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 :)

Ron Perelman's company is going to be done in a few years.

S

Sean Yu

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2008
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I don't see how any sensible consumer would use anything but Red in the upcoming years. It's a good thing for Perelman that he's got his billions in other investments. But either way, I can see that company file Chapter 11 within 15 years if they don't catch up.
 
I don't know, that new Hellboy movie looks pretty decent.

Oh, you mean the other guy?
 
toolizcool said:
I don't see how any sensible consumer would use anything but Red in the upcoming years.
Click to expand...

Then you don't really understand the nature of studio production, nor recognize that not everyone is going to share your opinion regarding RED versus 35mm film.

Format choice is not always about what is sensible anyway. Is one lens more sensible than another? One film stock over another? One script over another? One actor in a key role over another?

There are other factors at work than just sense. There is individual taste, there are long-term business relationships with vendors, there is comfort with standardized workflow procedures, there is traditional archiving concerns, there is technical conservatism, there is fear, there is "why fix it if it aint broke?" mentality, there is trust in the equipment and the people who service them, etc.

Currently the most popular digital cinema camera for major productions in Hollywood has been the Panavision Genesis. So you can thank Panavision for making digital origination more acceptable to the major studios.

And I hardly think Panavision is just going to suddenly stop developing new technologies to keep them competitive.

Besides, Panavision's popularity lies just as much in their service to the customer as their equipment.
 
Hmmm....
David sounds like the kinda guy who knows what he is talking about.

Wait.

Hold on.

Thats because he is the kind of guy who knows what he is talking about.

Okay good. Got that covered.
 
toolizcool said:
I don't see how any sensible consumer would use anything but Red in the upcoming years. It's a good thing for Perelman that he's got his billions in other investments. But either way, I can see that company file Chapter 11 within 15 years if they don't catch up.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the good folks at Coca Cola and Starbucks say the same thing into the mirror every morning... and yet... :ninja:

Noah
 
David, you're right. I'm wrong. However, I can't help but think....

It would just seem difficult for Panavision to compete with Red's pricing in the digital market, considering that the Panavision Genesis probably costs more to rent than to purchase Red cameras, after X amount of days. I've read the specs for both cameras, and I don't see anywhere where the Genesis is superior in performance.

As for other formats, of course many people are going to be more comfortable with older standards, equipment, format, workflow, etc. But just how long will that last? Of course, some film purists will not embrace digital, Red or no Red. However, the ratio of how often digital is used (and in particular, Red) to using 35mm film, I'm sure that ratio is going to change.

Either way, if things keep progressing for Red, Panavision, and probably Arri as well, will have a serious problem on their hands, if not already.

This might be a bad example, but...a few decades ago, no one thought anything of Japanese cars in America, not Ford or GM. Well, today...it's a different story.
 
a new world coming

a new world coming

This is really a moot issue because the change has already begun...but I'll chime in.

I've been editing for almost 30 years...linear to non-linear. From big-iron- black-box to proprietary high-end to off-the-shelf. Post production suites costs millions...now, we have Digital HD for 1/10th of that...software and hardware.

Just to say, I believe we are witnessing the start of a major shift that will transform the industry the way the music, photographic, print, and motion graphics industries have been transformed.

It's true that relationships and habit do have effect,... and the icons may not desire to change...but a whole new generation is rising to replace the old guard and their ways...

What is true, is that if I hadn't moved on to the "new non-linear world" of post production 20 years ago, it's doubtful I would be working today.

cd
 
Panavision isn't just a manufacturer. For instance, they are Arri's biggest competitor, but also their largest customer. If Panavision customers start demanding red cameras, I don't doubt that panavision would purchase quite a few, panavise them and start renting them. They already have several for testing.
 
Speaking of competition, the company that outfitted my camera truck said they're bidding on an order of 12 camera/production trucks for RED.

It looks like RED is upping the game across the board.
 
There is more to the issue than simply comparing the costs and specs of the RED vs. the Genesis. But even if you did that, camera specs change year by year. Costs change. Rental prices drop, etc.

Yes, RED will get a certain percentage of rental business that the Genesis may have gotten, that's guaranteed. But there are people who have deeper pockets than some, and would rather deal with Panavision and their great rental and tech support department and pay more for that service, than get into buying RED's and becoming equipment owners, or renting from private owners, etc.

But eventually things shift again and whether Panavision develops another new technology that competes with RED on a different spec/cost level than the Genesis, some other company may also develop something that competes with the RED. ARRI isn't standing still either in this regards.

Things change over time and predicting the future is a risky business.

I've been reading predictions of the death of film ever since 2000 when the Sony F900 came out and people said "now there is no reason to shoot on film" -- now it's 2008 and few people think that the future of cinema lies in the F900.

Movies with decent budgets don't take a bottom-line attitude when it comes to their acquistion format. They factor in many things, including the taste of the director and DP, not to mention the studio people, efx supervisors, etc. They factor in reliability, rental support, crew familiarity, post workflow, etc.

But mainly it comes down to the personal taste of the people who make the final decisions, logical or not. I've worked with directors and producers who make snap decisions on film stock or format without doing much research or testing, they just go by their own taste / prejudices and they have the power and money to do what they want.

But obviously RED will have a serious impact on the overall industry, simply because of the sheer numbers of cameras being sold and used. And obviously the older camera companies and rental houses are trying to factor in this new reality.
 
reality said:
Speaking of competition, the company that outfitted my camera truck said they're bidding on an order of 12 camera/production trucks for RED.

It looks like RED is upping the game across the board.
Click to expand...

What does this mean? Why would Red buy 12 camera trucks?
 
Lara Stara said:
What does this mean? Why would Red buy 12 camera trucks?
Click to expand...

Okay ... those are my trucks!

No seriously,

I do believe in the RED-Volution here, and on it I'm building my new Studios and all my projects are based on RED,
the Multimillion barrier has already been broken for RED productions, and even so I'm a little guy,
I have been speaking to many Big guys for my projects, and all have been very impressed with RED and look forward to see more.

So I do think that David is correct in his explanation but I do believe that any one that thinks, still,
that a major change in the industry has already begin, is deep at sleep, and bound for a big surprise when He awakes.

Just an Opinion off course.
ciao
 
Well, I don't want to give off the impression that I'm wishing Panavision goes out of business. I'm just anticipating that their business will have tremendous challenges in the future due to Red, which could lead to them changing their policies dramatically or even go out of business. I still think the Panavision Millenniums and the Arricams are beautiful machines that can create wonderful images. I just think they're the present and past, not the future, or at least not the direction cinema is heading.

As for the editing, I don't know anyone who still uses a splicer and tape, other than students in film school. Now it's all scanned with a telecine into a DI, and done with Avid or Final Cut. I'm not saying digital is always better, but it's definitely the way of the future, like it or not. It's logical cameras will follow.

Yes, the Panavision Genesis HD is the most popular model camera being used...for now. However, I might have to say that the Thomson Viper Filmstream and the high-end Sony cameras were the ones that really got Hollywood to notice digital filmmaking, with guys like George Lucas and Michael Mann doing movies like Star Wars I-III, Collateral, and Miami Vice.
 
toolizcool said:
It would just seem difficult for Panavision to compete with Red's pricing in the digital market, considering that the Panavision Genesis probably costs more to rent than to purchase Red cameras, after X amount of days. I've read the specs for both cameras, and I don't see anywhere where the Genesis is superior in performance.
Click to expand...

Big studios don't give a damn about a few thousand bucks. They are paying boom operators $600 a day and spending $100,000 a week for stupid "star trailers"... do you really think they care?

As David pointed out, one of the ways Genesis is "superior" (in some people's minds) is that it comes with the entire Panavision company behind it. It's a good camera. Red is also a good camera. This is not a zero-sum game.
 
Productions, no matter how big care about budget for every detail. I had to send back rolling spreaders on a multi million dollar project because it saved them $20/week. Also had to send back the extra op flat.... because it saved $10/week.
 
They care about the pennies, but they are also paranoid about making a cost-cutting decision that could backfire on them, so few people want to be pioneers. For example, I'm sure you could save some money by sending the negative for your 100-million-dollar extravaganza to Joe's Film Lab & Waffle House, or importing outdated stock from a Bulgarian basement... but few people are going to take a chance like that. They won't even take a chance on tested recan stock, not on a major movie, because they don't want to be that person who has to go to the bond company or the studio executives and explain if something goes wrong.

Hence why RED really needs to be established not only as an affordable but high-quality photographic system... but a reliable one. And establishing reliability and dependable serving naturally takes time. Nothing is ever proven to be reliable in the long-term within a short term because that's contradictory, like a new movie being labeled a "classic".

Studios can be simultaneously cheap and technically conservative, and often the second outweighs the first in decision-making because taking risks is discouraged and playing it safe is rewarded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top