OK... Film vs. RED

[Clint Johnson]

Me, I leave most of the lights on all night, the TV sometimes as well. The computers get turned off only rarely. I make no effort to conserve energy at all. Hell, sometimes I'll walk around turning lights on before going to bed.

You see, the generator that runs the camp needs a minimum load for it to run efficiently. The genset had to be sized to meet the maximum load anticipated. There is even a bank of baseboard heaters on the outside of the building that we can turn on if there isn't enough electricity being consumed by regular use.

And it is a logging camp so how un-green is that? At least we are logging the older trees so that the new growth can take up more carbon from the atmosphere. Yeah, that's it... that's the ticket.

 

[Ralph Oshiro]

Hmmm . . . well my 2006 Ford minivan is a 3.8L engine, and I STILL get only 10 mpg in it!

 

[Ace]

Clint, your a riot. Switching on the lights before going to bed... You should write for a living!

Ralph.. Take your foot off the pedal. Think of the Polar Bears. Everytime you floor it, one of them drowns!

 

[Bachman]

Give me a Genesis I'll tell you

Graeme

Hasnt Jim got one already?

 

[Keith Nealy]

"If its fruit you're after, a slice of watermelon is more fruit than a whole grape..."

Well said, Gibby. There's a lot of wisdom in that. Making movies is a team sport.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Rental only....

Graeme

 

[Fix]

Actually, we are probably using less electricity per household than we did 10 years ago. CRT's are being replaced by LCD's, 100 watt globes are being replaced by energy saver bulbs and we are recycling a hell of a lot more. Computers do use up a bit of energy, but compared to electronics of the yester year, no they do not.

Hm.. Well maybe you guys use les power in Austrailia, but am pretty sure we use a lot more in Europe. Remember watching a program on the TV about coal-fired power plant in the United states, they are building these like crazy now days and I don’t think its because the average consumer use less power. Now normal (old school) light bulbs are going to be illegal in a decade IMHO, those are plain stupid to our environment. But that’s a whole different story.

I do agree with you that its barely scratching the surface in terms of 'saving' the environment. But its a good start in the right direction. How many trees has the internet saved? I cant remember the last time i requested a paper brochure. How much transport emissions has email saved? I cant remember the last time I posted a letter.

Well at my work we probably use pretty much 10x as much paper as in the old typing machine days, only because of bad/wrong printouts. One click on your keyboard and you puke out one kilogram tree with the wrong heading on top “ups… gotta do that again”. Now that’s something we could fix, like give the guy 10 000 volts for every wrong printout.

I bet you many readers reading our environmental discussion here couldnt care less about this green BS. But the situation really is more dire than it seems at the present. As film-makers, documentary makers, news gatherers, video producers, it is incumbent upon the messengers of the modern world to contribute a positive environmental message in all aspects of work; the only way to really fix this problem is through conversion of the masses.

I couldn’t agree more. I am actually one of them. Remember I started my environment talk with “This is kinda stupid” no offence Clint . But don’t get me wrong I do care.

Hi Fix,

I did note that digital has its own detrimental impact. I also noted that the impact that film has isn't huge. My point was that even if it is only a million kilograms per year difference in favour of digital, and even though it shouldn't be the deciding factor, it is still a difference worth noting.

Well I didn’t want to seem harsh. I think you got some points, but if we sum up its not going to make a big difference for the environment. So people thinking they are super green using digital technology are only fooling them self in some way IMHO. Im not saying you are "keep the light on the whole night" wot!

 

[Kenn Christenson]

What was this thread about... Oh, yeah, something about film vs. Red.

 

[Jarred Land]

What was this thread about... Oh, yeah, something about film vs. Red.

heh heh heh.. i like you Kenn....

 

[Clint Johnson]

I wouldn't describe myself as an environmentalist since that particular badge has been usurped by far too many wild eyed folk that have a driving need to save the world at any cost and damn reality and science. For me it is simply a matter of lower my negative impact on the universe where it is reasonable and increasing my positive impact wherever I can work that.

The job that allows me to make my indie shows and buy things like Red cameras? I'm in the logging industry. That isn't terribly “environmentalist” but it is a job that is needed and we can do small things to lower out impact- like talking Babine Forest Products into getting an oil/water separator for the Tsitsutl Mist's bilge water before it is discharged. Even though there is no requirement for a system like this, BFP is pretty good about taking reasonable steps to lower its impact.

The lake is over 150 km long and we could discharge raw bilge water for the next thousand years without it having much of an impact on the system overall... but it is an easy step that doesn't cost a lot in dollars or time.

I just feel that I should be conscious of my impact and adjust it where it is reasonable to do so. You add enough small steps up and multiply them by enough people and that will make a difference.

Canada just passed legislation to ban the sale of incandescent light bulbs in five years. I'm not a fan of actions like these. Let the cost of electricity rise as the supply and demand gets out of whack and the market will take care of that... but that isn't going to happen because it will cost too many votes.

Rationally, the greenest source of electricity would be nuclear reactors with waste disposal into a cleanly subducting plate like the one in the Marianas Trench. Try getting that by the environmentalists! Just do the math and it looks like the impact of tidal, wave, wind and terrestrial solar would all be higher than nuclear for the needed wattage... but they are considered green?

The TV series I'm trying to get set up includes a company that is building an orbital power station with massive solar panels built utilizing a captured nickel-iron asteroid and minerals lifted off the moon. While it might be economically feasible, things like this can only supply a small fraction of the needed power.

 

[Fix]

What was this thread about... Oh, yeah, something about film vs. Red.

Okay okay! I got it, no more environment talk from my side at least.... In this thread.

Flip the coin.. how much is it to rent a Genesis anyways? I can imagine it will cost you less buying a Red one than renting a Genesis or a millennium for a couple of weeks shooting. Anyone?

 

[Clint Johnson]

I believe that the asking rate is about $3000 a day with three day minimum so depending on how your negotiating skills play out, it wouldn't take long to pay for a well kitted out Red.

 

[Fix]

I believe that the asking rate is about $3000 a day with three day minimum so depending on how your negotiating skills play out, it wouldn't take long to pay for a well kitted out Red.

I wounder how these guys are going to survive. "Did you rent a genesis... ouch bummer"

 

[Jim McKinney]

I guess I haven't really tested RED vs. Film with my step mother yet. I'd agree that 1/3" and 2/3" chip stuff often looks video-ish vs. film - even to the untrained eye.

But how many fewer people saw Superman or Zodiac because they were digital? My guess is ZERO. Ergo - shooting digitally doesn't matter to the mass audience IMHO. At that point whatever's cheapest, fastest and safest will win out UNLESS a DP/Director overrides those things and goes for THEIR ideal for highest quality because movies are part "art" after all. I also think we'll see the argument that film is safer for a while.

I'll still stand by the intention of my initial argument - which to restate it is: "The quality of the medium does matter to audiences, whether they see the movie or not."

 

[Jim McKinney]

I wounder how these guys are going to survive. "Did you rent a genesis... ouch bummer"

I think they may feel the heat, but they'll certainly survive. Panavision has a great product with excellent support. In fact, one could argue that their product is the service they provide, not simply the nuts and bolts of a visual recording device.

And . . . I'm in line for a Red, and I'm expecting great things from it. It just depends on the situation of the particular job.

Jim McKinney

 

[Joel Kaye]

I'll still stand by the intention of my initial argument - which to restate it is: "The quality of the medium does matter to audiences, whether they see the movie or not."

So this stock of film vs. that stock of film impacts moviegoers? Zeiss Lenses vs. Cooke lenses impacts your average viewer? Sure - that's arguably true as you state... but there's a point when there's not a "practical" difference in the real world for the average consumer.

Now performing in the center ring - RED.

 

[Fix]

I think they may feel the heat, but they'll certainly survive. Panavision has a great product with excellent support. In fact, one could argue that their product is the service they provide, not simply the nuts and bolts of a visual recording device.

And . . . I'm in line for a Red, and I'm expecting great things from it. It just depends on the situation of the particular job.

Jim McKinney

Now I admit I was stretching it a bit far, my sense of humor I guess. I can imagine panavison got some superior service and support. But I do think Red could challenge that. Like give some customers higher grade of support if wanted. Like 24h “we will be there” Something like this will of course cost a lot, but its a good insurance for those who cant afford one day delay because of technical reason.

 

[donatello b]

"asking rate is about $3000 "

projects that rent from Panavision - rent SYSTEMS and expect SERVICE ... 3000 day doesn't matter to their regular clients/users ... they ( regular panavision renters) could care less if at the end of a production they spent 100K on camera dept rentals - they accept it as doing business ...
IMO there will be Pana-Reds .. and the rental price will be up there - far more then most of us can afford ....

most productions do not want to OWN camera's , auto's, trucks, offices, buildings. stages - they rent/lease ...

now when you get to budgets under 1-2 mil they might consider the buy vs. rent ... in all my years i reaaly haven't seen that many projects BUY a used 35m camera - use it and then sell it at end of project ...

there have ALWAYS been excellent deals thru rental houses ( from 1/2 day weeks to the rental house letting DP have it for free because they are a regular ) for those projects done for love of it ... many DP's/producers/production managers can give their regular rental house a call and ask for a favor BUT the project has to be worth while for them to make that call ...

 

[Clint Johnson]

Yes, most of the production companies that rent this expensive gear also rent pretty much everything else. The rent they spend on lights and gensets could easily pay for them over a couple shoots but they prefer to leave the hassle of storing, maintaining, repairing, and upgrading equipment to the rental houses.

I have to give a shout out to William F. Whites in Vancouver who supplied all the lighting, the genset, the crane and the Fisher 11 for my TV pilot, they were great and I can see where a production company would find it a lot safer and easier on the stress level to go with renting everything rather than owning. Sure they gave me some great concessions because of a long relationship that my co-producer and my DoP had with them so your mileage may vary.

So yes, most of these companies won't be interested in buying a Red but rather they will be looking at renting a Red from the companies that they have grown to trust over the years. These Red rentals will bite into the rental for other digital camera systems and there will be a price correction- but first the Red cameras have to enter the system and prove themselves in production environments. The difference, once you remove the ancillary gear, may be fifteen hundred dollars a day and over a twenty shooting days that $30,000 is about 0.125% of the average feature film budget in the US. They will not be interested in "saving" that money until they trust Red not to cost them that other 99.875%.

My guess is that the other digital camera companies have maybe a year and a half, two years on the outside, to accommodate themselves to this new playing field.

 

[Jim McKinney]

Now I admit I was stretching it a bit far, my sense of humor I guess. I can imagine panavison got some superior service and support. But I do think Red could challenge that. Like give some customers higher grade of support if wanted. Like 24h “we will be there” Something like this will of course cost a lot, but its a good insurance for those who cant afford one day delay because of technical reason.

Yes, I have no doubt that many of the current rental houses will absorb the RED Camera into their business model.