Working With the RED

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I agree completely with what you say there.
But the article didn't say that, it said that in his opinion, the camera is presently not well suited for low-light, warm-colored scenes, and that the camera designers' "decided" to balance the sensor to daylight was a little shortsighted.

"The permanent color-temperature bias of the Red is “locked in” at polar opposites of the real-world shooting conditions cinematographers typically face"

But it is locked in at polar opposites! You want fast tungsten and slow daylight.

Is it accurate though that RED 'chose' to make the RED that way? No. Then again whenever someone assigns intent to someone else you should always take it with a grain of salt. Especially my assumptions about what the author intended to mean in the article.

That being said not all digital cameras are daylight balanced. Case in point our friend the Viper and its 'peculiar' native balance. One could be forgiven for assuming that RED deliberately chose its white balance.

 

[Stephen Strangways]

Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

I'm not trying to say Christopher is stupid, but rather that the technical inaccuracies are more likely mistakes than active attempts to discredit the RED ONE.

The technical errors do need to be pointed out and corrected, but for reasons of accuracy, not to defend a perceived slight against a chosen camera.

 

[Stephen Strangways]

This article was not written as an objective analysis based on research, it was written as a subjective analysis based on personal experience, which is a different type of article.

"The Red has also exhibited sensitivity to heat"... "I have witnessed this on many occasions with many different Red bodies"

There's a true fact, and subjective analysis based on personal experience. Great.

"This is due in part to the camera’s design: the heat-sink ventilation is located on the bottom of the body. As we all know, heat rises. The main chassis of the Red is basically an aluminum-alloy cylinder, and when the camera gets hot, the heat rises inside this tubular body and literally cooks the electronics inside from the top down."

That's not subjective, that's claiming the design is wrong, based on a very limited understanding of how it works.

Yes, well know that heat rises, right along with the people who designed the RED. Those people also know that an aluminum-alloy cylinder is not a design mistake... it's a heat sink!

Yes, the fans are on the bottom... again, not a problem. The vast majority of computers are cooled by fans at the front and back of the case, not the top. The RED ONE has too many electronics jammed in there to make a sealed cooling system, so do you want vent holes in the top of the camera that things can fall into? And as for those bottom vents, check the airflow with the fans on high, and then notice that you can't see straight through from one side to another... because the airflow path is moving air up, over, and around all the electronics.

It's a sound design. The RED has heat issues, sure, but, not because the designers, unlike the article's author and "as we all know" the people reading it, were unaware that heat rises.

Please, AC, feel free to give us subjective analysis, but cut it off when it becomes technically incorrect speculation as to why.

 

[Christopher Probst]

Similarly it's very important that readers understand that RED is a daylight sensor and should be treated like daylight film stock.

I agree completely with what you say there. But the article didn't say that, it said that in his opinion, the camera is presently not well suited for low-light, warm-colored scenes, and that the camera designers' "decided" to balance the sensor to daylight was a little shortsighted....

I THEN go on to explain how the chip should be handled with a proper color correction filter. Typical of using a daylight balanced film in tungsten light.


The color balance setting in the camera menu doesn't change the sensitivity of the sensor.

Again, I agree completely with what you said.
But the article didn't say that, it said "The permanent color-temperature bias of the Red is “locked in” at polar opposites of the real-world shooting conditions cinematographers typically face"

OF COURSE it did say that. if you're going to go out of the way to quote my article in order to attack my points made, then READ it. The next paragraph states it very clearly...

"No matter how you set the Red’s “viewing” settings — you can adjust the monitoring look-up table to display any color-temperature setting you desire — you will not be affecting how the “raw” image is recorded."

Stephen, I'm therefore bot sure which technical inaccuracies then are you attempting to correct me on.

 

[Christopher Probst]

"The Red has also exhibited sensitivity to heat"... "I have witnessed this on many occasions with many different Red bodies"

There's a true fact, and subjective analysis based on personal experience. Great.

"This is due in part to the camera’s design: the heat-sink ventilation is located on the bottom of the body. As we all know, heat rises. The main chassis of the Red is basically an aluminum-alloy cylinder, and when the camera gets hot, the heat rises inside this tubular body and literally cooks the electronics inside from the top down."

That's not subjective, that's claiming the design is wrong, based on a very limited understanding of how it works.

Yes, well know that heat rises, right along with the people who designed the RED. Those people also know that an aluminum-alloy cylinder is not a design mistake... it's a heat sink!

Yes, the fans are on the bottom... again, not a problem. The vast majority of computers are cooled by fans at the front and back of the case, not the top. The RED ONE has too many electronics jammed in there to make a sealed cooling system, so do you want vent holes in the top of the camera that things can fall into? And as for those bottom vents, check the airflow with the fans on high, and then notice that you can't see straight through from one side to another... because the airflow path is moving air up, over, and around all the electronics.

It's a sound design. The RED has heat issues, sure, but, not because the designers, unlike the article's author and "as we all know" the people reading it, were unaware that heat rises.

Please, AC, feel free to give us subjective analysis, but cut it off when it becomes technically incorrect speculation as to why.

Sorry Stephen, I read this and I think your post is reading more like a rant than my entire article now. You're often misquoting me and your arguements are flawed. Anyone can take my article with a grain of salt. Use the information I share if you like, trash it if you don't agree with it. But I stand behind everything I said 100%. I just shot with the Red last night and experienced nearly every point made in my article AGAIN. I don't have the time nor should I have the interest to defend myself on every attack here.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Sorry Stephen, I read this and I think your post is reading more like a rant than my entire article now. You're often misquoting me and your arguements are flawed. Anyone can take my article with a grain of salt. Use the information I share if you like, trash it if you don't agree with it. But I stand behind everything I said 100%. I just shot with the Red last night and experienced nearly every point made in my article AGAIN. I don't have the time nor should I have the interest to defend myself on every attack here.

Recently two movies shot on RED have got 5 Oscar nominations and also another one won Sundance US dramatic award 2010.

LINK>>>

The camera seems to work well if you know how to use it.

Btw, solving different problems and issues is a huge part of our life.

If you do not know to deal with that on daily basis than this could always become a big issue.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

That's not a helpful comment Sanjin and not in the spirit of the discussion. If we're taking constructive criticism here, let's be constructive in our responses.

Graeme

 

[Peter Lyons Collister ASC]

Learning

Learning

I simply would like to say that sometimes we learn more from negative comments than from glowing ones. Chris's article spawned a discussion here where Graeme's graceful knowledge helped my feeble mind understand Bayer pattern CMOS versus RGB striped CCD a little better.

And we in the ASC are not, I believe, head stuck in the sand film die hards. We simply want to have technology follow creativity. I bought a RED in order to learn and test despite having spent 25 years shooting features on 35mm exclusively.
I applaud the competition between all the digital cinema manufacturers and have always stated that Jim and RED have increased the pressure on everyone, from Sony to Arri to Panavision to give us better and better tools.

And remember there are few bigger film fans than Jim.

 

[Stephen Strangways]

Hey Christopher, I'm not trying at attack you, and I've actually agreed with a number of things you wrote in the article, and agreed with what Gavin pointed out, but I apologize if it didn't come across that way.

I've had a RED ONE overheat on me, I've missed shots due to long boot up times, had batteries disconnect when the camera was rested on the ground, just about every single problem you've also had. I don't have any issue with you pointing those things out.

But it's your explanations of why these things happen, with either technical facts that are not accurate, or things that you attribute to design decisions only the designers can comment on.

Really, I should just shut up and let Graeme respond.

Stephen, I'm therefore bot sure which technical inaccuracies then are you attempting to correct me on.

I've listed them in an earlier post, if not in this thread, then in the "RED One slammed in Feb issue of AC?" thread. They ought to be combined... but anyway, I'm really only talking about the exact same things Graeme is, and it's not that I'm trying to correct you personally, but that I'm trying to provide correct information for anyone who reads this.

I'm really not trying to "jump on the fan-boy bandwagon" so I apologize if it came across that way.

I agree that you shouldn't be trying to defend yourself here, and I hope that people here aren't trying to attack you personally, even if they take issue with the article and are skimming dangerously close to it.

Ultimately, what matters most in this thread is Graeme's response to the technical issues, and your response of

I think your points are worth mentioning and perhaps warrent a response letter to the editor. I'm glad that this opening up the discourse. Some of the readership and perhaps others here may glean some perspective from it.

is right on the money. As far as I'm concerned, that should make an open and shut case of it right there.

I've intended no personal offence Christopher, so I apologize if it came across that way, and I'm sorry you feel that I misquoted you, as I felt I was doing so as accurately as possible to stay on track to what I was talking about, and not have to quote entire sections from the article.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

I simply would like to say that sometimes we learn more from negative comments than from glowing ones. Chris's article spawned a discussion here where Graeme's graceful knowledge helped my feeble mind understand Bayer pattern CMOS versus RGB striped CCD a little better.

And we in the ASC are not, I believe, head stuck in the sand film die hards. We simply want to have technology follow creativity. I bought a RED in order to learn and test despite having spent 25 years shooting features on 35mm exclusively.
I applaud the competition between all the digital cinema manufacturers and have always stated that Jim and RED have increased the pressure on everyone, from Sony to Arri to Panavision to give us better and better tools.

And remember there are few bigger film fans than Jim.

I love the aesthetic of film too! There's no doubting it's subtle beauties in how it works. As Jim has always said, RED is designed to be a valid alternative to film, not a replacement to film.

I dearly want technology to be behind the scenes so it just doesn't get in the way of being creative. So that's why we went the RAW route, and the R3D REDCODE route.

Glad I can help with the Bayer / RGB stripe issue. I've written a fair bit on that topic on the forum, and it's certainly an interesting one.

Graeme

 

[Christopher Probst]

Graeme,

Can you perhaps elaborate on the nuances on the rolling shutter issue I brought up in my article as well. Has there been any improvements with the M-X sensor in that regard? There are other CMOS senor'd cameras in the field that don't have issue with strobes and quick flashes. Would love to see this split-frame exposure phenomenon get resolved.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

The new M-X has a faster roll, as does the Epic cameras. In this regard they should be very nearly as fast as the rotating mirror shutter of a film camera.

Graeme

 

[Christopher Probst]

Was hoping for some more techy-geekery... but good news nonetheless.

Thanks.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Jim did mention the numbers - can't remember them myself. I'm much more on the image processing codec geekery

Graeme

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

I'm not trying to say Christopher is stupid, but rather that the technical inaccuracies are more likely mistakes than active attempts to discredit the RED ONE.

The technical errors do need to be pointed out and corrected, but for reasons of accuracy, not to defend a perceived slight against a chosen camera.

I don't care about any perceived slight against the RED. The slight can be absolutely intentional, and that's entirely fine. Ultimately if an author has used the camera and absolutely hates it, that is a valid viewpoint.

For my part, I have a love hate relationship with the camera, for many of the reasons stated in the article. My favorite thing to love is that I can afford to own the camera. (I don't own my own, but its within reason.)

What I don't care for is the unbalanced reporting. There have been a number of posts here excusing this bad journalism by comparing it to film systems.

Well, its not film. Everyone already knows film. I don't have to explain about how awesome film is, I can skip straight to issues with a certain camera or whatever. That's shoddy journalism, but it does convey some important information, and may be acceptable shorthand (not desired) when space is limited.

The RED is new-ish. Articles on it should be balanced. That means making sure to state both sides of the argument for and against the camera. As a reader I certainly need to know the issues with the camera (if I hadn't run up against them myself), but I also need to understand its benefits. (again if I hadn't experienced them myself.)

There are technical issues with the write up of issues with the camera, but I'm not interested in niggling about those. In my opinion Mr. Probst did a reasonable job detailing those issues.

I do wish that in preparing his article Mr. Probst had contacted RED for help describing the resolution of the sensor and the operation of bayer pattern sensors. The central point, that RED's "4k" sensor resolution doesn't deliver 4K image resolution is valid, and very much worth mentioning.

There are a lot of positive things to say about the RED, and they should have been in the article in order to help maintain a neutral stance. He starts off talking about how he shot some of his favorite projects on the RED, but then never mentions anything positive about it for the remainder of the article.

Ultimately the images speak for themselves. They are very good work. I don't think Mr. Probst would have used it on more than 50 projects if he didn't feel it was a valid tool.

Some explanation of why, despite all the issues, he felt it was a valid tool would be warranted.

That's all I want. Balance, and a bit better research.

As it stands the article straddles the line between technical journalism and a hack job. Frankly I think it misrepresents the camera, and from what I can see Mr. Probst's own opinions about the camera.

I think what's published in AC Mag about our tools is important. The articles should be accurate and authoritative, but most important fair and balanced.

I hope I am being constructive. I hope to read more articles by him, and I hope they are better articles because of this conversation. I hope if I ever get the opportunity to write for AC magazine, or any other publication, I will bear in mind my own words here.

 

[Roger Crouse]

I don't care about any perceived slight against the RED. The slight can be absolutely intentional, and that's entirely fine. Ultimately if an author has used the camera and absolutely hates it, that is a valid viewpoint.

For my part, I have a love hate relationship with the camera, for many of the reasons stated in the article. My favorite thing to love is that I can afford to own the camera. (I don't own my own, but its within reason.)

What I don't care for is the unbalanced reporting. There have been a number of posts here excusing this bad journalism by comparing it to film systems.

Well, its not film. Everyone already knows film. I don't have to explain about how awesome film is, I can skip straight to issues with a certain camera or whatever. That's shoddy journalism, but it does convey some important information, and may be acceptable shorthand (not desired) when space is limited.

The RED is new-ish. Articles on it should be balanced. That means making sure to state both sides of the argument for and against the camera. As a reader I certainly need to know the issues with the camera (if I hadn't run up against them myself), but I also need to understand its benefits. (again if I hadn't experienced them myself.)

There are technical issues with the write up of issues with the camera, but I'm not interested in niggling about those. In my opinion Mr. Probst did a reasonable job detailing those issues.

I do wish that in preparing his article Mr. Probst had contacted RED for help describing the resolution of the sensor and the operation of bayer pattern sensors. The central point, that RED's "4k" sensor resolution doesn't deliver 4K image resolution is valid, and very much worth mentioning.

There are a lot of positive things to say about the RED, and they should have been in the article in order to help maintain a neutral stance. He starts off talking about how he shot some of his favorite projects on the RED, but then never mentions anything positive about it for the remainder of the article.

Ultimately the images speak for themselves. They are very good work. I don't think Mr. Probst would have used it on more than 50 projects if he didn't feel it was a valid tool.

Some explanation of why, despite all the issues, he felt it was a valid tool would be warranted.

That's all I want. Balance, and a bit better research.

As it stands the article straddles the line between technical journalism and a hack job. Frankly I think it misrepresents the camera, and from what I can see Mr. Probst's own opinions about the camera.

I think what's published in AC Mag about our tools is important. The articles should be accurate and authoritative, but most important fair and balanced.

I hope I am being constructive. I hope to read more articles by him, and I hope they are better articles because of this conversation. I hope if I ever get the opportunity to write for AC magazine, or any other publication, I will bear in mind my own words here.

There is something more that's missing from this discussion. That is the passion that the Red camera seems to evoke. Some people just get it. Some don't. Not talking about being a fanboy. But it's something more that is tough to explain. I think it's the realization that we are, even if by extension, a part of an historical shift in the accessiblility and methodology of telling stories. Soderberg gets it. Jackson gets it. Those of us who are quick to defend this technology apparently get it. Yet, some people just don't get it. Maybe they will never see it at the level of those who "get it". For some, it's just another camera. Just another step...another tool...for another job. I think it represents much more than an article could suggest.

 

[CJ Roy]

I've been fortunate enough to work with Chris several times now and I'm absolutely impressed that he would take the time to come here to discuss his article and its finer points with a forum that's known to go Springer on any criticism of the Red.

He's a great cinematographer and has done a lot of our favorite music videos and commercials. He's got a ton of field experience with the camera on some of the craziest schedules and high pressure jobs. Watching him work is a show in itself. If an R1 can survive a hectic day on some of those sets, it can survive a lot.

The camera is good, but not perfect. There are a lot of issues with ergonomics, design, accessories, etc. In the spirit of trying to achieve that perfect camera, I plead with everyone here, especially RED, to listen to the guy. He knows his shit.

Thanks.

-CJ

P.S. Chris- The rolling shutter is still there, but it's been improved. Perhaps it'll get even better.

 

[Christopher Probst]

Thanks for the kind words CJ. I'm just like any other user here, also looking to better my experience with the camera. I'm certainly not so high and mighty to not come to these forums and seek advice and information.

On a lighter note, do you have the M-X now? I may be using one next week, but don't think I'll be doing any flashing strobes to test out the rolling shutter issue. Maybe during prep.

 

[Mike Gross]

I've been fortunate enough to work with Chris several times now and I'm absolutely impressed that he would take the time to come here to discuss his article and its finer points with a forum that's known to go Springer on any criticism of the Red.

I think the issue that most people have with the article was that it was 90% negative rather than an objective article balanced with what works well on red also.

For someone new to red, just knowing what doesn't work isn't wholly in the spirit of being helpful. One has to present what also works well and how to know and optimize for it's strengths.

Unfortunately what could have been a fantastic article ends up coming off as a Fox news style of journalism.

 

[Stephen Strangways]

Hey Christopher,

I was pleasantly surprised to see that "Love Game" and "Waking up in Vegas" were shot on the RED, as I always liked the look of them, "Love Game" especially. What other music videos (with big enough artists that it's likely I've already seen them) have you shot that you are particularly proud of? (RED or otherwise)