Tom Lowe
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2007
- Messages
- 8,520
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
Welcome to our community
Be a part of something great, join today!
is Red Ray limited to red-originated footage?
- Thread starter J. Bernard Vallon
- Start date
JD Holloway
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2006
- Messages
- 825
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
I guess you were not around for the release of Laser disk, Betamax/VHS, and the first DVD players. A thousand dollars in 2009 money is nothing in comparison.
Graeme Nattress
RED Problem Solver
I still have my VHS, S-VHS and laserdiscs. Back in 1988 my S-VHS edit deck was, I think £650 - about £1500 in today's money, or $2300 - ouch.
Graeme
Graeme
I think the technology in Red Ray is impressive, but unless Red can partner up with some of the big boys, then I think this product is going no where.
Would Red camera owners buy a Red Ray player just so they can see their movies on 4k projectors that they can't really afford? Maybe a handful. But why buy Red Ray, when all of your clients have blu ray players that are cheaper and can play commercial disks? And they can only view your movies on their 1080p TV's anyway, so there's no quality advantage with Red Ray.
In my opinion, the people with the most to gain from using Red Ray right now are the movie theaters. If Red can convince the theater chains and the movie studios that Red Ray can save them a ton of money on distribution, then they can get some sales. Since Red developed the technology on their own, they might run into some "not invented here" problems when looking for partners. But maybe that's what it takes to shake up the industry.
If they can win over the theaters, then they can approach the movie download companies, then the cable and satellite companies. These guys would love the technology to transmit their programming at lower data rates. With these volumes, the price of a Red Ray player will come down to the level of a set top box or blu ray player.
I don't think Red Ray will displace blu ray, though, at least not in the next several years. Even if the price of the players were the same, why would movie studios and consumer electronics companies alienate a large installed base of blu ray users? Especially since there is no added advantage for this marketplace. Would a 4k movie look any better than a blu ray movie on a 1080p TV screen? No. Now if display technology improves, and we start seeing TV's with higher resolution, then maybe Red has a shot here.
Just my $.02.
Would Red camera owners buy a Red Ray player just so they can see their movies on 4k projectors that they can't really afford? Maybe a handful. But why buy Red Ray, when all of your clients have blu ray players that are cheaper and can play commercial disks? And they can only view your movies on their 1080p TV's anyway, so there's no quality advantage with Red Ray.
In my opinion, the people with the most to gain from using Red Ray right now are the movie theaters. If Red can convince the theater chains and the movie studios that Red Ray can save them a ton of money on distribution, then they can get some sales. Since Red developed the technology on their own, they might run into some "not invented here" problems when looking for partners. But maybe that's what it takes to shake up the industry.
If they can win over the theaters, then they can approach the movie download companies, then the cable and satellite companies. These guys would love the technology to transmit their programming at lower data rates. With these volumes, the price of a Red Ray player will come down to the level of a set top box or blu ray player.
I don't think Red Ray will displace blu ray, though, at least not in the next several years. Even if the price of the players were the same, why would movie studios and consumer electronics companies alienate a large installed base of blu ray users? Especially since there is no added advantage for this marketplace. Would a 4k movie look any better than a blu ray movie on a 1080p TV screen? No. Now if display technology improves, and we start seeing TV's with higher resolution, then maybe Red has a shot here.
Just my $.02.
JD Holloway
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2006
- Messages
- 825
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
In the short term RRay will not replace BRay as a domestic disk player.
Early adopters who bought into HD players saw the disk war and are way too cautious.
Many are committed to the technology they purchased. However...
HD broadcast sucks ass. Both in content and quality.
RRay could be like the Greek Airborne; "death from behind".
It has the ability to operate as a set-top-box in home theaters that are networked. This is an added advantage in the marketplace; it can deliver content that people might actually want to watch. In "HD" or better. The bandwidth of the internet can support real time 4k red ray, or conversely play a saved file. In time, this method can/probably will replace the cable networks standards for delivery. We are already used to watching programs when we want with technologies like TIVO etc. Pay for download would work well here too, high quality and fast for cheap. Cheap=good.
It has real potential in cinema projection distribution too. No doubt a 2K projector image will look great with Red Ray. With more and more 4K projectors coming to theaters (way too slowly for my liking) A cheap way to bring a 4K film scan/or digital to theaters and cinemas will be much appreciated. If we all left it to Some Other compaNY, I'm sure the cost would be outrageous, inaccessible to most, and not available till 2015 or later, depending on when the sales curve for BRay begins to level or lag.
Oh ya I almost forgot...Archiving. If RRay, as a format, is as good as everybody is saying, its worth the price of admission alone, at least in the short term.
Early adopters who bought into HD players saw the disk war and are way too cautious.
Many are committed to the technology they purchased. However...
HD broadcast sucks ass. Both in content and quality.
RRay could be like the Greek Airborne; "death from behind".
It has the ability to operate as a set-top-box in home theaters that are networked. This is an added advantage in the marketplace; it can deliver content that people might actually want to watch. In "HD" or better. The bandwidth of the internet can support real time 4k red ray, or conversely play a saved file. In time, this method can/probably will replace the cable networks standards for delivery. We are already used to watching programs when we want with technologies like TIVO etc. Pay for download would work well here too, high quality and fast for cheap. Cheap=good.
It has real potential in cinema projection distribution too. No doubt a 2K projector image will look great with Red Ray. With more and more 4K projectors coming to theaters (way too slowly for my liking) A cheap way to bring a 4K film scan/or digital to theaters and cinemas will be much appreciated. If we all left it to Some Other compaNY, I'm sure the cost would be outrageous, inaccessible to most, and not available till 2015 or later, depending on when the sales curve for BRay begins to level or lag.
Oh ya I almost forgot...Archiving. If RRay, as a format, is as good as everybody is saying, its worth the price of admission alone, at least in the short term.
Last edited:
Tim Whitcomb
Well-known member
Blu Ray is already dying, look at the sales figures and pick up a trade mag.
and the global economy, moreso than the tech is to blame...not to mention studios (and consumers)
love the quality but hate the costs. and most dont care. CONTENT IS STILL KING.
but I also humbly believe physical media is going to be like LP's and CD's soon. cool to collect, will always have a fiercely loyal, albeit SMALL, gaggle of followers... but will become obsolete.
I too still have my VHS, S-VHS, LASERDISC players and a Record Player :thumbsup:
RED RAY has implications we all used to dream about in the 90's. Which is affordable and fast digital distribution straight to the theater... without shipping costs...without prints.
to studios that means more A and less P (for those who understand P&A Budgets)
the implications go much further than 5000 Red Camera owners imho.
its so freaking exciting... and $1000 is an absolute bargain. wish I could reserve mine now!
Gavin Greenwalt
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2006
- Messages
- 7,614
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
- Age
- 40
REDRay would have to play back any footage because NOBODY is going to want to post a project without it being converted to RGB for their pipeline. You have to mix footage. You have to crop footage. You have to fade footage. Post production requires it to become RGB. Once it's RGB its source whether that be RED or Film is irrellevant.
It's also far more efficient to pre-grade footage and bake the color data into a lower precision color space than to keep the original file which has superfluous color information beyond that of the projection system. If it needs to be RAW then you can theoretically convert a 4K image back into 4K Raw but at a lower bit depth.
It's also far more efficient to pre-grade footage and bake the color data into a lower precision color space than to keep the original file which has superfluous color information beyond that of the projection system. If it needs to be RAW then you can theoretically convert a 4K image back into 4K Raw but at a lower bit depth.