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... looks great, looks not so great. Why?

film, digital.... I don't care really..... it's kind of all the same to me in the end.... as long as I'm the one "souping" or "grading" it. I want the choice to be mine not some baked in parameter that some dude I've never met decided upon. But hey... I get it.... some people need to be told what to do and what looks good.

Long live RAW!
 
good idea

good idea

Even the most professional SLR camera costing multi thousand’s of dollars (that only pro’s buy) have many modes. Pure RAW, full manual, or JPEG auto exposure. You can also choose to turn the auto focus on or off. There is nothing wrong with offering choices to your customer because each user has different needs, and every job has a different set of requirements as well.

Those that want to keep this system exclusive are not looking at the bigger picture for the Red Digital Cinema company. Red is smart and wants to serve the needs of many different types of customers. When the fixed lens Scarlet camera starts selling to the masses, it may also be important to have some “auto” functionality and workflows ready for the masses as well.

I don’t see this company taking away the ability to shoot/record RAW files for those who prefer. I applaud the progress RED is making in all area’s.
 
Our goal is RAW forever. We just want to give you easier and more accurate tools to work with. We will have some "auto" features going forward. But "auto" is rarely as good as professional control. There will never be "auto" instead of manual. Mostly what I was talking about was easier Pro control tools.

Jim
 
Jim, I think a great compromise is often not an auto mode, but a button that makes an auto correction then returns you to manual for fine tuning. That just saves time but still allows control.
 
The way I see it going is that those that choose to purchase Scarlet and have never shot on RED will take advantage of these "auto" functions more so than those of us who have shot professional on RED.

The first reservation holders more than likely will always want to do the grade themselves, we were here from the start, we are more likely to know how to get the most out of the image. Others who haven't shot RED will eventually get there and it's great RED has decided to help those people out with easier tools.

Personally, I hate the idea of "auto", I probably won't use the function...it's more fun and challenging to do the grading manually :)
 
I must admit that many people over here (even red users from day 1) indeed seem to know very little about the post-production issues (they actually create most of the time) and do not always take care of it if footage is being processed the wrong way...

Great idea Jim!!
 
Tim Whitcomb said:
While not a bad idea. I don't think you can replace the "hands-on" experience working in teams and solving "real world" problems with the gear.
Click to expand...

Our new website due soon is going to have an extensive REDUCATION section with tons of knowledge, interviews, and guides.. something that is long overdue.
 
Well I trust you guys, but I'm gonna second Shawn on that one... Please keep it easily tunable in addition to the workflow stabilizing your doing. It's hard to really know exactly what you intend to do, but if it makes workflow better, it's better for everyone.

-J.A.Brown
 
Jarred Land said:
Our new website due soon is going to have an extensive REDUCATION section with tons of knowledge, interviews, and guides.. something that is long overdue.
Click to expand...

Any word as to if/and what date the REDucation takes place just before NAB '10 in Las Vegas?

I can't make any hotel arrangements til I find these details out.
 
Jarred Land said:
Our new website due soon is going to have an extensive REDUCATION section with tons of knowledge, interviews, and guides.. something that is long overdue.
Click to expand...
Super :biggrin5:
 
The clearer your vision, the better your end result will look. Just remember that ALOT happens in the color grading stage of the process.. RAW images I shoot on my 5D2 can be very "bleh" but in post can be turned into very beautiful works of art..
 
Jarred Land said:
Our new website due soon is going to have an extensive REDUCATION section with tons of knowledge, interviews, and guides.. something that is long overdue.
Click to expand...

Amen. This is great news.

Has a Reducation event been considered at or before Nab? That would be worth the trip to Vegas.

Edit: I see Joseph has already enquired.
 
When I think of making things more simple I always think that it means on the post side. The camera is pretty easy to operate and I would never want to loose the flexibility of shooting RAW or the many different ways to set things up for yourself.

I believe, reading Jim's post, that more will be done to streamline the process of working with R3D files after they have been shot.

When I really think about it, it does come down to Education. If there are people treating RED like a video camera, picking it up and shooting right after they power up and hit the white balance button, then they are missing about 97% fot he functionality of shooting RED RAW.

I still cringe at times when I hear about major houses advising productons shooting RED to dump one-light transfers to HDCAM-SR and never go back to the RAW files again. I know it sounds to unreal to be true, but it is.

That's a real world problem with really educating people about the power of shooting RAW. People still trust some of the sh*t being shoveled at them about RED from some very major players (in canada at least).


David
 
David Battistella said:
I still cringe at times when I hear about major houses advising productons shooting RED to dump one-light transfers to HDCAM-SR and never go back to the RAW files again. I know it sounds to unreal to be true, but it is.
Click to expand...

It's not always the facility advising the production to do this. It's often the production company asking that it be done that way because they want to make the post path as close to what they've been doing - and understand - for film as possible.

In any area where there are long established and well understood methodologies, new methodologies must present clear advantages in order to be accepted. If cost is not a major issue (and on many commercial jobs, it isn't), the use of files rather than videotape for on the shelf storage of original materials is not the clear cut winner that it's seen as here. If a production company has established talent that they've worked with, and that talent happens to be in a post facility that uses SR videotape and DaVinci 2K color correctors, that is an inducement to use those methods, even if the facility itself is not directly advocating it and is capable of providing alternatives. Ultimately, the choice of a post path is not in the hands of facilities. It is in the hands of the production companies that have different reasons for choosing different methods on different projects.
 
M Most said:
It's not always the facility advising the production to do this. It's often the production company asking that it be done that way because they want to make the post path as close to what they've been doing - and understand - for film as possible.

In any area where there are long established and well understood methodologies, new methodologies must present clear advantages in order to be accepted. If cost is not a major issue (and on many commercial jobs, it isn't), the use of files rather than videotape for on the shelf storage of original materials is not the clear cut winner that it's seen as here. If a production company has established talent that they've worked with, and that talent happens to be in a post facility that uses SR videotape and DaVinci 2K color correctors, that is an inducement to use those methods, even if the facility itself is not directly advocating it and is capable of providing alternatives. The choice of a post path is not in the hands of facilities. It is in the hands of the production companies that have different reasons for choosing different methods on different projects.
Click to expand...

Mike,

I know that this is true and I understand the argument, but it seems quite backward to me to do things this way. There are many ways of working with RED footage but I believe that educated about the choice, the customer might actually want the higher quality of decoding directly from the R3D.

Tape to tape places with large investments in gear might tend to be OK with this, but this is why RED has come to be know in some circles as the camera that has "workflow issues".

How can people crap on RED when they are not maximizing the way it is supposed to be used?

I'll re-iterate that I understand your post, but it still seems counter intuitive, like trying to use a screwdriver to hammer nails, yes it can be done, but I would not advocate it.

Comes back to education, which can be like pushing a rock up hill. People get it, or they dont. They care, or they don't. It's messy business.

David
 
David Battistella said:
I know that this is true and I understand the argument, but it seems quite backward to me to do things this way. There are many ways of working with RED footage but I believe that educated about the choice, the customer might actually want the higher quality of decoding directly from the R3D.

Tape to tape places with large investments in gear might tend to be OK with this, but this is why RED has come to be know in some circles as the camera that has "workflow issues".

How can people crap on RED when they are not maximizing the way it is supposed to be used?
Click to expand...

Well, that's one view. But another view is that when a device comes along and the manufacturer wants it to be used in an established industry, it can be useful to provide methods and support to allow it to be used in established pipelines, to create established (and still required) delivery elements, as well as to provide new ways of using it that might yield equal or better results, and let those in the industry decide which to use. This is exactly what led to all of the upheaval here regarding the ASC/PGA tests, and it is also what has now led Jim to the apparent conclusion that it is in Red's interest to provide such support after all.

Using methodology that is proven and that works is not "backward," it is, in some cases, prudent if those involved are very well versed in that methodology and well equipped for it, and particularly if elements are involved in the project that don't happen to be R3d files, which is often the case. If new methods have advantages - and I'm certainly not saying they don't - they will be adopted over time. Things don't have to change overnight, especially when there are established delivery requirements to be met.
 
M Most said:
Well, that's one view. But another view is that when a device comes along and the manufacturer wants it to be used in an established industry, it can be useful to provide methods and support to allow it to be used in established pipelines, to create established (and still required) delivery elements, as well as to provide new ways of using it that might yield equal or better results, and let those in the industry decide which to use. This is exactly what led to all of the upheaval here regarding the ASC/PGA tests, and it is also what has now led Jim to the apparent conclusion that it is in Red's interest to provide such support after all.

Using methodology that is proven and that works is not "backward," it is, in some cases, prudent if those involved are very well versed in that methodology and well equipped for it, and particularly if elements are involved in the project that don't happen to be R3d files, which is often the case. If new methods have advantages - and I'm certainly not saying they don't - they will be adopted over time. Things don't have to change overnight, especially when there are established delivery requirements to be met.
Click to expand...

Excellent points Mike and I don't want to use "backwards" as derogatory as it might have sounded.

Red One has been one big beta program and those who have beleived in it have worked very hard through these growing pains. It's fine to try to smash into an established industry and try to knock it on it;s ear, but it's not always the best way to enter a room or mingle at the party.

Getting the camera to shoot nice images has been a priority and the post side has really been kind of lagging behing since they got out of the gate. Even REDROCKET is kind of "incomplete" or doing not all it probably could do. But that is a choice by RED, to release (unleash) stuff to it's customers or hold of until things are "all the way". The customers here would disagree on how that is done, but there has been relative transparency to date and film makers have really helped RED gain a foothold. (I can't remember the last time a tool in this industry caused such a cufuffle)

Nice exchange mike. I take your points, but it could be argued that as RED becomes a more popular shooting format, the "talent" at preffered facilites may have to move to new tools that will make for better workflows, but SONY isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

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