RED review by wildlife cameraman

[Rob Ruffo]

There are a lot of other things he could have done, for example using stills lenses, and Long Valley 15mm rails, which weigh almost nothing and screw right onto the front of the camera, or using a flash drive, which weighs less than the hard drive.

With Build 30, it's 1 minute boot, not 2.

With Premiere CS5, and other solutions on the near horizon, not to mention Red Rocket, I also honestly don't get why anyone would care about ProRes anymore.

 

[Denis Buhot]

to my knowledge...

to my knowledge...

it seems that anyone who ever had to use the red one for challenging wildlife cinematography in the long run, mostly sitting alone in uncomfortable hides and sometimes doing the carrying alone, has come up with the weight, power consumption and boot time issue, broken back, painful knees, concerns about the weather conditions, etc.... However, they all have ended up with an image quality that makes turning back impossible... As any innovative tool, the red one deserves a bit more than what looks like a seaside testing to simply get used and adapt to it, I guess.

 

[Stuart English]

Wildlife

Wildlife

Of course there are drawbacks, but there is a reason for the "hype" about RED ONE in wildlife videography applications.

e.g. Location: Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Cameraman : Steve Gibby.

- We shot 24fps 4K images to a CF card!
- We exported 4096 x 2048 TIFF still images from that footage with a 15" Apple laptop.
- We had a RED-DRIVE record solution that ran for 90 minutes (now 3 hours) at that resolution.
- We viewed real time playback of the recorded footage on the same same 15" laptop.
- We shot 120 fps 2K with the same Fuji 2/3' zoom lenses being used on F900 and Varicam.

It's also true that we have learned a lot in the past two years, and EPIC and Scarlet will take the shooting in-the-wilds experience to a whole new level.

Smaller and lighter, faster to boot and lower power consumption; they will offer more frame rates, more resolution and more options for remote control.

 

[Kennan Ward]

Kennan that is an impressive rig! Are you using Feisol legs? Please can you tell me what you are using to attach the head? Do you still maintain ball leveling ability? Thanks!

Sam,

Thanks, That was the rig summer of 2008. Today it is much more STEALTHY. I have a video I made of Really Right Stuff products I put together, but they are not ready for release. I use a Sachtler 20SB and Gitzo GT5540LS with speed lock. You have to order the 100 mm ball plate Gitzo G1424.

I have the Sachtler carbon 2 stage but do not use them in the field. I like the speed and stops of the Gitzo. Also, I like working low angle so these legs work perfect!

Back to the Red Wildlife and nature thingy! It is all about how to configure any camera to work in the field. I had to go through trials and tribulation to get every camera to work in the field. The biggest issue remains stability. Long lenses and wind not to mention atmosphere, yes, heat waves, pollution, dust and the extremes. I can list off more field problem solving with Panasonic, Sony and Arriflex and still only have HD or 2k at best. At least what I shoot today with RED will have future value. It is easier to deliver to a broadcast client a HDW-F900r HD cam tape and walk free, but if you own the film, it is much better to have archived it in 4k, or my fav 4.5 Super Wide.

If you want to shoot Red in extremes hire someone who has experience to help. If I needed to film a Cineflex in Alaska, I would love to say I could do it well, But I would Hire Daniel Zatz, or Shane Moore who have done it time and time again. Then, working together we would leap frog across the potential problems. And get it right, no complaints. I would also try filming from a helicopter RED 3K 50fps and see what the client liked better!

Personally, I think all the FICTION in Wildlife and Nature is a bigger issue!
Truthful and Wild vs. fiction & friction.

My humble penny worth! I have said too much so I need to get lost in the wilderness again! kennan

 

[Tom Lowe]

It's also true that we have learned a lot in the past two years, and EPIC and Scarlet will take the shooting in-the-wilds experience to a whole new level.

Smaller and lighter, faster to boot and lower power consumption; they will offer more frame rates, more resolution and more options for remote control.

Stuart, can you please offer an option for deleting files (bad takes) in camera? This would be incredibly helpful.

 

[Leo Ticheli]

Suggesting that the Red camera is the best choice for every application is unwarranted evangelism and damages the credibility of the claimant.

As we used to say in the Army, "you can put wheels on a mountain, but that won't make it mobile."

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

 

[Michael Hastings]

Suggesting that the Red camera is the best choice for every application is unwarranted evangelism and damages the credibility of the claimant.

As we used to say in the Army, "you can put wheels on a mountain, but that won't make it mobile."

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

Agreed, why can't we just admit that R1 - comparatively speaking - isn't very suited to wildlife or ENG style shooting.

Then we can get to a more rational discussion of whether the 4k resolution is worth the tradeoffs. In many cases it is and many cases it isn't.

 

[Elsie N]

Suggesting that the Red camera is the best choice for every application is unwarranted evangelism and damages the credibility of the claimant.

As we used to say in the Army, "you can put wheels on a mountain, but that won't make it mobile."

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

On the other hand, if Keenan Ward and Gibby consider it the best choice for the application mentioned in the OP article, is it fair to counter claims against bad evangelism?

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

Suggesting that the Red camera is the best choice for every application is unwarranted evangelism and damages the credibility of the claimant.

except that no one posting on this thread has put forth that suggestion...is your comment aimed towards this discussion? or RED fanboyism in general?

I think the parameters of this discussion are regarding whether it is a reasonable choice for wildlife shooting...the reviewer is suggesting it is not. There is a lot of actual evidence offering a different viewpoint.

 

[Jay Gannon]

And there is a lot of actual evidence suggesting its not....

 

[Leo Ticheli]

On the other hand, if Keenan Ward and Gibby consider it the best choice for the application mentioned in the OP article, is it fair to counter claims against bad evangelism?

If you have their skills and virtually identical tasks, you may find the Red an adequate choice. That still does not necessarily make it the best choice.

Surely you are not maintaining that the Red is the best choice under all circumstances because that is a completely indefensible argument and too silly to merit serious consideration.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

 

[Leo Ticheli]

except that no one posting on this thread has put forth that suggestion...is your comment aimed towards this discussion? or RED fanboyism in general?

I think the parameters of this discussion are regarding whether it is a reasonable choice for wildlife shooting...the reviewer is suggesting it is not. There is a lot of actual evidence offering a different viewpoint.

Quite the contrary, I think that's exactly what some are saying.

On the subject of fanboyism; yes, I find it offensive to rationality.

There is a qualitative difference between touting Red for what it does extraordinarily well, and proposing that it's the best for every job and has no attributes that could stand improvement.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

 

[Steve Phillipps]

Then we can get to a more rational discussion of whether the 4k resolution is worth the tradeoffs. In many cases it is and many cases it isn't.

I think I'd agree with that. I don't think anyone could easily argue that Red One is the best choice for field wildlife as a tool, it just isn't for numerous reasons. But as Michael says, perhaps the issues that you have to deal with are worth it for the quality of results you get - or maybe they're not. Exactly the same could be said of 35mm or even Imax! They'll definitely be better, but for most people and most projects they're absolutely not the best choice.
I think we also need to look to the law of diminishing returns, meaning that there is a quality level beyond which you'll gain very little and for those aiming at HDTV that would probably be 1920x1080 or even the 720 of the Varicam, this is why the Varicam is THE choice for the majority of blue chip wildlife from Planet Earth onwards. Improving the quality by shooting 35mm, Red or anything else will yield so little extra output quality that it's just not worth dealing with the issues it brings. Now if you were shooting for cinema release, well that's different - this is why the new DisneyNature films are using 35mm, HDCam SR and Phantom HD.
Just my thoughts.
Steve

 

[Anson Fogel]

I normally don't chime in on these old debates here, but what the heck I'm waiting for a render. Thanks for the reference Meryem - that interview reflects my positive experience with RED in the wild - it also says we shoot RED on our own productions partly for cost reasons. However, I agree in many ways with Jay also. RED often deserves the passionate pro-red at all costs stance many folks take here, however, it also deserves and needs criticism for the flaws. Working with RED has been a beta process that does not always work well for shooters that are not deeply familiar with the camera. Its not fair, or healthy, to say its perfect and every shooter that has a bad experience did not know what they were doing - his experience with overheating and codec shutdowns happens, and with a 900 or SR, it happens a lot less. Really.

I've shot a fair amount of remote, harsh environment, must get the shot NOW or never stuff on my R1, successfully. But if I had the money, in some cases, I would have shot with an F900 or with 16mm film instead, without question. I didn't because I was self funding the piece and simply could not afford the camera rental, or the telecine costs for film (I had an SR sitting in my studio until recently). I also prefer RED when I am doing my own post, as I have it dialed in, it looks a bit better, and I don't have an HDCAM deck! Of course, RED makes great images when used properly, and so do Arri, Kodak, and Sony.

The fact is, an F900 can make great images, people in EFP/ENG know it, it kicks out HDCAM which people expect, and it is bomber. I may get flamed into next week for this, but it IS more reliable on the whole, compared to an "average" rental R1 in the past 24 months. It DOES boot faster and deal with long term power better, and that DOES matter! There are workarounds, but they are workarounds. Lets just be honest about our tools folks, they ALL have flaws, pros and cons, and for wildlife EFP, for your average cameraman in that arena shooting for TV, RED is simply not the better tool (pre-EPIC). If someone called me today and said hey, I'm a longtime TV cameraman shooting wildlife, should I use RED or a 900, I'd tell em to use the 900, unless they could afford me to join them with my red and another rental, and needed the advantages on the framerate/image/post side.

I believe EPIC probably will be competitive with Sony reliability and consistency eventually, and I've had great luck with MY R1, but its mine, and I know it upside down in and out - I do tests in studio whenever I change firmware or any part of the system pre or post, and I find problems - yes, problems - and work around them. We all do. It works really well for experienced, dedicated owner/operators, OR for shoots where there is good on set support from an experienced RED tech/shooter/rental house (or time to learn). But for other situations like the reviewer was in - his experience and the shoot itself - its not the best tool today. Really, come on. I know the image quality and post RAW flexibility CAN be better, yes, but for a lot of output types, but we all know its NOT always just about that, nor can it be.

Red is great for a lot of us, but its flawed, as are all the other tools. Horses for courses as Gibby says. Lets not be extremists. Extremism is not healthy in anything.

Oh, and while I'm here - I'm with Tom, can we delete files in some "EFP" mode from RCX and in camera please?

 

[Elsie N]

Surely you are not maintaining that the Red is the best choice under all circumstances because that is a completely indefensible argument and too silly to merit serious consideration.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

Heh, heh, I actually wasn't (and I don't think you will be able to find that in any of my posts here), but apparently you have dismissed me as silly... (While I secretly dismiss you as arrogant) so let's just agree that each of us, like the Red 1, is flawed.

 

[dustin lindgren]

Mark Payne-Gill's article mentioned that he had only use a RED a few times. Every camera has kinks to work out when you first get them in your hands. 90% of his complaints are minor fixes.

The over heating thing is simple. Turn the fan on high when its hot and don't directly block the vents. I just got back from the Gobi Desert (Turpan, China) for 3 weeks and everyday we worked in 100-120 degree weather. Never had an overheat problem and very rarely did I shoot in the shade. We were also working in the dirt with unreal amounts of dust and dirt being sprayed straight at us by the mt bikers. No problems with that.

Battery problem is fixable with hot swap set ups.

The camera only takes 1 minute to start up.

The comments about the weight of his set up are crazy. He had the wrong gear for the job. You can set your camera up to be a huge studio rig or set it up unbelievably light. That's with rods, mattboxes, follow focuses, 35 lenses....... Reds mounting systems are good and there are all kinds after market systems as well. We fabricated our own top mounts that are smaller and super light. Reds mounting options I think are revolutionary.

I have seen many different shoulder mount system out there. Heavy and super light. He is right though its not like a typical HD cam. It more like a tradition film camera, you build to your liking and select from hundreds of companies out there to find the parts you need for the job.

Anyways who wants to shoot HD anymore!!! Those cameras use to cost 100 grand also. Look at what your getting for the price. Steve Gibby and many others can shoot wild life with the RED. You just have to learn a few things which intimidates some I guess.

 

[Steve Phillipps]

Steve Gibby and many others can shoot wild life with the RED. You just have to learn a few things which intimidates some I guess.

That's the sort of sentiment that often crops up in these discussions, it's like the Emperor's new clothes, if you're having problems you're obviously not good enough or easily intimidated. I know Mark, he's not easily intimidated.
Steve Gibby can shoot wildlife on Red, and Kennan Ward has certainly shown that he can, so can I, and I can also do it on a 5D and a Bolex, doesn't mean it's a great choice for the majority of people.
All the big new wildlife series aimed at TV that I know of (including all the BBC blockbusters like Frozen Planet, and the multi million Discovery Wild Planet series) are all shooting primarily Varicam 2700.
Steve

 

[Elsie N]

Steve Gibby can shoot wildlife on Red, and Kennan Ward has certainly shown that he can, so can I, and I can also do it on a 5D and a Bolex, doesn't mean it's a great choice for the majority of people.
Steve

Steve, I think this is the point here. The author of the article pointed to things being problems that people experienced with shooting RED overcame years ago. If he had researched a little better, he could have overcame those same problems and had a more positive experience. People do read what "professional" reviewers say. I think that the blowback here is that this review did not do justice to a camera that those who read this forum know is better than that. Advocates for the camera? Indeed.... Yes! And by defending what we believe to be true keeps our current cameras valuable. So, it's true we also have a financial stake in setting the record straight.

But sure, if you are someone like the author of the review, then obviously the R-1 is not a great choice.

 

[Jay Gannon]

No I'm sorry the people making the cases for by in large have no experience with the type of shooting that we're talking about. The RED is not a wildlife filmmaking tool for 75% of the situations that it takes place in.

 

[Elsie N]

No I'm sorry the people making the cases for by in large have no experience with the type of shooting that we're talking about. The RED is not a wildlife filmmaking tool for 75% of the situations that it takes place in.

Well, I guess that settles that.