HD For Indies

Sounds awesome! I'll be at NAB tomorrow and will swing by the booth to say hello if you are around :) well, I'm swinging by the booth anyway!...can't wait to see the footage!...might have to take a sleeping pill tonight cause I'm too excited..haha
 

They friggin did it! They even exceeded my expectations. What a story!!
 

Mike,

I'm a little confused over the support for REDCODE 4K. Does this mean a future version of FCP 6 will? Or a future version of FCP? I'm guessing FCP 6 will be updated in a month or two (I hope?) with support for 4K REDCODE. This would be rather dissapointing if we had to wait a year or so. But hopefully we'll get support quickly so people can shoot stuff soon after taking delivery of their cameras. :)

Yash
 

Actually, Mike, the prime set is 15, 25, 35, 50, and 85 (according to the handout). Only sold as a set, though Jim said he may consider selling the 85 seperate to go along with the 18-50 zoom.
 

Sounds like support for Redcode RAW may require Leopard.
 

Would you please tell us everything you can about the focus assist? I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks.
 

While I had been pretty sold on the RED just from all I had heard about it, seeing the footage that Peter Jackson shot really pushed me into the full believer camp on this thing. And seeing the same footage as RAW in Final Cut as well. This is really the first digitaly aquired footage that looks like film. I mean really looks like film, from the color to the depth of field. In fact I would say it looks better than film because there is no grain. It looked so good that this little saying kept running through my head.

"Film is dead, long live RED!"
 

Film is not dead!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is all fantastic but it's so expensive!!! I don't care what resolution it shoots at! Peter Jackson has all the facilities he needs to work in suitable workflow, and to be able to efficiently employ RED into a production workflow... Us at home simply cannot afford all the hardware and software required to EFFECIENTLY shoot and edit in RED at 4K!!!!!!!!
 

Anonymous above - Jonah said film is dead, not me.

But as for your 4K commentary, I disagree, and here's why:

Redcode RAW 4K @24p is about the same datarate as 10 bit uncompressed SD - datarate is going to be in the 24-28 MB/sec range as soon as Graeme gets done tinkering with it.

Final Cut Pro can read and edit Redcode RAW 4K files natively. Color doesn't today, but I'm betting they'll work on it.

Its a QT codec, so you can read it into any app that supports QT codecs - After Effects, Motion, etc. I don't know if Shake or Fusion requires explicit codec support on a case by case basis or not.

If you can render back to this compressed 4K, the only notable limitation is having enough CPU horsepower to crunch those frames. Feel free to render out to 2K as well.

Frankly, if you're doing it yourself, I think the smart play is to use the 4K files, but do HD renders. The ONE AND ONLY time you NEED 4K for deliverables is for theatrical display at 4K, as either a DCI spec 4K DCP or a filmout.

Even if indie filmmaker trying to get picked up, SXSW & Sundance want either 35mm print or HDCAM 1080i60 - so do your 24p master, add 3:2 pulldown on mastering to tape, and you're in bidness. You'd only need to worry about a filmout if you get picked up for theatrical distribution...which is about a 1 in 100 chance anyway...

So I think it is ENTIRELY possible to do 4K stuff affordably - like $10K-$30K worth of gear affordably...

-mike
 

In response:

I was not attacking RED at all, merely stating that in my opinion as an indie filmmaker RED is not a viable option, yet. The Sony HDR Z1 or Panasonic P2 or "cheaper" options, and obviously the quality is not 4K! But it is far far far better than DV, and more affordable in terms of a workflow.

Firstly REDCINE requires an Intel Mac with Final Cut 6, which nobody around here has. Which means I have to change my current hardware to Apple!! NO thanks! (P.S I don't want to argue the PC Vs. MAC thing again!!!! I don't care which is better or worse!)

Secondly as an independant filmmaker there is no way that you could buy a RED camera PACKAGE that you could start shooting out the box! I'm sorry but $40,000 is not affordable at all. Maybe in USA you guys get it cheap bu the rest of the world has to pay import duties. Also another thing is here in South Africa HD has not even begun to be the standard television broadcast format. Everything is still SD based and HD DVD & Blu-Ray are not even here yet. Millions of people are not going to suddenly change to HD DVD when it took them 5 years to go to DVD. Also most people don't have HD TV's so they won't miss the 2K or 4K quality. I know this RED is mainly going to be for Digital Viewings of Feature films in cinemas. The film projector does not have long to go...

Camera Rentals are obviously not available yet.

Then there is the issue of HDD's, they are $900 each for 320GB. The article stated that Peter Jackson shot 500GB in 2 days. NOW what if you or him shot a film over a period of 1-8 months!??? Where the hell are you as an INDIE filmmaker going to store all those TERRAbytes of data!!????? Not sure? Dont know about you but combined I've got just about 1 TB of storage in total. That will NEVER be ebough for 1 months shooting.

Then there is the issue of exporting your project out to do special effects and what not, wow what a network you would need to have say even 15 computers working flawlessly with all that information at ONCE. As an Indie the rental companies are now gonna charge more for machine time to push your product out! Can't afford effects houses and film & video labs?? Well then you can do it at home then. Well as before, you need a MAC system with a NEW version of FCP on there to be able to natively capture (as you stated at 24-28MB/s much like SD DV) and handle 4k or 2K. Again where are you going to stor this data???

Fine you can shoot in 2K or down-convert to 2K when you capture but then why on earth buy a camera that supports 4K if you can't work with it????(again I must stress the importance of an INDIE filmmaker with not a lot of money!!!) You might aswell just shoot 2K, on HD or 16mm. I know the rival cams are more expensive Panasonic HD AJ-HDC27H & Sony HDW-F950 & Panavision Genesis & finally Arri D-20 (all great cams!) but the workflow does not require any additional hardware or software changes in order to shoot a film on any one of those cameras, or any HD & HDV lineup of cameras!

So don't shoot me, I was merely stating that I love the camera yes the quality it being doubted. But its more affordable than most but still not as affordable as say Sony Z1, when in a film a good story counts a lot. I love quality pictures, i love superior sound so don't get me wrong.

P.S If you can't afford to output a 2K image to 35mm or Super 16mm film or or 2K digital file for playback in cinemas at festivals what can you do? HD DVD & Blu-Ray?? Not all will be quick to upgrade ALL OF THEIR CURRENT FACILITIES TO VIEW YOUR FILM... They will probably take a DVD which is SD in the end of it all...
 

Anonymous Above -

there are so many inaccuracies, misconceptions, misunderstandings, and misguided notions in that statement that when I sat down to explain, I realized it would take about an hour to write it all up.

I'll summarize in the freebie answer:

-basically, you're off on the technical stuff.

-If you can't afford to buy, rent. If you can't afford to rent, consider getting enough funding to buy up front and sell on back end (take out a loan to do so). If you can't do that...you weren't in the economic pool that Red was targeting - simple as that.

-If you can't afford to buy/rent, it is unfair/incorrect to say that it is not indie viable, or that it is too expensive....it is too expensive for YOU and folks in your same situation. Most professional working DPs that have seen the camera and footage consider it a bargain. Some folks can afford it, some can't, that's just the nature of any economy.

-if Z1U is all you can afford and you want to shoot for 1-8 months...then you have lots of other financial impediments to making a decent film. It can be done, and done well (witness Tomorrow is Today shot on Z1U and won awards), but requires a lot of time, craft, and know-how. But it is TOUGH, and a rare one that gets a meaningful release (enough to recoup costs or heaven forbid, turn a profit) as a narrative. Docs & reality a different matter, but still challenging.

-Z1U & HVX were never the target audience of the Red One. If those are all you can afford, then perhaps you should wait for the Red Mini and see if that is to your liking. In the meantime, shoot what you can afford - HVX, Z1U, XH A1, maybe the upcoming XDCAM EX.

As for viability of 4K post...you haven't done your homework on Redcode and Redcine.

As for "better off shooting 2K/HD/16mm" you haven't done your homework, nor have a realistic understanding of the true costs involved, nor are you factoring in the ability to downsample to 2K/HD, nor the benefits of doing so with a Red as compared to anything else anywhere near the price point. Continue to do your homework.

Archival issues - balance the cost of data backup with modern IT infrastructure (don't have to simply shelve those full $900 320GB Red Drives) against the cost of renting professional decks, getting downsampled dubs, etc. If considering 16mm, factor in costs of film stock, developing, telecine, scanning, etc.

Festivals - see notes NAB preso posted the other day.

You stated: "But its more affordable than most but still not as affordable as say Sony Z1, when in a film a good story counts a lot."

All true. But there's a definite threshold of "looks good enough to be taken seriously as a movie" that turns away many an audience and more importantly, many a buyer. If you're trying to get your film bought for some meaningful chunk of change, would you rather show one shot on Red One or Z1U? Z1U or DVX100B? DVX100B or Aunt Jennie's 5 year old 1 chip DV camcorder?

Consider who you are trying to sell it to. Most narrative Z1U projects aren't going to get theatrical distribution. Most aren't going to get a decent cable distribution. Most have a shot at limited direct to DVD distribution or self distribution. Think, realistically, about the quality of what can be shot on Z1U. Now compare that to the quality you see in the markets you are trying to sell to - does it fit? Really? Could you make a trailer that a stranger would watch and say "I want to see that?"

Sorry for the blunt tone. Anyone wanting to know more about how viable Red One is for independent filmmaking, how you can do the whole thing in house, how to handle 4K or 2K or HD post affordably, what to buy to do it, can hire me on a consulting basis to address all these issues. I charge $150/hr for the service, and can cover a lot of ground in an hour or three. How much time and effort would it take you to figure it out on your own? How many non-recoverable mistakes might be made trying something new? How many "I wish I'd known that before I started" moments will you hit? I have yet to encounter a client that I didn't vastly cost justify for - that the cost of my services didn't save them far more time and money than they would have spent otherwise.
 

Thanks for your response. I apologize for my remarks as they were in fact inaccurate. I must state that I was not specific when I meant Red One is not viable for Indie Filmmakers...
I should have said STUDENT FILMMAKERS. Before I go any further let me justify this. In South Africa students just do not get the kind of funding American Film schools receive, you have no idea what it is like being a film student here. Our entire industry works on an entirely otherwise level. It is struggling. Here's why.... money!!!
Our most successful film to date was Tsotsi (2006 Academy winner Best Foreign Film). Anyway the way it works here is not like the way it works in the US. You see in this country so many people are more concerned about the sharpness of the picture on their film, than they are with the film itself. Now by sharpness I don’t mean resolution per say, but more how crisp the image is i.e. people seem to prefer shooting with f-stops of around 5.6 upwards yielding more depth-of-field and an image that is perceivably sharper. That is very harsh on the eye for me. *HD is very sharp, regardless of the camera.* 35mm has a feel that for me is more enjoyable to watch. "Apocalypto" by Mel Gibson was as we all know shot on the Panavision GENESIS. The film was very good, but the "look" was terrible. It looked like it was shot on my Panasonic DV cam. Yes duh I know my technical stuff mate, I know the optical system of the camera was superior if not the best in the world, and I know the resolution was 10X more than I could ever hope to achieve, the camera body is fantastic, the digital processing of the image in 4:4:4 is awesome, and the list is endless but what I’m saying is that it "looked" like consumer video just much sharper with better colour rendition and better contrast ratio and latitude. Where it failed, for me, was the scenes during the night, the shadows fell apart and the grain was crawling around. In certain parts of the movie it looked like cheap video, in others it matched 35mm.
Anyway back to the main point. I’ll admit that I was "rough" at best in my arguments. I simply rushed the typing and assumed my point was clear. What I meant to say was that for me as a film student in South Africa the RED One makes no difference to my productions. In our circumstances it is too expensive and would not yield a result any better than HDV or a good DV cam (Canon XL2…) would. Here, we do not receive enough money to be able to do a full blown professional short film the right way. Lots of my colleagues are running illegal copies of programs that allow them to 3D VFX, professionally mastered soundtracks & music, as well as the editing package. So anyone that does has to be very rich to afford all those programs. Trust me our rental system here is TOTALLY different to yours!! Some of our LOCAL camera rental companies quote you in dollars!!! What the hell!? I cannot even with R50 000 (+- $7000) afford to rent all the gear to shoot a short film. Stuff is expensive here, and for a student 50 grand here in SA is a lot of money... Here we pay nearly a third more than you guys do for an XL2!! Here an XL2 would be equivalent of about $3500! Insane!
I take in your point your point about the 16mm idea. I know I’ve been down that road it is expensive yes but I don’t think you have any idea how much these guys rip us off for rentals, and we were lucky that we’re students as we got 50% off. Even then that $7000 will never be enough to finish a film off here in a company based professional environment, never! You would need more than double that. We are forced to buy our own prosumer equipment and do it ourselves. This brings me to my point... For me my system could probably handle the editing and what not but the storage space is not sufficient and it would cost me to buy more hard disc space for the 4K or 2K footage RED RAW footage. You seem to dodge how much space it will simply occupy once it has left the set and is in the post-production pipeline ready for editing, please ignore who owns the drive just how much space it would take up? Again stressing that rental is way way way way way more expensive here. The companies will laugh at me if I ask them for machine time when it is off hours, even if I know somebody that works there, our system does not function the way yours does. So even if I got a RED for free it would not help me because our companies are world class but so are there prices. I recently recorded a voice over in a professional studio with a pro voice artist, it was R3000 ($450) and that was discounted already! I was only there for an hour! You see the South African rand does not stretch as far as the American dollar. That 3 grand out of my 50 grand budget is a large chunk considering an hour of studio time is nothing at all. So please factor in all the other factors into my budget of 50 grand and you see that to use a RED One would be too costly. For example let me look at my rental list and reel off some numbers for you, working on a 30min short film budgeted around R50 000 (+- $7000): for a week a Sony DVW 790 WSP will cost me R 20 000, including Sachtler Tripod, and cam accessories, no tape stock. Next: A Sennheiser 816 will cost me R 690 a week, just the mic no boom. The shittest dolly I could find is R 860 a week. A simple Redhead kit is R500 a week. For me to an edit suite edit my film is R2300 an hour, excluding the machine time and digitizing process of my tape stock to their database. Let’s say the give that to me for free. To do my audio is R660 an hour. Sounds EFX are R250 an hour, and let’s say someone is willing to donate a 25 minutes score for free, this saves me a HUGE amount of money! To transfer back out to HD is R1200 an hour. Let’s say I wanna get extravagant and I require 3 shots that have CG elements in them, say 20 - 50 seconds of CG animation. I’m talking a simple model that would be composited into 3 background FX plates. On Maya it is R5900 a day!
Ok lots of numbers: yes these numbers are always subject to fluctuation and changes. This comes to roughly: R 32360 ($4500), believe me this figure excludes sooooooo many things that will cost me and most are per day, so I hope you get the idea and point I’m trying to make!!!!?????. To me having R50 000 is like you having $50 000. My money simply does not stretch as far…
That’s where RED comes in, the prices I quoted remain the same regardless of RED, excluding of course the Sony DVW 790 WSP. You say quality is an important factor in a client buying your product, for whatever means, of course quality is a factor, and I agree 1000% so shooting on even an Xl2 is out the picture. Add RED into the picture and the price for me in South Africa will quadruple! I can assure you! Regardless of how you can do it there, for me to do it the professional “right” way as a student will not work. I’m sure I can do all these things on a Mac or PC with cracked versions of Photoshop, Maya, and AVID, Adobe Premiere, FCP etc... Let’s say I can afford a few legal programs so I’ll spend a few thousand on other programs, still the point is you cannot run on a cracked system forever… Hence me saying that a Sony HDR Z1 is better for me as I can work with it in an efficient pipeline from production right through post-production and it would require no more effort than SD DV , I reread my article and it makes little sense I know, sorry. Sounds like I was saying HDV with its MPEG compression is better than 4K RED RAW. The only way for me to use RED would be to try and use my own equipment or use friends of mine, and as it stands only one pal of mine has a better spec machine than I do, because he is 4 years older and has a lot more money than I do. RED would therefore be more expensive and hence my argument.

"As for viability of 4K post...you haven't done your homework on Redcode and Redcine." Please elaborate...?? What do you think Im missing?
 

"...not in the economic pool that Red was targeting - simple as that." I agrreed with that statement. And its frustrating I would like to shoot on it. Great picture quality-reasonable price.

But I agree with the guy above to some extent. He does have a point that students are not really the target audience here. What he wants say but cant say it in shorter words is: only the lucky ones can use red. It is obvious that it was not meant for students, only guys like you mike who seem to have no problem finding money for all this premium camera equipment. The dude is in a no budget league with the rest of us film guys who make our own dollies, cranes and wat not.. I have a 1CCD sony video camera. But i dont care, im more interested in the content of my film. I assure you that knowing a film was sourced from a red 4k camera will not change my opinion on the film it will mean a terrible film will still be a terible film, the only difference that its a very very high picture quality shit film.

'Stealth' would still be shit if it was shot in 25K, and Lord of the rings will still be as great as it is regardless of the fact that it was super35mm.

otherwise interesting site, keep up the work :-)
 

Anonymous - thanks for the detailed response, it helps me understand your circumstances better.

A few notes/responses:

-ouch, the rates/fees/taxes there blow. Sorry to hear that, you have my sincere sympathy.

I would respectfully differ, strongly, about the image quality of Red One vs. HDV or XL2, even for standard def DVD deliverables. Good, clean, low noise, good exposure lattitude, etc., above and beyond the capabilities of those cameras. It would have been very instructive had you been able to see the Peter Jackson short projected in a theater as intended - it looks really, really good...shot with HDV, you'd have visible compression artifacts, clipped highlights, less subtle color rendition, etc.

I too was once a starving artist type, getting by on "remote backup installs" of expensive software until I could afford it. I know what that is like. I think there is a quiet level of acceptance that some of that is necessary, and sometimes (if of limited duration) useful to software companies if folks will pony up and buy full copies when they "grow up" into self-sustaining professionals.

As for what to do with the data, more on that coming up on the blog, but consider that Redcode RAW can be backed up for around $20/hr on the proper medium - that's a small fraction of what HDCAM or DVCPRO HD tapes cost for same duration (How to do that? For paying clients).

If in the end the Z1U is better for you because that is as much budget as you have...absolutely true. As a student, however, I gently admonish that not being able to afford a fully professional level camera to shoot with, working with bootleg copies of software, not being able to afford the post you want...you're not yet in the game, economically speaking - you're off the radar. As tools get cheaper (witness Color as a great example), more things will come within your reach and grasp.

4K post - even a Macbook Pro can edit it natively. Or convert it to something that edits the way you want it. if you can't afford to archive your digital negative, then archive your downconverted version (but how much space are you saving really, chug the math before ditching the 4K data, unless you're mastering with 720p24 DVCPRO HD.).

Note the datarates of Redcode RAW, note that it'll be a QuickTime codec, note the above archival requirements, etc.

Red is a professional camera and does require SOME professional infrastructure.

To paraphrase from a movie, but gently, if you're not ready to play at this level, kid, don't show up and complain.

Again, at your present budget constraints you're not in Red's target demographic.

But wait a while for that Red Mini - that may be right up your alley.

-mike
 

To the guy that posted while I was writing my own response above - yep, Red is for those who can afford it. As is a Lexus, or a Honda, or a bicycle, or a stick of gum. For every item in the world, some can afford it, some can't, that's just reality. I'd really, REALLY like a Ford F40 supercar, but I can't swing it (TL, I'm thinking of YOU!). ;p

Such is life.

For both of you, Red One is Red's first camera. Perhaps the Red Mini will be more to your liking.

As for would LOTR have been as good on a lesser format - the story would still be good, but like when I saw Pieces of April, I thought to myself "Wow, great cast! But what are they doing shooting on DV? This looks like crap compared to what it could be..." It was distracting.

If you're going to tell a spectable movie, spectacle requires a quality image.

For those that say story matters, YES! IT DOES! And it still gets done poorly so often. There's a gut level vibe of production value vs. quality that we have as Americans, good or bad, that's what it is. Screening movies looking at Tim League's screeners last night, 5 minutes into something with poopy DV production value we stopped it - it was kinda boring, nothing happening yet, and we could all subconciously sniff the suckitude -

If they couldn't get funding to shoot it worth a damn, what are the odds that it'll be good?

Low.

For the student above complaining that he can't afford what it takes to shoot quality...I think it is a far, far better thing to make something tiny that is GOOD rather than something large that is mediocre.

If your production value sucks, people notice it usually, and it distracts from what you want folks to pay attention to. Like showing up for a job interview in ratty jeans and hole laden t-shirt - what do you think they're paying attention to? Should they be distracted in a perfect world? No. But they are.

Such is life.
 

And also:

NOTE TO ANONYMOUS POSTERS - IF YOU INSIST ON POSTING ANONYMOUSLY, AT LEAST SIGN YOUR NAME AT THE END.

It is tough to take you seriously if you hide.

Anonymous posting is a priviledge, not a right.

Management (ahem, me) reserves the right to change that at any time.

Not that anybody is out of line in this thread at this point (appreciate the lengthy contextualizing post), but it needs to be said.

-The Management (mike)
 

"Stealth" commenter with the 1CCD camera. If you're shooting for yourself and happy with it, GREAT.

But good luck selling that commerically to anyone else. 4K counts there.

You can miss the mark in lots of ways - creatively (Stealth) or technically (1CCD DV). Ya gotsta get'em all right to make a commercially viable product. And commercially viable means you make enough money to live and eat and pay rent and get the next one going.

-mike
 

...or I may delete sufficiently annoying Anonymous posts.

Hiding and sniping not acceptable.

-mike
 

Its nice to some responses to this guys' comments hey people??

although the tit that started it all does not know his tech stuff...

look at all the activity!!??
From John :-)
 

[Enter Post Title Here]



I am 'Anonymous' writing longs posts... Name is Samuel.

Sorry I seem to be out of league here, I heard about this camera and thought it would be cheaper cause the name doesnt do much for its status.

But Im a frustrated filmmaker and people always are more concerned with the technical stuff and are more interested to shoot me down if i say im still on 3ccd SD. I simply cannot afford even HDV yet i feel i deserve the chance to make my films. Obviously im not selling my films for theatrical distribution so my image quality is as it is. However in my opinion i think its crap that somebody should look at my film and complain that it was not shot in HD when i cant afford it. I agree that the tech specs of the Red rival those of Genesis, D20 and Thompson Viper, i understand that. But im saying why cant i shoot on hdv (assuming i get it oneday..) and people just get on with it?

Just as an example HDV is better than SD DV. In all aspects.. I was personally invloved in a project last year that i was required, with the help of friends, to make a corporate video for this company. They held the event in the biggest cinema in south africa. We shoot all our footage on my friends Xl2 and it was projected digitally onto the screen. Nobody said anything, and in all honesty for that size it held well. Thats only cause its an XL2 and Canon are legends!! Point is, yes its grainy, little soft, crushed highlights etc.. it did NOT detract from the viewing experience at all.

As for the guy commenting on the other guys post on LOTR. I think he wasnt saying LOTR should have been shot on SD. He was saying that OBVIOUSLY YOU CANT RELEASE A MAJOR HOLLYWOOD BLOCKBUSTER IN A SHIT GRAINY, PIXELATED, AND SOFT RELEASE PRINT!!! That would be dumb. He was saying that 35mm is more than fine, there is nothing wrong with it. It is sharp, not the sharpest. But its been the standard for over a hundred years and frankly I dont think we need quality higher than that?

The core of this whole nice discusion we are having boils down to: why 4K actually? 35mm is sharp enough what is wrong with it?? The only thing i can think of is price?
In all honesty feature films have always worked this way... A last point to ponder... Im scared to think that with cams like RED and the future of digital cinema projections and the concept that films should be premiered as a live broadcast, or released onto DVD, BLu-ray, HD DVD whatever format. What that will mean is a gradual collapse of the Hollywood filmmaking system as we know it. I mean it could end up being that any guy can should on the same camera as the pros and release his film just as easily into the mainstream market. NO WAY!! That’s crap! TV is a killer! Think about it even the biggest consumer home HD TV is not as big as a cinema screen, the res is 1920X1080……… So again if one day 20 years from now cinema dies and films are released digitally why then just not stay with current HD Resolutions??? I know why because after broadcast and the steps to get it to ur tv its compressed somewhat. Not DVDs as much though.

Samuel

PS im not being difficult im merely wanting to express my views however insane, irrational or immature they may be.
 

Samuel - all well thought out, reasonable discussions welcome here. I'm Mike, nice to meet you.

Coupla reactions:

-if the Hollywood system as we know it fell apart, I wouldn't cry too hard if there were a viable alternative

-Japanese firms were demoing 8K at IBC & NAB for 10-20 years from now.

-the market will merely follow what people want - and if the Hollywood system and theatrical distribution wanes...such is life. Horses were a great way to get around.

(so long as I can still drive 7 minutes to Alamo Drafthouse, however, as I'm about to for Hot Fuzz)

Don't feel you're being difficult (after corrections after your first post).

Practice with the tools you can get access to - an artist must be prolific to grow....but the world doesn't owe you access to high level tools, don't forget - it isn't pre-ordained/destined to all work out.

-mike
 

Thanks Mike.

I just think a major bottle-neck is gonna creep in soon with regards to home cinema. The trend is towards home viweing of DVDs. So, there will be a point where consumers will stop forking out cash for the next gen TV or DVD system. At least in SA because trust me here reactions to films are different! People dont cheer in the cinemas, even if they like it. Our cinemas are quite small and its getting expensive to watch movies. Renting one DVD is the same as 1 movie is the same price.


HOT FUZZ IS AWESOME!!! I saw it today an loved it! Don't care what anyone says.

just a thought, this is totally away from RED and previous topics. The Canon range of HDV cameras? Any word on them?

For us guys at the bottom!:-)

Sam
 

if the trend is towards home viewing (and has been for many many years, why on earth would people stop upgrading their TVs? Then it is time for HDTVs and HD-DVD/Blu-ray.
 

Perhaps people wont just have the desire do fork out the cash everytime a new format is introduced? Come on! It needs to stop at one for a while say a 5 years then upgrade!! The rest of the world needs to catch up

Sam
 

Sam - which is one of the nice things about Red's format - should have some legs...
 

Hi Mike!

Red sounds cool. Could I edit it on my core 2 duo?

Iv read as much as i can and i think i understand Redcine. It basically lets u capture and edit with the 4k but at a *downrezed size so that it doesnt take up space and massive cpu power* Right? then when u filmout or export to hd u can then select 4k making it not nessesary to actually with the full 4k in the edit suite? Right?

Sorry im not sure?

Thanks


LEO
 

Or not?

Leo
 

leo - Redcode is a codec that FCP 6.x (future version) will let you edit natively the 4K RAW @ 1K or 2K proxy res on the fly no pre-rendering needed. Just drop on timeline and go. Requires MacBook Pro or Mac Pro.

Redcine is an application that will convert Redcode to...pretty much any format you want (or any codec you have installed on your system) - then can edit with any NLE you choose.

-mike
 

Hi Mike
Its Samuel...

Id like to apologize for all of my entire comments on RED. I have now done my homework on RED its workflow, aswell as all other areas of digital NLE edit pipelines. I see how 'the magic' happens.

I CLEARLY was wrong with just about every comment on it. So sorry for the rude things said.

No bad feelings??
 

Hey Samuel -

All good. This site is about getting info out on how to make movies without breaking the bank. Your questions were worth asking.

Good luck!

-mike
 

I've just read some heavy articles now on REd vs SI-2K. Very good stuff.

I came across this section, "SI-2K: As I mentioned in the form factor section at the beginning of this beast of an article, the SI-2K can operate as a camcorder or as a split shooting head/DVR setup. Another big, BIG thing they've announced is support for non-destructive LUTs, including 3D LUTs, that can be associated with the footage on a shot by shot basis."

What is LUT?

Sam
 

"Redcode RAW 4K @24p is about the same datarate as 10 bit uncompressed SD - datarate is going to be in the 24-28 MB/sec range as soon as Graeme gets done tinkering with it."

This was a response to an early post by me, iv since read the following:

- REDCODE RAW is 12 bit, RAW Bayer sampling, and has a bitrate of 220Mbits/s...... Not 24-28Mbits/s unless that transfer rate is from camera to the RAID hard disk array? But then how would it change when 'dumping' the footage onto your editing pipeline?

Sam
 

Sam - 220mbits=27.5MB/sec.

Keep reading up on the workflow...
 

Sorry didnt read properly 1024bytes = 1 megabyte.

duh :-)

Thanks for all the great info. I appreciate it!!!!!!

sam
 

Sorry but i got info from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cinematography#Digital_Intermediate_Workflow

But according to the chart 'digital acquisition codecs compared' that cant be right, right? they list it differently

sam