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 :)

Challenge to Zacuto...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Carl Weston said:
It's clear from the responses to this post that if your not using a red camera on your next shoot, you're an absolute idiot...:)
Click to expand...

More like if you finish 2K you are an idiot. Just like that Ridley Scott.
 
Carl Weston said:
It's clear from the responses to this post that if your not using a red camera on your next shoot, you're an absolute idiot...:)
Click to expand...


Hahahahaha!
Quote of the year!

If you disagree about anything RED does, or want to work in another fashion, you are basically silly... :)

I allways shiver when that finger is pointed at me, while I stand amongst a ton of RED cameras of different flavors and work, still feeling strangely like an illoyal traitor.

Then I just have to do a small realitycheck, and I feel fine again....

Actually I really wanted to work for RED once upon a time, but I guess I am too much of an anarchist to really fit in... :)
 
Thou are here Jim.

I'm not sure what you are asking of me? I really don't want to embarrass anyone but I did invite every manufacturer, including you and Ted, I sent the email to you several times, I can publish it on the site here if you want, although I would never do that without your permission. In it, I told you that you may pick your own team to operate your camera. I told you that you could take the footage and post processes it anyway you want, anywhere you want. I sent the email to you several times with no reply. Where art thou Jim? Further, I sent you the same letter for the 2011 shootout, as well with no response. I "begged" you for the EPIC in 2011 which you started delivering 2 weeks after the shoot, so there were obviously cameras available. I caught a lot of flack about that from your fans/users as well because the EPIC was not included.

Frankly, I make documentaries, not propaganda films. For those that don't understand the difference, I as the filmmaker have no idea what the outcome of my film is till it's finished (unlike a Michael Moore film, where the end is determined first and the shoot is just there to prove its case). Wow, your fans/users are very beholden to you, it's almost like they would join the EPIC military and fight to the death for its honor, that's cool, no other camera company has that kind of support. That's impressive that people think so much of you and your cameras but my film was not created for RED's benefit and no other camera or community is having a conversation like this. As I've stated, you have created a wonderful camera, congratulations but to me and many of the DP's in my film and guest DP's interviewed, it's just a tool like lights and tripods. It all has to work together. I rely on my crew, much more then my gear. If I had your amazing camera and put it on a lousy tripod and all of my pans and tilts sucked, to me it wouldn't matter, the overall film would suck.

Spoiler alert, these are the kinds of comments you will hear in my film: I asked 9 ASC cinematographers, if they had to pick between shitty picture or shitty sound what would they recommend to the director if in the situation you could only have one? Every single cinematographer said shitty picture. There reason: You can tolerate shitty picture but shitty sound is intolerable. I asked a cinematographer if he would be willing to live with a take where the actor didn't hit his mark and isn't in their eye light but the performance was better then when they hit their mark and his answer was an astounding yes. This is what DP's in a collaborate effort do and I felt it was important for people to hear this as well as well as see what camera are capable of. My film is not just about cameras, I keep telling everyone that, it's about both and I felt that a lot of young filmmakers, directors, cinematographers and operators will love the opportunity to hear from people like this. Much like we have done with all of our other shows. To educate and entertain. Remember, I am also a filmmaker and this is my artistic expression. If all you want to see is a raw test, they are out there, although, I'm not sure how fair and accurate they are. My film is the hows and whys of how to make your camera look great, plus a lot more. Actually, to be honest, I'm not totally sure what my film is yet because I haven't even really started it prior to getting the comments from the screenings.

Jim, everything you asked for I did. I invited the manufacturers to participate. Canon was there, although they did not interfere with what Polly Morgan did on the C300. Sony was there, only to operate their F65 since it was only 2 weeks old. They did not help with the F3 or FS100. Panasonic recommended the shooters for their GH2 and we used them. Alexa, Nikon and RED chose not to directly participate. Every aspect of this test is conducted by Bruce Logan ASC and I've never met anyone with as much digital knowledge as him. So much so, that he didn't feel that the work flow was exactly right when he viewed the show at NAB and decided that he would not allow the 15 sold out screenings at NAB to happen. I commend him for that and gave him carte blance to do that even know I had over 150 people show up at my booth to see the show and it caused me some embarrassment and lots of money. I don't care, we wanted it right. Bruce is currently redoing the presentation to make sure it is right and fair. Over 100 people were on set during the shootout including Gary Adcock and other digital specialists to make sure we did not make any mistakes and did everything fairly.

The only issue you seem to take with my process that I have done, is the issue of a 4K projection and I've told you why it's not appropriate. This test is not here to prove that your camera looks the best in an environment that only you and your pals can really see in 2012. Again that would be propaganda and I'm making a documentary about truth in 2012. Every one knows that in 2012 4K is not here, most of the people releasing projects with your camera are releasing in 2K. I respect you, I would love to finally personally meet you, I admire you and I agree with you on all but one issue. Let's just agree to disagree on that one issue. Best regards, Steve Weiss
 
Steve you're dead wrong . . . I would take a paper cut for RED but that's about my limit for any manufacturer ; )
 
KETCH ROSSi said:
Well, Michael as I respect your opinion, I sure hope you are not referring to me with such statement, as I can fortunately afford any camera currently available for sale, and few that you don't know about it as well... ;)

Yet, I choose RED EPIC, because simply it is as of today the absolute best camera ever made.... PERIOD!!
Click to expand...

I am not referring to you Ketch. Although you do have a RED or die attitude, which is 100% fine, it seems you have tested many many cameras and you know exactly why you chose RED. It is the best camera ever made to you.

Some people prefer the Alexa, or Sony's F_ _ _, or Canon's C500/C300.

My point is, people need to at least experience other cameras and learn other cameras before saying "That Alexa is complete garbage, or the C500 is the worst around". That seems to be the mentality for a lot of RED Fanboys and it gets old.

You can never label a camera as the "Best" camera ever. Sure it might be better in certain aspects, or many aspects. But labeling something "best" is still an opinion, and opinions are never fact.
 
Michael Millichamp said:
You can never label a camera as the "Best" camera ever. Sure it might be better in certain aspects, or many aspects. But labeling something "best" is still an opinion, and opinions are never fact.
Click to expand...

This. There are many situations where GoPro is hands down better camera than EPIC, Alexa or others. Choose the right camera for the job and put the right person behind the camera and you will have fantastic results.
 
The problem here is Shoot Outs and head to head Thunderdome style competition is what Americans want in everything in their life. Look at the current state of our politics. WTF? This is what sells and people tune in for and the trend is getting more bizarre each year. Soon RuPaul will be moderating the Presidential debates

What we need as a nation to succeed is not more guns and tough guys but more engineers, scientists, artists and educators. This message does not sell beer or DSLR accessories I'm afraid.

To be a good DP, like anything, there applies the 10,000 hour rule - not what our ADD nation wants to hear. We want a WWF style smack down to decide what product is going to transform our shitty little Vimeo ideas into Kubrick art. Crap at 5K is still crap - I know because I haven't gotten any more talented since I purchased my Epic. But it looks cool and chicks dig it! And in the end buyer motivation has a whole lot less with what the product does as it has to do with how it makes you feel to own it. Honestly, it feels good to own a RED product so that's why I do.
 
Steve... without a 4K test there is no interest on our part. Do Indie filmmakers ever hope that their films will be shown on the big screen? If so, and since 4K delivery is here, why would you not want to include this in your tests? Are we just talking about You Tube delivery? Everyone needs to know what their footage looks like for all possible presentations... at least that is the way we think.

We have disagreed about this from the beginning. If you want to constrain your testing to "what used to be the standard"... we have no interest.

Additionally... if 4K is not here, why have so many companies announced a 4K camera? We are not alone...

Jim

steve weiss said:
Thou are here Jim.

I'm not sure what you are asking of me? I really don't want to embarrass anyone but I did invite every manufacturer, including you and Ted, I sent the email to you several times, I can publish it on the site here if you want, although I would never do that without your permission. In it, I told you that you may pick your own team to operate your camera. I told you that you could take the footage and post processes it anyway you want, anywhere you want. I sent the email to you several times with no reply. Where art thou Jim? Further, I sent you the same letter for the 2011 shootout, as well with no response. I "begged" you for the EPIC in 2011 which you started delivering 2 weeks after the shoot, so there were obviously cameras available. I caught a lot of flack about that from your fans/users as well because the EPIC was not included.

Frankly, I make documentaries, not propaganda films. For those that don't understand the difference, I as the filmmaker have no idea what the outcome of my film is till it's finished (unlike a Michael Moore film, where the end is determined first and the shoot is just there to prove its case). Wow, your fans/users are very beholden to you, it's almost like they would join the EPIC military and fight to the death for its honor, that's cool, no other camera company has that kind of support. That's impressive that people think so much of you and your cameras but my film was not created for RED's benefit and no other camera or community is having a conversation like this. As I've stated, you have created a wonderful camera, congratulations but to me and many of the DP's in my film and guest DP's interviewed, it's just a tool like lights and tripods. It all has to work together. I rely on my crew, much more then my gear. If I had your amazing camera and put it on a lousy tripod and all of my pans and tilts sucked, to me it wouldn't matter, the overall film would suck.

Spoiler alert, these are the kinds of comments you will hear in my film: I asked 9 ASC cinematographers, if they had to pick between shitty picture or shitty sound what would they recommend to the director if in the situation you could only have one? Every single cinematographer said shitty picture. There reason: You can tolerate shitty picture but shitty sound is intolerable. I asked a cinematographer if he would be willing to live with a take where the actor didn't hit his mark and isn't in their eye light but the performance was better then when they hit their mark and his answer was an astounding yes. This is what DP's in a collaborate effort do and I felt it was important for people to hear this as well as well as see what camera are capable of. My film is not just about cameras, I keep telling everyone that, it's about both and I felt that a lot of young filmmakers, directors, cinematographers and operators will love the opportunity to hear from people like this. Much like we have done with all of our other shows. To educate and entertain. Remember, I am also a filmmaker and this is my artistic expression. If all you want to see is a raw test, they are out there, although, I'm not sure how fair and accurate they are. My film is the hows and whys of how to make your camera look great, plus a lot more. Actually, to be honest, I'm not totally sure what my film is yet because I haven't even really started it prior to getting the comments from the screenings.

Jim, everything you asked for I did. I invited the manufacturers to participate. Canon was there, although they did not interfere with what Polly Morgan did on the C300. Sony was there, only to operate their F65 since it was only 2 weeks old. They did not help with the F3 or FS100. Panasonic recommended the shooters for their GH2 and we used them. Alexa, Nikon and RED chose not to directly participate. Every aspect of this test is conducted by Bruce Logan ASC and I've never met anyone with as much digital knowledge as him. So much so, that he didn't feel that the work flow was exactly right when he viewed the show at NAB and decided that he would not allow the 15 sold out screenings at NAB to happen. I commend him for that and gave him carte blance to do that even know I had over 150 people show up at my booth to see the show and it caused me some embarrassment and lots of money. I don't care, we wanted it right. Bruce is currently redoing the presentation to make sure it is right and fair. Over 100 people were on set during the shootout including Gary Adcock and other digital specialists to make sure we did not make any mistakes and did everything fairly.

The only issue you seem to take with my process that I have done, is the issue of a 4K projection and I've told you why it's not appropriate. This test is not here to prove that your camera looks the best in an environment that only you and your pals can really see in 2012. Again that would be propaganda and I'm making a documentary about truth in 2012. Every one knows that in 2012 4K is not here, most of the people releasing projects with your camera are releasing in 2K. I respect you, I would love to finally personally meet you, I admire you and I agree with you on all but one issue. Let's just agree to disagree on that one issue. Best regards, Steve Weiss
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Josh Beadle said:
Crap at 5K is still crap - I know because I haven't gotten any more talented since I purchased my Epic.
Click to expand...

That was seriously funny line. Good job.
 
Josh Beadle said:
Steve you're dead wrong . . . I would take a paper cut for RED but that's about my limit for any manufacturer ; )
Click to expand...

Funny...and true.
Vendors are only viable as long as they make viable products.
 
Jannard said:
Steve... without a 4K test there is no interest on our part. Do Indie filmmakers ever hope that their films will be shown on the big screen? If so, and since 4K delivery is here, why would you not want to include this in your tests? Are we just talking about You Tube delivery? Everyone needs to know what their footage looks like for all possible presentations... at least that is the way we think.

We have disagreed about this from the beginning. If you want to constrain your testing to "what used to be the standard"... we have no interest.

Additionally... if 4K is not here, why have so many companies announced a 4K camera? We are not alone...

Jim
Click to expand...


Passive agressive commentary on forums is not how two prominent and successful industry leaders should air their laundry.

Get on the phone and work it out like the pros you are. Maybe there can be a 4K screening somewhere?

REDUSER is an amazing resource for all kinds of valuable information. The back and forth taunting and gaming is a turnoff.
 
Jannard said:
Steve... without a 4K test there is no interest on our part. Do Indie filmmakers ever hope that their films will be shown on the big screen? If so, and since 4K delivery is here, why would you not want to include this in your tests? Are we just talking about You Tube delivery? Everyone needs to know what their footage looks like for all possible presentations... at least that is the way we think.

We have disagreed about this from the beginning. If you want to constrain your testing to "what used to be the standard"... we have no interest.
Click to expand...
Lets see what is 2012 and whats not: http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?78305-What-resolution-do-you-finish

4K not doing too well so far.

Additionally... if 4K is not here, why have so many companies announced a 4K camera? We are not alone...

Jim
Click to expand...

4K is obviously better for post even if you don't finish 4K (which hardly anyone does). 4K footage downscaled to 2K looks better than 2K footage. You can test with your camera...
 
Although the 4K finish may not be the standard right now, it only seems right to try not to dumb down any camera in the test.

And there are other obvious uses for the extra resolution, from reframing to stabilizing.

It's fair that the difference in resolution can be appreciated on those tests, just as we can see the extra dynamic range of the Alexa or the extra sensitivity of the Canon C300.

-----------------------------------------------
https://vimeo.com/alexmontoyamelia
 
So all the cameras seem pretty great to me and the images that come from them are equally as great. Each one may be better at some things than the others. I have this image of Zacuto from seeing them represented at previous NABs of a cheesy kind of company with scantily clad women representing their products. I'm pretty sure their stuff is ok or they would be out of business by now. It would be hard form me to lend any credence to, or take seriously, a company with this business model...
 
As an indie filmmaker, I think I might have some trouble finding a theater right now that will show my film in a theater at all, let alone in 4K, (which is a good news as I've already mastered it in 2K) : )
I'm sure in the next 2-3 years it will be different.
 
Perry Wilson said:
yeah why doesnt RED just do a test of their own
Click to expand...

Very much this. Red guys shall to perform their own tests later this year with the recent 4K and sub-4K cams: Red Epic, Sony F65, Arri Alexa, new 4K Canons, Blackmagic CC (2,5K) and even DSLRs like mkIII (1080). Ask pros to come and judge it on a 2K and 4K projection. I'm really tired of some test shoot videos, that always have couple guys with nonsense like "wow, even the old dslr footage looks better than Red, haha!" I'm tired of that crap.
 
Jannard said:
Steve... without a 4K test there is no interest on our part. Do Indie filmmakers ever hope that their films will be shown on the big screen? If so, and since 4K delivery is here, why would you not want to include this in your tests? Are we just talking about You Tube delivery? Everyone needs to know what their footage looks like for all possible presentations... at least that is the way we think.

We have disagreed about this from the beginning. If you want to constrain your testing to "what used to be the standard"... we have no interest.

Additionally... if 4K is not here, why have so many companies announced a 4K camera? We are not alone...

Jim
Click to expand...

Jim,
I would agree with you that 4K cameras are here (and there are benefits for some, not everyone to using them), again, right camera for right job. My only issue is that 4K theaters are not here. Statistics prove it and at NAB I believe only Canon had 4K projection and it cost them a $250K rental for 2 projectors from what I heard. Sure I might be able to find a 4K theater to screen in LA but no way can I find one in all of the countries I'm screening in, probably not one. Again my issue is that I don't want to misrepresent the public on what they will be seeing. In 2012 they will for the most part be watching 2K. In the history of cinema for all practical purposes there has really only been one 4K movie released. So the theaters that do have 4K are only playing 2K in them because 4K films are very scarce in 2012.

If things change in the future, which they may or may not, because many theaters have already bought 2K and I don't see them shelling our more cake to upgrade their 2K to 4K when I don't see it selling them more tickets, we'll have to see. The theater business is a business and not a great one. BTW, in my film you will see a screening of average theater goers watching the shootout to see if they even notice the difference between the iPhone 4s or the F65, Alexa or RED. That is after all who we make these projects for, NO?

Now I have a challenge for you. I bet that in our 2K screening that you would not be able to pick your camera out between the Alexa & F65 and maybe some of the others. I've watched this thing a hundred times and all of us in the color timing room are like "which camera is this" Rodney was doing it, Bruce was doing it, I was, the higher end cameras all look very similar even when shot with different DP's and lighting schemes. It's very hard to tell the difference (we are splitting hairs), which is good news for you because your price point is the best. Now it all boils down to creature comforts, design, use, workflow, speed and preference. Again there is tons of business for everyone and an ass for every saddle. Signing off, Steve
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top