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 :)

What will happen after RED delivers…?

For the first time, bright fiilm-making students will be making self funded films which would inspire the next generation of cinema to come.
 
acehole said:
LA Plastic surgeons experience a surge in face lift procedures.
Click to expand...

If 35mm hasn't sent them to the surgeon, I doubt 4K will. On a related note, how many people in LA who work in front of the camera haven't been under the knife already? :whistling:
 
JasonMurphy said:
If 35mm hasn't sent them to the surgeon, I doubt 4K will. On a related note, how many people in LA who work in front of the camera haven't been under the knife already? :whistling:
Click to expand...

Yeah, except we dont get to see anything near 4K detail out of 35mm film.

4K Red Revision surgery anyone? :alien:
 
Just wondering. Is Red it's own entity or is it a division of Oakley. Meaning if you owned Oakley stock and Red "Hit" (which it will) would your share go through the roof?[/QUOTE]

Jim, just sold Oakley for over a billion dollars. So, I'd say he will be spending his full time at Red and taking over a new industry. I'd say he's a bit "avid" and will take over production digitally faster than Avid took over post production.

The suckers who are in denial of digital are happily sitting on the deck of the Titanic. Hope you old folks can swim... since i always saw the end of film editing, film production, and film projection... growing up in Silicon Valley...

Just ask the photographers who use to shoot film.... shoot what?
The editors who cut film... cut what?!
The film projectionist... the what?!@

Movies will now be movies.... digital.. no film... goodbye.. I do not miss the $1.00 a foot or second as a producer, director, or cameraman... it looked great... but at what cost... no longer... say goodbye... goodbye... goodbye... i can't wait to hang a Panavision or arri 35mm camera from the ceiling next to my movieola and flatbed... I'd say the iceberg has been hit.... film is sinking... get ready for the museums next to the fax machines, and mimeograph machines (and they smelled better!)...
 
acehole said:
Yeah, except we dont get to see anything near 4K detail out of 35mm film.

4K Red Revision surgery anyone? :alien:
Click to expand...

right on Ace !
-A
 
Greg Voevodsky said:
Just wondering. Is Red it's own entity or is it a division of Oakley. Meaning if you owned Oakley stock and Red "Hit" (which it will) would your share go through the roof?

Jim, just sold Oakley for over a billion dollars. So, I'd say he will be spending his full time at Red and taking over a new industry. I'd say he's a bit "avid" and will take over production digitally faster than Avid took over post production.

The suckers who are in denial of digital are happily sitting on the deck of the Titanic. Hope you old folks can swim... since i always saw the end of film editing, film production, and film projection... growing up in Silicon Valley...

Just ask the photographers who use to shoot film.... shoot what?
The editors who cut film... cut what?!
The film projectionist... the what?!@

Movies will now be movies.... digital.. no film... goodbye.. I do not miss the $1.00 a foot or second as a producer, director, or cameraman... it looked great... but at what cost... no longer... say goodbye... goodbye... goodbye... i can't wait to hang a Panavision or arri 35mm camera from the ceiling next to my movieola and flatbed... I'd say the iceberg has been hit.... film is sinking... get ready for the museums next to the fax machines, and mimeograph machines (and they smelled better!)...
Click to expand...

Maybe you're right, but the only given in this industry is:

"Nobody knows anything"
William Goldman
 
[/QUOTE]
Just ask the photographers who use to shoot film.... shoot what?
[/QUOTE]

Hi Thomas,

I know a photographer who still shoots film, he charges $50,000 per shot, over 2 days he made 4 pictures for $200,000. He sees no pressing reason to change.

Stephen
 
ibloom said:
Do you care to elaborate on this prediction Mark? I'm curious.
Click to expand...

The Writers Guild contract is up in October of this year. The SAG and DGA contracts expire next spring. The prevailing wisdom is that the WGA will either walk immediately (unlikely) or get a contract extension (or just agree to work under the current contract) until the SAG and DGA negotiations begin. But all three are looking for significant gains on residuals paid for non-broadcast, non-theatrical distribution (read: DVD and downloads), and the AMPTP has no intention of giving it to them. Studios and television networks are in the middle of stockpiling product in anticipation of possible strikes, that's why numerous television series have been given extended orders this season (for example, the show "Heroes" is making 30 episodes). None of this looks particularly good.
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi Thomas,

I know a photographer who still shoots film...
Click to expand...
i know at least 4.

Stephen Williams said:
he charges $50,000 per shot, over 2 days he made 4 pictures for $200,000. He sees no pressing reason to change.

Stephen
Click to expand...

are you sure it wasn´t 51.000$ per shot and 204.000$?

however this person should really consider red - he would shoot at 100p and make 5.000.000$ in one second.

back to reality:
be it nikon or leica, canon or hasselblad, kodak or agfa. Photographers buy digital cameras, camera manufacturers build digital cameras. They all dropped film and started using sensors instead - as they saw the pressing reasons to change, unlike the photographer you know.

film was >95% pro-market share ten years ago iirc.
is it still >5% today?

the indian matters, not the arrow.
film or sensor, in the hands of talented artists can produce excellent results. in photography, film has been become marginalised - as its to slow, complicated, risky, expensive, unflexible etc and has no advantages over digital aquisition.

People who still use analogue audio mixers or chemical cameras however, often do good work, have good clients etc. Anyhow, they have become a fading minority, and the elite certainly isn´t analogue/chemical anymore in sound as in still photography.
 
laguun said:
i know at least 4.

are you sure it wasn´t 51.000$ per shot and 204.000$?

however this person should really consider red - he would shoot at 100p and make 5.000.000$ in one second.
Click to expand...

Hi,

I am quite sure it was $50,000 not $51,000.

He is a still photographer, he only needs 1 shot!

Stephen
 
didn't expect this thread to be so funny and worthwhile reading!

there will still be film, but it will diminish, as analogue photography did.
But honestly: thats not new, is it ?
Rather relevant will be the question how rates of shooting will change indeed.

Apart from that red will bring more weight on creativity on one side (like the old after effects discussion) and service on the other.
Having that digital appliance in your hands, doesn't make anybody a good storyteller or moviemaker nor does it necessarily provide a good service to your client.
I am tensed to see some of that new creative power.
Also I have the feeling that RED enables passion and inspires some creative owls and critters out of their hidings. Thats what I see here everyday. Awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top