Scarlet

[jjj]

Im sure everyone here appreciates raw

Now, to get good colour on set - without raw - means careful metering - monitoring - you will have seen film crews lugging black tents around, full size 30inch screens in huge flight cases,  breeze blocks to stop the the tents blowing away, people to carry the breeze blocks, people to make lunch for the people who carry the breeze blocks

Its one aspect that makes making movies so horrible, and there is a set of luddites who want it to stay like that

So IMO it does affect crew size

Film making tends to need a lot of people to do the many jobs on set. Shooting RAW or not would have make no difference to no. of people on any of the sets I've been on. And having 30" monitors on set would be great even if shooting RAW.    Which still needs careful metering or good monitors.

I am shortly apprearing in a video on the FS100 - shot on the FS100, now my office has nice nat light and a few practicals around, the FS100 is web clean at 800ISO - there is loads of light to shoot with no lights - but no - the crew arrived and NDd my practicals, pulled out a bunch of  kino and dedo and carried on exactly like they were filming me with a 100 ISO film camera (while I, the subject, got nervous and ended up having little time to tell my story - most of the time had been spend 'lighting' my office) - to me missing they were missing the point of clean ISO, I see the same blinkers happening with raw...

Your office may have enough light, but it may not have provide the look they were going for.
I shot on location the other day. Plenty of light to shoot without lights, but we used lighting to create a different look and also rather importantly a consistent look, which would not have been possible over several hours of filming with fading natural light.
Would you have made the same sort of comment if David Hobby turned up to do some stills of you and whipped out a bunch of speedlights?    I'm not saying there are no luddites around, but there may be a good alternative reason for how they lit you or as you thought they may simply have been idiots.

[jjj]

Huh?

DP's have been shooting raw for 5 decades, it's called negative film, telecine and years ago analog grading, today electronic color grading.

There may have been a few guys walking around with color meters and crews blocking off practicals with dubos and cutters, to allow the set lights to control the look, but in the end, the negative, the telecine, the digitization and grading in post was the equivalent of todays raw file, except it had extra post production steps.

With RED raw digital we don't light any different than we do with any file, film or baked in digital, I just don't worry about things like matching multiple cameras exactly in color and tone, because we can do it in cine-x so easily.

But raw, naw . . . that's been around forever.

IMO

BC

Eh!? Film is not certainly not equivalent to RAW files, film is just like shooting JPEG as it has a [controllable] baked in look, both of which you can further grade after the fact.
I learnt on film, yet would rather shoot RAW files any day. I'd be interested to see how you'd get a nice colour grade out of a B+W film stock. Or were able to use any ISO you wanted at any time with film without a lot of faffing.
And negative/cine film and grading/timing has been around a lot longer than 5 decades. Unless I imagined all those films made before 1960....
 

[Morgan_Moore]

-Film making tends to need a lot of people to do the many jobs on set.
-Your office may have enough light, but it may not have provide the look they were going for.
-Would you have made the same sort of comment if David Hobbyturned up to do some stills of you and whipped out a bunch of speedlights?

I do understand all of this. Sure there is a place for 'high' production values and also creating looks, and also creating consistency that is not reliant on natural, changing light.

Also with higher ISO cameras there is space to throw away a lot of 'baggage' if you want to

Personally I have greatly enjoyed reducing my lighting package for most assignments - I have shot stills with 25ISO digiback and motion with EX1/Letus adapter, both very light hungry tools

With those I basically needed 3-5 elly heads, or 3k of arri to get an image to register !

I much prefer shooting stills on my D3 and motion on my 5d2/FS100 - light sensitive tools - that may create great images with nothing, or the odd bounce board

I think there are a huge amount of shooters who have not fully considered what light sensitive tools can bring to thier production if they want.

There are also highly regarded shooters (Newton?  Deakins?) who often shoot fantastic work with very simple lighting.. and great subjects

S

[Hywel]

Had a fun day shooting with a RED ONE on Friday. A few camera tests, and three very quick spots to try using the thing in something approximating our usual shooting conditions. (Shot one in pure natural light, one with LED panels and one with Arri Tungsten hot lights). Shot some comparison footage with my AF100 as well.

I'm still playing around with the footage and seeing what's what in the grading. But I'm absolutely convinced that RAW-like workflow is the way I want to go. It seems so versatile and rich and laded with potential compared with having to bake in the look at shooting time. For my shoots, where typically there is just me, or just me and one other person as crew, it is wonderful putting off decisions to the "do/undo/play with it" stage. Capturing maximal information from the sensor and deciding on the subtleties later, in a nice quiet unpressurised environment on a 30" monitor, is just the way I'd like to work.

Skin tones are lovely and hold very well through colour temperature choices. Obviously, there's more detail in the image. It is 4K, but the usual oversampling loveliness happens even if you downscale to ProRes 1080p after the grade (which is the workflow I'm going to try first, as I'm actually delivering web video). It just seems much easier to (say) correct a slight tint on a neutral background without buggering up skin with the RED footage than the AF100.

As you'd expect, of course, being as the camera is 5x the price and the data rate from the RED is insanely more than AVCHD! Nice to see that it all works, and in some ways a fascinating demonstration of just how amazing the quality of AVCHD is given that you've thrown away 99% of the information!

A lot of the "forum moans" I've seen about the RED proved not to be an issue for me (eg slow start-up times). I found shooting on 16 GB CF cards a bit unfriendly without either many more cards (I had 4, and filled them several times over which meant for nervous mid-shoot backing up and reformatting); SSD is clearly the only way to go. I also found the weight and bulk of the camera quite an issue, never having used anything heavier than a Hasselblad H3D or a rigged up AF100. Just adjusting the tripod height proved a bit of a struggle as a one man operation.

I'm VERY tempted by a Scarlet, but not sure I can really afford it right now... but I'm absolutely sure the next time I have a dedicated week-long location video shoot I will hire a RED. I think an external recorder would help the AF100, especially when grading, but is an expensive add-on given that the "real" way forward is to stop messing about and buy a raw-like camera...

So maybe I'll keep the AF100 as is, flog off some kit I haven't used in ages (my poor HVX200s have had no love at all this year) then do the sums to see if hiring or buying makes more sense for 2012.

Morgan, if you haven't had a play with one, I strongly suggest booking yourself a RED One MX to play with for a day or two!

  Cheers, Hywel.

[bcooter]

I love the RED One MX.  Even more than the Epic in form factor.

It's bigger and obviously heavier, but stripped own with a belt battery you  can get it to a little under 8 lbs, depending on lens.

For the start up times, a minute and a half start up seems like an eternity, though you can find third party hot swap v clip mounts that gives you 4 minutes to swap out a battery without shut down.

There is also new firmware for the RED One that gives you a higher frame rate at 3k and some other improvements, so RED keeps working on the camera.

The only thing I want for my REDs is the EFV bomb, which has been backordered before Madonna's first facelift. 

I was splaying around with one at the RED studio (old RenMar studios, and prior to that Warner's) and that EVF is bloody amazing.   You forget in two seconds that it is an electronic viewfinder, it's that sharp and easy to focus.

The SSD's are worth it, as the cf cards fill up fast . . . too fast and though you don't want to know this, if your gonna process out a lot of footage buy a Red Rocket first thing and save yourself two lifestimes in post.

Also I've finally decided on which PL's and going with RED's versions.  They're faster than the Zeiss mini primes and the one's we've tested were dead sharp (the primes, not the zoom) and the price is right.

Anyway, glad you like the MX, but now that you've been bitten you'll have a hard time gong back.

IMO

BC

[Hywel]

 

Just put a deposit down on a Scarlet and a box of SSDs.

Smaller form factor is good for me, getting started with EOS lenses is great for me (have a case full of them doing not very much since I went Hasselblad for stills and AF100 for video). Expansion to PL is there for the future. It should all work with my existing 15 mm light rods, existing tripods, etc..

I'm sure you are right that RED Rocket will be needed seeing how long the transcode times are for my first day's shoot. But there are enough days when my MacPro isn't doing anything overnight that I will get started with just software transcode and add a Rocket as soon funds allow.

Exciting stuff... just couldn't get over how much more natural skin tones are and how well it copes with funky things in the grade without skin tones falling apart.

In the meantime- time to flog off some older disused kit to help pay for it, and enjoy the shoots to come on AF100 knowing that RAW is coming way before too long!

  Cheers, Hywel.

[Bern Caughey]

http://philipbloom.net/2011/12/10/nomoreepic/

www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?68587-The-Case-of-Philip-Bloom

[fredjeang]

Hey, the Epic is still in its beta phase...all that is very normal.
And brand forums are generally integrists, the Red is no exception.

[bcooter]

www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?68587-The-Case-of-Philip-Bloom

It seems like everything worked out for Mr. Bloom, but I can understand his frustrations.

I've been either lucky or wise (probably lucky) with my two RED One's, but have gone down this road with expensive medium format still cameras and the difference is the medium format company did not make any public apology and actually never recognized the issues in public, so for Mr. Jannard to apologize may not make Mr. Bloom's experience better, but at least it shows an effort to recognize issues.

I really like our RED's but am not a fanboy as we pay retail and if something better comes along I'd change in a heartbeat, though I can see why RED didn't understand not having a backup on set.

I'd never do a project with one camera, because all cameras can have issues, especially something as new and complicated as a 5k motion camera.

A few weeks ago we blew out two Canon still cameras, one a shutter, the other a circuit board and because I had two backup Canons, two Nikons and Two Contax with digital backs we didn't miss a beat, but as frustrating as a camera going down can be, nobody but the crew knew of any issues and nothing was put in jeopardy.

When the EPIC was introduced we placed our order but pulled back and bought a second RED One MX.  I thought it made more sense to go with something that was tested and in wide production.   We have placed our order for a Scarlet, though this is a much less expensive camera and quite honestly will not be our main cameras, so though it is new, if something goes sideways, we're covered.

New digital cameras can be a savior or a nightmare.  Bern, as you know I was one of the first photographers to identify the overshooting and file damage of the Canon 1ds Mark II still cameras and as you know, reporting that and getting a resolve would make a Tom Clancy novel look like non-fiction, so in my view, no company wants a negative public report and few are quick to acknowledge it, some can be downright nasty, though once again, I've never seen a public apology from any camera company.

I rarely read the RED forums as they are full of fanboyism (is that a word?) and I'm not that brand centric to enjoy it or learn from it.  Given that, I do appreciate that the owner of the company does address issues straight on.

One thing I know is when I buy, especially in the high end digital range, not to listen to buyer's remorse.  You pay your money, you take your chances and if doesn't work  either fix it or. . . move on.

In Mr. Bloom's case he seemed to get it fixed, but still moved on.


IMO

BC

[fredjeang]

Coot,

Honestly, I understand mister Bloom and I would have done the same, to move on. But in french we have an expression that says : "chercher le bâton pour se faire battre" wich means more or less: to look for the stick to be beaten".

Those people have built and build their reputation in networking, doing testings of all kinds etc...and therefore they are just in the public front-line war and as we know how harsh can be internet and people's reactions, it's not really a surprise considering the fanboyism (I love this Coot expression and will adopt it if it's not copyrighted) in any brand. I remember the bombing MR has received with the Pentax K7, or yourself with the Leica M. A person like Philip Bloom is marketing himself everywhere everyday through internet, associating his name to brands, writting articles of all kinds and testing and testing equipments etc...
The same situation would happened to a professional filmaker with less internet presence and it would have been solved (or not) in-house but with discretion and elegance.
It will give to mister Bloom probably more experience and more awareness of what his personal business model implies in term of possible consequences.

Of course, I would never criticize the fact that someone can not afford 2 cameras for shooting business. He couldn't secure his set, but let's face it then, the whim was maybe too big, and when someone is in the motion world public frontline, educating people, it's also truth that it's very counter-productive to expose one-self on active pros bombings when it could perfectly happen with this "beta". Although as you pointed, the brand forums are always extremists. I never participate in any brand forum for that reason.

Things do not happen just by default, I think.  Good for him it's solved.
  

[fredjeang]

 

And now he features on the Arri website!  http://www.arri.de/camera/digital_cameras

[Bern Caughey]

Owner of the 1st Scarlet X review/impressions

http://tonacitran.com/red-scarlet-x-first-review-impressions/

[bcooter]

And now he features on the Arri website!  http://www.arri.de/camera/digital_cameras

This isn't directed towards any one person, but when you read the bio, "Influential digital filmmaker, blogger and educator ", then in my view as an off the street buyer . . . all validity goes out the window.

It's almost impossible to remain objective once, PR, favors, whatever changes hands.  I know, I've done it with camera companies and to this day regret every instance, because in my experience all anyone wanted was sound bytes and quotes that can play on a website or mailer.

I am sure there are exceptions to every rule and some people can remain objective, some companies can report fairly, but since digital came into the image making world, experts of all types came flying out of the woodwork.  A day never goes by where I don't receive multiple emails of expert opinions of why I should be buying something.

Just like computers and hard drives, every camera will break at some point.  Especially under heavy production, that's why we have back ups, that's why wherever we travel from Thailand to Chicago, we have accounts for rentals already in place, just in case that awful moment happens.

I've heard good and bad stories about the RED One's, Epics and limited stories on the Scarlet, good stories on the Alexa, but unless someone is shooting where money and their reputation is on the line and actually buy, not borrow a camera, then they are the only people I want to hear from.

I've owned a lot of digital cameras and only two have had zero software/hardware issues.  My original Canon 1ds (which I still keep to this day) and my two RED One's.  Does this mean anything to anyone else? . . . nope.  But it does to me because there is a lot of difference between shooting when you want to, vs. shooting when you have to.

IMO

BC

[fredjeang]

You know what really amazes me knowdays?

It's this fashion that some people ended to be famous worldwide doing networking.

The pattern is almost always the same. Just take a close look at this person's top banner website. It's based on his own image, with studdied lightning and kitch imagery exactly like a rock musician. Instead of the strat, the Red or the Alexa and many many brand sponsors dispached everywhere to make it looks serious. I don't really remember his films, but I can't forget his face, his smile, his voice. They build their business arrownd their own visual image filming themselves not only on set but into the shower, dinning, in the bar with their friends, soon it will be in the toilets if it keeps going like that. Politicians, rockstars, dictators...they use the same ingredients. And it works as never for the masses, as Andy predicted so well.

As so many people are now preocupated and anxious with testings of all kinds, the only thing they have to do is doing testing to get a ww audience. They post their timelapse essays, or a new lens testing as peices of art and people eat them as it.
And the most amazing is that they end to have real power. The "I like that it's good" put the sales up in a question of hours...
Those guys generate more traffic in their websites than any serious great film director.

Of course, everything is planned in such a way that people can post comments in their websites so they got the whaos and greats and bravos (the ego loves that), they are of course linked to facebook, twitter and all possible existing social networks and exhibate themselves with brands and equipments in wich they become in some ways ambassadors.  They end to get a world wide recognition or at least everybody knows who they are. Amazing internet!

But I'm asking, where is the real substance behind those mascarades? All that looks so artificial, ego centered and superficial in many ways.

[Rob C]

Fred, have you been watching the Francesco's Mediterranean Voyage programme on BBC HD via satellite? It's several legs of a Med cruise from Venice and around the Cyclades - so far - and the point is this: I have taken to putting a chair about a metre from the screen and watching like that, the definition on the HD screen is so amazingly detailed, so much more impressive than anything ever looks on my LaCie monitor. The depth of field is also incredible; I assume they must be using very small apertures - do you know anything aout the filming of this series, if it's digital or film?

This question is, of course, also wide open to anyone else who may have answers!

Watching the show is a visual eduction.

Rob C

[fredjeang]

Fred, have you been watching the Francesco's Mediterranean Voyage programme on BBC HD via satellite? It's several legs of a Med cruise from Venice and around the Cyclades - so far - and the point is this: I have taken to putting a chair about a metre from the screen and watching like that, the definition on the HD screen is so amazingly detailed, so much more impressive than anything ever looks on my LaCie monitor. The depth of field is also incredible; I assume they must be using very small apertures - do you know anything aout the filming of this series, if it's digital or film?

This question is, of course, also wide open to anyone else who may have answers!

Watching the show is a visual eduction.

Rob C

I'm sorry Rob, I won't be very usefull on that: I almost never watch tv, not kidding. Hope you got feedback.

Hey Rob, the new Nikons have good HD capabilities. The D7000. Isn't it a good way to be motivated again and start to learn motion with your Nikon? (I know I know...what to shoot in the island then...)

[Rob C]

I'm sorry Rob, I won't be very usefull on that: I almost never watch tv, not kidding. Hope you got feedback.

Hey Rob, the new Nikons have good HD capabilities. The D7000. Isn't it a good way to be motivated again and start to learn motion with your Nikon? (I know I know...what to shoot in the island then...)

Hell no!

I'm having problems with my eyes right now. I can't hold focus for very long. Working today, I could focus for about five seconds, at which time the eye would go out of focus, only to return to normal if I looked away from the viewfinder for a moment at something very much nearer to me. Then, back to the finder for another five seconds and all over again with the pantomime. I can see a day come when either I just give up, do a perfect swallow dive off a 1200ft cliff into the beautiful blue ocean or buy a set of af lenses. Not much choice, then, as you can see.

I don't have any interest in motion, nor money to spend - I'd rather have an M9 if I did have, but anyway, I'm too exhausted in the head to learn anything new.

I sympathise about not watching tv; in general it sucks bigtime. I check out the schedules on the internet in the mornings and make a list of maybe two or three programmes that I might watch. If I'm lucky.

My usual lunchtime bar is closed for vacaciones and I can't watch my current heartthrob doing her cookery show: Mariló Montero - have you seen her? Classic beauty, dark, tall, and the rest. No bimbo, but very sophisticated-looking... no wonder I sometimes get indigestion.

Rob C

[billy]

" Owner of the 1st Scarlet X review/impressions

http://tonacitran.com/red-scarlet-x-first-review-impressions/
"

man those clips look like they were shot on color negative film ....... so nice. I am definitely tired of that canon / cmos look that I have been shooting the last 5 years or so ( stills and video ). this looks so different.

[billy]

There should be a new name for RED.  Call it REDCULT.

If you want to buy a Scarlet and didn't go to the "Event", then you'll be pushed way down the line.

We ordered on Nov. 4 and in typical RED style we keep moving down the list as people that we're hundred of orders and weeks behind us have already received their Scarlet because they went to the "Event".

We are buying some lenses today and asked our RED "account person" whose only reply is "I can't comment on that".

I think you could ask RED if they made cameras and they would respond, "I can't comment on that".

You know, I just wanted to buy a camera not go on some list and watch our name slide down.

These guys run silly ass business model.

I think Phillip Bloom might be right.  

IMO

BC

yeah I emailed them asking " if I order a scarlet today approximately when would I get it, 3 months, 6 months?" they couldnt answer the question.

If the file didnt look so damn good I would just move on and buy a c300. I stated in another post how the scarlet footage looks like it was shot on color negative film ( portra 160 NC to be exact )

[Bern Caughey]

yeah I emailed them asking " if I order a scarlet today approximately when would I get it, 3 months, 6 months?" they couldnt answer the question.

Guess how long it will take to score a Bomb EVF to go with a Scarlet.