Major improvement... free as usual.

[Roberto Lequeux]

[rant]Sometimes we don't ask anything cause we can tell that they are not ready to answer subsequent questions, so we wait.

Sometimes we also feel like praising a bit, not as random forum noise, but with the intention to counter some of the bitching they have to put up with... of this I am guilty, and proudly.

And why shouldn't I be happy about cleaner high ISOs?! Even if it is the worst case and it is just a bit?![/rant]

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Can we have REC709 back?

I have seen this request a few times and I have to say, I'm a bit baffled. The new color science seems far more appealing to me than REC709 ever did. Though I should qualify that by saying I was fine with REC709 gamma, but REC709 color always seemed off to me. I think Graeme and the boys have made some substantial progress in this area.

I suppose having options is not a bad thing, if those using those options are well schooled in what each does. But I've been a pretty happy camper with REDcolor. Having that and RAW is all I need.

 

[Luis Otero]

Yes. This improvement is primarily for the RED ONE M-X and EPIC. We found this through EPIC development and since the RED ONE M-X is the same sensor... we are making it available to our customers with M-X....

Jim

Jim,

Is there anything within this discovery that would positively impact the R-1s without the M-X sensor? :violin:

Thanks for sharing with us such a good news! :thumbsup:

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

Very excited to see RED pulling still more performance out of its RED ONE cameras. Best camera company in the world. My two year old+ camera remains on the leading edge.

I've never heard news this good met with this much negativity before. Strange. Must be the astrology, Pluto squaring Saturn or something.

As for me, it pleases me to no end that RED is still finding ways to improve my original investment, for either free or moderate pricing (MX). Thank you, thank you, and thank you.

 

[Omar Saad]

Jim,

Is there anything within this discovery that would positively impact the R-1s without the M-X sensor? :violin:

Thanks for sharing with us such a good news! :thumbsup:

I'm curious about this as well.

Either way thanks for all of your hard work... I've been shooting for about 10 yrs. now... no where near as long as many of the people on here... but long enough to know that the "Red experience" is one of a kind!

Cheers,

Omar

 

[M Most]

The reality of the situation is far more complex than you think.

Perhaps. But another part of that reality is that these kind of things are exactly what gives fuel to the argument that Red is not as stable as some other camera choices for series work. The situation of which you speak was an example of that in that production was seemingly shocked that they couldn't see the footage properly processed the next day ("what do you mean it takes special software?"), and we did in fact have to process it twice. Some people involved understood, others didn't.

I never said any of this was easy. I'm not implying that now. What I am saying is that it can hopefully be controlled a bit better in the future, especially when there isn't a highly compelling hardware change involved.

 

[M Most]

I disagree. It is not RED's responsibility to ensure people do not act foolishly on their shoots/edits. How on earth could they be held responsible? That's why we have Rental house techs, DP's, DIT's Post supervisors etc, etc ad infinitum. It's the people on the project who are responsible.... not the manufacturer. I'm staggered by this logic.

I don't understand what's so staggering. Red came up with new hardware (the M/X sensor) that solved so many issues that the old hardware had that nearly every cameraman I know of who tried it didn't want to use the old sensor again. But because the software support was not completely ready and in place when the first cameras were let out into the wild, it caused some upheaval and confusion in that for a number of us, the software systems we use could not process the new footage correctly. If the software had been delivered prior to the hardware, that would not have happened. This has very little to do with changing things in the middle of production and everything to do with release patterns. If you built a car that got 500 miles per gallon, but required some exotic fuel that was not yet available, you'd have a similar situation.

I'm as big a supporter of Red and its efforts as you'll find, but every time I say anything here that can be construed as even mildly critical of something they've done, people seem to want to paint my remarks as something evil. All I'm doing is pointing out something that I hope will be addressed in the future because it's been a problem in my world in the past. I don't expect to be painted as some kind of pariah for expressing that concern.

 

[Joe Walker]

I have seen this request a few times and I have to say, I'm a bit baffled.

Why does it baffle you so much to see it requested?

 

[M Most]

I've never heard news this good met with this much negativity before.

What negativity? Since when is concern about being able to actually use this stuff in a professional environment negativity? Who here has said one negative word about the prospect of improved images?

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Mike, I am pretty sure she wasn't referring to you. Your posts always help. They might not make Jim jump up and down since he was hoping we'd join in on being happy about something that we should be happy about... But, a lot of the stuff that helps is hard to hear. I am sure he knows that and is very adept at utilizing it, well it clearly seems he is good at listening and making something of it.

You always put thought into your posts and I appreciate them. I am sure I am not alone. Many have said this to you before.

Anywho... someone let me know if Jim breaks any more details.

:thumbsup:

 

[Elsie N]

I've never heard news this good met with this much negativity before. Strange. Must be the astrology, Pluto squaring Saturn or something.

Pluto is no longer a planet, therefore, astrology no longer exists. On the other hand, it could be the Dog Star, Sirius rising (thus putting us in the Dog Days of Summer for a little longer) that is causing all the unbalanced thinking. But I'm just guessin'.

 

[Alex Mack]

The new color science seems far more appealing

Why does it baffle you so much to see it requested?

We're just curious, I suppose... no harm meant!

 

[Terry VerHaar]

I don't understand what's so staggering. Red came up with new hardware (the M/X sensor) that solved so many issues that the old hardware had that nearly every cameraman I know of who tried it didn't want to use the old sensor again. But because the software support was not completely ready and in place when the first cameras were let out into the wild, it caused some upheaval and confusion in that for a number of us, the software systems we use could not process the new footage correctly. If the software had been delivered prior to the hardware, that would not have happened. This has very little to do with changing things in the middle of production and everything to do with release patterns. If you built a car that got 500 miles per gallon, but required some exotic fuel that was not yet available, you'd have a similar situation.

I'm as big a supporter of Red and its efforts as you'll find, but every time I say anything here that can be construed as m even mildly critical of something they've done, people seem to want to paint my remarks as something evil. All I'm doing is pointing out something that I hope will be addressed in the future because it's been a problem in my world in the past. I don't expect to be painted as some kind of pariah for expressing that concern.

With all due respect - and I suspect you are due a lot as an industry veteran - but, IMHO it really just sounds like complaining, nothing particular constructive about it. It is sort of like saying "I know you are doing a lot, but do more...", "I know you are good, but be better.", I know you are trying hard, but try harder," "I know you have a lot of talent and capability, but you need more." "More, more, better, better - you guys screwed up." But did they?

I doubt there is anyone inside of RED who doesn't believe they could improve. But, and again I say for this situation, specifically, how on earth can they do what they do and try and control all of the parties with whom they have to coordinate. Is managing the process impossible? No - they have proven that. Is it hard? Yes - everyone seems to acknowledge that, however begrudgingly. And I am sure your "critique" has been duly noted and had its intended impact within RED. Seems to me they just need to be cut some slack as they aren't making systemic mistakes. To me, it seems to be a pretty well-run company.

OK - you can blast me now. :nads:

 

[Jannard]

Perhaps. But another part of that reality is that these kind of things are exactly what gives fuel to the argument that Red is not as stable as some other camera choices for series work. The situation of which you speak was an example of that in that production was seemingly shocked that they couldn't see the footage properly processed the next day ("what do you mean it takes special software?"), and we did in fact have to process it twice. Some people involved understood, others didn't.

I never said any of this was easy. I'm not implying that now. What I am saying is that it can hopefully be controlled a bit better in the future, especially when there isn't a highly compelling hardware change involved.

JJ Abrams seems to think it is stable enough for series work. So does Dean Devlin who is on his 3rd year of Leverage without a problem.

Jim

 

[Jannard]

I don't understand what's so staggering. Red came up with new hardware (the M/X sensor) that solved so many issues that the old hardware had that nearly every cameraman I know of who tried it didn't want to use the old sensor again. But because the software support was not completely ready and in place when the first cameras were let out into the wild, it caused some upheaval and confusion in that for a number of us, the software systems we use could not process the new footage correctly. If the software had been delivered prior to the hardware, that would not have happened. This has very little to do with changing things in the middle of production and everything to do with release patterns. If you built a car that got 500 miles per gallon, but required some exotic fuel that was not yet available, you'd have a similar situation.

I'm as big a supporter of Red and its efforts as you'll find, but every time I say anything here that can be construed as even mildly critical of something they've done, people seem to want to paint my remarks as something evil. All I'm doing is pointing out something that I hope will be addressed in the future because it's been a problem in my world in the past. I don't expect to be painted as some kind of pariah for expressing that concern.

Good news it that we are changing and improving at a rapid pace... mostly free to our customers. Bad news is that you have to pay attention...

Jim

 

[Jannard]

Dean Devlin has a self contained system for shooting, posting internally and delivering a very high quality show effortlessly. Somebody should ask him what he is doing. Every time I talk to him he is happy as a clam. He has never complained once. Every time we improve something he says... "thanks so much". I like Dean.

Jim

 

[Brian Petrie]

Good news it that we are changing and improving a a rapid pace... mostly free to our customers. Bad news is that you have to pay attention...

Jim

It's funny to think people are complaining that a product they use is getting updated/improved for FREE too often. Never heard that before.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Why does it baffle you so much to see it requested?

I guess I'm wondering, do you like this color science better than what is available right now?

The second question is, what do you use to process footage?

3rd question is, what do you use to monitor your footage on set and in post?

4th question is not really a question. Just want to say I respect your opinion either way, just curious that's all.

 

[M Most]

JJ Abrams seems to think it is stable enough for series work. So does Dean Devlin who is on his 3rd year of Leverage without a problem.

Jim

So do Fox Television Studios and Universal Media, for whom I grade "The Gates" and "Covert Affairs" respectively, every week. Directly from the R3d files. But noting individuals and their opinions doesn't mean that everyone in the industry sees it that way. And I think you want everyone to want to be on board, as do I.

Dean Devlin has a self contained system for shooting, posting internally and delivering a very high quality show effortlessly. Somebody should ask him what he is doing.

I don't have to, I know what he's doing. But not everyone wants to create their own post facility and staff it (in part because not everyone has the experience of having previously created a rather large in-house visual effects facility), and not everyone has the freedom he has in terms of daily deliverables, since he's not working for a broadcast network or a large studio - or outside clients with tight delivery deadlines, for that matter. For most of the productions in town, the post facilities serve a significant and necessary purpose in supplying both services and talent to complete those productions properly.

I'm not asking for Red to slow down its efforts one iota. I am suggesting that there be an awareness of the need for software support beyond simply a new release of Redcine X in order to help the facilities to do their job well when the changes do happen. In other words, to allow us to help Red look great as we all move forward. Does that sound better?

 

[Tim Morten]

But because the software support was not completely ready and in place when the first cameras were let out into the wild, it caused some upheaval and confusion in that for a number of us, the software systems we use could not process the new footage correctly. If the software had been delivered prior to the hardware, that would not have happened.

If I understand you correctly, you're suggesting that Red hold onto its improvements until Avid, Apple, Adobe, et al have integrated support for the latest changes? Is that right?

...every time I say anything here that can be construed as even mildly critical of something they've done, people seem to want to paint my remarks as something evil. All I'm doing is pointing out something that I hope will be addressed in the future because it's been a problem in my world in the past. I don't expect to be painted as some kind of pariah for expressing that concern.

As someone who has openly disagreed with your opinions before, I can assure you that my intention is not to "paint your remarks as evil" - simply to express my disagreement with you.

Case in point: I think Red is doing the right thing by releasing improvements as soon as they have them. It is inevitable that it will take time for these improvements to be supported by the increasingly large number of workflows that natively ingest Red footage. If you want to wait, by all means wait. No one is forcing you to use MX.

Cheers,
Tim