RED future...

[Peter Versey]

To the outsider, you simply seem bent on poking RED in the eye with a stick for no discernible reason. What difference does it really make TO YOU if the sensors are designed by Tom Smith or Emma Jones... or Mick Jagger, for that matter?
Mick Jagger ? But he couldn't get "any satisfaction" and it seems that many RED customers really do.

Peter Versey
Camera Operator UK

 

[Philip Lipetz]

The problem with forums like this is that tech visonairies such as Jim and Steve Jobs deliver not what people want but what will change what people want. Consumers usually stay in the old frame of reference until they have actually handled the game changing product. This makes focus groups and the like almost totally useless. Look at the response to the iPad, many critics knocked it but still it was a game changer. Even though we think we understand the new tech in Epic/Scarlet our frame of reference will not really change sufficiently until we become psychologically integrated with the new products.

When Jim posts a thread like this he is not communicating tech info or marketing promises but expressing the wonder and bliss that happens when you merge with new possibilities and your frame of reference changes.

As a communicator I recognize that to Jim, or any person who experiences this transformation, the most important message is not standard tech or marketing buzz but to simply share the realization that the product can produce one of those moments of ecstatic transformation that become highlights of our lives.

Will any degree of detail enhance that communication? No, it will just change the communication from being about the experience to being about things that lie outside of our inner selves.

From watching this forum for years I have come to realize that the RED team and many of RED's critics disconnect from eachother simply because some people do not understand what Jim and the RED team members are saying, or what is driving them. With transformative products the thing that drives the team is the experience of transformation, AND the possibility of sharing that transformative experience.

And that is a much greater gift than simply giving us a new tool. As film makers our lives are about producing transformative moments in other people. What Jim is giving us is transformative possibilities in our own lives.

One of our most fundamental instincts is to share joy and transformation. That is why we like to sit with strangers in a darkened theater. That is why joy and transformation are infectious.

Perhaps much of the world has misunderstood the thrust of the RED team communications, and thereby have not stepped into the tranformative possibilities being offered.

On a personal note, it is such a joy to be among people who want to share the experience of tansformation, and who recognize that the journey is it's own reward.

 

[JD Holloway]

Well I was one of them ....
...So thank you RED for bringing some excitement back into the film business.

God bless Geoff. Thats one for the history books.

FYI, sorry to have missed you for 3D in Toronto.

 

[Will Devine]

Well I was one of them

When Jim first announced I was hugely sceptical, in fact I said that it was a great idea to set up a company and take deposits on a camera and then close without delivering.

Jim and I had a "minor disagreement" at NAB in 2006, he thought that I had been rubbishing him and in fact I'd been rubbishing the idea of delivering a camera that was starting from scratch by November of that year.

Anyway, that was then....

I didn't know Jim's background at the time.

I have since said many times that RED and Jim in particular have turned the film business on its head and not just with their cameras.

We wouldn't have all the new PL mount lenses we have now if it wasn't for RED.

Alexa would be a dream on the horizon to be delivered in a couple of years if not for RED

Sony wouldn't have cut their prices on the F35 and the 9000PL if RED hadn't existed.

I could go on and on, particularly in the area of 3D but I won't

Things change and we have to live with and welcome that change.

So thank you RED for bringing some excitement back into the film business.

Thank's Geoff for your honest and detailed reply. I suppose with the information you had at the time it was reasonable to be worried about a potential 'scam'. Things have changed though. While it was reasonable in 2006 to think RED may be a scam, in 2010-2011 it is not.

To think that in a year (If I have the money) I should have a Scarlett in my hands that is the little brother of the camera Peter Jackson is using on the Hobbit. No other company is going to do that. I'm hooked.

Now off to lurk in the David Mullen ASC monster thread and learn some more about Cinematography. Also need to start writing some scripts.

Will.

 

[Elsie N]

Well I was one of them

When Jim first announced I was hugely sceptical, in fact I said that it was a great idea to set up a company and take deposits on a camera and then close without delivering.

Jim and I had a "minor disagreement" at NAB in 2006, he thought that I had been rubbishing him and in fact I'd been rubbishing the idea of delivering a camera that was starting from scratch by November of that year.

So, I guess that means you are either Stage 4 for an Epic or a renter?:devil:

Sorry for the dig (maybe) but coming to RED without your background and knowledge, I just jumped on board out of faith.

That may prove my undoing at some point in the future, but I hope my life-experience will help protect against that.

On balance, this one leap of faith should equal out to about 9 leaps that fail.

 

[Timur Civan]

Keep making that Alien technology..... I'll keep using your stuff.

 

[Jason Sinclair]

Just think what the whole cinema industry was organically created for in the first place. People have the innate desire to recreate reality so as to share experience. Cinema as an artistic medium has in the last 100 years had more impaction on world change and public opinion than any politician could dream of. Cinema has formed to a universal language which in turn has solely relied on technological mechanisms in which to Shape it.
Those technological mechanisms and innovations which have been most successful are ones in which the human experience is replicated or in other words, enhance POV (Point of view). One of the greatest innovations in cinema in last 50 years is GB's steadicam. The reason it has had such an impact is because it helps make the POV of the camera more human and therefore the language as more universal.

The Epic camera is about the same size and weight of the human head. It gives the opportunity for an operator and the observer of human reality (director, and in turn the audience) to view the world in such a way that simulates the human experience.
It also offers the technology which due to manufacturing genius, gives the ability to do this with lower associated costs known before. In this case, it is to be viewed similar to the portable printing press released in the mid 1800s which gave a platform for Oscar Wilde, the Bronte's, Tolstoy, Han Christian Anderson, Jane Austen, Dickens, Doyle, Tennyson, Wells, Verne, Stoker, etc etc... What occurred in publishing history was the ability for artists to be released from the financial constraints of publishers who had a monopoly on the printing press. When you look at the dark ages, you see the Catholic Church only allowing publications of the bible which limited the shared experience of humans to just one book, and no matter how profound that book is, one can see why indeed it was called the dark ages opposed to say the mid 18th century when many different points of view (POV) of the human experience were being explored. Luckily we don't feel the need to burn each other everytime someone is different any more and we have the liberated view that a plague is a medical condition, not an unknown evil force. So, publishers have historically influenced the POV of the human experience through manipulation of perceived audience desires, maintaining political advantage and control of the human experience via it's controlled and self owned technologies.

The convergence of these two technological inspired examples: 1) Greater POV positioning and 2) a more accessible technology, places us in a very unique point of time. For some, the moment will be seen as an excuse for wealth creation, for some it will be to be able to express their POV and individual experience, for others yet it will be a wave to ride of which only comes once in a blue moon and expresses a greater desire towards more egalitarian experiences, mutual understanding and sharing the expression of the individual human experience.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

...tech visonairies such as Jim and Steve Jobs deliver not what people want but what will change what people want. Consumers usually stay in the old frame of reference until they have actually handled the game changing product. This makes focus groups and the like almost totally useless. Look at the response to the iPad, many critics knocked it but still it was a game changer. Even though we think we understand the new tech in Epic/Scarlet our frame of reference will not really change sufficiently until we become psychologically integrated with the new products.
...

Very insightful and spot on!! :thumbsup:

 

[Rob Culpepper]

As a communicator I ...

You are communicator, indeed. Great post.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Or may be Red sensor team are perhaps not direct employees and Red has some sorts of licensing arrangement with some IP supplier - basically somebody does it for Red.

Jim can correct me or just delete this message if I'm remembering incorrectly but I'm pretty sure at one point Jim was more clear and what was said at the time was:

1) It's a RED operation.
2) It's located in Texas.

 

[Elsie N]

I think Joofa is just being Nationalistic toward the old country (his) and is trying to get some public recognition for the members of that cohort who may be working for RED.

Either that or he works for Arri.:001_rolleyes:

 

[Dee Joslin]

In the beginning, some said that RED was a scam. Now some say that RED is a one trick wonder. I have said that "the 1st is the worst".

So which is it? Is RED likely to last?

I guess this post is to say that we have more in development than we know what to do with. Our sensor program (the heart of a camera company) is way beyond my wildest expectations. We have stuff in the works that would scare you. I am shocked. Every day I wake up, the realities of what we dreamed are becoming a reality... and more. It is pretty surreal. EPIC (a nuclear reactor in a matchbox) is just the beginning. Hard to believe... but true.

Obsolescence obsolete. All the things we are doing forward work with what we are doing now. That was the concept. That is real today.

I thought I saw the future in 2005 when the decision to build the RED ONE was conceived. I also thought that was a big plan. While I guess it was... I see a much more advanced future now. Stay tuned. We have just warmed up the engine.

Jim

Steve jobs said something similar way back when. Hello Ipad.

 

[Dj Joofa]

Jim can correct me or just delete this message if I'm remembering incorrectly but I'm pretty sure at one point Jim was more clear and what was said at the time was:

1) It's a RED operation.
2) It's located in Texas.

Gavin,

I don't know why people get so irritated and don't realise a basic fact that it is not always possible for all companies to develop everything solely. As far as I see it, if in case Red has outside help for sensor development, that is perfectly okay with me, as there is no surprising fact in it. Companies have such arrangements all of the time. Does it lower my estimation of Red's competence and talent? Not at all. I still value it as a great company with a great product. BTW, not saying that Red has outside help. Just saying even in case.

See, Jim has created this mantra that "in the beginning people thought we are a scam, but we showed otherwise." It has a nice ring to it. But I don't know who exactly are those people who thought it was a scam. Of course, some notables such as Geoff Boyle have raised their hands. But, as a person who has worked in the imaging industry, I have never doubted that Red may not be able to accomplish it. They have some very talented people on board so all the reason that they can produce wonders. But Jim brings a lot of emotionalism to this entire picture, which is understandable considering that Red is his baby.

Point is, even if somebody considered Red as a scam in the beginning, as far as I see, it is purely a marketing ploy at this stage. Red should look forward now and try to address their product delivery which has historically been late.

Bottom line:

Is Red a great idea executed at the right time: Yes.
Has Red changed film industry: Yes, to some extent.
Can others do what Red has done: Of course.

Joofa

 

[Michael Olsen]

But I don't know who exactly are those people who thought it was a scam.

Of course, some notables such as Geoff Boyle have raised their hands.

...so, mystery solved?

--

I am continually impressed with how much RED has accomplished in so little time. And I think their goals are what was really questioned more than their ability to innovate on technology. Can a company go from zero to a major industry player in just a few years...in an industry that is already dominated by a powerful oligarchy? Will they be accepted by DPs and studios that have built decade-long reputations with other companies? Will people be willing to try something new in an industry which is infamous - at least recently - for taking every cost-loss measure possible on the creative side? That was definitely skeptical. Take a look back at blogs, forums, and mailing lists from the original NAB announcement. There is plenty of proof there, and there is no need to point out any individuals - skeptics ranged from the average joe to technology columnists to professional DPs.

 

[Bob Renalds]

I just found out that Steve Jobs does not personally assemble all of the ipads and iphones in his Palo Alto workshop. I am shocked....

 

[Dj Joofa]

...so, mystery solved?

--

I am continually impressed with how much RED has accomplished in so little time. And I think their goals are what was really questioned more than their ability to innovate on technology. Can a company go from zero to a major industry player in just a few years...in an industry that is already dominated by a powerful oligarchy? Will they be accepted by DPs and studios that have built decade-long reputations with other companies? Will people be willing to try something new in an industry which is infamous - at least recently - for taking every cost-loss measure possible on the creative side? That was definitely skeptical. Take a look back at blogs, forums, and mailing lists from the original NAB announcement. There is plenty of proof there, and there is no need to point out any individuals - skeptics ranged from the average joe to technology columnists to professional DPs.

Please don't be emotional.

The major reason Red One was welcomed, as far as I see it, was not necessarily the 4K thingy, as anything above or including HD would have worked or sufficed at that time. The real reason was PRICE - A relatively affordable camera with reasonable resolution.

Even today, I would consider price to be a major point.

Joofa

 

[Michael Olsen]

I don't really feel emotional, just pointing out the logic - the fact that some people were openly skeptical isn't an unanswered question. It's easily confirmed by a simple google search, and has even been confirmed here by a very notable individual. So why pursue it further?

The real reason was PRICE - A relatively affordable camera with reasonable resolution.

Well, price also worked against them. After all, can a $20,000 camera from a no name company really compete against my $200,000 camera from my major manufacturer? I don't think so. That was an instant reason for skepticism.

Of course, once the capability of the cameras was proven, it did prove to be a great buying point, as you insinuated.

I'm not even going to touch "reasonable resolution".

--

RED has come a long way, and they seem to be going even further. I don't know why it really matters who individually developed their sensors or the name of their CNC technician or the supplier of their shipping boxes.

I apologize for continuing this off-topic discussion.

 

[Irmeli R]

Can others do what Red has done: Of course.

the market is going to be fairly saturated with epic and scarlet coming soon. so for an unknown company to invest 8-20mio in R&D to surpass some features of these cameras is unlikely imho.
what's left is the lower end that sells tens- and hundred thousands of cameras and the highest end, that sells a few hundred or a few dozen.

btw didn't red buy the viewfinder-company at the beginning?

 

[Ryan Nichols]

This may be because I'm new and all but......Joofa you make my head hurt. :banghead:

 

[Humberto Rivera]

It’s the Patent, it’s that simple. For any other company to-do-it, they would have to invent a different way of doing-it.

Humberto Rivera