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 :)

RED FOCUS..

Could it be that many adopt the so called "burned in" file because of its affinity with the film approach: committing to a look, discovering and responding to the needs of that look, on set?
While post is a place for polishing what has been committed to; and do they see raw as more of a place of discovery or invention with the potential for much flailing about after the fact? I only work in raw, so don't dump on me. Just curious.
 
Bill,

maybe this is the reasoning.

When people shot film they would come into a DI and maybe see a log Lin scan or a flat image and it would be from that image the grading would start. ARRI made a lot of film scanners. When people started shooting ALEXA in log, they'd walk in the DI and see what they were exactly used to seeing on the monitors.

So maybe what Gunleik is suggesting (and I can't speak for him) is a way to have post devices see exactly that type of image when they get to the DI And start grading. Maybe it a kind of metadata hook for certain kinds of productions that defaults it to this flat REDlog image from which people start grading.

The rc3/rg3 is great for straight out of the camera stuff but not really the place to start grading.

Battistella

Bill Anderson said:
Could it be that many adopt the so called "burned in" file because of its affinity with the film approach: committing to a look, discovering and responding to the needs of that look, on set?
While post is a place for polishing what has been committed to; and do they see raw as more of a place of discovery or invention with the potential for much flailing about after the fact? I only work in raw, so don't dump on me. Just curious.
Click to expand...
 
It sounds reasonable. There is familiarity and safety in that. I think that genie is out of the bottle though. I'm pretty nostalgic but...

Well, that's just me; one Scarlet user. ;-)

Bill Anderson said:
Could it be that many adopt the so called "burned in" file because of its affinity with the film approach: committing to a look, discovering and responding to the needs of that look, on set?
While post is a place for polishing what has been committed to; and do they see raw as more of a place of discovery or invention with the potential for much flailing about after the fact? I only work in raw, so don't dump on me. Just curious.
Click to expand...
 
Scott Crawley said:
It sounds reasonable. There is familiarity and safety in that. I think that genie is out of the bottle though. I'm pretty nostalgic but...

Well, that's just me; one Scarlet user. ;-)
Click to expand...

yeah,

just treat that RED sensor like a 5000k (sensor native color temp) or 5600k daylight stock. I mean just assume like there is a 5000k daylight stock loaded. You could pretty much emulate the film experience just by doing that.

Battistella
 
Gunleik Groven said:
I think, from what I see, ACs and DoPs and producers are not "haters", but usually practical guys who choose the road of least opposition to get the result they want.

So I actually agree with Mark, that to address some of the issues David and others have addressed here about "perception", you have to fill the gaps, given that the perception is real IF RED does not want to become more of a specialist brand for specialized applications.

With the Dragon, I think it would be fun to see RED go for more than niche....

They really deserve that.
Click to expand...

So the take away is that Red needs to continue to be disruptive without being unfamiliar. I have no idea how those two ideas are reconciled, but I will be here for the ride, watching.
 
Scott Crawley said:
So the take away is that Red needs to continue to be disruptive without being unfamiliar. I have no idea how those two ideas are reconciled, but I will be here for the ride, watching.
Click to expand...


I like that summing up....! :)

Be disruptive in creating incredibly good images.
Be familiar in operation and post.

It is good to think through where "change" is good/necessary, and where it just becomes a hurdle... :)

I happen to think that that is possible... :)
 
Red's product and marketing focus has definitely evolved over these nine years since 2005. How do I know this? I was personally there giving my input to Jim Jannard at the very foundational stage of Red in mid-to-late 2005. I was also one of a select few invitees to attend the December 14, 2005 "Summit" meeting in the Board room at Oakley Headquarters where we think-tanked our way through diverse input on cameras. I'm under NDA on the details of that meeting, but I long ago received permission from Jim to disclose that I attended.

A few weeks after that meeting, in late December 2005 I traveled back to Oakley Headquarters and personally interviewed Jim Jannard for the very first published magazine interview about the Red One camera, and interview which then was published in the April 2006 issue of Studio Daily. Here's a link to that interview, which I own the copyright to. If you read it thoroughly you'll get direct insight into Red's original industry and tech intentions for their camera systems:
http://www.studiodaily.com/2006/04/first-look-at-red-2/

You'll notice in that interview a definite intention in the beginning to make a camera that was designed for both cine style and EFP style usage. Through 2006 and 2007 some of those early intentions were dropped (1080p, 1080i, etc.), but when Red One shipped in August 2007 it had a significant number of traditional EFP industry features. Shortly thereafter Red even made a PL to B4 adaptor to enable the use of B4 2/3" HD zooms on Red One when shooting in 2k format. In October 2007 I was the very first customer to test out B4 2/3" zooms on Red One, with that adaptor and broad assortment of Fujinon HD zooms.

Other evidences of Red's early commitment to alternative mobile EFP use of Red One were affirmed here on Red User by Red's Stuart English (who has an extensive EFP industry background), and the formation in March 2007 here on Red User of an "EFP / ENG and Red" forum here on Red User, of which I then wrote the Sticky thread.

Part of Red's focus all along has also been to enable the use of 35mm still lenses on Red cameras for hybrid shooting use. With Nikon mount for Red One, and both Canon and Nikon mounts for Epic that's still obviously part of Red's business strategy.

The announced plans for the 2/3" Fixed Lens Scarlet, which was to be packed with mobile EFP industry features (powered zoom, internal ND, and on and on), clearly reaffirmed Red's solid commitment to the mobile EFP industry. The cancellation of that camera, signifying Red's commitment to a "4k or above" future, was disappointing to those of us who work in the mobile EFP industry, but the new hope was that Red would still be a mover in the mobile EFP industry by then doing a camera very similar to the fixed lens Scarlet, but one that had a S35 sensor, and shot in 4k and Quad HD, in selectable raw or RGB - and offered both a fixed lens version, and a removable lens version. Unfortunately Red didn't. It was at this point I perceived a marked shift in Red's focus more to the cine side and less to the mobile EFP side.

Fast forward to the release of Epic. Epic is a highly capable camera for cine style production and reasonably capable camera for mobile EFP style production. The lack of internal ND was solved by the Motion Mount, and convertible EFP/cine S35mm zooms like the Fujinon Cabrios solved the lensing, but quick and easy RGB shooting capability is still to be be fully realized. Shooters in the mobile EFP industry using Epic have been most affected by Epic's lack of quick RGB shooting - and the mobile EFP industry just happens to be the single largest portion of the entire motion media industry in terms of number of productions each year worldwide, and commensurately the amount of camera equipment bought worldwide each year.

I'm an absolute ground floor contributor to, and supporter of Red, and one of Red's very first customers. Though I was trained ages ago in cine style production, by choice I segued over to mobile EFP style production way back in the early '80's. I've been a leader in non-traditional (mobile hybrid and mobile EFP) usage of Red cameras from the very beginning. Jim, Jarred, and Red Team are all very close friends of mine and have my utmost respect. That said, in recent years its been frustrating to me to see what I perceive as a polarization of Red further away from mobile EFP support, and increased emphasis into cine style. That's been one factor in my posting less here on Red User in the past year and a half.

I hope the above info opens some eyes here on what Red planned in the beginning, how Red has evolved over the years, and where Red seems to be heading. I still proudly own and regularly use Epics when they're the best choice for my productions and portions thereof. But for my mobile EFP production needs I find myself increasingly using other more EFP-featured camera systems - lately an F55 with Fujinon Cabrio zooms some of my productions.

Evolution in anything is totally natural, even in camera company philosophy in regards to their products. I deeply respect Red, and as a foundational contributor and adopter of Red I'll always be a supporter and give them input. Its way amazing what Red has accomplished in these nine years! They'll evolve their focus in the direction they feel is best for the company, and I respect that. But I've always been a straight forward contributor, telling Red what I think they needed to hear, not necessarily what they wanted to hear. I don't see that changing - I call it as I see it - and I think Red respects everyone on this thread, and beyond, for taking the time to voice their opinion, because everyone here has in effect helped to build Red into what it is, and also what Red will be in the future.
 
Scott Crawley said:
So the take away is that Red needs to continue to be disruptive without being unfamiliar. I have no idea how those two ideas are reconciled, but I will be here for the ride, watching.
Click to expand...

And this also echoes the responsibility of the artist and his connection to what has been described as the historical narrative.

I like to think of the present as being the fulcrum on which the push of the past is balanced with the pull of the future. If that's not laying it on too thick ( :
 
Oh, and too illustrate my take on that, I'll have work up at Wilding Cran Gallery in LA… very soon. I'll post a note when a date is confirmed. It would be cool to put a few faces to familiar voices.
 
Brain fart warning proceed at your own risk. ;-)

In the beginning, Redcode was the key to all things Red. Jim expressed that the RedOne could not have existed without it.

If the present and future landscape is as folks have suggested here, where r3d has little or no advantage over ProRes, then Red's most valuable asset in tech going forward would have to be the sensor technology, no? Those are a lot of assumptions that may be fundamentally flawed but bear with me.

In hindsight it seems that if Red had not narrowed their focus and put EFP type shooting on the back burner that Dragon would not be here now. It might still be years away, given that the relatively limited resources at Red would have been split and other tech would have taken up R&D cycles.

Arri's 4k competitor will be here very soon, and if Dragon is Red's new killer tech it is a damned good thing it was not delayed a single day. They will get the new OLPF and color science tuning done by NAB and that is where they will make their stand for the coming shitstorm.

I wonder what else they might bring.
 
Last edited:
ah...

If you refer to me... THAT is not what I said.

I just said that the data can be contained in other containers... :)For 4k, redcode is pretty unique...
 
Gunleik Groven said:
ah...

If you refer to me... THAT is not what I said.

I just said that the data can be contained in other containers... :)For 4k, redcode is pretty unique...
Click to expand...

Yes, you are one of the folks that I had in mind.

So when you remarked that RLF ProRes files were adequate for finishing you were speaking strictly of 1080 deliverables? That would clear my confusion about some of what you were saying.

Sorry if I misunderstood.
 
Last edited:
I think this discussion maybe belongs in another thread.

Ouch

That was cryptic. But I think it needs images and examples to be clearer,

In short, I think you need to store things in a non-destructive container to be non-destructive. And that a huge container is not necessarily non-destructive, if you treat what you contain bad.

It is better to treat signal good than bad.

The rest is for another tread. :)
 
Okey dokey. Looking forward to it. :beer:

Gunleik Groven said:
I think this discussion maybe belongs in another thread.

Ouch

That was cryptic. But I think it needs images and examples to be clearer,

In short, I think you need to store things in a non-destructive container to be non-destructive. And that a huge container is not necessarily non-destructive, if you treat what you contain bad.

It is better to treat signal good than bad.

The rest is for another tread. :)
Click to expand...
 
I think I will give it a shot in another context after feb 15th.

But in short:

A well treated signal in a small container, may well give a better result than an ill treated signal in a huge container.

And then the examples are needed... :)
 
Sure. But if this is akin to the "It's the photographer not the camera." argument then that has little to do with RED FOCUS, no?

Shit, I'm still confused. I won't waste everyone's time on my personal matter. I'll keep an eye on Shoot that Red.

Gunleik Groven said:
I think I will give it a shot in another context after feb 15th.

But in short:

A well treated signal in a small container, may well give a better result than an ill treated signal in a huge container.

And then the examples are needed... :)
Click to expand...
 
Steve Gibby said:
But I've always been a straight forward contributor, telling Red what I think they needed to hear, not necessarily what they wanted to hear. I don't see that changing - I call it as I see it - and I think Red respects everyone on this thread, and beyond, for taking the time to voice their opinion, because everyone here has in effect helped to build Red into what it is, and also what Red will be in the future.
Click to expand...

You've been a great contributer here Gibby. I don't have the RED pedigree you have but there has been a lot of good conversation here over the years and I hope it continues.

battistella
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top