Eliminating need to erase rushes on location?

[Tom Lowe]

IMHO loading your cards onto a drive on set and making them available to the director, dp, client, executive producer, talent is extremely important.

people want to SEE what the images look like coming off of these very new and revolutionary cameras. they are amazed when they see the size and quality.

Good points. And as a director, I like to sit down each night and go through almost every single clip (often with the DP, maybe some actors, crew) to see how the shots came out and whether they need to be reshot before we move to the next location or whatever. Sometimes you will discover big problems, like massive flares on your filter glass that make the shot all but unusable. Or some other random problem, like a boom mic or lav mic pack being in the shot, etc.

 

[dino g]

everyone must remember on december 1, 2007 there is a 99.99999% chance that whomever has either rented your camera or paid you to shoot something, THEY HAVE NEVER EVER EVER been on set with a RED before...NEVER and on top of that, in many cases they have been hearing about this RED for over TWO years now, so they are very interested in seeing the footage, they will not settle for, oh i'll show it to you tomorrow.

 

[Seth Larney]

Hi guys,

I think that for certain productions, solid state media will probably be a viable option for backup, or at least for delivery to the client in the short term. However : This would be assuming that the client was then going to back up that media themselves in a redundant fashion for their own archives. For feature films, and more specifically studio pictures, you will have a VERY hard time convincing the powers that be that solid state media is a 'good enough' backup medium. And even if you do, you may very well get your self into a whole lot of trouble down the road. The reason that Tape and Film workflows don't have backups (and they do have backups in the intermediate stage btw) is because those two formats are (and have been) the only two media that is trusted for long term archival in itself.

Solid state Media is NOT safe for archival. I know that CF etc has come an extremely long way in the last few years and by all accounts the RED units are extremely robust, but the nature of solid state media does not lend itself to 'safe', 'secure' backup. Sure, you might be fine and not lose any cards on a shoot, and sure, those cards might live for years in the lockup, error free, but the problem is : you simply cannot guarantee their longevity. For this basic reason, I would NEVER recommend to use todays solid state media as a backup medium. I have helped to recover dozens and dozens of CF cards after they've 'lost' their data. I have also seen dozens fail for good with irreplaceable information on them. Think about this : Sure, all professional photographers that shoot digital entrust their photo's to solid state media, but you will not see them archiving those photo's off on that same media. They will copy the files off ASAP (on studio features they run back to the office and have an stils coordinator (or themselves) copy thoes images off AS SOON AS THE CARD HAS BEEN FILLED. Those images are them immediately archived in a more trusted format. Even so, believe me when I tel you, that those same photographers DO lose images inevitably before they get to copy them off. It happens. For these photographers however, the benefits of shooting digital, luckily still outweigh the benifits of shooting film.

As a post production supervisor, it is my job to envision and deploy technology workflows and ensure security of the film and the only backup medium that I 'ever' use, is data tape. This may change in the future, but not today.

Now, all this technology that we are coming into now is an amazing thing and I for one am ridiculously excited at the prospects that products such as RED ONE are introducing (let me stress.. rediculously excited). It's also a great thing to be thinking outside the box with these new technologies to make them work for as to their full potential, but like any tool, it's important that RED and it's associated wonders are used responsibly, otherwise they are useless to us.

I'm sure some here will disagree with me on solid state media not being suitable for backup, and as I said, I'm sure it is perfectly suitable for certain projects. Just make sure you know exactly what you are doing before you trust your priceless footage to a system that lets you down. Post workflows have to be 100% reliable, it is the one place in the whole production pipeline where you can litterally destroy the whole film if you not on top of your game.

Sorry for the long winded response, it's early here

Cheers,
Seth.

 

[Seth Larney]

everyone must remember on december 1, 2007 there is a 99.99999% chance that whomever has either rented your camera or paid you to shoot something, THEY HAVE NEVER EVER EVER been on set with a RED before...NEVER and on top of that, in many cases they have been hearing about this RED for over TWO years now, so they are very interested in seeing the footage, they will not settle for, oh i'll show it to you tomorrow.

Hi kosmos3d

I am absolutely all for offloading your RED footage on set, and having playback available from that whilst simultaneously backing up duplicate archives of the footage. But : There are of course exceptions, and this only really applies to commercial shoots and studio pictures, but generally, of someone decides to shoot with your RED, chances are they would have seen it's footage before. Producers of smaller projects might shoot RED without ever seeing it's footage, because they are excited at it's prospects, but larger productions won't. Once they decide to shoot RED, they generally will have already made up their minds that the footage is good enough, they will also want to be sure that you have a solid workflow. You will also have done camera tests. With a standard on set workflow, directors are used to having to telecine to see their rushes anyway, some directors have now gotten used to being able to playback when shooting on tape, but this is what Video Split is for. Granted, Video Split is usually only SD, and compressed with DV codec or similar, but this is what is used to check performance, booms, etc. This is just what they are used to. There will be cases where, because RED is so new and exciting, directors and producers will want to see what they've captured, but not many of them will be interested to slowing down production to do this, the fact that they hired you means that (if you are a 1st AC), they trust that you are responsible for the integrity of the picture, they usually don't want to think about it. Again.. there are exceptions.. many, this is just how 'most' studio pictures operate (which may not be REDUSER's users' main business, I don't know.

Hmm, I just realised that most of the people here will 'probably' be operating on productions that are not so standard (which is why they have RED in the first place), so take what I just wrote with a grain of salt, it only really applies to studio pictures.

Cheers,
Seth.

 

[dino g]

seth:

chances are, today, right now, they have not seen the footage. and it is just that simple. most people have not even seen the camera, let alone the footage, have you seen it or the camera?

you are right though, most of the bigger clients require tests, but a test is not the same as the "real talent" in the "real location/set" with "real lighting"...so they still tend to want to see at least the first few shots of the day. again, this is only in my experience, someone may have a different set of experiences.

 

[Seth Larney]

Good points, as I said I am speaking only about studio picture scenarios specifically, there are many other setups out there.

Also, just to clarify. I am 100% for offloading and having footage viewable on set. In fact, I think you'd be silly not to. Firstly because you can, (one of the great benifits of this technology), and secondly, because that is the first phase in what I consider to be a necesarry workflow : backing up media on set.

Cheers,
Seth.

 

[Michael Morlan]

I just finished shooting a feature with P2 and, with a highly regimented process of hand-offs and verbal declarations from 1st a.c., through 2nd a.c., to data wrangler and back, never worried about losing a shot. (I reserve the title of "DIT" to an experienced colorist/tech.) The wrangler backed up to two harddrives and pulled still frames of every camera angle for my on-set reference. The production couldn't afford an LTO archive and will find another archive solution.

I will always push for a data wrangler on set. even when we're running and gunning with handheld, moving car, interiors all day, I still have time to hand off media to the wrangler rolling with his laptop in a chase car. And, if the DIT is at home base, I can still drop off media at lunch and the day's wrap.

Any sufficiently anal-retentive person can be wrangler. If they were 10% as anal as my scripty/continuity person, we'd be golden.

:shifty:

Michael

 

[Mark Crabtree]

CF the new video tape?

CF the new video tape?

Off loading on the set is a great workflow to provide peace of mind that you will not loose your data and that you really have the shots. However, the point has been made that we do not back up video tape or film on the set because we trust that these mediums are robust enough to make it to the post house or the lab. If we bid shooting a TV spot for a local company on Red and have to add the cost of having a data wrangler on set we may easily be outbid by someone with a VariCam. Now the VariCam is a nice camera and I have one, but the cost of buying a VariCam is more that twice that of our Red camera. To be put in a position that Red can ONLY be used with this more pricey workflow seems to go against the whole reason Red was invented in the first place, to transform the cost/quality equation and put high end tools in the hands of independents with meager budgets. There is no doubt in my mind that I will be forced due to budget requirements to shoot onto the CF for many projects without the safety net of the on set backup. Will I be taking a chance that I will lose data? Sure. But, I rutinely take the chance that my film will be scratched or ruined by the lab or the tape will be eaten by the deck and I am always worried until I see that it looks great and is all there. Since 1974 I have lost only 3 rolls of film, 2 due to lab error and one due to film loader error, and several video shots due to tape machine error. It almost sounds like many of us are wanting Red to eliminate this ever present anxiety that exists post shoot as we wait to see if we really have everything we shot. But in the real world we do not back up our tapes on the set. Of course on set backup will for now still be my preference, but, I can surely see that many, many Red users including myself will make CF their new video tape under low budget and run and gun conditions. If you want to take your Red to Alaska and shoot wild life and are totally battery power and need to hike in with the minimum weight you are not going to be downloading on the set/tundra.

 

[dino g]

for the past 3 months, we do not charge extra for the data wrangling, it is part of the cost of our package and we work how many hours it takes.

 

[Rob Terry]

Regardless of the final choice one makes on to how to use footage on the set, back up data and archive it, the wonderful thing is that all of these choices exist. It is easily scaled up and down per budget and shooting style.

I personally would like two backups on set all the time and the CF cards placed in a fire safe forever (if not forever at least until backed up again to tape, holgraphic storage, etc). Compared to film, this stuff is cheap.

I think a dit/data wrangler is always valuable on set. On a recent P2 job I was checking heads and tales of imported cards and noticed that about 90 seconds of a take was missing. Video assist didn't catch this because his tap was hot all the time, simply starting on rolling and ending on cut. I mentioned the issue to the 1st AC and he agreed. We were able to redo the take on the spot with minimal disruption. Obviously, this would normally not be noticed until the next day with film, or hours later after the tape had moved to post.

So again, the technology is providing more and better options for creating. All good!

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Consider following costs of backing up on location;
Day rate of data wrangler....

How long before CF reach this price/performance?

Mike Brennan

Never. Unless you're cheap in which case no workflow logic really makes sense at all anyway... you'll do whatever is free.
Day rate of data wrangler his hotel expenses and transport.
Who looks after your data and makes sure it's all in a nice safe organized box if it's not the guy who copies it to the HDD? He might as well copy paste verify while waiting for the next card.
Computer kit purchase or rental.
What computer will this be performed on later? I'm quite certain your editor doesn't want to deal with copy/pasting 100GB of data.
Cost of drives.
I just bought 2 300GB drives at Frys for $50 each. That's like 4 days of shooting.
Increased cost of transporting drives to production.
?? I'm sure fedex will send it for <$20. Or you could put it in your box of stuff to bring to set along with the camera, laptop (that you already bring anyway), lights, power cables, generators, cars... This isn't space travel. Every pound doesn't cont.
Cost Risk of accidental erasure of rushes on set or location.
The only case that I can see being made for CF Card "disposability".
Potential savings in the reuse cards after final edit. Wait... that isn't a cost of re-using. That's a savings.
Time saved on set (depends on crewing levels)As opposed to? Handing them to the guy who puts them in a box. Sounds like both actions take the same amount of time.

One way or another that data eventually needs to end up on a hard drive. You can have someone whose job it is to keep track of those buggers or you can have someone whose job it is to keep track of those buggers and back it up to a hard drive. Both cost the same.

 

[Seth Larney]

One way or another that data eventually needs to end up on a hard drive. You can have someone whose job it is to keep track of those buggers or you can have someone whose job it is to keep track of those buggers and back it up to a hard drive. Both cost the same.

Bingo.

I think the point here is that a professional workflow MUST involve backing up your data (unless you are shooting film or tape, in which case it's already on a medium that's considered 'safe').

If you are going to back it up somewhere along the line anyway, the most sensible place to do it is on set as, if it's done properly, it's the most secure method and it also opens up options as you have that footage available immediately.

Unless you really think you don't need to back up your CF cards at all (which as I wrote in an earlier post, I think is a REALLY bad idea), I think it's a no braniner, really.

 

[Rob Terry]

Bingo.

I think the point here is that a professional workflow MUST involve backing up your data (unless you are shooting film or tape, in which case it's already on a medium that's considered 'safe').

If you are going to back it up somewhere along the line anyway, the most sensible place to do it is on set as, if it's done properly, it's the most secure method and it also opens up options as you have that footage available immediately.

Unless you really think you don't need to back up your CF cards at all (which as I wrote in an earlier post, I think is a REALLY bad idea), I think it's a no braniner, really.

Not to mention that his is the most sensible use of time possible on a set. The data is being ingested and backed up at the time. It can be checked as I I mentioned earlier too. It sure beats sending a PA off at the end of a day with the film.

Sitting in a telecine suit can the most exciting or terrifying moment of filmmaking. When it's beautiful (which is almost always is) the thrill is amazing, but when its bad, it rips your guts out.

As digital supplants film over the next several years in union/commercial work, a dit/data handler will most likely become a requirement. The cost of that one person will probably be the cheapest insurance that they can get.

Finally, even if you are an owner operator working on your own masterpiece, I can't see wanting to come home at the end of 12 to 16 hour day and start importing. That is exactly when mistakes will happen and data will be lost.

 

[Joseph Mastantuono]

Not to mention that his is the most sensible use of time possible on a set. The data is being ingested and backed up at the time. It can be checked as I I mentioned earlier too. It sure beats sending a PA off at the end of a day with the film.

Sitting in a telecine suit can the most exciting or terrifying moment of filmmaking. When it's beautiful (which is almost always is) the thrill is amazing, but when its bad, it rips your guts out.

As digital supplants film over the next several years in union/commercial work, a dit/data handler will most likely become a requirement. The cost of that one person will probably be the cheapest insurance that they can get.

Finally, even if you are an owner operator working on your own masterpiece, I can't see wanting to come home at the end of 12 to 16 hour day and start importing. That is exactly when mistakes will happen and data will be lost.

You're going to go through (at this point) anywhere from 10-30 cards in a day. Cataloging and dealing with these cards would be close to a fulltime job. Why not just have someone on set, the set footprint isn't that high, who at the same time is color correcting your dailies, and copying, verifying and watching every single shot that comes out of the camera?

Who can immediately say *before moving on the to next setup* whether the the exposure is good or there's a smudge or whatever.

 

[Michael Brennan]

Backup by erasing original?

Backup by erasing original?

Very interesting and valid points raised.
So far (54 votes on Nov 3) the majority of pollsters don't want to erase rushes on set.
Hard to tell if the result is being skewed by a possible split between studio and run gun location work.


Backing up (and keeping the original) on set is valid and occasionally done on tape projects and may be the future when CF card prices drop to the point where its worth keeping them.


The question hasn't been addressed by most posters, at what price does CF have to fall, to do away with the need/cost for recycling of cards on set?
Same price as tape?
That is not to say we wouldn't view and grade rushes on set on a computer.


Point taken about needing to check back on set ect, on HD I check before we shoot as well as after by playing from camera.
For studio work I would consider duplicate record or cloning at the end of tape or scene.

RED can playback in camera, without necessarily needing CF to be loaded into a computer. Sure if budget can include video assist/wrangler then they may as well clone at this point, but often we just want to playback one shot and carry on, this would mean a lot of running around between camera and video village?


Perhaps in the future we can give a record locked CF to PA or director for him to playback in a handy CF player!


If CF were to drop to $50 for 64GB would we be asking Jim for a duplicate record facility on the camera?



Mike Brennan

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Case in point. Did a music video shoot recently shot on an HVX. I am the editor of the piece and I mentioned to the director that it might be worthwhile to have me on set as a data wrangler. His experience with the camera before had been frustrating because of problems with Firestore drives and losing takes. So he got money freed up to pay me to be on set. We established a system for handing off the P2 cards so there was never any question as to what was hot and what could be formated. I was able to backup the media to multiple drives, organize it, confirm there was no corruption, and even had a preliminary edit done by the end of the shoot. Director was so thrilled he said he can't imagine not having someone there to do the same thing next time. He got to sleep that night because he wasn't concerned about losing footage. Could they have saved the money and got away with shooting on a Firestore and hoping all would be well? Sure, but it was worth it to have someone who was on the ball and could assure the footage was secure. If projects like this one where money is an issue are willing to spend it because they see the value I would hope projects that truly can afford it are willing to do the same. It saves a lot of headaches later on.

Steve

 

[Daniel García]

WORM Flash cards

WORM Flash cards

I don't know why nobody has mentioned WORM media yet (write-once-read-many). I read an announcement last week that Sandisk was releasing (or planning) a new type of write-once card, and making it slightly cheaper that regular erasable cards. I immediately thought that they would have a big market with redusers and professional photogs... if they make them fast enough.

 

[Michael Brennan]

CF for archive

CF for archive

I don't know why nobody has mentioned WORM media yet (write-once-read-many). I read an announcement last week that Sandisk was releasing (or planning) a new type of write-once card, and making it slightly cheaper that regular erasable cards. I immediately thought that they would have a big market with redusers and professional photogs... if they make them fast enough.

Yes, they may be launching a 1GB card soon according to this site.
Mooted to be $5.99
http://digitalcameras.engadget.com/2007/11/20/1gb-write-once-sandisk-memory-cards-to-cost-5-99/

San Disk have been championing the concept for many years
They are aiming at a 100 year archive life!


Wonder if they will be fast enough and can eventually make a 32GB version for under $100.


Mike Brennan