Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Here it is...

I really hope that Red does not assume (for workflow discussion) that everyone gets a RedRocket. I'd love one, but have to prioritize the purchase of RPPs & EpicX, just those two are going to bleed me good, so another $5k for a card (however cool it may be) is just not on the table in these times
 
mmost said:
So let me get this straight. You feel that Automatic Duck's products (which are under $500) are "pricey," and you also feel that Crimson (which is under $200) requires that "you've got money," and that hard drives are affordable because they're "cheap." Yet, you seemingly have no problem whatsoever suggesting that everyone should have a Red Rocket card - which will cost $5000 (more if you need the breakout box). So I guess your feeling is that everything is too expensive for "normal people" like yourself unless the manufacturer happens to be Red, in which case it's completely affordable, regardless of the actual price. Is that about right?
Click to expand...

Somebody please get Mike a 3-hour long feature length film to grade to keep him away from the forum so he doesn't have a heart attack in front of his computer :-) Easy there Mike, easy...BTW, I agree with everything you've said on both these threads.
 
on planet earth $500 is expensive for a piece of software that has limited functions. but if it saves you time and hassle its worth it. course if your broke everything is expensive. as cheap as red one is , its still the price of a car. windows 7 costs $200 and has millions upon millions of lines of code and man hours. did it take less cost/time to create automatic duck , not even close , but only a tiny niche will buy the latter while the former will sell millions of copies. if software was priced according to the effort and costs required automatic duck woudn't cost $500
 
course red cine x is free and required lots of effort , but it'll help sell scarlets , epics and reds in the long run. so its kind of a loss leader
 
mmost said:
So I guess your feeling is that everything is too expensive for "normal people" like yourself unless the manufacturer happens to be Red, in which case it's completely affordable, regardless of the actual price. Is that about right?
Click to expand...

Sorry to drag this thread slightly off topic, but yes I do think Automatic Duck at around AUD$617.00 is quite expensive - however that's not to say that I don't think it's worth that amount of money. If I owned a post house and was constantly doing jobs that needed to get material out of FCP and into Avid, then I obviously I wouldn't think twice about purchasing it. However, as a "home user" that's already spent a large amount of money on a NLE package - it does seem quite expensive considering how function packed all the current NLE packages are. Specialised software costs a lot of money. I realise this, and I'm certainly not complaining. But I do think it's "pricey".

Again Crimson is a specialised tool. If I was making money off RED productions on a daily basis - then sure, it's well worth the money! But again, as a "home user", compared to the complete Final Cut Pro suite, it does lean on the more pricey side vs features. I'm not complaining, but can understand why there have been a lot of threads on the forum have been looking for a free (as in beer) solution.

As for RED ROCKET - no I don't expect EVERYONE to get one. I do however expect everyone with a RED to get one, and any editor who makes a living off editing RED footage. For the "home user" (i.e. a film student who begged/borrowed/stole a camera for the weekend to shoot his or her little short film), I don't expect them to invest in such a professional and specialised product. However - they shouldn't have to. RED ROCKET just ACCELERATES the work-flow. You don't need RED ROCKET to cut together a RED film. Trust me - I've edited RED footage on an old eMac and done all the transcoding on a bottom of the line MacBook!

So apologies if I offended anyone... I certainly didn't intend to! It's hard when you're discussing such broad topics in this forum because half the users and professionals who making a living of working with RED products, and there other half (or maybe even more) are people who don't actually own a RED, and don't spend their days working with RED material, and are just regular visitors to the forum because they love the concept of RED, and they want to support this "new wave" of film-making in any way they can.

As for the touch screen - I never imagine the DOP or Director sitting down to view the footage. I imagined it more like an interactive kiosk that you'd find at an airport or information desk. So let's agree to disagree! But yeah, that's getting really off topic, so let's get back to REDCINE-X...!

I hope this clears things up! Feel free to private message me if you wish to discuss anything further! Thanks for your time!

Best Regards, Chris!
 
Holly F...!!!

Incrível!!!

Good work...

Esperando Agosto.


Cheers
 
MichaelP said:
No one wants to have their content beholdant to a non standard format preventing them from repurposing their content when needed.

...
Michael
Click to expand...

Every leading platform should, in a ideallistic world, enable you to ingest whatever format without transcoding to a proprietary codec. Output format and standard is another "fast changing" topic.

Greatings.

Patrick
 
Looks very exciting.
Dunno if this has been talked before, but, what about implementing some sort of "control" on quicktime gamma issues? As we know, when outputting DPX is always what you see is what you get, but when using quicktime a gamma compensation is used depending on the compression type. It would be cool to have some dialog boxes/options to have some control on the gamma compensations used when exporting. I've seen that the gamma shift behavior changes between applications (Shake, Color, Quicktime player, Nuke behave differently on that regard) so i guess applications can have some control over that?
It's confusing because it's hidden, so i guess come options/dialog boxes would help the average user to understand what's happening?
 
Patrick Tresch said:
Every leading platform should, in a ideallistic world, enable you to ingest whatever format without transcoding to a proprietary codec. Output format and standard is another "fast changing" topic.

Patrick
Click to expand...

I think you have may missed the point. MXF is an open standard, and so DNxHD, known as SMPTE VC-3. Avid makes the QT codecs for encode and decode for both Mac and PC, and you can download source code directly form Avid.com for DNxHD - you can't be more open than that. I also said I agree that an NLE in a perfect world should edit whatever in its native format as much as possible. And of course "delivery formats are jist that - meeting a specification either open like DCP or not. But from an archive point of view, and the ability to repurpose, re-edit, and re-monetize content, from high resolution sources are in an open standard which is why you have DXP (SMPTE), and of film (bunch of SMPTE) so that content owners in the future know they can access their picture and sound (WAV - standard) even if the manufacturer of the original format is no longer around (Kodachrome for example).

A real standard is one that is open, described and recreatable if needed. Then there are defacto standards that such as the CMX format EDL that for better or for worse still used, but never improved.

Michael
 
OK, this whole "free vs EDL" debate thing...

Is there any reason (and I completely understand that there may well be, but it's a question worth asking in my books) that there cannot be a paid-for version of RC-X and a free version? Perhaps the worry at Red is that a paid-for production tool implies significant support standards that make it difficult to justify?

Just thinking out loud here really, but I for one would quite happily pay a reasonable fee for a more advanced version of RC-X that incorporated EDL support. If supporting the software is the concern for you guys at Red, then maybe sell it fairly cheap (~$300?) without any support (other than perhaps a refund if your system won't run it - particularly on the PC side), and then have support contracts that can be paid for, or not, as you wish.

The indie guys (which includes us!) would love an EDL-capable (or even as Michael says, simply pull-list generating) RC-X type tool for low-budget finishing. There's plenty of tools out there for the bigger jobs/production companies when you want or need them, and plenty of post-houses we can go to if we don't want to invest in a system ourselves (we do this for bigger jobs currently, no problem) - but for day-to-day smaller in-house jobs, this kind of tool would be amazing.

At the end of the day, it's not a problem so long as tools like Crimson exist (any idea if Crimson will be compatible with the new RC-X?), but just a thought for those who want EDL support in RC-X and maybe an idea to break the deadlock - I agree entirely with the Red team that complaining about the functionality of a piece of free software is out of line... The solution, it would seem to me, is to offer to pay for it should it provide the functionality you require.

Either way, looks great and we'll find a way to make it work within our workflow, don't you worry!!

Nice work guys!...
Dom.
 
Good job sir,looks really cool. At the same time I'm with those who believe you can as well think about giving us a working Online/Offline complete tool for a fee.
 
Dominic Jones said:
OK, this whole "free vs EDL" debate thing...

Is there any reason (and I completely understand that there may well be, but it's a question worth asking in my books) that there cannot be a paid-for version of RC-X and a free version? Perhaps the worry at Red is that a paid-for production tool implies significant support standards that make it difficult to justify?

Just thinking out loud here really, but I for one would quite happily pay a reasonable fee for a more advanced version of RC-X that incorporated EDL support. If supporting the software is the concern for you guys at Red, then maybe sell it fairly cheap (~$300?) without any support (other than perhaps a refund if your system won't run it - particularly on the PC side), and then have support contracts that can be paid for, or not, as you wish.

The indie guys (which includes us!) would love an EDL-capable (or even as Michael says, simply pull-list generating) RC-X type tool for low-budget finishing. There's plenty of tools out there for the bigger jobs/production companies when you want or need them, and plenty of post-houses we can go to if we don't want to invest in a system ourselves (we do this for bigger jobs currently, no problem) - but for day-to-day smaller in-house jobs, this kind of tool would be amazing.

At the end of the day, it's not a problem so long as tools like Crimson exist (any idea if Crimson will be compatible with the new RC-X?), but just a thought for those who want EDL support in RC-X and maybe an idea to break the deadlock - I agree entirely with the Red team that complaining about the functionality of a piece of free software is out of line... The solution, it would seem to me, is to offer to pay for it should it provide the functionality you require.

Either way, looks great and we'll find a way to make it work within our workflow, don't you worry!!

Nice work guys!...
Dom.
Click to expand...

I think both Jarred and Jim made it clear that the support side alone, is not worth the investment and more importantly... by opening it up to outside developers , everybody wins and they (RED) can focus on making killer cameras systems and sensors and delivering them in a timely fashion.

There is a common axiom for emerging companies...

"just because you CAN do something, doesnt always mean you should"

This app as it appears looks awesome, and with 3rd party EDL support encouraged and enabled by RED, the future is so bright...

we are all going to need to wear (Oakley) shades... :coolgleamA:
 
There's another problem with EDL support.

If you create EDL import (pull lists with tails and headers) you also have to modify the original. If you have footage which takes in a clip "Frames 30-300". And you want a 10 frame header and tail then the original project needs to be edited to "Frames 10-270". If that's just an EDL then you're ok. But then you get into transitions, multi-track and a lot of unknowns. You have to start supporting Avid, Premiere, FCP, etc and keep up to date on the nuances of each implementation. It's not a fire and forget sort of application it's a program that has to be kept up to date or else it will stop conforming.

REDCine has EDL support. They said it will have an XML format. If you want iMovie/Moviemaker level editing decisions then converting the XML to a simple EDL will be so easy I guarantee someone will offer a free tool.

Alternately Adobe, Avid and Premiere could offer REDCineXML import.
 
Avid already creates a SCAN list (pull) that is all the elements used in a sequence regardless of VFX and layers. It is optimized for clips that have the same spans and we will be adding a tolerance to it for farther optimization. It is exported in XML and the dictionary to describe the XML is documented and available at www.avid.com/filmscribe. But XML is just a language which needs common description in order to be seamless without conversion. In those cases, a script can be written to go from XML to XML or any other format - those files exist today as well at www.avid.com/red.

The issue with REDCINE as it stands today is that it can't first take in a pull list, then scan the media based on the metadata - all the files need to be loaded first, then the file merged into that a subset which is backwards. And can run into memory issues, etc. Also, if the R3D files move from when they were first indexed for the offline, it can't conform. again, the tool should take in the XML and scan re-index as needed as do Monkey, Avid DS and I am sure others.

The beauty of this is that complex sequences and conforms are handled by the NLE while dailies and selects are handled as a series of straight cuts. That workflow is described as well in the Avid step by step guide on www.avid.com/red

I am looking forward to seeing whatever REDCINE X will be - at the very least it should be a combined RED ALERT and REDRUSHES which makes sense. If it offers basic project R3D management with a defined and consistent metadata import/export then it will be a very good first release.

Michael
 
Dominic Jones said:
...Just thinking out loud here really, but I for one would quite happily pay a reasonable fee for a more advanced version of RC-X that incorporated EDL support. ..
Click to expand...

Gavin Greenwalt said:
...Alternately Adobe, Avid and Premiere could offer REDCineXML import.
Click to expand...

Yes, they all could. But it has been a painful enough road to come where we are. If it is for others to make a plugin for R-X, then yes, but please keep it in R-X. Lets not wait others to do all the work for RED.
We paid for crimsons and monkeys, why not for a R-X plugin.
 
Jarred Land said:
You are correct sir.... Adding EDL/Conform support to REDCINE-X will be a somewhat easy task for the 3rd party guys... that's the way we are designing it.

That way everyone wins :)
Click to expand...

Let's just repeat this bit, for the benefit of everyone who doesn't want to wade through this thread and instead keeps asking repeatedly for the same feature...

...so instead of adding to further clutter, I'll just say thank you, RED, for pushing REDCINE-X and all of these other workflow innovations through. I'm very much looking forward to all of the changes that the next 3-6 months will bring.

What a rocket ship ride the last six have been!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top