Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

ENG does not belonge here

B

Bruno Solaja

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
53
RED 1 Was not the tool for this job... Cinema grade camera
EPIC is a way off... Cinema grade camera
SCARLET ( EPIC s ) ... Cinema grade camera

RED stated that they are a cinema grade company...

So, what do you think ?
 
Remember this ?


"Proxy Module... – 04-10-2010, 11:53 AM

RED is increasing the workflow flexibility on Epic and Scarlet with Proxy Modules… the first of which is an H.264 Module.
This module encodes a 1080P stream (high quality scale from full frame) and records to Compact Flash in a rear module. The module also offers secure password protected streaming over dedicated WiFi and ethernet to iPhones, iPads, laptops as well as broadcast to the internet.

This will be beneficial for on set viewing, instant dailies, offline editing, easy file transfer to remote locations, dailies review and collaboration services with such companies as Pix, or live broadcasting for realtime media distribution.

The modules will also support full metadata and XML for editorial.

Availability will be September 2010 and the price will be $2500.

Jim"
 
Yes.

It's true.

News organizations did not flock toward buying RED cameras. I've always seen it as a replacement for 35mm film never for Electronic News Gathering.

I'm happy about that. Plenty of cheap video cameras are made for news gathering including the iPhone 4.

David
 
In terms of video work, its not great for news. But if your a photojournalist, it is amazing.

A camera is a tool. DSCM is a very versatile tool, but its not a do everything tool.
 
Steve Gibby has eloquently expressed the place of Red cameras in the ENG/EFP market, and there is a place for such a camera, and even more so with the DSCM concept. Sure, I don't see the nightly news shooting on a 4K RAW camera, but other than that, there is a WIDE variety of projects that fall under the ENG/EFP and documentary label that can use a higher-quality image and 35mm optics and don't need to turnaround an HD image immediately for delivery, nor stream live HD for hours straight. A "Planet Earth" type series is an obvious example. And many ENG/EFP projects have a mix of material in them, from talking heads to landscape shots or beautiful product shots.
 
I think for the most part you are correct. HOWEVER, in some and a variety of situations....it can and i do use it as ENG style camera for doc work and when shot well results are extraordinary. Additionally.....to add to your point...it is not a run and gun camera as i've found since 2007.....under a variety of situations. WOULD LOVE to have seen Scarlet fill that gap with small sensor and push auto focus one touch....but keep manual most of time....small sensor; fixed lens....YEP, not for cinema, but GREAT for nature/doc work where all or most work is sent out 1080p and where RAW just plain RULES.
 
Problem is that you guys are seen the ENG/EFP as news cameras type only, were in truth it represent such a much wider range of users projects, and I have seen the R1 and now the Epic M,
and I'm more then sure will see plenty of Scarlet cameras too... ;)

The DSMC represent a much better camera system then the ones so far used, less cumbersome, more options, moire configurable to meet the user needs, and so on,
more importantly they can become smaller and lighter when needed!!
 
Well, Gibby not withstanding, what is happening is the non-fiction film and television world is on a budget slide downhill, which means more and more demand for one-man crews and fast delivery and smaller and smaller per-hour budgets. Production value is less and less important. Red is really about production values and image quality, meaning higher end work—specials and personal projects where time can be taken and a reasonable crew can be budgeted.

The truth is that you are not seeing a lot of high production values on cable television reality shows or documentaries.

Carefully set up, I think the Epic could be a pretty good personal camera for run and gun, but not ideal. And with these budgets there is a point of diminishing returns using a camera like this under these conditions.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Steve Gibby has eloquently expressed the place of Red cameras in the ENG/EFP market, and there is a place for such a camera, and even more so with the DSCM concept. Sure, I don't see the nightly news shooting on a 4K RAW camera, but other than that, there is a WIDE variety of projects that fall under the ENG/EFP and documentary label that can use a higher-quality image and 35mm optics and don't need to turnaround an HD image immediately for delivery, nor stream live HD for hours straight. A "Planet Earth" type series is an obvious example. And many ENG/EFP projects have a mix of material in them, from talking heads to landscape shots or beautiful product shots.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'd just suggest we delete "ENG - Electronic News Gathering" and constrain our discussions to "EFP - Electronic Field Production"; we are NOT an MPEG-2 LONG GOP / DV compression based news camera and we never will be. However all of the applications David lists here and Gibby has pointed out previously are perfectly valid use cases for either camera.
 
Last edited:
Stuart.

This is why I suggested ENG and excluded EFP. There's lots of EFP applications for red cameras.

But news gathering is in iPhone land now.

David
 
David Battistella said:
Stuart.


"news gathering is in iPhone land now."

David
Click to expand...


I like that ! That is absolutely right and well said. ENG is all about news value and no production value, due to more and more tight budgets (like Rob said) and the changing (iphone, ....) world. When it is not used for cinematic projects, Red can only show its true value in the EFP world.
 
To me, the distinction between ENG and EFP, has always been a bit silly. ENG is EFP. EFP can potentially BE ENG. (i.e production done for news.) Mostly these terms came about to help describe whatever was not film more than anything else. I think back in the day, these terms were a way for textbooks to help catagorize the three main styles of production at that point in time, Film, News (ENG), and everything else that wasn't those (EFP). A very tiny slice of the production pie back then. In my mind, the terms EFP/ENG doesn't really fit well anymore. (Especially the word electronic as it kind of implies analog) Things have changed a lot since 1978. But back to the topic, personally I can't ever see Red cameras being used for news, but EFP, sure depending on the project.
 
I think Stuart and David are missing a point here. Of course you can use these cameras in a documentary situation (meaning smaller or nonexistent crews and non-cine lenses). But for the great majority of non-fiction cable-fodder that is being made, there is no reason to. If you have a personal project in which you can spend the time and the quality of the image is very important to you, then this is a great camera. If you are doing documentaries for theatrical release or high-end documentary specials, with significant budgets, where production quality and image quality is very important, then it is a great camera.

If you are a one man band in tough production circumstances, or if you are just grinding out footage for low-end productions on the cable systems for a low budget, then I don't see any advantage to a Red system and in fact I think in many cases it would be a burden.

With all due respect to David, he doesn't make non-fiction films. It seems to me that Red made an important decision when they created the Scarlet with the price-point and features that they did, a parting of the ways, if you will. This is a professional camera. If you want to shoot run and gun low budget films with it, God bless you, but there are easier and cheaper ways to do that. That's all I'm saying. And I agree that the EFP/ENG term is really dated and actually has no meaning any more. Hard news is showing up shot on iphones after all (perhaps not by choice but there it is) and the ability to shoot anything in the field electronically has been the situation for a long time.

I love Red cameras and we own two of them, but they require special treatment (and introduce limitations) fi you are going to use them on the cheap.
 
Thank you David, Stuart, Rob, and other experienced industry veterans on his thread for your comments...

At the top of this forum there has been a sticky I wrote way back in 2007 explaining the difference between EFP (electronic field production) and ENG (electronic news gathering), and defining the strengths and weaknesses of Red One for each of those types of production. In that sticky and ever since I've emphasized that Red One wasn't a good choice for ENG - primarily because of time pressure in the field, and the quick turnaround nature of news work. Sure, the terms EFP and ENG are dated, but then again isn't the term "film" also dated even worse? Tons of people on Red User continually say they're going "film" something with Red One and Epic - but they just use that anachronistic term because it has had such a common and descriptive use in the motion media industry. For the same reason the terms EFP and ENG will continue to be used - but as with the anachronism of using "Film" to describe a shooting style, EFP and ENG also now describe shooting styles and equipment setups rather than their original meaning to describe separate industries.

Its really surprising how many people in the motion media industry, particularly those who haven't worked in the EFP and ENG industries, that erroneously lump all no-cine production into the catch all moniker of "ENG". EFP styles of shooting and ENG shooting have historically shared many equipment and camera setup commonality - but with its longer turnaround times for programs, and generally longer time and care put into image acquisition and editing, EFP work is very different than news gathering.

Lets talk about Red One. The camera obviously was designed to be a modular digital cinema camera - but it also has EFP industry features (zebras, RS422, support for EFP/ENG zoom lens servos, etc.). Why are features like that included in Red One? Because as Red has said from the beginning - including Jim Jannard, Stuart English, etc. - Red One was secondarily designed to be used for mobile EFP style work - and thousands of EFP professionals (myself included) have done just that since 2007 - used Red One for mobile EFP work.

Is Red One ideal for mobile EFP work? Yes and no. If someone knows what they're doing, realizes that mobility requires minimizing weight, and thinks their way through their camera setups, yes, Red One can be excellent for mobile EFP work. For me, even though I tested out 2/3" EFP/ENG zooms on R1 clear back in 2007, for resolution, weight, and image purposes I settled on using a range of Nikon (and one Canon) 35mm still lenses on R1 - exposing quickly via zebra (and histogram) and eye focusing quickly by operator using image magnification. For lack of a better term I labeled that approach "mobile hybrid EFP" = the hybrid meaning the use of 35mm still lenses, some cine style techniques, and many traditional EFP style techniques. Horses for courses...

The list of mobile hybrid EFP style genres of production Red One (and now Epic) have been used for is exhaustive - documentaries of various kinds, alternative sports, adventure travel, food, cultures, home improvement, wildlife, outdoor, nature, music, corporate - IE a huge range of cable network television programs.

So what about Epic? Being smaller, with a wide variety of frame rate capabilities, and having multiple EFP-friendly features (zebras, various outputs, Genlock, etc.) Epic is IMO a significantly more capable EFP camera than Red One. Again, mobile hybrid EFP users of Epic are opting for lightweight setups, Canon lenses (and Nikon when the mount is available), mostly no matte boxes (screw on filters or clip on MB), using image magnification to eye focus by operator, and exposing quickly using zebras and histogram.

So what about Scarlet X? I'm still analyzing the specs and haven't used one, but from the specs I'd say Scarlet X may be a reasonably good mobile hybrid EFP style camera - unless you shoot in EFP genres which frequently need higher frame rates (sports, wildlife, etc.). But for documentary work setup with Canon or Nikon lenses, a small on-camera light, a short shotgun, and a dual wireless receiver on a L-bracket, Scarlet X could be a good choice - depending of course on the experience and skill sets of the user.

What about the 2/3", 3k raw shooting, high frame rate, fixed 8x Scarlet that was canceled? IMO it would have been far and away the most mobile EFP capable camera from Red. For the work I do, which by choice is about 85% mobile EFP work, the Scarlet Fixed would have been used extensively by myself, my crews, and thousands of other mobile EFP professionals. I completely understand Red's strategy in creating Scarlet X to compete in the mid-cost s35 cine style industry. That said, I'm quite unhappy that Red didn't simply choose to stratify their products by offering Scarlet X AND Fixed Scarlet. In my opinion Red could sell 100,000+ Fixed Scarlet in the short term.

End note: I've found my friend David Mullen to have a vast amount of technical and creative knowledge in both the cine-style industry and even in the EFP style industry. My friend Stuart likewise, with the added bonus for this forum and thread that before coming to Red he had a distinguished career with Panasonic developing lines of EFP cameras, including the Varicam. Rob Gardner has a long and solid background in field production. Each of these guys has very experienced opinions as a veteran - and I do to.

In the end the terms EFP and ENG won't be disappearing, just as the term film hasn't. Those terms are part of the overall fabric of the comprehensive motion media history. The bottom line for each motion media professional (or aspiring pro) is to closely analyze what genres and styles of production your passion lies in - then to pick the field production equipment that satisfies your particular needs. There are no perfect camera systems out here - but there are camera systems which can be adapted widely for many genres and styles of production - and among them are the cameras that Red offers.
 
Steve Gibby said:
I completely understand Red's strategy in creating Scarlet X to compete in the mid-cost s35 cine style industry. That said, I'm quite unhappy that Red didn't simply choose to stratify their products by offering Scarlet X AND Fixed Scarlet. In my opinion Red could sell 100,000+ Fixed Scarlet in the short term.
Click to expand...
And it will sell in the due time, Steve. First, it is necessary to sell the S35 offer to the crowds. Same DSLR clientele who will probably buy a more affordable 2/3" later for certain kind of work, not for everyone. But don't quote me on that please (E :-)
 
Steve Gibby said:
Thank you David, Stuart, Rob, and other experienced industry veterans on his thread for your comments...

At the top of this forum there has been a sticky I wrote way back in 2007 explaining the difference between EFP (electronic field production) and ENG (electronic news gathering), and defining the strengths and weaknesses of Red One for each of those types of production. In that sticky and ever since I've emphasized that Red One wasn't a good choice for ENG - primarily because of time pressure in the field, and the quick turnaround nature of news work. Sure, the terms EFP and ENG are dated, but then again isn't the term "film" also dated even worse? Tons of people on Red User continually say they're going "film" something with Red One and Epic - but they just use that anachronistic term because it has had such a common and descriptive use in the motion media industry. For the same reason the terms EFP and ENG will continue to be used - but as with the anachronism of using "Film" to describe a shooting style, EFP and ENG also now describe shooting styles and equipment setups rather than their original meaning to describe separate industries.

Its really surprising how many people in the motion media industry, particularly those who haven't worked in the EFP and ENG industries, that erroneously lump all no-cine production into the catch all moniker of "ENG". EFP styles of shooting and ENG shooting have historically shared many equipment and camera setup commonality - but with its longer turnaround times for programs, and generally longer time and care put into image acquisition and editing, EFP work is very different than news gathering.

Lets talk about Red One. The camera obviously was designed to be a modular digital cinema camera - but it also EFP industry features (zebras, RS422, support for EFP/ENG zoom lens servos, etc.). Why are features like that included in Red One? Because as Red has said from the beginning - including Jim Jannard, Stuart English, etc. - Red One was secondarily designed to be used for mobile EFP style work - and thousands of EFP professionals (myself included) have done just that since 2007 - used Red One for mobile EFP work.

Is Red One ideal for mobile EFP work? Yes and no. If someone knows what they're doing, realizes that mobility requires minimizing weight, and thinks their way through their camera setups, yes, Red One can be excellent for mobile EFP work. For me, even though I tested out 2/3" EFP/ENG zooms on R1 clear back in 2007, for resolution, weight, and image purposes I settled on using a range of Nikon (and one Canon) 35mm still lenses on R1 - exposing quickly via zebra (and histogram) and eye focusing quickly by operator using image magnification. For lack of a better term I labeled that approach "mobile EFP" the hybrid meaning the use of 35mm still lenses, some cine style techniques, and many traditional EFP style techniques. Horses for courses...

The list of mobile hybrid EFP style genres of production Red One (and now Epic) have been used for is exhaustive - documentaries of various kinds, alternative sports, adventure travel, food, cultures, home improvement, wildlife, outdoor, nature, music, corporate - IE a huge range of cable network television programs.

So what about Epic? Being smaller, with a wide variety of frame rate capabilities, and having multiple EFP-friendly features (zebras, various outputs, Genlock, etc.) Epic is IMO a significantly more capable EFP camera than Red One. Again, mobile hybrid EFP users of Epic are opting for lightweight setups, Canon lenses (and Nikon when the mount is available), mostly no matte boxes (screw on filters or clip on MB), using image magnification to eye focus by operator, and exposing quickly using zebras and histogram.

So what about Scarlet X? I'm still analyzing the specs and haven't used one, but from the specs I'd say Scarlet X may be a reasonably good mobile hybrid EFP style camera - unless you shoot in EFP genres which frequently need higher frame rates (sports, wildlife, etc.). But for documentary work setup with Canon or Nikon lenses, a small on-camera light, a short shotgun, and a dual wireless receiver on a L-bracket, Scarlet X could be a good choice - depending of course on the experience and skill sets of the user.

What about the 2/3", 3k raw shooting, high frame rate, fixed 8x Scarlet that was canceled? IMO it would have been far and away the most mobile EFP capable camera from Red. For the work I do, which by choice is about 85% mobile EFP work, the Scarlet Fixed would have been used extensively by myself, my crews, and thousands of other mobile EFP professionals. I completely understand Red's strategy in creating Scarlet X to compete in the mid-cost s35 cine style industry. That said, I'm quite unhappy that Red didn't simply choose to stratify their products by offering Scarlet X AND Fixed Scarlet. In my opinion Red could sell 100,000+ Fixed Scarlet in the short term.

End note: I've found my friend David Mullen to have a vast amount of technical and creative knowledge in both the cine-style industry and even in the EFP style industry. My friend Stuart likewise, with the added bonus for this forum and thread that before coming to Red he had a distinguished career with Panasonic developing lines of EFP cameras, including the Varicam. Rob Gardner has a long and solid background in field production. Each of these guys has very experienced opinions as a veteran - and I do to.

In the end the terms EFP and ENG won't be disappearing, just as the term film hasn't. Those terms are part of the overall fabric of the comprehensive motion media history. the bottom line for each motion media professional (or aspiring pro) is to closely analyze what genres and styles of production your passion lies in - then to pick the field production equipment that satisfies your particular needs. There are no perfect camera systems out here - but there are camera systems which can be adapted widely for many genres and styles of production - and among them are the cameras that Red offers.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing your knowledge and wisdom, Steve. Much appreciated.
 
Steve Gibby said:
What about the 2/3", 3k raw shooting, high frame rate, fixed 8x Scarlet that was canceled? IMO it would have been far and away the most mobile EFP capable camera from Red. For the work I do, which by choice is about 85% mobile EFP work, the Scarlet Fixed would have been used extensively by myself, my crews, and thousands of other mobile EFP professionals. I completely understand Red's strategy in creating Scarlet X to compete in the mid-cost s35 cine style industry. That said, I'm quite unhappy that Red didn't simply choose to stratify their products by offering Scarlet X AND Fixed Scarlet. In my opinion Red could sell 100,000+ Fixed Scarlet in the short term.
Click to expand...

Great post, Steve! Long live Scarlet Fixed! :biggrin5:
 
+1

ENG has no place here. EFP does.
 
Thanks Steve for making some sensible comments about the fixed 2/3"

I am not disappointed with the Scarlet-X, but i wanted the 2/3" for all that is different from Epic, not what is similar.

RED will probably never release a sub 4k cam now. Even though I see Scarlet-x as just that for many applications.

But resolution osn't all for all situations, even though it's kinda pretty important when doing landscapes and cityscapes in cinemas... :)
The popularity of te 5D is much from closeups and shallow DOF in traditional FF, a situation where you don't notice the underfed pixeldensity as much, but your eye is drawn to other aspects of the image.

And the Scarlet 2/3" fixed had te attraction of the inverse 5D. The antidote to that camera.
Lots of resolution and framerates.
Relatively small and lightweight.
Easy and relatively affordable to mounnt n high-risk situations.
Newsfriendly (actually, I think so for interviews etc in a more general way than the R1/Epic...)
Holidayfriendly... :)
Shooting RED RAW

That were my main reasons for desiring it.
NOT resolution or pinultimate glass. Rather the oposite, in many ways.

I post this here, instead of in any of the many Scarlet - bashing threads, because I don't see any reason to bash it. It in the middle of the F3/Canon cinema & DSLR/Alexa debacle and it will bite well ad furiously in that segment methinks.
But I already have two cams in that segment...

Cheers

G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top