snip........."The C 300 is not just about purity of the original image before being compressed into a small space, it is also about a fast work flow... TIME may cost some users money..."......snip
Uh no . . . not really.
This becomes a somewhat silly comparison of a camera (the canon) that isn't on the shelf comparing it to a RED scarlet whose form factor in the EPIC is already being sold.
Time will tell.
Workflow is another matter. If you need a camcorder's already baked file that you do not do any post production correction, then there are a lot of camcorders that'll do this, though from our experience everything needs some matching and correction.
The thing is in their sales presentation, Canon can't seem to make up their mind as to whether this is a already baked out news camera that spits out a file ready for edit, or a camera that shoots a flat cine file that is later corrected and graded to match or for look and and effect.
If it's the latter, then there is absolutely no time or money savings in that type of file format . . . in fact for us it is always more workflow intensive than shooting a RED file. We shoot the Sony AF 100 and 5d2 next to the RED file for a small percentage of our work and it takes twice the time to remove the wrapper and go to some third party software to process out adjusted prorezz for editing and smaller mp4's/h264 for gallery view, because RED Cine-x is an easy software to learn and with the RED rocket processes multiple file formats very fast.
On set we set up our RED's to look pleasing or as close to the final look we can achieve (kind of like setting up C-1 or lightroom), though just like a still raw file, we don't worry about it that much because we know we're going to go back and match them in cine-x anyway, so the worry factor in initial set up is not that big of a deal and time setting a color look in post is a lot less expensive than having a full production sitting around while the cameras are being set up to hit an exact look.
Since we've moved to more and more motion production we've integrated ourselves more into the cine-world and bumping past DP's, directors and all sorts of technicians and suppliers. Bottom line is there is no bottom line and like still cameras everyone uses what either they want, need or the budget allows.
The thing about RED is, in the cine world they have a big head start and everyone is familiar with them, dp's, sound techs, focus pullers, steadicam operators, everyone, so there is really no surprises when you say your shooting a RED.
I don't doubt the the Canon won't be used, or become part of the landscape, but in the cine world, even small web spots, the requirements for complete integration from pre through post production makes or breaks a system.
Without doubt you have to give RED credit for thinking about the complete system from day 1.
Last night we were wrapping on a sound stage and I was talking to a DP on the stage next door. They were shooting with EPICS and most traditional DP's like the Arri's because they are familiar with the camera and brand, but the DP's that get involved with post production love the raw file of the RED just for the reasons I mentioned.
One thing this DP said that was interesting is twice he's seen still images from his productions in outdoor and print. Whether that is good or bad for our industry is another matter, but the fact that you can make a useable still from the RED plays very well to a client.
One other thing I've found interesting is most of the dp's and operators I've met that don't own cameras, but rent, all think about buying the scarlet, even if it's a backup or a B cam, just due to price and functionality. Whether they do or not remains to be seen, but nobody I've met is talking about the Canon camera, a few have mentioned the lenses, though I'm not taking a pole, I'm just working.
The most telling comment I've heard is everyone is stoked by our DIT station and that we do it in-house and on set.\
So workflow for the RED isn't that complicated.
IMO
BC
