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 :)

Clarifications...

I believe ChuckT to be a Sony/panasonic dealer in some capacity - period.

Everyone is entitled to opinions in here, but chuck's body of work speaks volumes. The one thing I would agree with him on is that Red is not for everybody. Its a very professional camera, and those who have trouble with getting good exposure(lens choices, lighting, filtering, etc) are not going to get the most out of this camera. If you shoot with autoexposure on a prosumer camera, Red is probably not for you. This is all about painting with light. If you don't want to put in the effort, go with a camera that is more point and shoot. We all know how those look.
 
Hi ChuckT,

I saw Che at Cannes and thought the film looked amazing at the times when SS exposed it well. Having used most of the cameras that are available on actual jobs, I would say the Red easily holds it's own with the other high end electronic capture formats, and with 35mm too.

You can point to some areas where one camera/format slightly out performs another, but with an understanding of how to use it you can get great results with all of them.

You know ChuckT, I'd actually prefer you remain unconvinced... Lets compete in the marketplace, and put my $65,000 investment against your $250,000 and see who comes out ahead in 5 years ?

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com
 
just ignore him... he is talking out his ass....don't even post more response..just makes his day when you give him the energy of a reply.
 
Peter Majtan said:
Wow man - that is some of the most amazing animation I have ever seen. I am only beginning to comprehend what they went through...
Great link Jbeale...
Click to expand...

There's no way that was done practically. In this day and age??? Boujou??? If this was real...OMFG, but I really don't think so. Clever use of technique though.
 
chuckt said:
In comparison, Sony F35 is definitely worth $250K or more in quality and practicality.
Click to expand...
Not for Sony customers as us.

We have spendt -way- more than $250.000 on HDCAM gear, are very happy with it and preferred to add red instead to F23/35 - due to many factors including image quality.

RED offers many creative options the F35 doesnt have (120P?).
RED is more compact and lightweight.
REDs image resolution is near 400% higher than HDCAMs as the F35, 900, 750.

Sony certainly has a -much- better and faster workflow, is not of reduced compaibilty with todays postproduction, is less buggy and has a better service network, especially in europe etc etc. Also Sony ergonomics are, lets say, better suited for some jobs - however reds superior resolution and raw data make it the camera of choice for many others shoots, especially at the upper end. And buying, owning, renting and using -all- devices of Sony HDCAMs System (VTRs, Monitors, Cams etc) - we choose to add red.

The cameras evolution over the last 8 months has been impressive, and if you cant shoot a brilliant movie with red - the camera is one of your last problems. The workflow issues, closed fileformat and resulting lockout of most of the relevant postproduction systems are now, red has pointed that out several times, ending. The cameras softwares issues are meanwhile no longer real issues, at least for houndreds of productions worldwide with dedicated, skilled and professionels moviemakers.

That you dislike Soderberghs artistic choices is fine.
Thats your taste - and probably the reason why he is getting paid a slight little bit different than you are - because he doesnt have your taste.

p.s.
regarding prices: Our first CD-Recorder costed >10.000 USD, our first online SD-NLE >100.000 USD. Electronic Devices (as RED, F35/23/900/750, Origin, SI2K, Phantom 65 etc) allow to be produced in top quality at low prices over time - and its excellent that red is bringing these price advantages to its customers.
 
Regarding blown highlights.. let's set the record straight as I was there for some of the scenes people are talking about. The exposures were creative decisions and SS knew exactly what he was getting. Not everything is about technically perfect choices.
 
chuckt said:
If proof is in the pudding, "Che" movie was a major disappointment from a camera point of view. In comparison, Sony F35 is definitely worth $250K or more in quality and practicality. However, Jim has done enough damage in the market by flooding it with $17K camera bodies. Market share matters. To make things worse, Sony and Panasonic and Canon are not making any attempt to compete with Jim. These Goliaths think the single product David is not worth paying attention to. In the meanwhile Jim has sold 2000 cameras and Sony can't move even 5 and Panasonic is desperately trying to clear their warehouse with incentives. It is VHS vs Betamax story all over again. Market share beats quality everytime. Look at Apple OS vs Microsoft OS.
Click to expand...

Playing devil's advocate is fine, and even useful in the right setting. Doing it behind a pseudonym without sharing your real name just makes you a coward.

(putting ChuckT on ignore list)

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA
 
stevesherrick said:
I believe ChuckT to be a Sony/panasonic dealer in some capacity - period.
Click to expand...

really? I assumed he was a 15yo who couldn't afford a RED ONE so had to go Sony instead... Hmmm, I guess we'll never know...

Nice to have you back Chuck, been a while :)
 
Guys, I think one should have the temerity to respond to the points raised in somebody's concern than reverting to personal attacks. I think ChuckT does have a point in a sense if Red does capture a large number of market share. Red has shown a tendency to flout some acceptable technology workflows, and, additionally, backward compatibility with existing products. I have seen big companies who have large market shares in whatever technology they produce do some violation of acceptable norms. However smaller underdogs normally try to be well-behaved.

Unfortunately, seeing Red's viewpoint on ignoring several of the important features (some which they either dismiss as irrelevant or claim that they are actively working on, however, one never sees them) which many of their customers demand, just gives me an indication, that what may happen when the underdog becomes the dominant market share holder.
 
Joofa said:
Guys, I think one should have the temerity to respond to the points raised in somebody's concern than reverting to personal attacks. I think ChuckT does have a point in a sense if Red does capture a large number of market share. Red has shown a tendency to flout some acceptable technology workflows, and, additionally, backward compatibility with existing products. I have seen big companies who have large market shares in whatever technology they produce do some violation of acceptable norms. However smaller underdogs normally try to be well-behaved.

Unfortunately, seeing Red's viewpoint on ignoring several of the important features (some which they either dismiss as irrelevant or claim that they are actively working on, however, one never sees them) which many of their customers demand, just gives me an indication, that what may happen when the underdog becomes the dominant market share holder.
Click to expand...

couple of points:

1) the community does have the temerity to address points, and several of chuck's points were addressed, however Chuck has a long history in this community :) Since his first appearance he has had nothing nice to say and only criticisms that even when politely explained or corrected he continues to spread. Criticism is more than welcome here, just not from Chuck :) His behavior is consistent enough to know what he's all about.

2) This argument that RED is ignoring peoples complaints or sleeping on the job always really bugs me. RED is a brand new company and a very small one at that, and in only 2 years they've already changed the industry and given all of us an AMAZING tool at an unbelievable price point (thanks guys!). They are continuing to get product out the door, preparing new products and continuing to make shipped product repeatedly better and better, after it's in your hands! How can anyone think they're ignoring requests? No request is ignored, but some are obviously more important to the majority than others.

Is EVERYTHING with RED running perfectly? No, of course not, but ask anyone in the industry if they could have accomplished what they have 2 years ago and you would have been laughed off the backlot.
 
Brandon said:
... ask anyone in the industry if they could have accomplished what they have 2 years ago and you would have been laughed off the backlot.
Click to expand...

Brandon, I don't want to belittle Red's accomplishment -- they have certainly achieved a lot in a short span of time and I respect that. However, statements such as being "laughed off the backlot" are uncalled for since a certain myth has been perpetuated regarding what can be accomplished by any technology company in 2 or 3 years. I don't think it is in Red's interest to let such a myth go on for a long time, because it may be a useful marketing gimmick, but in the long run such statements are hurtful.

The technological achievement of many companies that are doing related work are no less phenomenal, however, many of them have stayed out of such myths because they have allowed more transparency in their development methods, and very importantly candidness regarding testing methods and procedures.

(Additionally, many of the other companies have websites more befitting of a technology company. :angry2: )
 
Joofa said:
Guys, I think one should have the temerity to respond to the points raised in somebody's concern than reverting to personal attacks. I think ChuckT does have a point in a sense if Red does capture a large number of market share....
Click to expand...

Like most trolls, there is enough truth in his posts to beg a response. But if you check ChuckT's history - he is purely a troll. Nothing to add, nothing to really address, and mixed in with the "truths" is a lot of pure garbage.

So yes, if you just read that one post, there is some truth buried in it. But check the history of his (always anonymous) posts, and the guy is just a troll.

I personally have no patience for that.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA
lucas (at) assimilateinc (dot) com
 
Brandon said:
No, of course not, but ask anyone in the industry if they could have accomplished what they have 2 years ago and you would have been laughed off the backlot.
Click to expand...

That's an exaggeration -- more like "met with extreme skepticism".

Most industry people knew that adapting DSLR RAW technology into a digital cinema camera was coming down the road -- you already had the Arri-D20 and Dalsa in existence before the RED ONE, so the camera hardly appeared out of thin air with no precedent. Dalsa already was doing 4K RAW recording, just without no compression scheme.

Most of the skepticism around the RED was in regards to the short development time and the price point... but you actually belittle RED's accomplishment if you say that people were wrong to be skeptical! If RED said they would develop the camera in a year and sell the body for only $17,500 and industry people yawned and said "sure, go ahead... sounds possible" then what's the big accomplishment?

Personally, as one of the skeptics, I completely believe I was justified in my skepticism even today, and I'm glad that RED has overcome such technical hurdles to surprise me and most other skeptics... but that doesn't mean we were wrong, only that RED achieved something significant that defied conventional wisdom. But there's a good reason why they call it "conventional wisdom"...

I also wonder in the long term, in the historical sense, if it really would have mattered if the camera came out six months to a year later and a lot further along in its development. Of course, there is the "fun" factor in being a part of the public development of a new system and workflow, but it is also risky.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Most of the skepticism around the RED was in regards to the short development time and the price point... but you actually belittle RED's accomplishment if you say that people were wrong to be skeptical! If RED said they would develop the camera in a year and sell the body for only $17,500 and industry people yawned and said "sure, go ahead... sounds possible" then what's the big accomplishment?
Click to expand...

David thats exactly what I meant. I mean Dalsa does similar (presumably better) stuff, but not for 17.5k. If the DP i was talking to a year ago had never heard of RED, and I told then I was getting a 4k digital cinema camera that records raw to onboard magazines, do you think he's take me seriously at all? I'd be surprised if I didn't get a chuckle out of him/her.

I think you may have misinterpreted my post, I never meant to imply that attitude to be irrational, but thats exactly way I brought it up. Why anyone would have full faith that RED could have pulled off what they have is beyond me, but I'm sure glad they proved all of us wrong. I believe we're exactly on the same page.

I was just trying to point out that the guys at RED still have their hands full and are not arrogant hedonists now that they have 2000 cameras out in the world.
 
zak forrest said:
Warning to everyone out there:

ChuckT dicked me around on a possible rental for his film: http://superslute.com/ for a few weeks in an extremely childish way until I stopped responding to his offensive sarcasm and unprofessional requests.
Click to expand...

Good to know, and yet not surprising :)
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Most industry people knew that adapting DSLR RAW technology into a digital cinema camera was coming down the road -- you already had the Arri-D20 and Dalsa in existence before the RED ONE, so the camera hardly appeared out of thin air with no precedent. Dalsa already was doing 4K RAW recording, just without no compression scheme.
Click to expand...

And Jeff Kreines had already shown his Kinetta prototype, based on the same idea.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I also wonder in the long term, in the historical sense, if it really would have mattered if the camera came out six months to a year later and a lot further along in its development. Of course, there is the "fun" factor in being a part of the public development of a new system and workflow, but it is also risky.
Click to expand...

Like Steve Jobs said about the NeXT computer: "6 months late? Are you kidding? This thing is 10 years ahead of it's time!"

Turns out, actually, that it was 20 years ahead...

Chris
 
Film Ylem said:
There's no way that was done practically. In this day and age??? Boujou??? If this was real...OMFG, but I really don't think so. Clever use of technique though.
Click to expand...

I think it was - just notice the "trail" of the white paint he used to "erase" the previous frames, especially visible when the subjects move across the wall...

Kudos to him and his team! True genius...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top