Defending RED, Camera (Brand) Wars, Shot On What?!

[Mike Nagel]

more of what we know already...

https://stephenfollows.com/digital-vs-film-on-hollywood-movies/

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

You have to hand it to Arri. Only they could sell a 4K up-sampling licence to a 2.8K camera and be taken seriously, while nobody even blinks. But, being #2 is no bad thing. "We're #2, so we try harder."

 

[Marc Wielage]

You have to hand it to Arri. Only they could sell a 4K up-sampling licence to a 2.8K camera and be taken seriously, while nobody even blinks. But, being #2 is no bad thing. "We're #2, so we try harder."

Well, the Alexa LF and the Alexa 65 made a lot of inroads. And I suspect the new Arri Mini (which will almost certainly be 4K) will get a lot of users as well.

Again: it's good for cinematographers and filmmakers to have more choices. Ultimately, everybody benefits from that, especially when many of the choices can make great pictures. It's no different than choosing different film stocks or different lenses: it's just another creative decision you have to make.

BTW, all the Arri projects I've dealt with in post in the last year have been 3.2K. Just sayin'.

 

[Tom Gleeson]

When people criticise Red I just like to point out some of the most amazing TV presently being shot is with these cameras. Mindhunters, Stranger Things, Bodyguard, NightFlyers, The Terror, The End of the Fucking World, Lost in Space, Luke Cage and Jessica Jones, Glow, Preacher, House of Cards, Better call Saul, The Expanse, The Man in the High Castle, Mister Robot, Godless and the Young Pope. This is just small selection of my favourites from all the shows presently using Red cameras. The list demonstrates that creative artists can create the very best work out there with Red Cameras. It is also a huge vote of confidence that big budget productions with immensely talented DPs and crews have trusted and chosen to shoot with Red. I have watched all these shows because they are wonderful dramas photographed by some of the best in the business and not because of what camera they used. There is brilliant work being done on Panavision DXL, Alexa, Venice and Varicam machines. I know I have said it before but there are a lot of great cameras out there and you just need to pick your poison.

 

[Marc Wielage]

When people criticise Red I just like to point out some of the most amazing TV presently being shot is with these cameras...

Although... here's the list of the 2018 Emmy nominees for Best Single-Camera Cinematography:

Legion (Dana Gonzalez, ASC) - Arri Alexa Mini

Ozark (Ben Kutchins) - Panasonic Varicam LT

Stranger Things (Tim Ives, ASC) - Red Dragon

The Crown (Adriano Goldman, ASC/ABC) - Sony Cinealta F55

Handmaid's Tale (Colin Watkinson) - Arri Alexa Mini

The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (M. David Mullen, ASC) - Arri Alexa XT

Westworld (John Grillo) - 35mm Kodak Negative

I would not say that any single camera is a clear-cut favorite for nominated films. But of the 7 above, 3 were Alexa.

 

[M Most]

Stranger Things season 2 was shot on Red Helium. And pertinent to the previous post, Main In the High Castle season 2 was shot on Arri Alexa.

But I agree with your overall point.

 

[Phil Holland]

I want to leave some points where they are, but something that was interesting to me was the general audience at the ASC Awards this year. DPs from all corners of the world filming in every camera system you can think of, mostly a clear bias/preference of two major brands and moderate clicks and clubs even. But most are happy to have choices these days when it comes to the tools they have access to. While it wasn't a focus point of many conversations, it was interesting what was brought up and where, as well as perhaps why.

To my original point, much of the perspective and opinion on RED cameras and workflow in general are rather dated or full of either not relevant info or misinformation. I stand by that as I'm still answering questions that have long been solved or tackled on a nearly daily basis when it comes to filming with RED. Even apparently at the awards as people are gearing up for a few 4K delivery projects.

 

[Jeffery Anderson]

not sure what questions are being asked... is it

why is Alexa win awards?

probably people with budgets for crew, lenses, aks... even talent. ...move towards Alexa because of the price tag and proven quality. Alexa is a real simple camera to use and it would be hard to mess up, there are no ratios for compression, no blackshading, it's all PL mount cinema lenses. It's built ONLY for high end productions...

or something like

why do the top DoPs choose Alexa over Red to shoot on?

probably how they are taught to shoot. How to expose for the camera more towards film, not digital.

How to use the different options can confuse some DoPs at times, specially if they moved up from being a Gaffer. Basically, the camera scares them.

even...

why these articles stating that Alexa is better?

Probably because Red is real competition for Alexa.

I'm sure the Alexa does some things better, how it sees light and color accuracy are what the DITs and DoPs talk about.

End of the day, if you're really concerned about it, you have to ask, 'can I get a better image out of a Red or Alexa?', i believe that Red can deliver a better image. It's also more mobile and can do things others can't.

The tech needs and options that might not have been a factor few years ago are now needed and Red already done the R&D

...just wait and see, the Ranger might kill it with rentals over the Alexa LF, it's a whole lot lighter and has great built in options that are needed by production

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

NOTE: In the "StephenFollows" chart, there's a drop in the RED percentage around 2016 that appears to be offset by the PV DXL rise.

IAC, ARRI has been making reliable professional cameras for a long time and earned their brand loyalty. Many of the DPs hired for the most compelling projects have little reason to shoot anything else. Now, what if RED was the established vendor and ARRI the upstart? Assuming the same core technology portfolios; ARRI on ALEVE sensors with dual gain, less resolution and less compression - OR - RED on custom sensors with more resolution and more compression... Just askin'

Cheers - #19

 

[Andrew R Lewis]

That was the approach with film due to highlight lattitude and with introduction of digital in many cases changed to paranoia over highlights, due to poor DR and highlight lattitude of first era of digital cinema and quality of transformations from log. Overexposure with digital now is left as a practice more for low light scenarios, to avoid the thing under b) in the next part of the text.

I've had a bunch of talks with directors and DoPs before shoots and on the sets, insisting low light scene blacks are exactly exposed as they see it on the set gamma corrected, relying on that gamma transformation as a reference and underestimating post production process requirements, but many directors and DoPs don't require education in that department and bring perfect negative for post. Some DoPs mostly look at the scene and use the monitor to observe the "health" of log signal, with only occasional glance at gamma corrected approximation. When the scene requires large DR variables, DoP's will naturally incline to a camera which does the upper part best. Not just in range but in lattitude and tonal stability.



Besides ignorance and paranoia, underexposure tendencies are further motivated by:

a) generalized and misleading ETTR trend
b) the trend of relying on digging data out of shadows, inherited from raw digital photography, when pixels shrunk, mid grey moved to the left and highlight lattitude decreased, the trend which is for the most part flawed in principle for cinematography, depending on specific light design, contrast ratios and tonal/texture continuity, complex post production and display/presentation factors
c) 65472 types of log gammas between manufacturers and 6453423748 monitoring pipeline variables
d) log transformations overboosting the image, for the camera users unaware they are basing exposure decisions on already pushed image

You forgot:

e) Preference/Taste

 

[Josh Becker]

NOTE: In the "StephenFollows" chart, there's a drop in the RED percentage around 2016 that appears to be offset by the PV DXL rise.

IAC, ARRI has been making reliable professional cameras for a long time and earned their brand loyalty. Many of the DPs hired for the most compelling projects have little reason to shoot anything else. Now, what if RED was the established vendor and ARRI the upstart? Assuming the same core technology portfolios; ARRI on ALEVE sensors with dual gain, less resolution and less compression - OR - RED on custom sensors with more resolution and more compression... Just askin'

Cheers - #19

I could be wrong, but my assumption on the RED dip post-2016 was less to do with the DXL release and more to do with RED offering so many sensors in the span of about two years: original Dragon (and different cameras with different sized cuts), the VV Dragon, Helium, Monstro, and Gemini. For people paying close attention to RED's offerings, this can be perceived as them making different sensors to suit different needs and it's just more options for the filmmaker (so it's a good thing!)... but to a lot of folks that aren't tracking each incremental change, it looks an awful lot like RED is jumping all over the place while Arri is still standing strong on their one sensor. And that's a lot of time/energy they may not feel the need to expend when they might like/prefer the Arri image and they know exactly what they are getting. It feels like from 2016-2018, the more cameras RED threw out there, the less people wanted to use them.

EDIT: also, the steady slow rise from 2012-2016 was almost exclusively RED Epic Dragon, right? Four years with the same sensor, I think there is a lot to be said about people having the time to learn and trust something. There have been so many sensors the last two years that people don't really feel like they learn the ins/outs until a new one is out.

A little example... I know that RED is now recommending that Helium sensor be calibrated using Manual mode instead of Auto. This was definitely not documented or communicated at the camera's release (I have a copy of the manual) and it sort of slowly trickled into newer field manuals and the new video RED put out. Why was this not tested/discovered during the development of the camera? I mean, it's a baseline fundamental part of the process and I certainly don't have the tools, expertise, and time to test between the two. Hell, I'm amazed there is a quality difference between Auto and Manual, isn't that something that should be dialed in so the performance is good in both? Or just limit the mode to the "best" one for that camera's sensor or something.

 

[Phil Holland]

There have been updates to the Arri ecosystem, and if my memory serves me right, they are up to 10 different Alexa models, with subtle minutiae of bodies out there with different licenses and all that. Not of course counting anything prior to the Alexa as it's rare air finding anybody who's shot with the D20 and D21, D21 being moderately a relevant comparison that is. But the Alexa is where they found success.

I certainly agree on the RED front, there was a moment where there were a variety of bodies, body types, and sensors. I like the way it is now with DSMC2 Unified, that makes decent sense. I do strongly thank RED for making different format sizes, resolutions, and sensor technologies. I think this is a trend worth exploring as we had format options with motion pictures film, it's truly nice having digital cinema camera options. Format size is very real to some who understand all that it means towards their work, whether that's a larger or more common S35 image plane.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

I do strongly thank RED for making different format sizes, resolutions, and sensor technologies. I think this is a trend worth exploring as we had format options with motion pictures film, it's truly nice having digital cinema camera options.

It's 2019, cars aren't flying yet, hoverboard has wheels and proper S16 utilization is still missing. : )

 

[Todd S]

I do strongly thank RED for making different format sizes, resolutions, and sensor technologies. I think this is a trend worth exploring as we had format options with motion pictures film, it's truly nice having digital cinema camera options.

I couldn't agree more. This discussion has been strongly biased towards the High-End gear.
However, when I was looking for a camera around the price of my Scarlet-W in 2017, I had the very pleasant surprise that I could get in to "Cine" and the RED ecosystem at a price-point comparable
to Canon/Sony/BMD/Panasonic "Docu" & DSLR rigs.

I don't really see the "low end" to "high end" compatibility from the above manufacturers. Strong similarities, but not complete component interchangeability.
So even though I am not shooting features or TV episodes yet, as a newer owner/operator, I have something upscalable that I can continue to cut my teeth on.
Newbs don't stay newbs forever and for me and others on the journey, RED's line, branding, and upgrade path is pure GOLD.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

You forgot:

e) Preference/Taste

As long as it is based on awareness and understanding of:

a) exponential property of light,
b) basic principles of digital quantization,
c) post production requirements,
d) specific properties of the chosen creative tool,
and ultimately
e) full price of that route paid by quality of final results.

In many cases it is not, and boils down to simply tolerance of noise, with a false sense of security coming from overly optimistic interpretation of raw workflow. With compressed raw this is especially important.

 

[Jon Dishler]

I could be wrong, but my assumption on the RED dip post-2016 was less to do with the DXL release and more to do with RED offering so many sensors in the span of about two years: original Dragon (and different cameras with different sized cuts), the VV Dragon, Helium, Monstro, and Gemini. For people paying close attention to RED's offerings, this can be perceived as them making different sensors to suit different needs and it's just more options for the filmmaker (so it's a good thing!)... but to a lot of folks that aren't tracking each incremental change, it looks an awful lot like RED is jumping all over the place while Arri is still standing strong on their one sensor. And that's a lot of time/energy they may not feel the need to expend when they might like/prefer the Arri image and they know exactly what they are getting. It feels like from 2016-2018, the more cameras RED threw out there, the less people wanted to use them.

EDIT: also, the steady slow rise from 2012-2016 was almost exclusively RED Epic Dragon, right? Four years with the same sensor, I think there is a lot to be said about people having the time to learn and trust something. There have been so many sensors the last two years that people don't really feel like they learn the ins/outs until a new one is out.

A little example... I know that RED is now recommending that Helium sensor be calibrated using Manual mode instead of Auto. This was definitely not documented or communicated at the camera's release (I have a copy of the manual) and it sort of slowly trickled into newer field manuals and the new video RED put out. Why was this not tested/discovered during the development of the camera? I mean, it's a baseline fundamental part of the process and I certainly don't have the tools, expertise, and time to test between the two. Hell, I'm amazed there is a quality difference between Auto and Manual, isn't that something that should be dialed in so the performance is good in both? Or just limit the mode to the "best" one for that camera's sensor or something.

I am a little amazed and perplexed by this as well. It would seem that auto would include that manual setting but maybe since there is only one "calibration file" in auto it is an average of a much wider range than typically used and not optimal for the usual ranges used. In any event, I have switched to manual at this new recommendation for Helium, but not sure that I see a difference, at least looking for noise and white balancing off the same set of lights, but maybe it is subtle. Or maybe it just saves time since manual is all you really need. But it would be nice to have some further explanation of the change.

 

[Morgan Ryan]

I think RED should stick to just one sensor, Monstro for all of its cameras. Put the best sensor forward and nothing else in between. Eliminate any and all confusion.
Then put all the resources (i.e. research Development of color science, modules, partnerships with accessories companies, etc.) into just that one sensor. That's what can bring RED's competitiveness in the major productions.

 

[vincent kardasik]

IAC, ARRI has been making reliable professional cameras for a long time and earned their brand loyalty. Many of the DPs hired for the most compelling projects have little reason to shoot anything else.

On set here in France, I hear a lot "Arri" and "reliable" in the same sentence. I also have people around me complaining about Red cameras sometimes being not reliable which I thought was a thing of the past.
I already talked about it here http://reduser.net/forum/showthread...ood-old-days&p=1844244&viewfull=1#post1844244
I have the feeling, for us European, it's more difficult than US customers to get in touch with Red and talk with RMA, etc... So when we have an issue with a camera, which can happen with any brand, it won't be resolved fast...
Since Red UK is not in charge anymore of the customer service, things are getting slower and when you're on set, you don't want to wait more than 24 hours to get a problem solved.
I'm not doing any Red bashing, far from this, I just want to provide feedback based on my experience but I have more issues with the release of "combo firmware" than I had with "that type of sensor" or "camera" firmware.
I also understand that Red needs to sell gear through resellers and distributors but I think they should stay in charge of the customer service as it was before... At some point if your client/producer/director doesn't believe in Red for some mythological reasons, it's always good to mention them that the customer service is top notch and will provide answers, gear, etc... ASAP.
Once again, this is just my humble opinion...

 

[M Most]

In my world (studio level features and broadcast/streaming/episodic production) the requirement for use is usually what the end client demands (i.e., 4K minimum for the streaming entities, HD for broadcast, etc), and within that limitation, what the cinematographer prefers. There are now a lot more choices than there used to be, and therefore more competition. It's not just Red and Arri, we are seeing a great deal of acceptance of the Sony Venice (much more than the F55 ever got), and to a much lesser degree, things like the Canon and Panasonic cameras. For additional bodies, we often see Blackmagic and GoPro as well. In that world - in which nearly all camera packages are rented - cost is relatively unimportant. But more competition means more diversity in what is chosen.

 

[Andrew R Lewis]

As long as it is based on awareness and understanding of:

a) exponential property of light,
b) basic principles of digital quantization,
c) post production requirements,
d) specific properties of the chosen creative tool,
and ultimately
e) full price of that route paid by quality of final results.

In many cases it is not, and boils down to simply tolerance of noise, with a false sense of security coming from overly optimistic interpretation of raw workflow. With compressed raw this is especially important.

Technical. Logical. And missing my point.

Your requirement that “b) basic principles of digital quantization,“ be understood is part of the problem with why we become obsessed with the newest thing. I know, I’ve been there.

Some of the best and most successful DPs and photographers don’t know what the hell any of that means. And thank god for that. There is a time, a place, and a person for that. But it’s not for everyone and it certainly isn’t a requirement.