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 :)

The rest of the movie...?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thom said:
If you didn't make it to NAB, it is really too bad as it was an amazing experience which you only got a taste of with the sample. Also, you have plenty of us that you now know and trust, albeit digitally, who saw it and gave universal praise and excitement for feedback.
Click to expand...

Okay, I agree with you. RED doesn't have to do a damn thing for us if they don't want to and we should all be grateful that we even got stills let alone a clip from the film. I know I certainly am, and I have ceased asking Jim for the footage.

But I have to take issue with your argument. Essentially you're telling me that it's somehow okay that they don't release the footage because they showed it at NAB for people who paid $500? You're saying "You could have seen the film. A 12 minute movie for $500. If you didn't, tough luck". Sorry but that's a little harsh. And I'm even a little offended that Jarred would agree with you on such a flippant attitude towards a lot of people who made a generous leap of faith with this project. I'm going to end up spending over $21,000 for this camera, which is great. It's a choice I made. But even though it's miles less than $200,000 it's STILL a lot of money and it's money I'm going to have to pay in a few months. So unfortunately, I couldn't AFFORD to pay $500 to go see this film (forget the cost of the flight and the hotel fare). Sorry, if I'm being melodramatic, but I feel a little offended by your flippant attitude towards those of us who weren't able to make it to NAB who are really honestly pining to see this film. We invested in the camera and I don't think it's necessarily fair to lump us together as if we were just lazy and didn't want to spend that "extra $500" to come see footage we didn't even know was going to be there".

And, please, Jim and the RED team, don't view this as anything against you. Like I said above. As much as I'd love to see the rest of the film. I'm eternally grateful enough that this camera exists, let alone that I get to be one of the first 500 purchasers, let alone that I got to see 20 seconds of the film. It's more than I could ask for. I just feel like defending both RED AND those who want them to release the film. Jim IS completely justified in holding back, and still those reservation holders who want to see the movie, I feel, are justified in wanting to see it. I just ask that everybody be respectful on both fronts.
 
I just want to add to what I just wrote before something gets out of hand. I want to admit that I may have misunderstood the tone in your post. You may or may not have intended what I got out of it as it's hard to determine tone from a written post, so before I start any kind of disagreement I want to clarify that. Essentially I'm giving an advanced apology if I may have misunderstood you. But until it is clarified, my initial point still remains that I don't think it's necessary to start attacking the people on here who are asking to release the rest of the footage. I feel they are just as justified as RED is in not releasing it.
 
No worries, I wasn't trying to be flip or disrespectful, I just got a little frustrated with the tone of many people insinuating that Red wasn't doing enough for them when I've never seen a company bend over backwards so far.

My point was that Jim went to great lengths and great expense to show us footage from a cinema camera in as full a cinema experience as possible in a trade show. The were all gratious enough to answer whatever questions we had, for as long as we wanted to ask them. Every member of the team, including Jim himself, was available and eager to answer any question we had.

The $500 reference (travel, hotel, food) was only to say that many of us who saw it went to some lengths and expense to get there to be a part of it and we were rewarded with our questions answered and to see the footage in all of its glory.

No one is saying you don't deserve to see what the camera is capable of before you buy it, and I'm not saying people shouldn't see it--I thought it was amazing--I want everyone to see it (especially my wife because she thinks I'm crazy to spend so much on a camera!)

But, judging by what happened the last time they posted some clips, and the firestorm of questions it raised, at this point I would rather they hold off posting any more footage, so they can spend their time finishing our cameras, rather than fielding endless questions that they have already answered for themselves and moved on.

I'm sorry if my words came off disrespectful, or devisive--they weren't intending to be. We're all in this revolution together and we're in for an amazing ride.
 
I'm a poor student (well, not anymore actually, but that's another story) who can't afford a RED, but I'm very interested in it and I love to see footage from the camera.
No, the Red team doesn't HAVE TO release the rest of the footage, and certainly not for me, I'm not even a reservation holder (if I would have the money, I would have been there from the first day).
So, I don't have the money to fly from Belgium to Las Vegas to see RED, I already payed to see them in IBC (was great experience, thanks to the RED Team).
It's not like 'I made the choice not to go to NAB', it's that I just don't have the choice because I don't have the money.

You already apologized for the tone that maybe arose from your post, so I don't want to bitch about it anymore, I know you didn't mean it in a bad way, but the tone was really harsh, and it's also harsh that some completely agree with this point.

This being said, I of course, RED has to be busy with releasing a camera.
It's already amazing they still post here, very frequently even.
Putting a film on the web won't be their first priority, and it's not because I and other would *like* to see the rest of the movie,, that they have to put it online. It would just be nice though...
ps: loved the first clip, it showed more from the camera's potential then the
4k frame grabs, to my opinion.
 
On a different note, I know that Peter Jackson filmed a WWI dogfight for his first tentative of bringing Kong to the screen. It’s in the Limited Edition DVD. Having seen some pictures of the planes and dogfight from “Crossing Lines” the whole plane sequence looks basically the same as the one he filmed some years ago. Knowing that the dogfight is 3D generated, well at least the planes, they may gave shot the aerial plate with RED, but I just thought as they had just 2 days to do it all, maybe PJ finally put his old dogfight scene to good use and that’s what’s in Crossing the Line? That would explain how they did it so fast.
 
Zk2007 said:
. Knowing that the dogfight is 3D generated, well at least the planes, they may gave shot the aerial plate with RED, but I just thought as they had just 2 days to do it all, maybe PJ finally put his old dogfight scene to good use and that’s what’s in Crossing the Line? That would explain how they did it so fast.
Click to expand...

That's a definite NO on that one, that stuff was obviously live air-to-air footage.
Besides, what would the point be in faking it? It would only take longer to do that way.
 
It's always the same thing. It was the same with the HVX. Speculation and expectation get people incredibly uneasy, to the point the camera turns into the holy grail. It should be so perfect, that people really don't even see it as a camera, it's a miracle, a work of god, salvation to the people of the world. Then, images come, and people realize that even though the images are great, close to perfect, better than anything out there for nearly the price range, they are just that, digital images from a sensor. Well, that's what we love to do, I give you that, but it's far from a miracle, no matter how good it looks. Than starts the quest for small defects and artifacts and negative qualities to explain why nobody actually had an orgasm the time they saw the images. Nothing to do with their expactations being a little crazy, but it has probably something to do with rolling shutter artifacts, or with the image looking like video. Honestly folks, VIDEO? God, who makes video look like that deserves an award.

But then people start saying the critiques are going to drive costumers away, and that is just silly. The camera is almost out there, and there will be a huge numbr of images from it shortly. Most of them won't be Peter Jackson. There is absolutely no way showing off this film will hurt RED sales. If the camera delivers it delivers (and from what we've seen it's obvious it WILL DELIVER). It will be impossible to keep the hype they did for the last year when the secrecy is bound to end and the cameras are bound to enter the market. But hey, if they want another couple of months, who am I to disagree...
 
taubkin said:
It's always the same thing. It was the same with the HVX.
Click to expand...

Well, said. I am having a hard time tempering my expectations. :bleh:

This Red thing is like my expectations of the HVX amplified through a peyote trip to the desert.
 
For me, the confusion started with Jim saying they would be posting clips, (plural) (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1944), followed by Jarred saying the first one would be up soon (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1944&page=2)
Later in the same thread, Jim writes, " We have a problem here... to package this stuff . . . We'll post, but need some understanding until we can figure out a better way to deal with 8 bit delivery to all of you." (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1944&page=5).
I thought I was being encouraging with reference to how other media gets presented for web delivery. The first clip wasn't encoded as efficiently as an H264 encoding would've been. Was just trying to help, without being negative or questioning anyone (anyone believe me?).
I'd always assumed Red's primary underlying philosophy was to bring fire down from the gods for the everyday man, and assumed that showing this footage to everyone, whether they could attend NAB or not, would fit in that vein. If not, that's fine. I'm not trying to push anyone into a corner, just a misunderstanding based on what I thought I was reading.
I (and assume everyone else on this thread) certainly didn't mean to offend, or even realize it was offensive. Nor did I take it as a right or a demand, or imply that those who sacrificed so much to attend NAB shouldn't walk away with any experiences more special than those who sat at home waiting for camera-welfare (that's a joke). I was just responding to what I thought they said they were going to do. That's all. If they changed their mind, then fine. It'd have been nice to be told, instead of being berated:w00t:
Never mind . . . probably just a tempest in a teacup.
 
Patiently waiting...

Patiently waiting...

Andrew said:
We are all going through the learning curve here, including RED team.
Patience please patience…
Click to expand...

Still patiently waiting...
:)

Whatever.
 
Hey ho, let's go!

Hey ho, let's go!

There's plenty of Red footage out there. That has nothing to do with it.. I just want to see PJ's short. Whatever camera he might've used.

And I don't recall what kind of intolerable bad things the evil ones here said about the camera, but was it really so bad it's justified to refuse to let it out?(as someone said it was) Because the soundtrack got cleared if I remember correctly.

It's a crime against humanity holding away a short made by PJ. A crime I say. Of course you don't HAVE to show it. You don't HAVE to leave the seet for old ladies on the bus either. You don't HAVE to share candy with your friend at the movies. You don't HAVE to.... You get the picture. Now show it already.
 
luki said:
First post. Negative and anonymous.

Troll.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA
Click to expand...

I think "whatever." was his signature. in that context its not that negative, lets give'em another chance
 
Andrew said:
Actually Blue-Ray with its miserable 6MB/sec peak bit rate is good enough for true DVD quality or at best for highly compressed 720p.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. 6MB/sec looks very good. You can't compare this directly with intraframe compression which is far less efficient
 
Wow.

Wow.

luki said:
First post. Negative and anonymous.

Troll.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA
Click to expand...

Wow, really?

Check the sign up date. I've been a lurker since the first NAB.

I've watched the camera grow from a 'Scam' to seeing it in nearly every booth at Cinegear.

I was just thinking about the PJ short, and wanted to see it again. I searched this site and found this thread. I'm still patiently waiting for a release of the full short. In fact, I was surprised to see a post in this thread about a problem with the arial footage, as I remember it being clean and vivid in color.

I'd think that even if there was a problem with that footage, at this point it could just be disclaimered as being shot with Alpha firmware on an Alpha camera.

Your companies' product is directly married to the success of Red, so I guess I understand why you are so worried about any negative feedback that their product might get. But is it so bad that you need to read it into posts where nothing negative is implied?

"Lighten up, Francis!"

Whatever.
 
whatever said:
Wow, really?

Check the sign up date. I've been a lurker since the first NAB.

I've watched the camera grow from a 'Scam' to seeing it in nearly every booth at Cinegear.

I was just thinking about the PJ short, and wanted to see it again. I searched this site and found this thread. I'm still patiently waiting for a release of the full short. In fact, I was surprised to see a post in this thread about a problem with the arial footage, as I remember it being clean and vivid in color.

I'd think that even if there was a problem with that footage, at this point it could just be disclaimered as being shot with Alpha firmware on an Alpha camera.

Your companies' product is directly married to the success of Red, so I guess I understand why you are so worried about any negative feedback that their product might get. But is it so bad that you need to read it into posts where nothing negative is implied?

"Lighten up, Francis!"

Whatever.
Click to expand...

If you have lurked consistently as long as you say, then you should understand that Lucas isn't worried about "negative feedback" as much as lame ill informed and ill informing trolls who for some reason just want to use any opportunity to give RED a bad name. And like I tried to explain, you're previous post does appear to be very sarcastic and condescending until you realize the last portion is actually your signature (I'd do something about that to avoid this kind of response again).

But it was an honest mistake and everyone's on the same page now :) Welcome to the boards mate :)

whatever.

(see how that looks?)
 
Brandon said:
If you have lurked consistently as long as you say, then you should understand that Lucas isn't worried about "negative feedback" as much as lame ill informed and ill informing trolls who for some reason just want to use any opportunity to give RED a bad name. And like I tried to explain, you're previous post does appear to be very sarcastic and condescending until you realize the last portion is actually your signature (I'd do something about that to avoid this kind of response again).

But it was an honest mistake and everyone's on the same page now :) Welcome to the boards mate :)

whatever.

(see how that looks?)
Click to expand...

WTF? It's called WIT. Y'all take yourselves WAY to fuckin' seriously. Brandon, that mini diatribe you just wrote is ridiculous. This place is turning into what the other sites are saying about it, a bunch of totally defensive fanboys with very little sense of humour. Guy says patiently waiting, even adds a emoticon thingy, and Luki jumps all over him. And then three other people open their traps to back Luki up. His moniker is the funniest on the site, well, tied with Acehole anyways. Sarcastic and condescending his first post was not. And what's wrong with sarcasm? "everyone's on the same page now": Oh Yeaah!!!! You sound like an high school cheerleader. And then in the next breath "welcome to the boards mate".....some mate you are......hey let me spit in your eye and intro a few rules on what to say and what we like to see, and then I'll call you mate......maybe you should think before you start writing pc nonsense. The idea here is to expand the number of redusers, not drive people away with absurd notions of conduct.

Brandon. See how boring yours is?

oh and luki, you had no legitimate reason to write that, so you should do what's right when that happens, n'est pas?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top