The (real) Impact of RED cameras

[Rob C]

Photography forums...I'm afraid I'm running out of energy, enthusiasm and above all patience.

My passion for image making thankfully remains undiminished.

The thing about forums is that they all depend on what you bring to them - they are but the sum of the disparate parts. I suppose we all carry a responsibility to make them rock. Looked at like that, on the basis of "not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country", I am sure they could be made to sing... I can't be made to sing, of course, not even a friggin' note, not once, not ever. My best songs are silently in my head, unless I forget. Or in the shower - the acoustics remind me of what I imagine Sun Studios were like in '54...

Or a Greek tragedy.

Rob C

[fredjeang]

And for whom are the ice cubes, Fred?

Rob C

That is probably the best question someone asked me recently.

The cubes are from inside each one of us.

Cheers.

[eronald]

Ok, here is what you can do when you can't stand the fashion crowd anymore: set up your kitchen table as a bee landing strip.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/art...hotography.html

Edmund

Yep.

What we need are more profund and fascinating threads. Many Lu-La members are able to bring that new air, unfortunatly when such topics show-up from time to time
they are not popular and almost interest nobody.

But just check the most visited and active topics, a part from the interesting pro works, you notice that what really run the forums are the "zero noise methods, who has the best DR, the fastest shutter-speed, the sensor size, the DxO reports and the cheapest bargains".  
Ironically as pointed BC, there is not really nothing ground-breaking or new in terms of gear for many times, despite of that fact, gear is the number one favorite topic. Not even gear sets in real world that could be interesting but gear for gear, for talking like men talk about sex all the time.
This forum has all the ingredients to recover the level it should be and I hope it will be so.

As I've learned enough so far that the human being never apreciate something free but only when he pays for it, and more the price is high more it is respected, maybe the BCooter's idea about making a toll for the vendors, or even asking every member a 10 euros/years to access the forum would probably be a good idea.

Then, Michael will buy an hotel in Mexico and Chris will finally drive his Sunseeker yacht in the Bahamas (and invite us for a nude shooting on the boat's roof of course  Frank D brings the models)

2 ice cubes in my Martini, thanks.

[Dansk]

 I havent been around the boards much but I was following the RED pretty close for a while and as for what do i think now? Its more like a Leatherman tool vs a tool box full of proper tools. Although the Leatherman tool does a lot of things but it doesnt mean its the best at all of them. I think the RED is best suited as a movie system and not really ideal for stills for a multitude of reasons most of them simple practicality vs cost.

All said and done the cold hard fact is no one and I mean NO ONE can accurately predict the future or the trends that will come along with it.

So as far as i see "the (real) impact of RED cameras?"

Minimal at this point.

Also I only read a page or two as I just dont have the time to spare but I did catch Michaels comment about how he now feels an all in one camera is NOT the way to go. Just because a camera "can" do both does not mean its the best product to do either. I personally dont think the convergence of technologies makes a photographer a videographer or vice versa and I for one could care less if my DSLR shoots video just as Im sure most pro motion guys could care less if their rigs also shoot great stills. A neat nick nack but not altogether a "must have" or necessarily a feature that would make one camera system better than another pro camera be it still or motion.

Besides the one big thing I cant believe no one really talks about is cost???

Since when did James Cameron care if the cameras used on his shoots cost $3000 or $3,000,000??? When it comes to the pro market either which way video or stills the budgets are there to provide the necessary equipment for the job and no one really cares about the next Leatherman all in one tool. Most are quite comfortable with a tool box full of a selection of pliers and screwdrivers and knives etc etc. If someones on a budget and wants a decent all in one Im sure the G10/11 or similar offers plenty for them.

For me I'll still be buying Canon bodies for the foreseeable future

[feppe]

Since when did James Cameron care if the cameras used on his shoots cost $3000 or $3,000,000??? When it comes to the pro market either which way video or stills the budgets are there to provide the necessary equipment for the job and no one really cares about the next Leatherman all in one tool. Most are quite comfortable with a tool box full of a selection of pliers and screwdrivers and knives etc etc. If someones on a budget and wants a decent all in one Im sure the G10/11 or similar offers plenty for them.

Not sure how the man with #1 and #2 top grossing films of all time is at all relevant to the discussion. To put this into perspective, some of the most revered photographers shot with gear that would be considered sub-par by most amateurs these days.

There are a lot of wannabe pros who have been held back by the high barrier to entry due to the six or seven figure investment required in gear alone. Red levels the playing field to a certain extent.

I also find it fascinating how some pros on this board talk like money is not a problem and budgets are essentially unlimited. Perhaps some photographers really do make real money even in this economy...

[Dansk]

Simply trying to make the point absurd in that given the choice by the pro market they tend to use whatever the best tools are for the job period. Cost or versatility are not the elements that swing the decisions concerning gear. Whatever the best tools for the job concerning budget may be, thats whats used. So there will certainly be a time and place where even someone as big as Cameron will LOVE the features of Red for motion and stills but its highly unlikely that this will be the required norm for him or many others.

In the end its about creativity and the ability to see your vision come to life whether its stills or motion this constant does not waver and no one cares how this is achieved as long as its at a quality level that meets expectation

[ziocan]

In any case the biggest impact is not given by any of the equipment that we mentioned on all the posts of this thread.
They have little influence on the demand of motion images being more and more requested to us.
What have had the major impact is the lower cost of the millions of flat LCD and LED panels that are floating around the world and
the possibility of putting content trough an ever growing number of channels.
If you travel in Asia, they are practically everywhere and replacing printed display, posters and bill boards.
It also helps that in Asia the cost of running stuff of people who produce content (not only shooting, but creativity, editing and promoting the content) is much lower than any other place.
The other two continents are not there yet, but soon they will be.

Not mentioning ipad and alike devices, plus the broad band internet.

[Rob C]

If you travel in Asia, they are practically everywhere and replacing printed display, posters and bill boards.
It also helps that in Asia the cost of running stuff of people who produce content (not only shooting, but creativity, editing and promoting the content) is much lower than any other place.
The other two continents are not there yet, but soon they will be.

If your thoughts are accurate, which they may well be, now seems a pretty good time to take up something else - at least, if you are under twenty-five or so.

Rob C

[Dansk]

It also helps that in Asia the cost of running stuff of people who produce content (not only shooting, but creativity, editing and promoting the content) is much lower than any other place.

Maybe so but again that doesnt change the reality of the golden rule. Typically you get what you pay for and when it comes to photography or film making there has never been a more proven constant its not just about price.

There will always be those that want something better than the rest and be willing to pay for it... and pay HUGE.

Last time I checked film budgets were going UP not down and bringing in more profit not less.

[ziocan]

If your thoughts are accurate, which they may well be, now seems a pretty good time to take up something else - at least, if you are under twenty-five or so.

Rob C

Yes and not.
Unfortunately I was 25 long time ago, I do not know if I would take something else if a could though.
Maybe I would become a financial advisor or a fund manager. Never mind as I would perform, I will be still regarded as a master while ripping all my customer off.  ;-)

On my previous post, I did not phrase myself well. I was referring more at the low cost and the spreading of flat displays panels that will reach also in the west.

As for the costs of labor, it is changing a bit also in the western world where workers have to give up some of their older benefits on order to keep working and helping the companies being competitive against the Asian and South American ones, but it is also changing in the asian world, where workers have started to strike and demand better conditions a bit every where in Asia.

But there are some very bad habits in Asia: if we exclude Japan, in Asia the majority of companies do not value creativity as we do in the west.
In most of asian countries, intellectual property is an abstract concept and they tend to rip off most of the work made by western companies and artists.

[ziocan]

Maybe so but again that doesnt change the reality of the golden rule. Typically you get what you pay for and when it comes to photography or film making there has never been a more proven constant its not just about price.

There will always be those that want something better than the rest and be willing to pay for it... and pay HUGE.

Last time I checked film budgets were going UP not down and bringing in more profit not less.

Maybe I did not explain myself properly or the fact that you took one phrase and put it out of context, made you think something different that what I meant.
my point was that if we are smart, we will be able to work more than we ever did, because  there is more demand for content.
all these new changes, are actually providing more demand for content and are generating more request for visual artists work.

I was mostly referring at the cost of post producing, editing and distributing content, which in Asia can be lower.
Samsung and LG and similars, also own the companies (or partially own) who distribute content on the LCD displays on many countries.
since costs are lower, it became possible to appeal clients to produce more.
More of this..... LCD panels allow to put much more content than printed space, where you could put one advertisement, now you can put 6 or 7 or more looping on a LCD display.
clients will pay less for that space, but there will be more demand for content to fill the space on those displays.
Then if the clients are ready to pay a lot more or a lot less, for the creator of the content, it is a different story that will vary depending on the persons involved.
there will always be clients ready to pay more for who they rate high. I'm not denying that. It was not even the point of my previous post.

It is true that you almost always get what you pay for, but it is also true that many task of the process of preparing the content for the viewer and distributing, have become much easier to be done and do not require geniuses.
As for quality, "unfortunately" in Asia they can deliver very good stuff in term of graphic design and quality. Those guys are ready to put more hours and are most of the time more meticulous than we are in the west.

[Bonobo]

Just saw this on Gizmodo.

http://gizmodo.com/5608522/camera-porn-red...ots-an-epic-s35

[Graham Mitchell]

It would be fun to go back a few years and see who was predicting a complete Red revolution in the still photography market within 1-2 years (I won't name any names). Some were even planning to sell their existing cameras because they were so convinced that the Messiah was around the corner. Remember those days? Luckily that hasn't happened. If anything I am hearing less buzz about Red now than I did a year or two ago. The impact is still zero, from my point of view, though I expect it will change things to a limited extent within 5 years.

[michael]

Don't confuse RED the company with RED the camera, and either with the Scarlet.

The RED One camera has been revolutionary in the commercial area. Toronto is a major production center for advertising, commercials and feature production. Whenever I see a location shoot going on I stop to see what they're shooting with, and nine times out of ten it's a RED One.

Visit a rental house and ask what they rent more than anything else, and they'll tell you the RED One. Speaking to some of the leading commercial stills photographers who are now also shooting video, and most will tell you they are using RED Ones.  This is the minimum that clients now accept.

The Scarlet is another matter. It was supposed to be THE convergence leader, but technical delays have lost them market leadership in this segment. Though Jannard is now promising to ship before the end of this year, we've heard that before – twice in fact.

There's no doubt that the Scarlet will ship eventually, maybe even within months, but it won't have the impact that it might have earlier. The major Japanese (and some European) companies now clearly see the video writing on the wall, and are prepared. Two years ago they weren't. The success of the Canon 5DMKII changed all that, and in a little while when the Panasonic AF100 ships the large sensor semi-pro camcorder will be a reality. (The Sony VG10 doesn't count in this league).

As for a single camera to shoot stills and video – well, we already have those, don't we? They do a great job with stills, and a passable job with video – even an excellent job with video in some restricted situations.

To coin a phrase – the future is already here.

[eronald]

Yeah, what happened was that instead of RED coming in with a pro surprise and then selling to the prosumer crowd, RED has relegated itself to becoming the next 16mm Arriflex - not quite enough for big budget, but a huge seller to low-budget productions.  Which I guess is not bad for a new company.

Edmund

[feppe]

Yeah, what happened was that instead of RED coming in with a pro surprise and then selling to the prosumer crowd, RED has relegated itself to becoming the next 16mm Arriflex - not quite enough for big budget, but a huge seller to low-budget productions.  Which I guess is not bad for a new company.

Uhh no. If by "big budget" you mean Avatar or Transformers, you're correct at least for now. But there are several movies with 9-figure budgets shot with Red cameras, and this is only the 1st generation of their cameras. Not sure about the exact budgets, but at least Gamer, Jumper, Green Zone, and Angels and Demons have budgets at around $100m, and have AAA talent attached to them. If that's not a testament to Red's full pro-credentials, nothing is.

[Graeme Nattress]

Not least to mention Pirates Of the Caribbean 4 (in 3D) being shot on RED Ones at the moment. Gamer was shot fully on RED and was one of the earliest movies to do so, but Jumper, Green Zone, and Angels and Demons only had segments of sfx shots on RED. District 9 is probably one of the biggest movies shot on RED so far. El Secreto de Sus Ojos won the foreign movie Oscar. The Lovely Bones had sfx shots on RED.

Graeme

[paul_jones]

i was just on a 5 day TVC with two reds shooting stills for separate Advertisments.
looking at the files the red was producing, when the subject was "still" was amazing. i was wondering why they were hiring me. 12mp looks great (at low iso), and is big enough for many uses.
but the problem was that the red shoots motion, and everything thats worth using has motion blur. also, to get anything they used 60th of a second or slower at a grainy 400 iso, and this was with sets using multiple 10k hmi's. a trucks worth of lighting.
i was needing to shoot still with 1ds mk3 at 400-800iso at f1.6 -2.0 to get anything sharp.

so, taking stills of a red isn't really practical on anything that moves.

just on a note about the red, i had heard from crew who use the red, that its very unreliable. that was one of the reasons they had two of them on this ad (also so they can run through two angles at the same time, saving time). every day of shooting, there was a problem with either of the cameras. it would be an "overheat", and the camera would shut down, or one would need a reboot, and there even was a corrupt "sound file" (even though they didnt need this- as it was recorded else where) but this stalled the shoot 20minutes. 50 crew stalled for 20 minutes is a big cost.
but when the could, the opposite camera would take over while they sorted the one with the problem.

i asked the dop about these problems, and he said they were well know, but they compare the down time with film reloading, and weighs up the advantage of all the extra footage they can run (from two cameras ) without the worry of film use. But he said the biggest hassle with the red was that these problems are un-predictable, and always happen when theres some great takes of an actor, or when the sun is going down!

paul