Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: KOMODO....

Reply to Thread
Page 95 of 184 FirstFirst ... 4585919293949596979899105145 ... LastLast
Results 941 to 950 of 1835
  1. #941  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Brooklyn!
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Bastien Tribalat View Post
    Don't know. On C700 and C700FF they rely on a Codex Recorder for the uncompressed Canon RAW.
    I'd love to see what the real world difference is, if any, between uncompressed RAW and CRL.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #942  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Brooklyn!
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Bastien Tribalat View Post
    Never had any issue with Canon Raw Lite on Premiere Pro CC (but I prefer Redcode Raw anyway :p)
    I have more trouble with 400mbps h265 than I do with Canon RAW Lite. It works very well on a suped up 2012 Mac Pro.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #943  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto & Vancouver
    Posts
    3,709
    They probably want to use CFExpress because it's going to (quickly?) become the defacto standard. No point holding on to CFast if the price of media is going to be the same, but CFE can do almost 3x the datarate.

    Also they may want the added throughput for better offload speeds and/or multiple streams (proxies + raw)... OR maybe they plan on releasing internal uncompressed RAW in a firmware update. Who knows? I certainly think it's better (for the consumer) to have the latest media option in there though, especially if it's going to be the standard in all cameras moving forward (until ~2025+)... Isn't CFast2 almost a decade old already?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #944  
    Senior Member Bastien Tribalat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cannes area, France
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by Fahnon Bennett View Post
    I'd love to see what the real world difference is, if any, between uncompressed RAW and CRL.
    I have no clue.
    Both are limited to 12 bits.
    VIDEO EDITING - COLOR GRADING - VFX
    APPLE FINAL CUT PRO, AVID MEDIA COMPOSER
    ADOBE CREATIVE CLOUD, DAVINCI RESOLVE, REDCINE X PRO...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #945  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,636
    For years now, people have been saying RED was going to get squeezed out by this and that budget cam. But, many of the cameras that people said would contribute to that scenario have fallen off the radar. It hasn't happened for the same reason the Alexa isn't getting squeezed out by these budget cameras for the higher end stuff.

    RED and Arri aren't in competition with them.
    There is more to this than the specs/performance of a camera vs its price. Red and Arri DNA as companies is based on service. When the chips are down and you have a serious problem they have your back. BMD treats their low end products like throwaways and their support philosophy reflects this . If you are a documentarian out on a remote shoot and something bricks the camera, good luck getting anything but thoughts and prayers out of BM, much less an advance overnight loaner or replacement to get your through.
    Sony, Canon, Panasonic, are a tier down from Red and ARRI, but they do support their high end products well. Not the same for say a GH5, or low end Canon consumer DSLR though. They don't make enough profit from them to do it.
    Intangibles like these have real market value for some, but not for others. They are part of what makes the reputation of a company and its products. It is part of what you pay for.

    Even with the Hydrogen 1 phones, when Red couldn't deliver the titanium preorder versions in a timely fashion, they sent their customers a free phone.. to keep!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #946  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Bastien Tribalat View Post
    And still I don't understand why it uses CFExpress cards. Officially because their 5.9K RAW Lite @ 60fps has a bit rate of 2.5 Gb/sec but that's like 312.5 MB/sec which is still under what CFAST 2.0 can do. Am I missing something ? (like there's some kind of buffer in cards which forces your to have double your codec bitrate ?)
    Look at the RED patent for recording compressed RAW.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #947  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Bastien Tribalat View Post
    I have no clue.
    Both are limited to 12 bits.
    AFAIK, Only Sony has linear 16 bits(Venice X-OCN), the rest logged the 16 bits to 12 bits.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #948  
    Senior Member Blair S. Paulsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    5,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    Which is exactly my point. And fiddling with the released RAW footage from the Pocket 6K and comparing that to my 6K Dragon sensor footage just makes me stand by that point even further. (snip)
    For many of us, the quote in Christoffer's signature is the biscuit - lightly compressed RAW ready for the digital dark room. Have no experience with BRAW, but even if it's a pale imitation of RedCode, it's still an opportunity to alter the captured values prior to constructing the RGB image. Beyond that, for many in the target market; the time and expertise for grading is not there anyway. I expect the Komodo will be more camera than the BMPCC6K with a "fatter" digital negative for post - but, again, what percentage of the price delineated market segment we are discussing will be willing to pay for that extra meat in the file?

    Cheers - #19
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #949  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bastien Tribalat View Post
    And still I don't understand why it uses CFExpress cards. Officially because their 5.9K RAW Lite @ 60fps has a bit rate of 2.5 Gb/sec but that's like 312.5 MB/sec which is still under what CFAST 2.0 can do. Am I missing something ? (like there's some kind of buffer in cards which forces your to have double your codec bitrate ?)

    I know you're stuck on the CFast card and can't foresee the advantages that CFExpress will give us going into the future, but I for one, really think the form factor of the Express card plus it's capabilities will future proof memory for a long time. We're on the cusp of a memory medium change and I think going CFExpress is a no brainer. I've always hated the form factor of Compact Flash/CFast for some reason. It's like CFast and SD got married and spit out the perfect child. Finally, now we can all be on the same memory card throughout the industry for the first time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #950  
    Senior Member Brian Boyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    863
    I could take issue with practically every sentence in your 3-post response. It's that far off base from what I was saying. But, I won't counter point-for-point and, instead, have condensed a lot of it below into something more manageable to address overall.

    A few of your responses were so off base, you actually supported the point I was making without knowing it, thinking you were arguing the opposite viewpoint when you weren't. You've wasted a lot of words on things I never said or meant. At times it was by willfully ignoring things that I explicitly stressed in bold and italics.

    Nevertheless, I will try again.

    I said RED's primary target was the high end. Not their only target. This suggests they have a secondary market, and tertiary markets, they try to accommodate as best they can. You said it yourself: "Their aim is to deliver digital cinema at the highest quality..."

    What camera company has that as a goal but primarily targets the lowest budgets? Nobody. Ever. Therefore, I think it's quite clear for whom that philosophy is meant.

    The added benefit and value that RED knew existed from the start was, at the price points they could deliver that quality, a secondary market of cinema camera owner-operators, which they created, could emerge.

    They'd get the same quality as the big productions at a previously unobtainable price point. After that, a very familiar pattern began to develop and the cinema camera market expanded and divided into tiers.

    Like almost everything else you buy, low-medium-high, bottom-middle-top or good-better-best came to be for these as well. Sometimes there are tiers within these tiers.

    It's the same when you buy a car, a toaster, a watch, etc. In retail, there's a name for what it's called (I forget) when they give low-med-high options but the goal is to push the middle product. It's clearly better than the low end and almost as good as the high end for a lot less.

    Consumers are very comfortable with three choices. Too much choice is problematic, as is not enough. Most people go for the middle range. I know what you're thinking. The middle is clearly better than the bottom in my example, which won't be the case when BMD and others close the gap.

    Here's the thing: BMD will also contribute to the tiered system (like RED eventually did) and, once things settle, will themselves have clearer distinctions among models.

    Yes, RED sells more cameras to the middle - the owner-operator crowd makes up the bulk of their sales. However, given their business model, it's still congruent with the notion of primarily targeting the high end of digital cinema. They can and have done both successfully.

    Despite owner-operators being their largest customer base, if they were the primary focus, RED probably would've put knobs, switches and buttons on their cameras, as those things are a big draw on the cameras that do primarily target owner-operators and solo shooters. But RED never has, because, well...I've already told you.

    The middle is broad and I'd argue that RED caters more to the middle of the middle tier on up, leaving the bottom of the middle tier to other manufacturers, including BMD with the URSA Mini Pro.

    So, since you think I'm committing a fundamental flaw by referencing the past, I'm going to tell you what's going to happen in the future. Pay close attention.

    Prices will drop at some point; maybe considerably. RED and others will sell their camera lines for less than they do now. The increase in quality at the bottom will drive the price decreases across the board. You're right about that. But, here's where you're wrong.

    Since we don't know what cameras will exist, what capabilities they'll have and how much they'll cost, let's use today's cameras (merely for a frame of reference - these might not be the cams in question) and capabilities and apply future, market disrupting prices.

    So, the Pocket 4K costs $495. The Pocket 6K costs $795. URSA Mini Pro G2 costs $1995. Most of RED's cameras range from $5K - $10K, with Monstro costing $17.5K. Guess what? The market is still tiered. There's still a high-medium-low stratification. The price points have merely shifted. There won't be a one-size-fits-all price for cinema cameras.

    If this happens two years from now, maybe these are the cameras in question. Let's say that's true. It's so close that many people considering and prepared to buy an URSA Mini Pro for $5K might now consider buying a RED for $5K.

    Because like you said, "Their aim is to deliver digital cinema at the highest quality..." People value that. It's an intangible that's hard to quantify.

    There's two things I can guarantee you:

    1) Those low tier prices will bottom out at some point. BMD isn't going to lay people off so they can produce a Pocket Whatever K for $150. Diminishing returns, remember? In fact, once they hit bottom, you can probably expect a slight increase in the bottom tier over time. There will be no more room at the bottom to be priced disruptively.

    2) There's no way in hell RED is going to jump in the fray of $495 cinema cameras. There's too much volatility and that segment is fickle. They'll do what they've always done by targeting the high end while simultaneously serving the middle-to-upper middle tier. Their business model scales with the market. I think they can exist there indefinitely.

    If they can do that, there's no real need to treat BMD or Z CAM as direct competitors in a way that impacts their business any more than it does now. That doesn't mean RED is ignoring them.

    How do I know this? By looking to the past. It happened with audio gear. It happened with video gear. It happened with graphics software. I've seen it all before. There's no reason to think it will be different for cinema cameras. The future, however inexpensive it may be, will be tiered.



    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    The "when" is not a few years from now...The "when" is therefore just around the corner...I find it interesting that every time we have larger shifts in technology, people are always pointing out that "all of this high-end professional equipment will never be available for consumers"..."Some people" are a larger group than the other group. It's a statistical flaw to view only what you see as the bigger group. The largest group of Red users aren't filmmakers doing big productions, it's the smaller owner-operators companies, content creators and so on...You are talking about years ago, which is a fundamental flaw when talking about technology and how it develops...Is it really far fetched to assume that a shift in low-priced cameras to deliver the same quality as high-end Red's is about to happen? Because it will happen, it is happening right now...So, what about the MK II or MK III of the Pocket 6K, S1H, ZCam etc.? The price of technology comes from development costs, material costs but most important through what competition it has.
    ...disruption...diminishing returns...statistical flaw to only count the big productions...Brand loyalty...Komodo might be the most rational decision Red's taken in recent times...How far back are you looking?...By popular, what do you mean?...You base all your argument on the status quo...This is the whole reason for Komodo's existence, it's for THAT market, the market who are about to sell their Red to get something more rationally priced for their job without cutting back too much on the quality they deliver.
    The disruption is not in that specific camera, it's in the idea that now such a camera can exist for $2500. Do you think these companies will stop delivering after they released something like that? Your argument relies on these companies not improving their cameras. How much more can Red improve their own lineup? Look back at the development from the big Red One MX to now, do you see what I see? A slow-down. The radical improvements Red has done over the years have been slowing down while other companies have caught up.
    In your previous post you mentioned "Pocket 6K" every 57 words. You talked about it like it was the Messiah. Now, it's only "indicative" of the inevitable changes to come? Ok.

    My argument relies on everyone improving their cameras, not just the low end. You're the one who seems shortsighted about what more advancements there are to be made in imaging technology. Did you not see the link Misha provided about Panasonic's sensor tech? That's only one of the things they're working on.



    Red is no way near doomed, but there's a change in winds that the Komodo is the answer to, if it succeeds...Imagine if BMD beefed up the price and improved on that concept, imagine if they released a $10000 camera as a new iteration of the Pocket 6K. This is the wind I'm talking about, that the Pocket 6K is the breeze of.
    If BMD releases a $10K camera, it justifies the price of middle tier cameras and users, in terms of price, that RED very much caters to. A $10K BMD cam seems to contradict everything you've said about $2,500 being disruptive to similarly priced RED and Canon cams, not to mention a $6.5K Komodo with similar specs to the Pocket 6K.


    Only counting by the sensor. But a big heavy Epic Dragon is no match for a sub-2 lb Pocket 6K that could be used with a cheap gimbal to achieve results far beyond what you can do with that Epic Dragon. And good luck with getting side-gear to that Epic Dragon since Red doesn't sell that anymore. Buying an old Red is foolish for a business compared to alternatives today.

    Anyone buying an old Red when the Pocket 6K is around, is a fool. Red One is not "more camera", not even close.
    Huh? I mentioned Dragon-X, not Epic Dragon. I also said the Dragon-X was more camera than the R1. I told you, you've wasted a lot of words on things I never said. You're all over the place.
    Last edited by Brian Boyer; 09-05-2019 at 04:12 PM.
    Cutting out soft shadows in Photoshop tutorial
    YouTube | Vimeo

    www.harbonder.com


    Strand on Soundcloud
    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