Redonomics

[Robert Ruffo New]

Agreed.

As a " young " man in the field (Got my first Red One in 2012, I was 21 and so happy to have a great toy at the one month of VFX work price), I just wanted to add that as easy it is to jump in the Red train (One year later I could afford the Scarlet, and one more year later the Scarlet Dragon and maybe in 1.5 year finally the top of the chain Weapon ?), the speed/price of upgrade doesn't seems to high (Especially for people shooting - let's say - 10 days a month) to keep up the good gear.




This marketing tease is the thing in my opinion that make the brand, and the brand itself sells a lot my camera to clients (Maybe more the camera than the operator ? Haha, this is another subject).

10 days a month is an enormous number for those of us working in fields where prep is very long, and/or those of us who are also directors. For me that would mean shooting about 5 commercials a month. I would die from exhaustion.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

I think I hear what you are saying but on the surface those are some pretty strong and short sighted words. I mean no offense by that. It just seems that you are not considering the bigger picture.

Red has managed camera values very, very well. R1 held value much longer than the vast majority of tech products and it was only allowed to fall in value after the company gave all R1 owners the opportunity to get all of their investment back. If I am hearing you correctly, the other way to say it is the only reason why R1 value fell as hard as it did was because the company gave all of their customers a new camera for free. Either way you slice it, that's a free ride. Edit: AND the free ride isn't happening again. That is reason to expect prices will not drop so sharply this product cycle.

If Red was guilty of anything when managing the value of R1 it was being loyal and generous with their customers to a fault. With that in mind, do you think they will deliberately do harm to Epic values?


Relax, the aircraft is leveling out a bit and things are smoothing out. Our pilot has mad skills and he has our backs.

No, I'm referring to the $4000 battle tested cams, which decimated the value of those cameras and even made an Red One MX suddenly perceived as a cheap student cam. Red did not have t do that, and I personally feel it was a mistake.

Yes it is true that Red was very loyal to their early customers. Again, I'm not saying Red has been a bad investment, or bashing Red, really, other than to say that I don't agree with every decision they have made. I'm saying I'm not sure I would but ANY camera anymore. The cheap Vimeo Kiddie cams like what BM sells are offensively substandard (No OLPF!? Are you kidding me!?) and I would never want to shoot with them. The good cams are still a real chunk of change and loose value too quickly now, and I would output less money renting them from someone else over the same time period - also because then someone else can do all the worrying about price drops or where the money should come from for upgrading, and I can focus on shooting.

 

[Demetri Zuev]

Honestly, with all due respect to people who are not very happy about the whole upgrade system, I'm amazed of how much whining there is when there's not supposed to be any IMO.

First - nobody's forcing you to upgrade to Weapon. RED is giving you an opportunity to receive a credit that you can apply to accs to complete your future Weapon package. You don't want that credit? Just pass and upgrade when it's logical and convenient to you. There's no race like "if you don't upgrade to Dragon before NAB you'll be the last in line for the rest of your life" or something. RED does not owe any of us any details on any future cameras or prices or anything. They are giving us info prior to release as an act of good will, because the company cares about its' clients (and that's more true with RED than with any camera manufacturer right now). I'm surprised that no one is whining when ARRI drops a press release without any notice that says - "your Alexa is obsolete, here are three new Alexas, the new one will set you back $70,000. Deal with it and put a pre order or fuck off."

Second - the upgrade concept is awesome because I don't have to pay $50.000 every time when I buy a new camera. I only pay $6000 or $9000 or $12500. Is this amount justified in relation to the actual difference between the old one and the new one? That is another question. The fact still remains that you get a new camera by paying a fraction of the cost compared to other manufacturers. You're not happy that your Dragon is this much better for $9500? Well Sony FS100 owners got an FS700 which was just a tad better. But they had to buy the thing all over again.

Third - If you're a DP who offers his/her services with the camera your day is north of $500. How many days you'll need to get your "upgrade money" back? Even if you're lowballing and doing everything plus a camera package for $500. It's 20 days. You can work 2 days a month and get your upgrade money back in a year. A lot of guys I know are DPing like 10 shoots in a month. After that it's pure profit. How many days to get back the money you invested in a new Alexa Mini by buying just the camera brain for $45.000? I'll leave this without an answer.

Fourth - The MX situation. RED is closing the upgrade lines for MX to Dragon procedures on June 31st. That's fine by me. Why should they keep them forever? Why should they even offer an upgrade? It's their business. They don't owe you anything. They can act like ARRI by dropping press-releases and charging all over again.

RED made some controversial choices and mistakes. We all do. But the upgrade program is the best deal that any camera manufacturer is offering right now and I see nothing wrong with it.

 

[sam karr]

I'm amazed of how much whining there is when there's not supposed to be any IMO.
Second - the upgrade concept is awesome because I don't have to pay $50.000 every time when I buy a new camera. I only pay $6000 or $9000 or $12500. Is this amount justified in relation to the actual difference between the old one and the new one? That is another question. The fact still remains that you get a new camera by paying a fraction of the cost compared to other manufacturers..

Being lectured is a bit annoying sometimes here .....
So basically when you own a camera from another manufacturer you throw it away and buy a new one? You don't sell it?
I'm amazed by this argument that I read everywhere on this forum. It's a lack of good faith. I always changed my gear by selling the previous one for a good price. I don't think there is a big difference with Red upgrades. Red's upgrades are just more simple to handle. But then I don't have a new shiny camera.

 

[Scott Crawley]

No, I'm referring to the $4000 battle tested cams, which decimated the value of those cameras and even made an Red One MX suddenly perceived as a cheap student cam. Red did not have t do that, and I personally feel it was a mistake.

We are talking about the same thing.

The reason there were $4000 BT R1's was Red bought them all back and then liquidated them.

Were it not for the full value trade in, those $4000 cams would never have existed and the price would have remained strong.

 

[Demetri Zuev]

Being lectured is a bit annoying sometimes here .....

I'm just expressing my opinion.

So basically when you own a camera from another manufacturer you throw it away and buy a new one? You don't sell it?
I'm amazed by this argument that I read everywhere on this forum. It's a lack of good faith. I always changed my gear by selling the previous one for a good price. I don't think there is a big difference with Red upgrades. Red's upgrades are just more simple to handle. But then I don't have a new shiny camera.

Selling takes time, and for me personally it's a lot more convenient to just perform an upgrade. Saves time and hassle you often have trying to prove that the price you're asking is actually justified and you won't be giving another discount just because...You wouldn't believe how many times I was selling new and unused equipment and people expected me to drop the price like 30% just because they're buying it from me and not from a store although it's in the same exact condition.

 

[sam karr]

Selling takes time, and for me personally it's a lot more convenient to just perform an upgrade. Saves time and hassle you often have trying to prove that the price you're asking is actually justified and you won't be giving another discount just because...

I agree with that.

 

[Timothy Eaton]

Being lectured is a bit annoying sometimes here .....
So basically when you own a camera from another manufacturer you throw it away and buy a new one? You don't sell it?
I'm amazed by this argument that I read everywhere on this forum. It's a lack of good faith. I always changed my gear by selling the previous one for a good price. I don't think there is a big difference with Red upgrades. Red's upgrades are just more simple to handle. But then I don't have a new shiny camera.

Hi Sam,

I don't think Dimetri meant to lecture. I think he was just speaking emphatically.

In any case, you're not exactly right about the upgrades. Red One to Epic yielded a shiny new camera, and Red extended an option which allowed you to sell the R1 and still receive a credit toward purchasing an Epic. Let me know when Arri rolls out that plan. In the case of Weapon, it looks like the upgrade will, once again, yield another new shiny camera.

There are many reasons why filmmakers prefer one camera over another, but the deal I've received from Red and the upgrade path they've created is simply unmatched, dollar for dollar. My capital outlay on a similar path with Arri or Sony, owning at each step their state of the art cameras, would have been two to three times my outlay for Red Cameras. This is the kind of economics that before Red, would have made it impossible for me to own, over a period of years, state of the art cinema cameras. I hope they make this next upgrade just as affordable as the others.

At the same time, I believe owning Epic means I own the best camera in the world for my purposes. That's on top of affordability. Hard to beat. Very hard to beat.

Tim Eaton

 

[sam karr]

Hi Sam,

I don't think Dimetri meant to lecture. I think he was just speaking emphatically.

In any case, you're not exactly right about the upgrades. Red One to Epic yielded a shiny new camera, and Red extended an option which allowed you to sell the R1 and still receive a credit toward purchasing an Epic. Let me know when Arri rolls out that plan. In the case of Weapon, it looks like the upgrade will, once again, yield another new shiny camera.

There are many reasons why filmmakers prefer one camera over another, but the deal I've received from Red and the upgrade path they've created is simply unmatched, dollar for dollar. My capital outlay on a similar path with Arri or Sony, owning at each step their state of the art cameras, would have been two to three times my outlay for Red Cameras. This is the kind of economics that before Red, would have made it impossible for me to own, over a period of years, state of the art cinema cameras. I hope they make this next upgrade just as affordable as the others.

At the same time, I believe owning Epic means I own the best camera in the world for my purposes. That's on top of affordability. Hard to beat. Very hard to beat.

Tim Eaton

You have some good points but I think people have different feelings because everyone has a different story with Red. Some were there at the beginning and got these incredible deals. Some others got the battle tested cameras for cheap. I arrived with Scarlet, paid a price that was higher than the announced one, and paid an upgrade that was the price of the camera. And after december 1st some even paid more than the price of the camera. So I guess some people who arrived in the red environment with epic or with scarlet don't really feel the singularity of red upgrades in the same way as early adopters. I just feel like I paid an upgrade to a company for a nice camera, like I would have with an Arri license or upgrade.
And to be exact it takes 2 upgrades to get a new shiny camera, the dragon one that brought some new internal parts only, and the weapon bringing a new outfit with the dragon parts ^^

 

[Mike Nagel]

Agreed. Of course you won't have many fans around here. Because most people are still drinking the RED Kool-Aid.
Jannard, somewhat disingenously claimed you could have upgraded your camera 3-4 times and only spent about $43K total. When I pointed out the accessory game which adds a lot more everyone just applied the same old crap about how ungrateful I was, because of the genius of RED, blah, blah.

The reality is that reduser's want to take credit for every advance in the industry as if somehow RED invented it. The model everyone holds up is one from 2007 when cameras cost $150K and state that thanks to red we only have to pay tens of thousands instead of hundreds of thousands or at least $10K to upgrade every 12-18 months. Great, right? However, the REAL truth is that the 5D Mark II is what changed the industry pricing levels. Cost came down considerably after that.

And where was RED ? - $3k for 3k if I remember correctly. Funny how no one mentions that here anymore.
RED realized there was more money to be made from the owner operator who aspires to Hollywood, rather than the bread and butter ENG market or the cheapo hobbyists. You are all Hero's, and part of the Brave New World ! Ha ha. You too can use the same camera that was used on the Hobbitt. Yeah right. Just need that extra 100 million to cover my production expenses, now.

Here is the dilemma, prices are going to keep coming down. The difference between high end RED cameras and the rest of the market is lessening. It will be interesting to see how they can maintain their current pricing structure. I am not sure they can.

For someone like myself, getting in now at $40K (and yes that is what it would likely cost with all the necessary extras) makes no sense. Most of the advantages of 2007 have been integrated into the market. NAB will be interesting this year. I would be very surprisd if there wasn't a very competitive camera in the offering for $10-15K.

I use RED cameras and respect the product. But there is fast approaching the point when your upgrade is going to cost far more than the total cost of simply buying a new camera each time - if it hasn't arrived already.

The kool-aid thing is a joke...

Smart peeps buy RED cams (or any cam for that matter) specifically because we know what we can get out of them... if u cannot get what u need out of the RED cams, get the Alexa for twice the price or - if all of this is way above ur budget and quality requirements - shoot 5D line skipping, wannabe 1080, baked-in, juice-drained 420 sauce...

I wanna see the camera that you buy for the "upgrade price" every 2-3 years ? what is that ? a BMD ?

RED cams are (and always have been) in the top echelon of the industry, alongside Arri and the top Sony cams. Canon is NOT in that league. BMD is NOT in that league.

the reality is that there are peeps that need to shoot high-quality content and they gotta choose from what's available, and if you have certain quality requirements u will choose between Arri, RED or Sony and if u consider everything together RED is the best deal - in price/feature set/performance - it may not have the best image in your opinion...

But... clearly, I also would like all products to be free and surely we would all appreciate a price drop on RED gear ;-) ... just make sure to not drop the quality, because that would be a real problem for me and others...

The few things I agree with that one could argue against "RED politics" are:

(1) price announcement and then later price increase - peeps that signed up for the initial price should get that price as per the contract. OTOH, usually early adopters get a price discount so all in all it probably levels out, still not great IMO.

(2) The Epic/Scarlet line should have come with an on-board control set to actually use the camera, w/o the need to buy an add-on to fire up the cam and browse the menus... but it seems they changed that with Weapon.

(3) Transfer of ownership fee is way, way too high...

 

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

RED will have to constantly amaze even as expectations get constantly raised. That's just the nature of the game.

The industry having changed as it has, the expectations people have are much elevated now. That's all. No point saying that's not valid.

Instead, RED will have to now more carefully listen to its customers to prioritize the value stream of its products. I just hope the DRAGON -> STEALTH upgrade is priced very, very competitively. The many new features it has will not be as useful to current customers as just the basic features that were pain points with the DRAGON that will for sure get fixed in the STEALTH.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

Honestly, with all due respect to people who are not very happy about the whole upgrade system, I'm amazed of how much whining there is when there's not supposed to be any IMO.

First - nobody's forcing you to upgrade to Weapon. RED is giving you an opportunity to receive a credit that you can apply to accs to complete your future Weapon package. You don't want that credit? Just pass and upgrade when it's logical and convenient to you. There's no race like "if you don't upgrade to Dragon before NAB you'll be the last in line for the rest of your life" or something. RED does not owe any of us any details on any future cameras or prices or anything. They are giving us info prior to release as an act of good will, because the company cares about its' clients (and that's more true with RED than with any camera manufacturer right now). I'm surprised that no one is whining when ARRI drops a press release without any notice that says - "your Alexa is obsolete, here are three new Alexas, the new one will set you back $70,000. Deal with it and put a pre order or fuck off."

Second - the upgrade concept is awesome because I don't have to pay $50.000 every time when I buy a new camera. I only pay $6000 or $9000 or $12500. Is this amount justified in relation to the actual difference between the old one and the new one? That is another question. The fact still remains that you get a new camera by paying a fraction of the cost compared to other manufacturers. You're not happy that your Dragon is this much better for $9500? Well Sony FS100 owners got an FS700 which was just a tad better. But they had to buy the thing all over again.

Third - If you're a DP who offers his/her services with the camera your day is north of $500. How many days you'll need to get your "upgrade money" back? Even if you're lowballing and doing everything plus a camera package for $500. It's 20 days. You can work 2 days a month and get your upgrade money back in a year. A lot of guys I know are DPing like 10 shoots in a month. After that it's pure profit. How many days to get back the money you invested in a new Alexa Mini by buying just the camera brain for $45.000? I'll leave this without an answer.

Fourth - The MX situation. RED is closing the upgrade lines for MX to Dragon procedures on June 31st. That's fine by me. Why should they keep them forever? Why should they even offer an upgrade? It's their business. They don't owe you anything. They can act like ARRI by dropping press-releases and charging all over again.

RED made some controversial choices and mistakes. We all do. But the upgrade program is the best deal that any camera manufacturer is offering right now and I see nothing wrong with it.

Some funky math here. Your salary and the camera rental are two different issues. $500 a day "with the camera" does not mean that all that money goes back to paying off the camera, otherwise what are you using to eat and pay your rent. This kind of math means that one must become an unpaid slave laborer for a certain time in order to break even with a camera, and be back at zero. Most of us do not wish to do that.

You guys are also forgetting that a client can't really argue with an external rental - it costs what it costs and they can even call the other guy to verify if they have trust issues. If they try to low ball the other guy this is not your problem. Your camera, on the other hand, they often try to get you to throw in for next to nothing.

As a good DP you can work with or without owning anything, and make whatever day rate your clients will be willing to pay. Camera ownership and a career are, again, separate issues.

That said I think"DPing" is not the word for the kind of job you do ten of in a month. There would be no time for prep/meetings/light diagrams / equipment lists... David Mullen does not shoot 10 gigs a month. You can only shoot 10 gigs if what you are doing is more like camera operating and/or documentary work, where you show up and point the camera at stuff with no or not much lighting. Nothing wrong with that, but certainly not the career goal of absolutely everyone here.

 

[Demetri Zuev]

That said I think"DPing" is not the word for the kind of job you do ten of in a month. There would be no time for prep/meetings/light diagrams / equipment lists... David Mullen does not shoot 10 gigs a month. You can only shoot 10 gigs if what you are doing is more like camera operating and/or documentary work, where you show up and point the camera at stuff with no or not much lighting. Nothing wrong with that, but certainly not the career goal of absolutely everyone here.

I'm not in features yet, so I was referring to mainly music videos/commercials. I wouldn't say that these guys are doing them without much lighting. And there are meetings and light diagrams, they're all happening months before principal photography occurs with these high-end music vids. Last project I was working on our DP had lots of lights and lots of locations within a big country house, so he was constantly working with gaffers cause we needed to create a sunny day in a huge hall with tall windows and other things on the same level of complexity. Of course no one is DPing 10 features in a month but with music videos that is not very rare. I don't think that this makes these guys less a DP than a feature film DP. They're both doing the same job just on a different scale and time period.

 

[Michael J Brennan]

You can only shoot 10 gigs if what you are doing is more like camera operating and/or documentary work, where you show up and point the camera at stuff with no or not much lighting. Nothing wrong with that, but certainly not the career goal of absolutely everyone here.

Granted, job descriptions have been errr democratised!
So what is the definition of a DP?


Mike Brennan

 

[Scott Crawley]

I'm just expressing my opinion.

Selling takes time, and for me personally it's a lot more convenient to just perform an upgrade. Saves time and hassle you often have trying to prove that the price you're asking is actually justified and you won't be giving another discount just because...You wouldn't believe how many times I was selling new and unused equipment and people expected me to drop the price like 30% just because they're buying it from me and not from a store although it's in the same exact condition.

Maybe be you should be leasing instead, then? Essentially that is what you are doing; leasing to own.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Granted, job descriptions have been errr democratised!
So what is the definition of a DP?


Mike Brennan

If your first statement were true, there would be no need for the second. ;-)

democratize:

to make (a country or organization) more democratic


: to make (something) available to all people : to make it possible for all people to understand (something)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democratize

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

I'm not in features yet, so I was referring to mainly music videos/commercials. I wouldn't say that these guys are doing them without much lighting. And there are meetings and light diagrams, they're all happening months before principal photography occurs with these high-end music vids. Last project I was working on our DP had lots of lights and lots of locations within a big country house, so he was constantly working with gaffers cause we needed to create a sunny day in a huge hall with tall windows and other things on the same level of complexity. Of course no one is DPing 10 features in a month but with music videos that is not very rare. I don't think that this makes these guys less a DP than a feature film DP. They're both doing the same job just on a different scale and time period.

I work mostly in ads and music videos. 10 jobs a month doing complex work on music videos and ads would put you in the hospital in no time. I do not know anyone in real life who works that much. That's just crazy.

 

[Guillaume Depestele]

10 days a month is an enormous number for those of us working in fields where prep is very long, and/or those of us who are also directors. For me that would mean shooting about 5 commercials a month. I would die from exhaustion.

Yes but different job I guess, I speak for 10 days a month as camera operator but you're probably making three times the money I make in a day (Given experience, prep' work et co).

 

[Grant Smucker]

You have some good points but I think people have different feelings because everyone has a different story with Red. Some were there at the beginning and got these incredible deals. Some others got the battle tested cameras for cheap. I arrived with Scarlet, paid a price that was higher than the announced one, and paid an upgrade that was the price of the camera. And after december 1st some even paid more than the price of the camera. So I guess some people who arrived in the red environment with epic or with scarlet don't really feel the singularity of red upgrades in the same way as early adopters. I just feel like I paid an upgrade to a company for a nice camera, like I would have with an Arri license or upgrade.
And to be exact it takes 2 upgrades to get a new shiny camera, the dragon one that brought some new internal parts only, and the weapon bringing a new outfit with the dragon parts ^^

I'm in the same boat Sam. I bought into RED less than a year ago at $20k for a Scarlet-MX package, and now I need to put at least another $10k-13k just to 'stay alive' before MX is end of road. Sure, no one is making me upgrade, but nobody wants to be left behind. For those that have been with RED since the start it's not as hard to swallow since the investments have been over time, but for the newer owners, we are having to come up with a lot of dough to keep up.

The thing that gets me is why is every new camera/sensor an additional $10k? Over time things should become 'faster, cheaper', technology improves. If any other tech company comes up with improvements over time, the old model is discounted and the new one sells at the same price. So in the case of weapon, the old bodies will be discounted and the weapon would fill in the current Epic dragon prices. I think the upgrade program is the main cause of these continual price increases. Current owners only have to pay 10k for a camera every couple years, but new adopters will be paying $40k, 50k, 60k, ... it goes on. So if you're on the train you're riding pretty but to try and jump in later on is not fun.

 

[Nick Morrison]

For the people that bought Scarlet MX's late (as in end of 2013 and in 2014), they are the worst hit. Many upgraded to Epic and now to Dragon....all in 12-16 months. Tough todo, especially when they were buying budget RED to begin with.

That said, many have done very well with their cams. Someone who bought a Scarlet in 2011, then upgraded to Epic in 2013, and then Dragon in 2014...has probably done very well....

Also - those that spent $40ish grand since 2007/8? I'm sorry but that's just amazing. That's less than the cost of ONE Alexa...spread out over 7 years and 3 different major upgrades.

Overall - I think RED pays off the longer you stay in it. But getting in late can be painful, yes. Until you catch up...I guess.

Still I think of the dudes you bought a FS-700 for $10K. And then within 16 months got a FS7 for another $10k. Yes they could sell their old camera used, but that disposability bothers me.

A $10K upgrade every 2 years (assuming you finally "catchup"), doesn't seem too bad to me. That's $5K a year. Or basically the cost of an affordable camera.