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 :)

Panavision videos...

I am just a bit concerned over the confusion. Seriously, the biggest challenge I have in introducing the Red One to the South African rental market is to dispell the myths people have. The resistance to this camera and the technology is enormous.

I've got an idea, Jim why don't you start selling shares to red owners, we are a loyal bunch, with the capital raised you buy out Sony. Problem solved. It's now not small fish big fish, Red is then the big fish... or maybe a shark, a great white with big teeth. I'd be first in line to help the cause.
 
Hey guys, stop and think for a minute.
Why does Panavision (or Sony or Kodak for that matter) have to "lose" for us to "win"? Red One is a fantastic camera and we'll all use it whenever we can. If certain production requires film, or an HVX, or whatever, will you all stubbornly "push" your Red One? Yes, Panavision is biased. But aren't we too? Good DPs use what tool best serves the project. Just sayin...
I agree with Jim that misinformation is bad. And we SHOULD call people on it. And Panavision not renting lenses without a camera (if that's true) is pretty petty, but then again, it's their company.
But if Panavision abandoned the RGB stripe and came out with a CMOS 4K sensor, or an 8K sensor, would you all turn around and say it's great? Or would we just bash them for some other reason?
They make FANTASTIC lenses, guys. And the film cameras are pretty good too! ;) It's true that they've been on top of the pile for a long time and sometimes have a bad attitude; but let's not stoop to that too.
Wait, give me a minute to put my Romex suit on...
Harry
 
Jannard said:
Panavision's Chief of Technology is John Gault. Ours is Greame Nattress. I'll take Graeme.

Jim
Click to expand...

Sure - but in my book Panavision is a lens company. They did not get into filmmaking, and there should be no need for them to make the electronic replacement for film.

If I were a Panasonic shareholder, I would have wanted them to concentrate on their core business. More high-quality digital cameras means more opportunities to make money on lenses.
 
Harry: Agree...

Old: Guess you mean Panavision...

There's a multitude of factors that applies for me personally for jumping on the RED ship. As price is one of them, my choices are limited. I feel only fortunate that I'm now not currently shooting a 2100 with AVC-I board, even though I'm likewise certain that that would have served a lot of my needs.

I am a digital dude by nature and virtue. Not because I think that is always the best, but it's where I decided to learn and hope to become slightly useable. I don't despise film for that reason. I just don't use it...

RED, thus - opens up some of the more sexy aspects of filmproduction for me, thus far unachievable. I couldn't rent any of the other 35mm digicams here anyway, so they're kust not an option without moving to another country. With 2,5 kids and a wife, that's not on the near horisont...

Does this make me unhappy with the RED?

Not at all. Couldn't be happier. But I'll get an EPIC when it's available.
 
If you go by the numbers (specs), each camera will have strengths and weaknesses. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, the bottom line is what looks good to an audience or client and can you achieve your artistic or commercial intent. Resolution is not the final answer there. A lot of variables will contribute to whether the content is deemed enjoyable and effective.

What's important for RED's future is that we all use it well to tell stories and shoot beautiful pictures. That's what people will remember, not the actual digital resolution numbers.

Having said that, the Panavision videos were worth checking out. That filled my geek boy quota for the day.
 
Our two-year old David is waking up the haughty Goliaths.

Now they'll have to move their a$$es and try to deliver better, in terms of quality and price.

Good for us customers.

Right now, The Force is with RED...
 
NERVOUS PANAVISION WEBSITE said:
. . . A so-called “4K camera” that has an imager with only 8 or 10 million photo sites but outputs 25 or 32 megapixels is interpolating data without adding any image performance. Moreover, it creates a four-fold increase in post-production digital data to be stored and processed that is both unnecessary and expensive. . . . . By contrast, Genesis has a 12.4 million photo site sensor, produces content superior to what is commonly called a “4K” camera, but through “super-sampling” our final output which is only 6 megapixels (or an 8 megabyte DPX frame). In other words: Same or better picture quality with far less overhead.
Click to expand...

hmmm. Now I wonder who they are talking about when they say "a so called 4K camera" ???

Sounds to me like someone's seriously concerned about the future.
 
harryclark said:
Hey guys, stop and think for a minute.
Why does Panavision (or Sony or Kodak for that matter) have to "lose" for us to "win"? Red One is a fantastic camera and we'll all use it whenever we can. If certain production requires film, or an HVX, or whatever, will you all stubbornly "push" your Red One? Yes, Panavision is biased. But aren't we too? Good DPs use what tool best serves the project. Just sayin...
I agree with Jim that misinformation is bad. And we SHOULD call people on it. And Panavision not renting lenses without a camera (if that's true) is pretty petty, but then again, it's their company.
But if Panavision abandoned the RGB stripe and came out with a CMOS 4K sensor, or an 8K sensor, would you all turn around and say it's great? Or would we just bash them for some other reason?
They make FANTASTIC lenses, guys. And the film cameras are pretty good too! ;) It's true that they've been on top of the pile for a long time and sometimes have a bad attitude; but let's not stoop to that too.
Wait, give me a minute to put my Romex suit on...
Harry
Click to expand...

Priecesly...

PV has and is a very important entity in the motion picture field. And like Kodak they will adapt to the times. I never wanted to work for them myself and in fact curtailed an interview about half way thru because the person doing the interview had his head so far up his ass I found it astounding that he could breath. lol None the less, what they have achieved is amazing.
 
oldphart said:
Sure - but in my book Panavision is a lens company. They did not get into filmmaking, and there should be no need for them to make the electronic replacement for film.
Click to expand...

What do you mean they did not get into filmmaking?
 
Dominic Cochran said:
What do you mean they did not get into filmmaking?
Click to expand...

I'm hip. And even more then being a lens company they are a motion picture camera manufacture. Some (not all) will argue that they may be the best. So I can't see how they could be any more involved in film making then that. No cameras...no movies.
 
Well I do like Canon a lot, as well as I know you do Jim, this has very little to do with them directly, and more to do with the particular branch of the Broadcasting and HD division, but in that regard, you stand correct they are getting nervous, even so we might think that thanks to Birger Mount, they should be happy, because REDUSERS will buy 100's and 100's of lenses sets, in reality that is nothing to Canon, as they just announced "ONE MILLION EF LENSES SOLD" But they too have cameras in the market, many of them, which are now seriously threatned by RED as well as SCARLET as soon as She will be released.

“Demystifying Digital Camera Specifications” is a meaningful way to understand clearly where each part of the movie-making process plays its part.


Well here they can talk as much as they want about what they think about the so cal "4k CAMERA" which they should just got hold of their Balls and called by the given name "RED ONE", at the end of the day, you said it your self, all it takes is to see the final result in 4K, the talk about Pixels and Sensor capacity all makes very little sense to the 99.99% of the viewers, which lets not forget are the ones that will make us money.

I, if some one at RED recalls, got very upset right from the begin when I decided to give RED a deposit for Three cameras, and don't go true with the purchase of the Viper Filmstream, after I had bug the crap of the guys at CINEMATOGRAPHY.com like the very generous and now our own great REDUSER, DAVID MULLEN, people all around in the mist of the BIG boys were telling me that I just made a huge mistake, well I DIDN"T, and soon in off I'll have a MOVIE to prove it!


All this talk is actually good, I just hope they at list called by name, just in case they got confused, "ITS CALLED RED ONE" and not a "4K camera".

Sorry, but I had to write this, my Doctor says that it is bad for me in my conditions to keep things inside, and this F%$@%@ people now are starting to really upset me, RED is my camera now and as part of this family (RED DIGITAL CINEMA Company) and their products I fill they are talking S%@%#$ about me as well.


Ciao
 
Canon in the past made some decent 35 and 16mm cine lenses (although a bit wimpy in the mechanics) and they could do it again probally much better then the first time around. If they could do a set of 35mm format lens that can take advantage of the RED cameras capabilities then they could sell those lenses to film camera users also. Zooms have improved alot over the years and if they could do a series of short focale length range ones like the Arri vari-primes I bet they would sell a s**t load ofem.
 
Jannard said:
We had one (nameless) ASC member come to our booth. He grabbed me to admit he had been a true skeptic. After watching the 4k footage, he converted. It was like a religious experience. He was particularly impressed with the anamorphic footage from "The Argentine". We spent 1/2 hour going over our line, including accessories... especially the lenses. He scrutinized the 18-85mm zoom and left a true fan. It made my day...

Jim
Click to expand...

That's exactly where small producers/cinematographers like us are happy to have taken the risk. hee! :)
Two years ago, ...well...it was a risk...
Honestly, it impresses me more than comments from well known cinematographers who see the final results. Those comments are the confirmation that RED is a top cinema tool. Nice to hear.

Now, ...the camera is nothing less than incredible. I see it every day. :)


Thanks again!

Antoine
 
I hope your all actually watching the video with an open mind or at least just watching the videos before getting steamed up about them. I mean I can understand how RED wouldn't completely agree with the video after all Panavision aren't huge fans of the Bayer pattern technology that the team here have chosen. But thats all the videos are, a comparison of 3 chip, Bayer and stripped (which the genesis uses), specifically I think they just don't like the idea that Panavision refers to Bayer as 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 (in another slide they're a little more generous.
But the idea that they're attacking Red specifically is nonsense they named 3 other 4k cameras in their bayer example hence the generalized "so called 4k cameras".
I understand where Jim is coming from but some of you are losing your minds over this.
 
I bet the tipsy-looking old guy giving the presentation doesn't even like to watch movies. :wink:

It is amazing that we have to go do deeply into the subject to look for discrepancies between the higher-resolution approaches. I am totally ready to accept that Bayer might be technically inferior in color sampling and resolution to another approach.

However, I don't give a fuck. Even if Red were 90% the image quality of the Genesis which I'm sure would be too harsh a handicap, the ease of workflow and just the size and adaptability of the tool makes it a no-brainer.
 
Yes, Sanjin. Leica glass. But they spec and design the entire lens, design and machine the mechanicals, test, and redo. Just like Red. They are also good at listening to customer feedback. Just like Red. They have made lenses to order for specific customers and jobs, have stripped coatings and otherwise intentionally ruined lenses for customers.
And the Panaflex camera, when it came out, was revolutionary. Just like Red. The camera of choice then was the Mitchell BNC. Anyone here in the forum remember those? 100 lbs.+. No handholding. Rackover viewing system. Power hungry. The Panaflex was tiny in comparison, silent, and efficient, with reflex viewfinders (that some "old timers" refused to use because the spinning mirror was new and bothersome) and the camera was modular. You could configure it with the mag on top, or in back. There was a plethora of bracketry for handholding and mounting the camera. Very advanced. Just like Red.
They also, once upon a time, had a camera called the Panacam. It was (I believe) an Ikegami HL-59 inside a Panavision-machined body. So they've been in the electronic camera business too, albeit not from a "ground-up" position like Red.
I am sure that the next digital camera they release will be better than Genesis. And it's nice to have choices...
So yes, it's disingenuous for them to bash Red in the videos (if that's indeed what they are doing) but I think wishing for them to vanish because we're all on the Red Team, while a natural first reaction, is pretty childish.
As cinematographers, we should use the right brush and technique that's right for OUR STYLE and OUR WORK, but don't belittle other artist's brushes, even if the brush-maker is being rude. ;)
Cheers,
Harry
 
Jannard said:
We had one (nameless) ASC member come to our booth. He grabbed me to admit he had been a true skeptic. After watching the 4k footage, he converted. It was like a religious experience. He was particularly impressed with the anamorphic footage from "The Argentine". We spent 1/2 hour going over our line, including accessories... especially the lenses. He scrutinized the 18-85mm zoom and left a true fan. It made my day...

Jim
Click to expand...

Hell yeah Jim. I'm happy for you. It's a great feeling to have people recognize your labors. Too bad it happens so infrequently.

However, you have a throng of loyalists, so when you hear detractors and other companies trying to snuff you...let that gas you onto further victories. I think I said somewhere that you're the man.

This whole situation is a doc in and of itself. I call dibs on that idea. Copyright Film Ylem 2008. :)
 
Somehow, I'm a dumb guy, I don't understand all this clever words about pixel here, sampling there, because I DON'T want to dig in the deepness of technical prozesses of sensors. The only thing what counts for me is: Do I like an image or not. Can I deal with the technique of a camera or not. What I get out of my RED is more than what I got out of any other digital camera I was able to rent or buy in the past. RED helps me to transform the reality to the digital world in a very special way like I only got from 35mm film. I don't need explications for that, I don't need somebody who tells me, oh but, by the way RED 4K is not really 4K. I give a s/&%/&t on that. RED is a concept, RED is moving, every day, RED don't look back, RED flirts with the future. There will be better REDs, better EPICS soon, I'm convinced. But what I already have is perfect. I love this camera, because the pictures of RED ONE are closer by my heart than any other I got from digital cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top