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 :)

Ambush test...

Status
Not open for further replies.
This war started a long ago.
For this ambush test Jim reacted immediately a good fighter.
THE RATS are everywhere as we know well.
Anyway RED will be a winner in a year and this could be the end of the war.
 
These are my observations:

1. An ambush test serves Kodak nor any of the other players no good, so my assumption is that they will at least try to look objective with the "results" of the managed tests.

2. Red only recently shipped its 1st 50 units (very young in tech terms) to begin to speculate on its potential reach and place in the industry - even Jim concedes his, is pretty much a work-in-progress. He's not where he wants to be with the Red One yet, so every tests should and must recognize this fact, were they to be even slightly taken seriously.

3. Before the 50 units rolled out, Peter "LOTR" Jackson, Soderberg and others have "field tested" the RedOne with largely positive feedback - no Kodak "studio managed tests" can outstrip these, unfortunately for them.

4. From what has come out of the 1st 50 units and the prototypes, coupled with the very streamlined and cost effective workflow of the Redcode Raw aka "indie DI", Kodak, Sony and the other big guys have a helluva compettition on their hands ala the RedOne.

5. Finally, just like digital still SLR steamrolled traditional 35mm SLR film, Red and all the other players and proponents of the digital motion capture industry, will eventually have the day... its an inevitable reality of free market economies that cost efectiveness, coupled with time saving and ease of use, always wins the day.

Coming from a fan... I mean a rez holder, it might not mean much, but taking a few steps backwards to see the bigger picture, I bet it will resonate.
 
They can ambush all they can. You have something(s) they don't have.

The ones who will get the wrong opinion about RED will only bang themselves on the head more later. It all comes back...eventually.

You started changes. Many people will try to resist.
Try.
 
Jannard said:
We have a tip there there is an ambush test going on this weekend. We have been told that someone from Kodak is doing a side by side test where the results "have been pre-determined". The cameras involved are RED, D20, F23 and a 35mm film camera. Should be interesting. By the way, RED was not invited to the test.

We are scheduling a similar test. But we will invite all companies involved to supervise the test. The only way a test like this is valid.

Jim
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
I don´t know how many tests I have seen in my life. One is sure - the result of the test depends on the people making the test. So for us we do not believe anything what tests say - we want to see it ourselve.
One thing no test ever has done: handling, power suppy, working in critical situations. We saw a lot of shit shot on the best cameras, and we saw fantastic pictures with cameras we didn´t believe.
 
It'll be a long time...

It'll be a long time...

...before they have the results if it involves 35mm film. Will they test them under a film projection model? Or digital projection? Or both?

Will they also test the economies of the digital vs. film workflow? Will they assess the environmental impact footprint of each workflow model? The speed from acquisition to projection? Their archival capabilities?

I don't think so. So, when you consider the above, what is there to test, really?
 
Evin Grant said:
And this is parallel because they both exist in this universe?
Click to expand...

i believe Hugh Grant there is refering to the fact that film has also reached its
development limit.

Of course if you shot a 35 feature of a tank round being shot your career would be at its delvelopmental end as well
 
Jannard said:
If someone wants to "win" a test... it is pretty easy. Just don't invite the other players.

We are suggesting a test where all the other players are invited.

Jim
Click to expand...

But aren't you doing essentially the same thing as Kodak? That is, isn't the outcome already pre-determined? Why would the other participants voluntarily show up knowing that if they were beaten, they would have no alibi such as "we weren't there!" I'm thinking they already know about RED (may be reading this post right now) and its capabilities, so why is it in their interest to participate in a pre-determined loss?
 
Hi Jim,

It sounds like a PR stunt from what you've said. You've done the sensible thing by publicly denouncing such activities before the results can get out.

If they now publish something that doesn't fit with actual test results it's only going to reflect badly upon them.

I look forward to your testing of the various cameras with representatives, Jim. Perhaps Mr Mullen could oversee the proceedings as he is a trusted voice of reason amongst most if not all of the main, online, cinematography communities.

Paul
 
Well, if you point all the cameras at a Stouffer backlit wedge tests, a macbeth, and a zone plate, how is there any bias? It would let the chips fall where they land. I'd also shoot a strong light direct into the lens too to look for flares / prism artifacts.

The key thing with any camera or imaging system is knowing it's limits. Know the limits and you can get the best out of it.

Graeme
 
So what if more votes go to film at the end? Will that stop you from furthering your quest to make beautiful images with this beautiful camera?


yes, it's a damn good camera.
 
Lol at how fast Admiral Akbar showed up with his classic "It's a trap!" line. :)

I wouldn't worry about this test. As Graeme points out, these are, in theory, scientific tests, and scientific tests are subject to peer review, repeatability, etc.
 
I think what Jim is proposing is getting the people who really know what the cameras are capable of and doing the tests that way. Considering whoever is putting on the test didn't even invite ANYONE from the RED team seems to me they ARE setting up a pre-determined loss.

How can they test the abilities of the RED camera when the team that has worked so hard on it for the past year and 9 months, the people that know the most about it, aren't even present to operate the camera. It's total BS. It's like me inviting Microsoft to a showdown with Apple, Inc., but not inviting Apple, Inc. to the showdown. Without someone present on the developing team how can you get the most out of the newest and best things from a product?

Jim, you guys are work horses. We know you will do things right. Invite people to do the showdown. It'd be interesting to see if the competition accepts the invitation or not. If they don't, that's when you see your revolution working. They are scared.
 
So, what happens when they see the red image and it looks far superior???? Are they going to post those results? Maybe that's why none of the other players were invited. That way, when they lose, they don't have to show anyone the results and can deny the test ever existed!
 
I don't think they will... Doesn't Kodak have a reputation of denying the power of digital?
I think they'll try to make 35mm look it's best, and RED it's worst...

RED, on the other hand, already honestly reported that film has a superiour dynamic range, in comparison with the RED camera (although Jim said they would like to increase dynamic range in a later stadium). Although Jim also reported the advantages of RED in comparison with film (but that's another thread, stupid to just repeat)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top