Also, the sharpness of the edge of the 'spot' is uncomfortably crisp-looking to me in the Red image... looks more real in the Contax, less like an imaginary disk suspended in front of the girl.
The coloration of both images is done in post, still and motion.
Same with the sharpness of the spot light.
Now obviously the still camera contax file has much more detail and depth, not not as much dr as the RED file, but close.
When I work both of them in post they are much different, though the look of the contax/p30 file takes a lot more work to make look like film, as it is so smooth and detailed, where the RED one file looks like pushed 35mm film, (though doesn't have but 1/4 to 1/2 the detail).
Now the real kicker is the final video compared to the print run will be the video will take 50 times more work in post (for processing, editing, coloration and effects, sound score and titling), maybe 75 times more work but will be viewed by 200 times (minimum) more eyeballs (probably 2000 times more).
The second kicker is the publication will have no issue running the RED file double page in print (and it's an oversized high qualaity print magazine).*
*Now I'm not saying the RED file will replace any professional still camera image. It's a pretty look, but doesn't have that dead sharp still look.
Regardless, the pose that is in the RED file is not in the still images. Kinda of close but not the same and that's where a still from motion is interesting as you get this live view look when you go to post to find the pose or look you want.