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 :)

nofilmschool.com EPIC Article

Frankly, I don't find the articles "annoying", it's just more words by someone who has watched some videos on the internet and has not put his hands on the camera he's writing about, yet. There will be hundreds of epics out there soon, just as there will be cameras from Sony, Panasonic, Arri, etc. Some will produce amazing images, others will not. Some people will use the great footage to prove that any said camera is capable of creating great footage, others will use the most amateurish footage to prove them wrong. The more we go on, the more capable cameras we'll see, and maybe the differences between systems will be quite minimal, i.e. the camera, as a tool, will be picked for what it's capable of doing and because it fits a given project. There's no perfect camera, no matter what marketing says, and hopefully we'll always have many different systems to choose from, there's just the perfect camera for the project at hand.
What sometimes bothers me is the need to "defend" this or that camera, the "Star Wars VS Star Trek mentality", as I sometimes call it :smile5: : I know this is RedUser, I know a lot of people have invested lots of money in one system or the other, so maybe this is the wrong place to express my very humble opinion, but what shocks me (and shouldn't, really) is this mentality of antagonism (if that makes some sense). I've been on 4 sets for tv series in the last month or so, all shooting 16mm film, 3 on Kodak, 1 on Fuji: no one on the "Kodak" sets was bashing Fuji, or viceversa. That one production went Fuji because they made some tests and the cinematographer decided that it was the right choice for the project. You could say the same thing about the choice of accessories, lenses, cameras, etc.
Sorry for the rant, I guess I'm just tired of reading "Red VS. Sony VS. Arri VS. ....". For me it's always been (and hopefully always will be) "Red AND Sony AND Arri AND ...". Choice and competition between camera-makers are a good thing.
 
Hey guys,

Those are my articles. I hope you don't see it so much as "Trashing" as asking questions that should be asked. The fact is, I've written a lot of positive stuff about RED on my site as well -- the point is to not be a "fanboy" of one company or another.

I'm an award-winning, young independent filmmaker who doesn't claim to know the absolute most when it comes to camera technology. I would like to think the value I bring to the table as a writer is helping filmmakers who don't know much about cameras understand the tools and techniques that are out there. Say what you will about "look who's writing it," but I'd like to think I've put together a decent resume given my age (and the fact that I don't specialize in one area). Ultimately, like most of us, I'm simply trying to find the best tool for my own future productions.

I've had my sights set on an EPIC-S since it was known as the SCARLET S35. It's possible if I get a production off the ground sooner I'll go with an F3. But I'm by no means interested in trashing RED. As proof, here are some of the things I've blogged about RED in a positive light:


Michael, Brooke, George... thanks for taking the time to read the posts and seeing past the headlines. My long-term goal with NoFilmSchool is to get other writers involved -- especially filmmakers who have more expertise than I do in a given area -- so I always welcome guest posts from others. If you think I'm missing something about RED, feel free to write in!
 
Hi Ryan,

I read your articles in full and as a dedicated Red supporter and owner, I didn't find them offensive or trashing.

The fact is, there are a lot of fantastic cameras on the market in all price ranges that suit a wide number of users, and naturally RED isn't going to be appropriate for a large number of them.

I think the thing that frustrates us a bit is when articles don't mention that the majority of these cameras will not hold up in the top production environments or when projected in 4K on a 50' screen, somehow suggesting that they are as capable as a RED in all aspects.

When it comes to VIMEO and 42" plasmas there are a hundred cameras that will look amazing, so you may as well go for the easiest and most cost effective solution.

RED makes cinema cameras that happen to also work for indies, I just wish that all articles would acknowledge this. Instead there is an entire generation of kids believing that an F3 or 5DMII will do the same thing.

I have seen RED projected at 4k on a large screen, it's breathtaking. No way you could confuse it with one of the other cameras mentioned.





Ryan Koo said:
Hey guys,

Those are my articles. I hope you don't see it so much as "Trashing" as asking questions that should be asked. The fact is, I've written a lot of positive stuff about RED on my site as well -- the point is to not be a "fanboy" of one company or another.

I'm an award-winning, young independent filmmaker who doesn't claim to know the absolute most when it comes to camera technology. I would like to think the value I bring to the table as a writer is helping filmmakers who don't know much about cameras understand the tools and techniques that are out there. Say what you will about "look who's writing it," but I'd like to think I've put together a decent resume given my age (and the fact that I don't specialize in one area). Ultimately, like most of us, I'm simply trying to find the best tool for my own future productions.

I've had my sights set on an EPIC-S since it was known as the SCARLET S35. It's possible if I get a production off the ground sooner I'll go with an F3. But I'm by no means interested in trashing RED. As proof, here are some of the things I've blogged about RED in a positive light:


Michael, Brooke, George... thanks for taking the time to read the posts and seeing past the headlines. My long-term goal with NoFilmSchool is to get other writers involved -- especially filmmakers who have more expertise than I do in a given area -- so I always welcome guest posts from others. If you think I'm missing something about RED, feel free to write in!
Click to expand...
 
"But with the RAW workflow, so much depends on post-processing that it’s impossible to look at something shot on RED and say, “I don’t like RED.” DSLRs thrill so many users because the footage looks pretty damn good out of the box (but doesn’t hold up as well to post-processing); a DSLR the EPIC is not."

Seems pretty accurate to me.
 
Lee Saxon said:
"But with the RAW workflow, so much depends on post-processing that it’s impossible to look at something shot on RED and say, “I don’t like RED.” DSLRs thrill so many users because the footage looks pretty damn good out of the box (but doesn’t hold up as well to post-processing); a DSLR the EPIC is not."

Seems pretty accurate to me.
Click to expand...

I have to agree. I didn't see anything inaccurate in either of his articles. He wasn't impressed with the Epic footage that has been release thus far. How exactly do you argue with that? It is, after all, an opinion.
 
Elsie N said:
Haven't read the links. I'm guessing that it's just somebody who's a nobody that is trying to attract attention to themselves. The Epic Ms are apparently working so flawlessly that it just seems a waste of time setting a naysayer straight. Too many more important things to do with time now that Epic X release is near.
Click to expand...

Why not read the article before making such a curt judgement? I know people on RedUser are excited about Epic, but that's not reason enough to be irrational.
 
Nofilmschool has a new outlook on Epic!
3
Now That’s More Like It: 5K RED EPIC Footage at 96 FPS is Stunning

03.11.11 @ 11:26AM Tags: epic, red, redepic

5510579922_62d49b6c68-224x117.jpg
A camera is really only as good as what you put in front of it. So while I was disappointed in some of the first RED EPIC footage to hit the web, I did suggest that it wasn’t the camera’s fault: drab brown interiors or ski slopes on an overcast day don’t capably demonstrate what a camera is capable of. A nice sunset over water with birds flying in slow motion, on the other hand, makes for a good showcase. Here’s the video embedded (make sure you’re watching it in HD, and keep in mind you can click on the vimeo title to download it in 1080p: More »
g-decor1.gif
 
I think one of the problems is that when we read something "published," many of us still have an expectation of real journalism, even when it's just a blog. Obviously. the research done for these articles wasn't particularly thorough or exhaustive; although reasonably well expressed, they are just slightly informed opinions. Legitimate opinions, perhaps, but still based on fewer facts and less analysis than we might expect from an article in The New York Times or Rolling Stone. I guess we all just have to live with the fact that everyone with a computer, an internet connection and an opinion can be "published." On balance, probably a good thing. :cheers2:
 
Known here as a long-term RED project supporter must honestly to say right now after I just saw some of F3 low light footage that Sony nailed pretty good with a digital cam that has S35mm imager and costs about $16,000.

In this case we should wait for NAB and see how RED would respond on that F3 capability with EPIC (mostly is about cheaper and some feature cut version named EPIC-S)

at a low light employing its own HDRx™ invention (that is based on use of shutter speed) especially with possible motion blur and electric light flicker artifacts, also in slow motion, etc,...
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Everyone -- including the media -- has to stop with labeling any critical analysis as "trashing", "slamming", etc. The world isn't that black and white.
Click to expand...

Agree ;)

Also this thread's title should be changed by a Moderator, as it is not nofilmschool.com that is trashing EPIC, in fact no one really is,
few replies however do have it on me ;)

Fortunately I am secure in off with what I can do with EPIC M and or any camera for that matter, so that doe not effect me, as again,
they simply have no clue what we were testing for.

Any how we will be posting an other version of the Beauty Test Shoot, this time Graded so they can see the difference.
 
i think he just didn't like the girls.. or maybe he expected they revealed a little more.
 
as long as you're checking on this thread, Ryan - a little context for the images might be helpful...

this is the same phenomenon which we have seen with RED ONE, upon its initial release...

1) people on reduser demand footage now, if not sooner
2) early adopters race to supply footage, eager to help their community
3) unlike all of the other camera companies, RED does NOT selectively choose the filmmakers or control what they post -

they are the most egalitarian camera company in the world, in that regard - they reward loyalty, as you can see with EPIC-M, and they are putting it in all kinds of hands, not just a select few - not just your Phil Blooms or your Vince Laforets

This is something that is REALLY AWESOME about this camera company, perhaps you can try to understand that and bake it into your future critiques...

you won't find that practice at RED - you will see a range of looks from a range of shooters from Peter Jackson to Ketch to Tom Lowe to John Cordell

I can't stress enough how this differentiates RED in a good way from its competitors.

otherwise, you are as subject to manipulation by the footage that is released by the majors, which they sell by putting into the most competent hands they can and they give them plenty of time to work with the camera before they release the footage, insuring that lots of incompetent camera operators will see the footage and say "oooo want that!" when in fact, they will never be a Phil Bloom or a Vince Laforet - or a Jason Wingrove - or any of the camera testers for the other, larger companies.


4) in RED world, footage is released fast, before users know everything about the camera, and without much context, as Ketch is saying here...
5) people outside the community bitch about what they see because it's usually quick and dirty, not fully cooked.
6) RED gets used on major feature films, on 4K reels and toured around the world, etc., and then finally everyone sees what we are all fussing about...

This is the product release cycle...do you understand why your analysis without context misrepresents the company, the technology, the users, and the footage?

it is probably the most honest and unfiltered release from a new technology which you will ever see...that should be worth something.
 
For what is essentially a large blog he's not doing too bad guys. He is trying to show both sides of the argument and attempting to show all of the options. He's hardly slamming RED or Ketch for that matter, all he was saying was that the footage didin't do it for him.

http://nofilmschool.com/2011/03/5k-red-epic-footage-96-fps/

Tom's work seems to have hit the spot for him tho..

Remember most sites are personal blogs styled like magazines, they are usually run by one person, not by a team with editorial guidelines. I think sometimes we expect too much for a lot of these sites.

Theres room in the world for all of us!
 
KETCH ROSSI said:
Agree ;)

Also this thread's title should be changed by a Moderator, as it is not nofilmschool.com that is trashing EPIC, in fact no one really is,
few replies however do have it on me ;)

Fortunately I am secure in off with what I can do with EPIC M and or any camera for that matter, so that doe not effect me, as again,
they simply have no clue what we were testing for.

Any how we will be posting an other version of the Beauty Test Shoot, this time Graded so they can see the difference.
Click to expand...

As always a gracious dude, Ketch takes it in stride as a challenge and opportunity to make the case even though the author didn't really slam anyone. Ungraded Red test footage is unspectacular... Really? When did that become a slam?
 
Last edited:
Scott Crawley said:
...Ungraded Red test footage is unspectacular... Really? When did that become a slam?
Click to expand...

I think the reason that such a critique is disingenuous is because it lacks context. Most people who have shot with a RED, or those here at REDuser, understand that RAW footage looks a certain way, and that isn't very "flattering" compared with some footage that is processed in-camera. The context would be in pointing out that a) there is nothing unusual or worrisome about this "unspectacular" look, and b) with some normal grading, RED/EPIC footage does often tend toward the "spectacular" as a matter of course. :coolgleamA:
 
Terry VerHaar said:
RAW footage looks a certain way, and that isn't very "flattering" compared with some footage that is processed in-camera.
Click to expand...

This is something I find myself pointing out to my readers all the time, when they ask why RED footage looks flat and grayish-brown. Definitely a common misperception.

I understand the product (footage) cycle -- when The Hobbit or Contagion or Fincher's Girl with a Dragon Tattoo come out, of course they'll look terrific. They'll have had generous lighting budgets and, more importantly, top-notch talent in every department ensuring it looks great. My site is written from an indie's perspective, however, and there is often a very different set of considerations for a non-studio, smaller-budget production (which is why the F3 and EPIC-S pricing is exciting).

One observation, however. When the RED ONE came out and some of us weren't ecstatic about the colors, dynamic range, or even the CMOS skew -- I recently re-watched the film Cyrus and these issues jumped out at me -- there were a ton of people who would defend the RED ONE with "it's 4K and it's the future, you don't know what you're talking about!" But now years later people look back at the early builds of the ONE and say, "yeah, they had problems, but they're fixed now." It seems like the same folks that were so quick to defend the first RED now refer to its problems in order to make a point about how good the new cameras are. Which to me is just a confirmation that those of us who weren't over the top about the first RED had some legitimate points...

I am definitely not The New York Times, nor do I pretend to be. Though when it comes to tech writing, the old media outlets very often will assign a general tech writer to cover cameras, and it's unfamiliar territory for them. Remember when Wired first wrote about RED and how they got a number of things wrong, and suggested it was $17k all-in? It's easy to think that there's a firm line between old/print media and new/blog media, but as someone who's also had stuff in print (and just turned down a print assignment, in fact), it's not so cut-and-dry.

Anyway, I'm glad my posts inspired discussion here and I hope to call REDUSER home with an EPIC-S one day (sooner rather than later... ).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top