Red production package. What's needed?

[Finner]

on a 10million plus movie you can get me.

 

[donatello b]

"TV movie usually shoots five to six weeks"

when i started in the business in 1980 TV movies of the week were shot 32-36 days ( 5 day week )
by 1995 they were being shot 15-18 days ( 6 day week)

 

[pixeltv]

Hi all,

In Spain are possible rent a RED basic config from 500 Euro/day!

Body RED.
RED view finder.
RED Monitor 5,6" 16:9
Optical zoom 50-150 mm F2,8.
HD 320 Gb.
Bat´s 140 Wh/e
Charger
Follow focus Dinamicam system. Wireless with microwave video and LCD-TFT 5" monitor.
Mate box.
Cases.

1 day: 500 Euro ($680)
2 days: 750 Euro ($1,020)
3 days: 1.100 Euro ($ 1,496)
4 days: 1.400 Euro ($1,904)
.......
15 days: 2.900 Euro ($3.944)
1 month: 7.500 Euro ($10.200)

See:

http://www.mundogrua.com

Good!

 

[Simon Baechler]

I must admit I didn't do any tests with this camera nor the whole post process. But even in 35mm you don't edit on a 15m screen. You edit it on an AVID in SD (or an Steenbeck if you want) so it's not necessary to edit in 4k REdcode Raw. For the comforming process it's true that Redcode is not yet implemented natively in AVID. But you can work in the best 2k resolution DPX 10bit uncompressed in many systems (qantel/davinci/matrix...) including AVID (nitris). And if you want to have the whole 4k uncompressed you can work with proxies and output 4k dpx files from these platforms.

:cold:

I would even edit in 6s if I had to. But the problem is the time it takes to downconvert about 100GB of 4K redcode raw footage every day.
I mean I was at Online a few weeks ago and we had to import a 2 minute end credit which was a 1080 TIFF sequence into their Avid Adrenaline. It took two hours! Now imagine 60 minutes of footage with four times the resolution every day.
There is also always the danger that the original footage will not resync in the end.

It took Avid almost a year to support HDV and over a year to fully support P2.
I hope that they will adapt Redcode RAW sooner.

Simon

 

[Simon Baechler]

Where did you notice this? How could you possibly know what we already have or have on order?

Rental houses won't rent accessories without a camera. That's really helpful. And there's nobody out there who already owns accessories that may just want to rent the camera? I find that hard to believe. Also, your definition of production is pretty exclusive. I'm sorry, but these are blanket statement and I find them ridiculous.

I asked a few friends who have a camera on order (about seven). None of them has a mattebox or a follow focus. And without those items you are screwed if you want to shoot a moving person or shoot with the sun elsewhere but behind you.

The rental houses I talked to don't offer the RED camera. They are rather holding back their accessories in case someone wants to rent a 16mm camera.

Simon

 

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

I thought that was a pretty useful list. Doesn't "scare" me -- if the packages we assemble initially aren't sufficient, i.e. if we lose business because we don't have this or that, I have the cash to make sure that never happens again. Some people say they can't afford this or that... I can't afford NOT to have what is necessary to have my packages rented out on a frequent basis.

Considering our company won't just have one package to rent out, though, I think we'll be assembling different options. We've talked to a number of people who think a $3,500 to $5,000 tripod would work great for the RED One, despite what many people say, which is that you can't get by without a $14,000 tripod -- Hollywood crap. Not true whatsoever. But it's supposed to "scare" the little guys. Nice try, $14,000 isn't going to scare me, if that's what I had to get, I could afford a dozen of them and not blink. It's a matter of what is necessary. I'd rather have one $14,000 tripod and rent it out to the, ahem, "professionals" who think you need that, and one $3,500 tripod to rent for cheaper to the more budget-conscious producers.

I have a low opinion of people who think you need the most expensive, most massive set of equipment imaginable to make anything good. Those people are compensating for something, usually a poor story, bad concept, or lack of a good creative team. Give Steven Spielberg and a great crew the most basic crap imaginable and he'll run circles around people with 100 times the budget. But if people will pay for renting massive packages of things they don't really need, I'll certainly have no problems being there to take their money, with pleasure and a smile.

 

[Ken Willinger]

I have a low opinion of people who think you need the most expensive, most massive set of equipment imaginable to make anything good. Those people are compensating for something, usually a poor story, bad concept, or lack of a good creative team.

Experience counts for a lot. Many of the people who you may have a low opinion of (I guess you'd have to count me in there), have been in this business for an awful long time. I know I've tried pretty much every configuration of crap gear to the best gear in real world situations. If it was up to me on a production, I'm going to want to use the best gear available. Subpar equipment will in the end cause you delays and subpar performance...and most likely time and money.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Jonathan, have you ever done a pan and tilt with some complexity in the movement? Have you ever had to follow action and then come to a completely smooth, perfect stop? If you have, you will come to the conclusion that some tripods (those in the lower ranges) just don't do a great job of it. They may be okay, but when you use a tripod with one of the great heads you quickly realize why they are more expensive amd why people use them. I don't want to pay $15K for a tripod either, but I do realize that I have to find one that meets what I would consider to be good enough for my own standards. And that may cost me a pretty penny. Until the market changes, the prices are what they are.

Steve

 

[Rocco Schult]

...Now imagine 60 minutes of footage with four times the resolution every day...

It took Avid almost a year to support HDV and over a year to fully support P2.
I hope that they will adapt Redcode RAW sooner.

Imagination is exactly the key. We have no clue what the Quicktime wrappers do, or to put it differently, the only thing: A fast downscale, works in realtime. Its left to imagination and reality what can and will happen with that. Still wonder because its more about the pickyness of Avids Quicktime/codec implementation.

HDV and P2 are generally and widely used codecs. We will see if theres a licensin to Avid. Would like to see that, but we all know REDs affiliation with Apple and the more indy-like approach. Thats a place where Avid has lost most if not all ground.

 

[Matt Uhry]

I have a low opinion of people who think you need the most expensive, most massive set of equipment imaginable to make anything good. Those people are compensating for something, usually a poor story, bad concept, or lack of a good creative team.

No, it's the most valuable thing to a cinematographer: TIME

GREAT cinematography has been done and continues to be done with poor equipment, but there usually was a lot of time to do it. Typical 18 day $1 million features and Episodic TV benefit from a bit more equipment and crew than a self financed Indie who has a lower per day cost and can take a bit more time to shoot.

When you are hired to shoot a film the production expects you to do great quality work in very little time. You want the film to look amazing and you want the director and Producers to be happy and hire you again. If you can go just a little bit faster with 2 cameras you can avoid the 15 minutes to go to Steadicam or Crane or a Car Rig and 15 minutes to go back and run 2 cameras for stunts or maybe some scenes it makes perfect sense. 30 minutes of overtime incurred just once during the production would easily pay the rental costs on the second body.

If you are making a self financed project and the crew is essentially unpaid one camera might be enough.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

 

[Greg M]

No, it's the most valuable thing to a cinematographer: TIME

GREAT cinematography has been done and continues to be done with poor equipment, but there usually was a lot of time to do it. Typical 18 day $1 million features and Episodic TV benefit from a bit more equipment and crew than a self financed Indie who has a lower per day cost and can take a bit more time to shoot.

When you are hired to shoot a film the production expects you to do great quality work in very little time. You want the film to look amazing and you want the director and Producers to be happy and hire you again. If you can go just a little bit faster with 2 cameras you can avoid the 15 minutes to go to Steadicam or Crane or a Car Rig and 15 minutes to go back and run 2 cameras for stunts or maybe some scenes it makes perfect sense. 30 minutes of overtime incurred just once during the production would easily pay the rental costs on the second body.

If you are making a self financed project and the crew is essentially unpaid one camera might be enough.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

exactly...time is very valuable.
We have 2 bodies on all our commercial shoots, as you said the savings in time pays for the extra body several times over. Especially when you have jibs, or any other type of rigging. As far as cheaper heads go, sure they will work...but dont fool yourself...there is a huge difference.

If you think a $3500 head will give you the same results as a Oconer 2060 or 2075 you obviously haven't used one.