Media that needs to be offloaded, on top of that, to get the best out of it you need to power an extra module (Nanoflash) while using the camera.

The F3's still needs to be powered similar to the RED. I mean, most people are already stating they're going to use V-Mount or AB mount.

The F3 still needs an AC as much as the same job on a RED needs an AC. Which means, if you can pull focus great, if you can't, get an AC. it doesn't change between the two cameras.

The F3 still needs as much attention to lighting detail as RED does. Neither are film.

So how is the F3 a run and gun camera anymore or any less than a RED? I don't get the theory here: they're Hyper similar tools. One is just more expensive and offers more image quality.

To me, this entire thing goes back to the fist post. It's about cost. The F3 is thousands more affordable and for some people that's the catch, the same way as DSLRs versus Af100's or whatever.

Please point out something that I'm missing in the production workflow.

Post Production? That's probably different. The best workflow is to have a RED ROCKET card available. Period. Once the RED ROCKET Card is installed in your workflow, the issues become non-existent. You never have to go back to the REDCODE Raw once you hit ProRes, and you can adjust and get the best image from the raw before you do that.

That's where the F3 on-board, and even adding a Nanoflash, becomes valuable to those who can't shell out for an extra card etc. And that's a POST deal, not a production.

Kholi are you being sarcastic? The F3 is better than the Red in run and gun situations.

The Red weights about three times as much. It draws quite a bit more power than the F3. It cranks through gigabytes of footage at a much more signifigant rate. It takes longer to offload. You can only record to 16gb cards and how many minutes do you get on those? Or maybe you can record to the SSD drive if you can get your hands on it. Or maybe lug around the RED DRIVE.

It takes a lot longer to start up. It has a complex menu system. It weights a lot.

You have to add a DIT to your crew list if you're shooting on Red.

100% of post houses that I've worked with or one-man band preditors I've worked with do not have red rocket. Transcoding to Pro Res takes a long time. Like overnight if you shoot 3 hours of footage in the day. Where do you live where every editor has the Red Rocket?

Kholi go back and read Timur's assesment of the financial difference between the cameras. Seriously man.

Downhill.
Later.

 

[Kholi]

Kholi are you being sarcastic? The F3 is better than the Red in run and gun situations.

The Red weights about three times as much. It draws quite a bit more power than the F3.[/quote]

You can configure a RED to be as light as you need it. I shoot with a heavy lens, but when I have the 18mm T1.8 I'm working with a 12lb camera. F3 in the same situation? An optimistic weight guesstimate is what... 9lbs? That's not weight to me.

It cranks through gigabytes of footage at a much more signifigant rate. It takes longer to offload. You can only record to 16gb cards and how many minutes do you get on those? Or maybe you can record to the SSD drive if you can get your hands on it. Or maybe lug around the RED DRIVE.

I lug around a RED Drive(s) when I shoot. It's the smart way to shoot when you don't have money. Shooting to a Nanoflash is going to eat up Gigabytes as well.

And offloading RED Cards doesn't take longer to offload, it's the same for any data on a computing system. Offloading with a FW800 CF Card reader is gonna take the same time if you were using CF Cards to record to offboard modules on the F3.

It takes a lot longer to start up. It has a complex menu system. It weights a lot.

The F3 probably doesn't take as long to startup, you're right. A few seconds could mean a shot for some.

The menu system, complex? It's no more complex than trying to setup Scene Files to get the best image out of a baked-in-look camera per scenario.

A run and gun red setup can easily come in at 15lbs. Unless you just don't shoot often, I don't see how that's being a problem.

You have to add a DIT to your crew list if you're shooting on Red.

Absolutely wrong. Mis-information. There's no more a reason to hire a DIT on a RED shoot then an F3 shoot. They're both digital, they both may need offloading.

this is wrong.

100% of post houses that I've worked with or one-man band preditors I've worked with do not have red rocket. Transcoding to Pro Res takes a long time. Like overnight if you shoot 3 hours of footage in the day. Where do you live where every editor has the Red Rocket?

Los Angeles.

But, this is POST workflow. I said production. And I already stated that Post can be easier with the F3.

Kholi go back and read Timur's assesment of the financial difference between the cameras. Seriously man.

Downhill.
Later.

LIke I said above: it comes down to the fact that some people just can't afford the better tool. COOL. But, why spread blatant mis-information about it? That is my ENTIRE point. CHoose your tool and shoot with it, but don't attempt to discourage people who might be looking for real deal working experience and information to base a choice on.

 

[Duke M.]

Haha while I like this - I think actually Timur and Kholi are making excellent points. Red One is the better camera - but only if you have the workflow and support for it. Reframing is a great feature - but you need to have a larger crew to work successfully with the Red. And more of a budget for post.

The F3 is a very welcome addition to the camera world. Let's embrace it rather than try to discredit it for not being 4k and driving down the price of Red rentals.

eddavid, a big +1. As a summary that is very to the point.

 

[gunleik]

Haha while I like this - I think actually Timur and Kholi are making excellent points. Red One is the better camera - but only if you have the workflow and support for it. Reframing is a great feature - but you need to have a larger crew to work successfully with the Red. And more of a budget for post.

The F3 is a very welcome addition to the camera world. Let's embrace it rather than try to discredit it for not being 4k and driving down the price of Red rentals.

The issues with RED workflow is often overstated (even though I actually agree with your overall sentiment...)

The RED can be worked like a "film" camera, but also very much like a 1080 video-cam. The difference between the two approaches to the same cam goes from exposure to delivery.

This sometimes leads to circuler arguments when people refer to the simplisity of the one concept versus the image-results and workflows of the other.

Getting "the most" out of the RED, needs a bit of workflow capacity.

Getting "excellent images and ease of use" is actually simpler than any videocam I have used.

That does not mean I don't welcome the F3/AF-100/whatever.
But, if you want to compare workflow with RED, compare them with "RED as a videocam", not with "RED the Pirates cam", even though that's an option on the RED, too...

And then you have all those extra sexy options on the RED, too...

I can easilly see how this becomes confusing, though...

As a PS.

I found the F3 to be quite hard to ballance with an Ultra, even...

 

[Viddovation]

I must ask this question: What is the difference in production workflow between the F3 and RED?

Please point out something that I'm missing in the production workflow.

Post Production? That's probably different. The best workflow is to have a RED ROCKET card available. Period. Once the RED ROCKET Card is installed in your workflow, the issues become non-existent. You never have to go back to the REDCODE Raw once you hit ProRes, and you can adjust and get the best image from the raw before you do that.

That's where the F3 on-board, and even adding a Nanoflash, becomes valuable to those who can't shell out for an extra card etc. And that's a POST deal, not a production.

Please note - I'm quoting Kholi's response to Timur, who was responding to my hypothetical 10K corporate shoot example.

Now, what if I clarified that example to say that a this company has 10K to get a video shot, script to screen. To them, the distinction between production and post production is meaningless - it does them no good if I shoot their tradeshow marketing video but can't budget getting it onto the screen and web. They tell me their department has been alotted 10k to get this done. So, I quote them 10K for the shoot, edit, and delivery of master copies for web, DVD, and tradeshow bluray players in HD. I give them the names of some duplication and replication companies, and explain this cost isn't covered. I double check the display size they plan to use at the tradeshow (42" 1080p consumer televisions). Contract also gives them the right to keep the raw footage for use in future productions.

Tradeshow and web launch is in 30 days. Two shoot days need to be scheduled, then all the post elements have to be put together, edited, and presented as a first draft. Notes, notes, notes. They put me in touch with the duplicator - they've decided they need 500 copies to hand out on the floor. That mean the deadline for project completion just got pushed up by a week.

And so on. The key point here is that I have one relatively small budget here for both production and post. The client doesn't care how I allocate it, nor do they know enough about specific cameras to request one, they just want the job done right. To get back to you Kholi, this is where production and post are no longer separate considerations. If I shoot RED I will have to spend more for the post process. RED ROCKET transfers aren't free. Those would be billable hours, sure. But the client already put a cap on the budget. So, if I can reduce the post budget by $1000-2000, that means I can either put more into the production shoot, or I can put more in my pocket. Same with the cost of the RED on set - I can take any savings and reallocate or pay myself.

Am I saying RED is not a great tool? Absolutely not. It certainly is. But given real world budgets, workflows, and delivery destinations, it's not necessarily a justifiable advantage.

 

[rgdfilms]

Balance in terms of ergonomics or picture balance?

 

[Viddovation]

The issues with RED workflow is often overstated (even though I actually agree with your overall sentiment...)

The RED can be worked like a "film" camera, but also very much like a 1080 video-cam. The difference between the two approaches to the same cam goes from exposure to delivery.

This sometimes leads to circuler arguments when people refer to the simplisity of the one concept versus the image-results and workflows of the other.

Getting "the most" out of the RED, needs a bit of workflow capacity.

Getting "excellent images and ease of use" is actually simpler than any videocam I have used.

That does not mean I don't welcome the F3/AF-100/whatever.
But, if you want to compare workflow with RED, compare them with "RED as a videocam", not with "RED the Pirates cam", even though that's an option on the RED, too...

And then you have all those extra sexy options on the RED, too...

I can easilly see how this becomes confusing, though...

As a PS.

I found the F3 to be quite hard to ballance with an Ultra, even...

Can you briefly explain your workflow for using a RED camera like a 1080p video camera? Particularly, I'm interested in how you're choosing to record, any redundancies, how any redundant files match up.

I'm aware the RED has HD-SDI/HDMI outputs, and that you can record in 1080p by using a sensor crop, but... any of these methods would appear to defeat the argument earlier in this thread for shooting RED in the first place - IE, reframing capabilities and resolution being technically superior from 4k.

Please explain to me how to reconcile this (I'm not being facetious, I honestly don't know, please enlighten me!).

On a separate note, my point isn't that the RED post is "difficult" - I'm well aware its very ironed out at this point, but what is true is that I either need to own the hardware and use my CPU cycles on the post work, or I have to pay a post house for the hours they spend working for it. In theory, I can work with XDCAM-EX or Prores422 from a KiPro or Nanoflash device with a computer that costs $2500 or less. And, I can be editing without transcoding.

If fillet mignon was as cheap as ground beef, I bet we'd all be eating it a lot more often.

 

[gunleik]

If you shoot 4kHD, and post in AVID/PPRO/VEGAS and to some extent FCP, you can expose and deliver without really ever noticing "the 4k issue". I have had shorter turnaround for RED/FCP than I had with HVX-200/FCP, back in the days... Even did it for news. Not a recomended newscam. But it worked...

To me, a lot of the fun with RED is metadata, workflows and RAW: BUT I know quite a few guys who're doing excellent work and business treating it as a WYSIWYG 1080 cam.
... with the added option to salvage a bit more in post.



Addendum:
As to skintones, I'd have liked to see something like this on the F3:
http://www.gunleik.com/tests/tungbrack/bracket/Skintones-Tungsten.html

Sure seemed very narrow to me...

(Yup, I agree... circular argument... = different workflows... but still skintones was where I felt the F3 was really... sketchy...)

 

[Viddovation]

If you shoot 4kHD, and post in AVID/PPRO/VEGAS and to some extent FCP, you can expose and deliver without really ever noticing "the 4k issue". I have had shorter turnaround for RED/FCP than I had with HVX-200/FCP, back in the days... Even did it for news. Not a recomended newscam. But it worked...

To me, a lot of the fun with RED is metadata, workflows and RAW: BUT I know quite a few guys who're doing excellent work and business treating it as a WYSIWYG 1080 cam.
... with the added option to salvage a bit more in post.

Is this an answer to my question? Because it doesn't explain any technical details in laymans terms for those who don't already shoot RED. How do I reconcile shooting RED as a 1080p camera with getting the 4k data from it to do reframing? What mode do you use on camera? How do you record? How do you post process? How powerful does the post computer need to be, and what special hardware if any (REDRocket?) is required?

Everyone is happy to tell me to shoot RED, and that it's better, but no one is carefully breaking down how to do it. Workflow shouldn't be the bastard step child you ignore. Workflow matters, and the ease of workflow on the PMW-F3 is a huge plus for me. You tell me RED is easy, but you're not explaining how you're accomplishing that, and I've been preconditioned by all sorts of horror stories about RED going overbudget in post and taking longer than expected.

Sure, you can tell me those people didn't know what they were doing - but that's exactly the point - it serves no advantage to work with an excellent tool if I don't know how to use it.

 

[gunleik]

Sorry, if I am ignorent, but that was what I tried to do... )

In "technical layman terns": Shoot 4k HD, which gives you a 1080 workflow as easy/cheap/simple/good as any 1080 I have ever shot (admittedly I work in the TV-drama/feature-film segment)

If you need to reframe... Just du it in the timeline, you will not lose resolution in a 1080 workflow if you reframe those shots up to 150%.
If you reframe, you'll have to render, whatever camera you're on...

This should be quite an ok reference:
http://www.gunleik.com/tests/alexmx/RED1_MX_and_Arri_Alexa/Resolution.html

I am not claiming that the F3 will do as well as either of the examples ...

If you want to go really simple, go Storm. iMovie for RED...

 

[Viddovation]

Sorry, if I am ignorent, but that was what I tried to do... )

In "technical layman terns": Shoot 4k HD, which gives you a 1080 workflow as easy/cheap/simple/good as any 1080 I have ever shot (admittedly I work in the TV-drama/feature-film segment)

I did some brief reading, so hopefully I'm getting this better now.

Okay, but am I correct that you're editing the proxy files, and that you're going to then have to render the resulting EDL?

Because, it's that final render and color correcting that I was expecting to be intensive. Working with proxies, obviously that shouldn't be too hard. And nothing you've said indicates the final render and color correction process has been made any simpler.

If I shoot a 1080p cam that uses ProRes, XDCAM HD, XDCAM-EX, or AVC Intra, among others - I can edit natively on plenty of platforms, and if the shot looks good, apply as little as a 3 way color corrector. If I need to reframe and punch in, I can. And on modern systems, all of this renders quite fast.

I notice you point out that you work in TV-drama/feature-film segment. While I have worked on a few features, they have been ultra indie. If I worked in your field I probably would shoot RED, or F-35 or Alexa. And S-Log looks like a great tool, but once again, it has a more intensive post process.

For those of us working small budgets destined for nothing larger than a 50 inch screen, I still think RED frequently costs more in post & production than it adds.

 

[gunleik]

If you do a 3way CC, the rendering times should be quite similar whether you shoot prores, mpeg2 or redRAW.
Of course depending on your system.

The final render CC is not really that intensive, and it is definitely much easier done from REDRAW than most XDCAM/AVC codecs. And trust me, I have done those tests...

 

[Viddovation]

My quad core Mac Pro system system handles an XDCAM-EX 1080p 3 way color correct in realtime. And that's with no external handling cards. I doubt highly that it can downscale and grade a 4K .R3D file in realtime. Care to share what system specs you're using to accomplish your post production?

But, isn't a R3D file going to have a much flatter image, requiring more grading by default than a video camera where I choose many settings such as White Balance, Picture Profile, Gamma, Gain, etc in the camera? We're all well aware of the downside of a baked image, but for jobs with quick turnarounds, it can be a timesaver in post. Hence, it's much more realistic to indicate that a simple 3way CC could be applied to that footage than RED footage that is flatter.

In your workflows, are you responsible for color grading, or is that passed on to someone else?

 

[gunleik]

If you choose to stick ny the default redcolr/redgamma, the images sure don't look flat... They actually ook so unflat that that is y current biggest beef with current red calibration...

The second question is a bit software dependant. I have realtime on my 2008 8x 2,8 MacPro with a GT 120 and 10 GB of RAM and live fine with it.

Still I prefer to transcode to prores with the Rocket.

Yup. I do both.

And resolveish solutions... Or uncompressed.

Point is.
I can scale the workflow to the gig. I sure know how to get more DR out of a RED file, and I agreee: Then the workflows aren't comparable. But even then I'd prefer the RED image. Particularily because the range seems quite limited in XDcam land. Especially around skintnes. They break into metallic blue before you've had any fun.

 

[rgdfilms]

Red is actually quite fast in terms of the workflow depending on what you're doing. I sometimes shoot celebrity weddings where they want a 5-10 minute montage/music video the next morning. We ingest everything into FCP, editing with the medium quality proxies in near real time on a laptop. Then the sequence is sent to color where we do all of our quick grading. Then output to 2k files, bring it back in FCP and boom, done. F3 would be faster for us when it comes to these jobs, yes but to say that the Red workflow is difficult is kinda a mute point. You get what you pay for. Post takes longer but the images speak for themselves.

 

[Kholi]

Red is actually quite fast in terms of the workflow depending on what you're doing. I sometimes shoot celebrity weddings where they want a 5-10 minute montage/music video the next morning. We ingest everything into FCP, editing with the medium quality proxies in near real time on a laptop. Then the sequence is sent to color where we do all of our quick grading. Then output to 2k files, bring it back in FCP and boom, done. F3 would be faster for us when it comes to these jobs, yes but to say that the Red workflow is difficult is kinda a mute point. You get what you pay for. Post takes longer but the images speak for themselves.

So THAT is how you get to afford all the cool toys!

Ahah, sorry, just kidding!

Oddly enough, the workflow you and gunleik just posted? I've never tried that. It's always been straight up converting, but now that I think about it... even for a feature film or narrative work, just cutting with Medium Qualities is plenty and then going to REDCINE with the EDL, from there to DPX's and from DPX's to AE or DaVinci for grading... then all back to 2K/1080/720 for delivery...

... I've been burning through extra gigs of HDD space without thinking about it.

 

[Viddovation]

Red is actually quite fast in terms of the workflow depending on what you're doing. I sometimes shoot celebrity weddings where they want a 5-10 minute montage/music video the next morning. We ingest everything into FCP, editing with the medium quality proxies in near real time on a laptop. Then the sequence is sent to color where we do all of our quick grading. Then output to 2k files, bring it back in FCP and boom, done. F3 would be faster for us when it comes to these jobs, yes but to say that the Red workflow is difficult is kinda a mute point. You get what you pay for. Post takes longer but the images speak for themselves.

"You get what you pay for."

A very salient point. For me, buying an F3 was a step up from a Letus adapter, and an EX1. A step up that put a significant dent in my credit card balance. I don't have the client base yet for the RED, and I'm stretching to show clients the advantage of the F3 over DSLR cameras, so I'm just not shooting in the same segment you are yet. Certainly wish I was!

I have nothing but respect for what RED has engineered, and I hope to be working RED cameras in a couple years. Just not there yet...

 

[eddavid]

So THAT is how you get to afford all the cool toys!

Ahah, sorry, just kidding!

Oddly enough, the workflow you and gunleik just posted? I've never tried that. It's always been straight up converting, but now that I think about it... even for a feature film or narrative work, just cutting with Medium Qualities is plenty and then going to REDCINE with the EDL, from there to DPX's and from DPX's to AE or DaVinci for grading... then all back to 2K/1080/720 for delivery...

... I've been burning through extra gigs of HDD space without thinking about it.

Kholi the world of DaVinci and DPXs is not the world I work in. The world I work in is...shoot footage...give to the editor...editor edits the piece and it's done. This is the world of 98% of the work I do. To have them even accept my work digitally was a stretch - and I still for some clients lay off to tape.

We are in a different world. And I am not argueing with you at all about this world you're in - the narrative and commercial world that has a budget for grading, has red rocket in their machines - knows how to do proxies - all this good stuff - then the Red One is perfect.

But as everyone is saying - this takes time and money. And post is going to cost more than me and my f3 going to nanoflash and giving the post house native files they can start editing with.

I know the workflow seems simple to you because you're used to it....but to me on a job that needs to be cut and out the door next week...I can't train these editors to accept this.

This is when the F3 comes in handy - cause it's going to give me a look that is pretty darn close to the Red One, but without this whole hassle.

It reminds me of when I first got the M2 and SG PRo 35mm adapters in 2005 and I would go into the edit room and because the footage was upside down- I would personally flip the image. It was a pain in the butt to do it, but I would do it because I believed so much in the camera system and the results it would give that I would go to the extra effort for it.

But on most jobs I do - I don't always have this luxery.

And yes the Red One is more crew-intensive on set than the F3. I can record 3 hours of footage at 80 mbps on the nanoflash and offload at the end of the day and it takes 40 minutes. Using compact flash cards to an expresscard reader.

You can't do that with Red. You need to have someone there offloading all day. And that takes away resources. Also with the battery drainage and the size of the camera - you need more help. I'm sorry but I really believe that.

I've used the Red Camera on literally 3 jobs in my entire career even though I pushed for it so many times. And it always comes down to budget. Budget vs quality. And this was before the F3 existed. Now with the F3 existing on the types of jobs I do - well then it's going to be even harder to justify the extra crew to deal with the camera.

 

[Gabrobot]

If you choose to stick ny the default redcolr/redgamma, the images sure don't look flat... They actually ook so unflat that that is y current biggest beef with current red calibration...

The second question is a bit software dependant. I have realtime on my 2008 8x 2,8 MacPro with a GT 120 and 10 GB of RAM and live fine with it.

Still I prefer to transcode to prores with the Rocket.

Yup. I do both.

And resolveish solutions... Or uncompressed.

Point is.
I can scale the workflow to the gig. I sure know how to get more DR out of a RED file, and I agreee: Then the workflows aren't comparable. But even then I'd prefer the RED image. Particularily because the range seems quite limited in XDcam land. Especially around skintnes. They break into metallic blue before you've had any fun.

Just to add to this for Premiere CS5 land it's even easier...for the corporate edits I did with Red footage, I just did a basic grade right in Premiere since it supports metadata changes and then rendered straight out without any intermediate steps or even CC effects applied to the clips.

 

[Kholi]

"You get what you pay for."

A very salient point. For me, buying an F3 was a step up from a Letus adapter, and an EX1. A step up that put a significant dent in my credit card balance. I don't have the client base yet for the RED, and I'm stretching to show clients the advantage of the F3 over DSLR cameras, so I'm just not shooting in the same segment you are yet. Certainly wish I was!

I have nothing but respect for what RED has engineered, and I hope to be working RED cameras in a couple years. Just not there yet...

I saw this post before I went back and read your other one. I was going to post "You're right about those types of jobs, but then... why not use a DSLR???"

But, you said it here: you're trying to make the people who rent your gear see the difference between the F3 and DSLRs. Universally why I don't want to own anything until I don't have to worry about paying it back.