Any Big Time Director's Buying RED?

[Akcelik]

I cant imagine not. But it would be nice to know who is..

One of my short list of the most favorite Director's "Hal Hartley" is always making movies on a shoe string budget. I just cant imagine anything better than Red.

BTW, anyone have any idea what the Australian short "We Have Decided Not to Die" was shot on?

 

[Andrew Benz]

Jackson, Cameron, Fincher... Emanuel.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Myself.

[EDIT]

Jackson, Cameron, Fincher... Emanuel.

 

[Akcelik]

Jackson, Cameron, Fincher... Emanuel.

Jackson _____? Cameron____? Fincher_____? how do i search to learn more???

Emanual! you! which films did you make? how do i learn more peoples! one name = bad search result on google. need specifics

 

[Brook Willard]

Peter Jackson, James Cameron, David Fincher

 

[Emanuel A.]

Emanual! you! which films did you make?

Chiuuu!!

I'm undercovered...

 

[Akcelik]

Peter Jackson - "Lord of th Rings"

James Cameron - "The Terminator"

David Fincher - "Fight Club"

Emanuel - "Chiuuu!" (that i have not seen)

 

[Emanuel A.]

Peter Jackson - "Lord of th Rings"

James Cameron - "The Terminator"

David Fincher - "Fight Club"

Emanuel - "Chiuuu!" (that i have not seen)

My bad: sorry my translation difficulty from my own native phonetic expression...not yet translated for the universal english!

[EDIT -- Spelling reasons... ]

Even if speaking seriously and actually the point is not who are the directors but the shooters who will be shooting with the RED...

 

[Matthew Greene]

Most traditional "big time" directors don't own cameras nor are they really knowledgable about them, you'd even be hard pressed to find one that has even operated one in a long time.

There are exceptions like Robert Rodriguez or others that actually own a full production company with gear like Peter Jackson but they're the exception and not the majority.

There is a much better chance of a Cinematographer/DP owning one.

 

[Ruairi Robinson]

Most traditional "big time" directors don't own cameras nor are they really knowledgable about them, you'd even be hard pressed to find one that has even operated one in a long time.

There are exceptions like Robert Rodriguez or others that actually own a full production company with gear like Peter Jackson but they're the exception and not the majority.

There is a much better chance of a Cinematographer/DP owning one.

This is different though, With film you have to deal with stock, development and telecine costs on top of the camera and lenses, so there was never any point in directors owning one outright, because you couldn't just shoot and plug shots straight into the editing timeline. I think with this camera, you just might find this situation could change at least for some people... Because in the not too distant future you will be able to skip a whole lot of costs, favours, bureaucracy and all sorts of grief that can impact image quality.

It changes EVERYTHING.

 

[Ben Feuer]

There's some truth in that - but I think most directors will still have their hands full taking care of everything a director is supposed to do without trying to do the DP's job for him.

 

[Jason Francois]

I for one, am a director-type that continues to have an interest in cinematography. I don't really ever plan to hire myself out as a DP nor will I ever shoot my own features, but I want to learn more about the craft.

For me RED represents a way for me to learn and add a bit of "serious hobby" to my love for filmmaking. I also believe that in order to be the best director it doesn't hurt to know as much about what everybody else is doing, even if you will never do their jobs. Usually in business the best CEO's are the ones that have worked their way up the ranks learning as much as they can as they go.

I think there are at least a few directors out their buying this camera and I don't see anything wrong with that.

I guess that really doesn't address the BIGTIME DIRECTOR issue unless it counts in my own mind.

 

[Jason Francois]

There's some truth in that - but I think most directors will still have their hands full taking care of everything a director is supposed to do without trying to do the DP's job for him.

well said. I still show up on set and pretend like I've never touched the camera, so that nobody will ask me to deal with something I shouldn't be doing.

 

[Ruairi Robinson]

There's some truth in that - but I think most directors will still have their hands full taking care of everything a director is supposed to do without trying to do the DP's job for him.

It's not JUST owning the camera though - you can still have a DP to light and operate and all that stuff and careers aren't threatened. It's owning the file management system that gives you complete control of all the footage that you shoot, from shoot to edit all the way to making a finished film print.

And it means if you need, umm... one a shot of the sun through trees or something, and you are in the editing room long after the DP has gone onto another job, and this one shot will make all the difference, you can grab that one shot without having to invoke a whole massive chain of cost and labour that's typically involved in shooting ANYTHING on film, and to a certain extent, cut out the fat.

 

[Steve Gibby]

The compartmentalized staff and crew situation of features and certain other higher budget cine-style productions (especially union projects), may hold true for a certain percentage of projects using RED One, but there will be a vast number if indie projects, smaller productions, and small to mid-sized EFP productions where project staff performs multiple functions. The old "I'm the producer, you're the director, you're the DP" structure simply does not apply for those genres and sizes of productions.

I'm a good case in point. I do no union work. Over a 30-year career I've developed the experience and skills to function as an Executive Producer, Producer, Director, Scriptwriter, Editor, DP, Cinematographer, Videographer, Photographer, and Production Assistant at the national and international production level. On some smaller, but nationally airing productions, I function as all or most of those job titles on the same production. On larger contract projects, I may function as only one of those job titles. I regularly win national awards (Emmy, etc.) for work in most of those job titles.

RED One is will be a flexible and versatile tool that will be warmly embraced by motion media professionals who are also versatile and flexible - and yes, many of them will be a highly-experienced combination of director, DP, cinematographer, and videographer. A versatile tool designed for versatile workers to use in a versatile manner.

 

[Thomas Mathai]

It's not JUST owning the camera though - you can still have a DP to light and operate and all that stuff and careers aren't threatened. It's owning the file management system that gives you complete control of all the footage that you shoot, from shoot to edit all the way to making a finished film print.

And it means if you need, umm... one a shot of the sun through trees or something, and you are in the editing room long after the DP has gone onto another job, and this one shot will make all the difference, you can grab that one shot without having to invoke a whole massive chain of cost and labour that's typically involved in shooting ANYTHING on film, and to a certain extent, cut out the fat.

It's assuming the director enjoys being that hands on and/or doesn't have the resources available to have it done for him/her.

 

[Matthew Greene]

It just doesn't work that way in Hollywood. Directors don't deal with cameras, thats a tool of the camera dpt just like they don't own the barbecue that makes the hamburgers at the craft services table.

Outside of Hollywood and internationally it's a different story.

 

[Trevor Meier]

RED is part of technological catalyst that is rebuilding the way Hollywood does things... as is not unusual, from the outside in - the independants embrace it and, what is successful, the studios adopt.

The technology of storytelling is slowly becoming transparent. The truly valuable asset is becoming the craft of storytelling. RED and Final Cut and other products that commoditize the technologies used in filmmaking mean that the structure of how a show is produced will follow the form needed to enable the highest craft, rather than boundaries imposed by the technology.

There is still need for large, unionized, hierarchical shows. For certain genres that makes sense. But it's now not a requirement to create a great show, it's an option. Cameras like RED are one part of the shift - options.

 

[Ruairi Robinson]

It's assuming the director enjoys being that hands on and/or doesn't have the resources available to have it done for him/her.

Damn, cuz I was assuming they would be forced to, with guns pointed at their children's heads. Obviously it would suit the people it would suit. It's axiomatic.

And we all know how much directors hate having CONTROL.

It just doesn't work that way in Hollywood. Directors don't deal with cameras, thats a tool of the camera dpt just like they don't own the barbecue that makes the hamburgers at the craft services table.

Outside of Hollywood and internationally it's a different story.

There was no point owning a film camera for all the reasons already mentioned. It's a different deal with Red, because for a reasonable cost, you can own something outright that would shoot stuff that would fit seemlessly into the pipeline of the entire production process at no extra cost.

Some of the shots in 28 days later were taken in the directors back garden because it was shot on DV, so it didn't cost any more. And it cut in perfectly because the rest of the film had the same look. You think people won't take advantage of this if they can capture full quality images with NO extra cost, beyond buying the camera and a couple of lenses?

Shots in The Bourne Identity were taken by just the Director (who used to be a cinematographer) and the actor on the street. Ridley Scott always operates his own camera. George Lucas operated B camera on loads of shots on Raiders of the lost Ark, and have you heard of that guy, what's his name... something Rodreguez? There are COUNTLESS examples of this, all through history, in and out of hollywood.

That may not have been how Hollywood tended to work in the past, but there was never the option of a low cost 4k rez digital cinema camera either.

R.

 

[Appleton]

That may not have been how Hollywood tended to work in the past, but there was never the option of a low cost 4k rez digital cinema camera either.

R.

Most directors prefer not to op. It has little to do with the cost of a system. In my experience there are various reasons for it. Some of it's generational, stylistic, performance requirements, ego etc...albeit that seems to be changing. More directors seem to be grabbing the reigns themselves.