Recent pics...

[Mike Peters]

I've got a lot of respect for Peter Jackson. Just the shear nerve of what he set out to do to make LOTR and the fact he pulled it off. Its a great story with a lot of lessons for many fields of human activity.

Great to see these wonderful cameras getting used.

 

[james Mallon]

I think it's worth remebering where Peter Jackson came from. He like Sam Rami, Robert Rodriguez was just a guy making movies with his mates with almost no budget. Guys like this should inspire us and also not forget they're are JUST guys making movies, but we should respect them as filmakers. I dont like celebrity culture but these guys aren't Paris Hilton they are US just with budgets and a lot more talent! The flip side of the backlash of celebrity culture is we stop to treat them like what they are, real people, and if they hold onto their ego even after they have fame then they are probably doing something many people wouldn't if they found fame and aclaim. So respect to Peter Jackson, who I have always followed and admired from Bad Taste days to now. I watched a Doc about him once and he has making stop animation king kong movies at home with plasticine and the kitchen table when he was a kid. I love the fact that he didn't come from a famous rich background which if you scratch the surface of so many of the new directors you find a loaded family and family members in high positions in the industry. So respect to PJ and others like him....sorry too long..:thumbsup:

 

[Casey Green]

cheers, james. good post.

 

[Curran Giddens]

I think it's worth remebering where Peter Jackson came from. He like Sam Rami, Robert Rodriguez was just a guy making movies with his mates with almost no budget...
...respect to PJ and others like him....

Agreed.

Thanks James! Reading your post I just had a moment of inspiration....

 

[keaten abbott]

People such as D'arcy keep forums interesting. However, new photos also keep me interested. Jim, how about a few more?

 

[Dave Barak]

Stanley Kubrick supposedly had the same wardrobe plan in effect, at least while shooting 2001. That and the obligatory beard.

 

[D'Arcy Foley-Dawson]

D'Arcy... fully understand your point of view. I would just add that part of what makes PJ so interesting in RED context is the fact that he is pushing along a vast amount of experimentation with different rig combinations... something not many others have the time or resources to do.

When we showed up in NZ for "test footage" in March 2007, Peter had mobilized his troops for our arrival. Over 100 people, props, aircraft, etc. to do "real" testing... that led to "Crossing the Line". We didn't ask him to do that, he volunteered. Remember, this was at a time when we were generally thought of as a scam. He invested his time and money when he could have just laid back and waited to see what others would do before he got interested. He didn't wait. He led the charge. Literally.

Name dropping for the sake of association is not very elegant. But this is a key part of RED history. The fact that Peter is as engaged today as he was with "Boris" and "Natasha" is noteworthy IMHO. It seems a lot more relevant than whether he has a beard or not.

Best.

Jim

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your response.

I just want to make it known that I have enormous respect for what you're doing with the RED project. I think this open model of customer feedback etc. is truly magnificent and I respect you as a businessman, or entrepreneur. I also understand the nature of business and that the association with people like Peter Jackson and Steven Soderbergh makes good business sense. Just as, for example, the association with Michael Jordan and Oakley sunglasses.

Last time I hung around this forum, late last year, there was a lot of discussion of 'signal-to-noise' ratio. I was then, as now, in the camp that feels there is a bit too much noise in the form of fanboy-ish carryings-on, and I perceive the celebrity directors as another manifestation of this. This is just my personal opinion, others will feel differently.

I fully understand and appreciate your gratitude towards Jackson for his role in the development of RED.

I just want to reiterate, that he uses RED because it's a good product. RED is not a good product because Peter Jackson uses it; Peter Jackson uses it because it's a good product.

You say that in the early days people generally thought of RED as a "scam". Well, I'm guessing Peter Jackson is a pretty intelligent guy, you need to be to achieve what he has achieved. I have no doubt he did his homework, he was well connected, and I'm guessing he researched you Jim in particular and your history with Oakley. Ergo, Jackson knew he was probably onto a good thing, and I'm sure he didn't invest any more money than he was prepared to lose on such a venture. Yes, he was a pioneer, and good on him.

My original comment was just motivated by my own personal opinions of him as a filmmaker (as well as alcohol and perhaps some other substances, I can't remember exactly.) It is my personal belief that, in his capacity as a director, he committed a cardinal sin when he couldn't deliver King Kong in under three hours. In my opinion, it was bloated and self-indulgent. In particular all the scenes on the boat were unnecessary and should've been cut. I remember reading a review of the DVD that said, of the lengthy 'making-of' documentary, that it goes some way to justifying the enormous length of the film. The reasoning was, that spending so much time, money, effort etc. on getting these scenes means they deserve a place in the final cut.

Well, to me that's just a major failing as a director. Again, that's just my opinion. But it irritates me that Jackson receives so much adulation when there are many more directors who I believe are doing far better work but receive far less praise.

Having said all that, I respect him for his achievements and I'm sure he's a very intelligent and capable individual.

I'm glad this didn't descend into a chorus-line of abuse and scorn poured on me, as I half expected it would. I just wish everyone would take the time to read exactly what myself or anyone else is saying before they reply with half-baked, irrelevant comments. Tall Poppy Syndrome?

 

[Shai Schcolnik]

Did anyone notice that the left monitor is connected to the right camera and vice-versa, despite the fact that the left camera is recording the right side of the frame and vice-versa...

Peter

I believe this is to compensate for parallax. The Cameras are all rotated around the nodal point of the lens.

Shai

 

[Troy Smith]

Hi Jim,



Well, to me that's just a major failing as a director. Again, that's just my opinion. But it irritates me that Jackson receives so much adulation when there are many more directors who I believe are doing far better work but receive far less praise.

Failing as a director? That's the most ridiculous statement i've ever heard.

He receives so much adulation because people luv his films, bottom line.

Many more directors doing far better work, wow, who are they?

Having PJ on board with red simply proves to the morons that red is the real deal, morons that
don't go test for themselves, simply hear trash talk and believe it because it was said,
there is still alot of talk how it's simply not stable enough, blablabla, alot of crap talk from sony etc, trying to scare people from using red on big gigs.

Not responding probably would have been better, just couldn't resist.

 

[Andrew Benz]

Failing as a director? That's the most ridiculous statement i've ever heard.

He receives so much adulation because people luv his films, bottom line.

Many more directors doing far better work, wow, who are they?

Having PJ on board with red simply proves to the morons that red is the real deal, morons that
don't go test for themselves, simply hear trash talk and believe it because it was said,
there is still alot of talk how it's simply not stable enough, blablabla, alot of crap talk from sony etc, trying to scare people from using red on big gigs.

Not responding probably would have been better, just couldn't resist.

Wait a second. Are you drunk? Go back and re read what D'Arcy said without cherry picking his full response. You might arrive at a different conclusion.:beer:

There is no need for this continued desire to dog pile anyone with a divergent point of view... Can we please move forward.:thumbsup:

I also hate to be a pedantic bastard and point this out but this is a friendly reminder from Jarred, "Just a Reminder to everyone.. June 1st if your username isn't a Real name, your account gets locked."

Here's to insomnia and no offense intended...:beer:

 

[Buck Forester]

I'm confused by D'Arcy's comments... Jim isn't name dropping for the sake of name dropping. He's not saying, "I know so and so", or "(insert famous person) and I had some beers last night" to try and make himself seem more important. If Jim wanted to name drop I'm sure in the circles he runs in he could start rattling off dozens of impressive names. This is solely in the context of using RED cameras. RED cameras aren't better because Peter Jackson uses them, they're good enough that someone like Peter Jackson shoots movies with them. Peter Jackson has every cinematic tool at his disposal and him using RED cameras is testament to the quality of RED cameras. That's exciting for many of us to hear, good information, a great endorsement. It's not name-dropping for the sake of name-dropping. For photography I have tear sheets for publications I've been published in for the sake of gaining other's confidence to use as a marketing tool... tear sheets don't make me a better photographer but they sure as heck show the trail I'm on and where I'm likely headed. But I did say hi to Huey Lewis once while walking in a hotel hallway in Hawaii.

 

[D'Arcy Foley-Dawson]

Thank you Andrew.


Seriously everyone, I've said my bit, Jim's said his bit. Move on, get over it. Or start another thread.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Mr. Benz just putted the ball on the place. ;-)

 

[D'Arcy Foley-Dawson]

I'm confused by D'Arcy's comments... Jim isn't name dropping for the sake of name dropping. He's not saying, "I know so and so", or "(insert famous person) and I had some beers last night" to try and make himself seem more important. If Jim wanted to name drop I'm sure in the circles he runs in he could start rattling off dozens of impressive names. This is solely in the context of using RED cameras. RED cameras aren't better because Peter Jackson uses them, they're good enough that someone like Peter Jackson shoots movies with them. Peter Jackson has every cinematic tool at his disposal and him using RED cameras is testament to the quality of RED cameras. That's exciting for many of us to hear, good information, a great endorsement. It's not name-dropping for the sake of name-dropping. For photography I have tear sheets for publications I've been published in for the sake of gaining other's confidence to use as a marketing tool... tear sheets don't make me a better photographer but they sure as heck show the trail I'm on and where I'm likely headed. But I did say hi to Huey Lewis once while walking in a hotel hallway in Hawaii.

Why do I have to say it again? READ what I've written. There is a clear argument there. You've just repeated some of the points I made VERY clearly which suggests you haven't made the effort to comprehend my point of view.

I don't want to continue this discussion, at least not on this thread where it doesn't belong, but it's very frustrating to have people not put in the time or effort - let alone respect - to listen to what I'm saying.

 

[Buck Forester]

D'Arcy, I comprehend your point of view, I read them, I just disagree with it. No worries. It's not a huge deal. I like you and Australia.

 

[Jarred Land]

And thats about enough of that