Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: $101,800.00 for basic 8K package

Reply to Thread
Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 28910111213 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 122
  1. #111  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Montreal - Toronto - NYC
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Stacey Spears View Post
    This is key! We all shoot in so many different conditions and sometimes it is difficult for us to understand, or appreciate, someone else's point of view.
    Indeed. That's why I think when people here review cameras or any products, they should specify what kind of shooting they do. It's always relevant.

    For example our Kessler full sized jib has been awesome for us, but if I were hiking up a mountain and carrying a jib on my back, it wouldn't be my first choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #112  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    855
    I’ve been thinking about “Film Production & Distribution” on a “Global Worldwide Basis”! Imagine “Cloud Atlas” it was made in Germany, financed by a “European Consortium”. “Cloud Atlas” took in $27,108,272 Domestically, and $103,374,596 Internationally for a total “Worldwide Box Office” of $130,482,868, THAT’S NOT ALL THAT GREAT, but it was a GREAT FILM nonetheless, at least for me. It was distributed in the Unites States by “Warner Brothers” and the rest of the World by others. “Cloud Atlas” was directed by Andy & Lana Wachowski, the same people that brought you "The Matrix”!

    As a film, I personally liked “Cloud Atlas”, I’m not sure why, there was something about the film that resonated with me, I like it a lot, it should have been a “Big Hit”, but that’s the way of the world. This is one of many examples of film shot around the world. It was shot with Two American Directors (but really Global Directors’) Mostly American Actors, but the Crews were Germans, in a German Studio, European “Financial Backing”, it was a German Film in all of its senses.

    But how about “Lucy” a French film written and directed by Luc Besson, it was shot on a $40 Million Dollar Budget and made $126,663,600 Domestically and $332,200,000 Foreign for a worldwide Box Office Total of $458,863,600, most of the Box Office Receipts came for other parts of the World, this film did make a profits for its investors. Remember to make a profit you have to have “at-least-take-in” “Two and Half Times” or possibly “Three Times” of the “Production Budget”, that’s the “General Rule of Thumb”. The Film was mainly shot with Sony Cameras’, but many parts were they required a “Lighter” camera, they use the “Red Camera”, you cannot tell one from the other on the “Movie Screen”, however that will change with the new “Epic Dragon Weapon/Stealth 8K CF Camera” comes in the market.

    Think about the Australian Actors, Irish Actors, Canadian Actors, New Zeeland Actors, and British Actors, with a “Dialog Coach”, they can easily speak any variation of the “International American Accent”, and as they do “Hollywood Production” is slowly being left behind, soon “American Distribution” will go through the same filter, as the World enjoys today, using a different “Film Viewing Paradigm” which of course includes “Theatrical Distribution”, as people like Netflix and others like them continue to advance on a “World Wide Basis”, the theaters must do more but it will take time for this phenomena to become a reality, but it-is happening, the TRUTH is that the World brings in more than 60%-70% of revenues to any production. One day in the “not-to-distance-future” you will have a flat 120 inch television screen with all the “Theatrical Sound” at home, that will definitely change the your viewing Model, who knows when, but it’s coming, the “Aspect Ratio” will be 2:40.1 or 2.1 all in 8K.

    http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015...age-of-my-life Look at the people that showed-up at the “Harvey Weinstein” party at the “Cannes Film Festival”, that would have been a Major Studio party years ago, things are changing, slowly, but changing!

    I know that none of this has anything to-do with the “Epic Dragon Weapon/Stealth 8K CF Camera” but on the other hand it does, there is a “New Sherriff” in town, it’s called the “Epic Dragon Weapon/Stealth 8K CF Camera” it’s by far the best of all the other option available, but it’s mainly Sony and Arriflex that are way behind Red, it once again leaves them in the dust; on every level. So as the “Hollywood’s” of the World continues to change, so do the options available to “Filmmakers”! I’m sitting here looking at Phil Holland’s last chart, and thinking there is a lot more Real Estate with the 8K camera than the 6K camera. My question is where would the lenses come from, that-is “The High Quality Lenses”? 46.3 mm is a very “Large Image Circle” to fill-up with something comparable to the “Zeiss Master Primes”; well there is still time till the end of the year, or the beginning of the next!

    Humberto Rivera
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #113  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin,TX
    Posts
    1,493
    I propose a new section called "Humberto's" "rambling's" "and" "overuse" "of" Quotation" "marks".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #114  
    Senior Member Mike Krumlauf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    212
    He's like that character Chris Farley did on SNL during weekend update
    Digital T Productions
    Panavised Sony F23 Cinealta Camera
    Fujinon HD Zoom Lens
    2008 Apple Mac Pro
    AJA Kona 3 Dual Link 4:4:4 Capture Card W/ Kona 3 Breakout Box
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #115  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    855
    Shane Kelly, and Mike Krumlauf one of the good things about RedUser is that you can say whatever you want, in whatever method you choose, so long as you do-not offend another person, or personally talk about them personally, so I choose to say what I want, the way I want.

    Humberto Rivera
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #116  
    Senior Member mikeburton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
    Or you could just rent it when you need it and not blow $102K at one time. Just a thought. I know of many, many crews that just rent a camera a day or two a week for commercials, or get a package deal for 7-8 weeks for a feature, and there are lots of good rental/lease deals out there.

    You should thoroughly explore the sobering realities and cost of doing post in 8K before planning to shoot in 8K. I know of several producers who were quite surprised at how costly and time-consuming it was just to do a full 4K end-to-end workflow for certain projects, particularly when there were tight budgets and deadlines involved.

    but, but, but, then I wouldn't be able to shoot my cat in 8K whenever I want. My kid doesn't really need college anyways.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #117  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Montreal - Toronto - NYC
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Shane Kelly View Post
    I propose a new section called "Humberto's" "rambling's" "and" "overuse" "of" Quotation" "marks".
    Yes he should use less quotation marks, but as an avid reader I don't find his posts too long at all. Hs points are always well made and interesting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #118  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    855
    Since we now have a Digital version of Vista Vision that no longer uses 35 mm Motion Picture Negative and has to travel through the camera sideways, it becomes easier to deal with VV it in digital cinema. So I thought I would share and “Old Article” from my archives.

    Here is quote from a much larger version of an article on different formats for Cinema; “A History of Widescreen and Wide-Film Projection Processes” Written by: Les Paul Robley, Film & Video Critic, Los Angeles, USA With additional research by Dan Sherlock

    http://www.in70mm.com/news/2010/widescreen/index.htm “VISTAVISION: An 8-perforation horizontal negative image of 1.485-in x .991-in. (twice the area of regular 4-perf 35mm film) that was later optically reduced to a standard 35mm frame. Paramount’s process was based on the Glamorama and Superama widescreen systems invented by Douglas Leigh. The studio did not rely on current anamorphic systems, such as Cinemascope, and looked for a more satisfying alternative. Their aim was to create finer-grained negatives by shooting with a double copy ratio in order that flat 1.85:1 images would be incredibly sharp when blown-up on wide screens. Paramount premiered a full 8-perf projected image with limited road-show engagements of “White Christmas” in 1954 (with maybe only two or three prints struck in this original format).”

    “This original 8-perf projection process proved impractical since the footage had to travel at twice the speed through the projector (180-ft per minute), doubling that of normal 35mm film, thereby opening itself up to many technical problems. VistaVision films were shown in a number of aspect ratios, the most popular being 1.85:1. Others included 2:1 and 1.75:1. The resulting release print image was of such fine grain and high quality that the process proved favorable for making anamorphic prints, as it helped compensate for the high grain found in early color negative stocks. The negative was scribed with a different kind of cue mark, created at the start of each 2000-ft reel. Similar in shape to an F, the cue contained staffs that directed the projectionist to the top of the frame for 1.66:1, 1.85:1 and 2:1. The projectionist moved the framing knob so the staff touched the top of the masking (at the appropriate ratio) and the framing was perfectly set for the rest of the reel. For shooting, the camera threading patterns were horizontal, often referred to as “Lazy 8” or “Butterfly,” because the film lay flat. Whereas most competing widescreen film systems utilized 4-track magnetic striping for stereophonic sound, VistaVision typically carried Perspecta Stereo encoded into the optical track. Perspecta was a faux-stereo system invented by Fine Sound Inc. in 1954. It was a competitor to magnetic stereophonic tracks for motion pictures, and as it did not require a new sound head for the projector, proved a cheaper alternative until its abandonment in 1958. For the same reasons, exhibitors especially liked VistaVision since the reduction prints didn’t require them to purchase extra equipment. Eventually, it too was replaced by Panavision. In 1977, the VistaVision negative was revived for the enhanced quality found in the Dykstraflex visual effects camera used for shooting motion-controlled miniatures on the first “Star Wars,” as well as improved front-and-rear-projected background plates employed in Hansard’s and Introvision’s process photography.”

    Humberto Rivera
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #119  
    Senior Member Elsie N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    6,658
    Humberto, I don't usually read long posts but sometimes scan them for relevant information. I like the fact that you bring a background to show where we've come from and how that often relates to where we are.

    David Mullen (and even Phil in filling in between very old ways and more recent film ways) is a master at that and even though most of us are immersed into what helps us now, still, having posts like David's, Phil's and yours are very comfortable to read with a hot beverage during a time of relaxed reading.
    One camera is a shoot...but four (or more'-) Hydrogens is a prohhhh-duction... Elsie the Wraith
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #120  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    855
    The other day I watch two films back to back; one was the “The Great Gatsby” (2013) and the other was “Thor: The Dark World” (2013) I was struck by the differences in all the aspects that make a Motion Picture Film, a “Motion Picture Film”. There was certain a CLARITY to The Great Gatsby and there was a visible LACK of resolution to Thor, there it was on my television screen all off all things, all the way to Costa Rica, I personally don’t know what kind of processing there was from the broadcast site to my television set, but it was there nonetheless. With the “Epic Dragon Weapon/Stealth 8K CF Camera” the differences should be even more pronounced at the higher end of the scale, and the option available for the different format even more, just a thought.

    Humberto Rivera
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts