FORUMS: list search recent posts

The Red Shift.

COW Forums : RED Camera

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
The Red Shift.
on Sep 12, 2007 at 2:57:31 pm

I


Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 12, 2007 at 8:25:13 pm

The HDCAM EX is an HD camera as is it's bigger brothers, the 350 and the F-900. This was never intended to be an answer all camera for HD & SD.


Return to posts index

jiri vrozina
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 12, 2007 at 8:29:34 pm

I think Bill most of the guys will be looking for camera which is "FUTUREPROOF".....20 years ago you would buy Sony Betacam and be OK for 5-10 years.Today,every year there is different format and camera.Just check out how many SD-HD formats Sony has available.

Who knows-perhaps RED Camera will be THAT camera for High End for next 10 years.I really hope so..


Return to posts index


Steve Wargo
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 12, 2007 at 8:31:22 pm

[Bill Davis] " I saw some news about the XDCAM EX and was a bit disappointed to read that it


Return to posts index

jiri vrozina
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 12, 2007 at 8:37:41 pm

I like the idea of camera which can do it ALL properly.
I own camera which is OK for HD but not so good in SD.
It should be technically possible in 2007.


Return to posts index

Ben Kupfer
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 2:30:23 am

The Sony PDW F350 (XDCAM HD) can shoot in SD and HD. Just a menu switch away (of course, you'll have to use a new disc formatted in the format you've programmed)


Return to posts index


jiri vrozina
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 3:53:42 am

I have this type of camera and it does not do it for me.


Return to posts index

Ben Kupfer
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 10:09:22 am

I too own this camera.

The PDW-F350 offers HD recording in 1080/59.94i, 50i, 29.97P, 25P and native 23.98P and the operator can also select the desired bit rate to record in, either 35, 25 or 18 Mb/s depending on the desired picture quality and recording length. Being a dual format camcorder, it can also record in SD mode at 25 Mb/s (DVCAM


Return to posts index

jiri vrozina
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 8:48:27 pm

I know Ben,but quality of SD picture especially is nothing special...HD is OK.
My old Thomson 140 and Panasonic 910 had better quality.


Return to posts index


Ben Kupfer
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 8:52:39 pm

You're right. It's nothing special. Once you shoot HD, it's really really hard to shoot SD. I did find it held up well next to my DVCAM camcorder...


Return to posts index

jiri vrozina
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 9:03:39 pm

Sony's own DSR-450 has got better pictures in SD then F350 or F330....even if one downconverts from HD to SD.
Same goes for Pana 2100 or HPX-500...and i hear the same about HDCAM900 too. If you want the best SD quality you shoot on SD camera like SDX900....but I understand why people shoot HD and buy HD cameras in 2007.That is why I bought F330,but pictures(EVEN HD)is nothing special.
....better stop now-this is RED forum.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 12:00:04 am

But it's germain if we're discussing how well a RED camera footage does or does not fit the need to occasionally downconvet and deliver to SD - something I imagine nearly ALL users will need to do at some point. (High Rez HD conent downconverted to SD DVD for legacy compatibility, etc.)

Increasinly of concern, BTW, since the FCC announced TODAY that they're requiring brodcasters to retain SD legacy support for at LEAST another 5 years. (to 2012)

One surprising experience I've had since I invested in an HD broadcast television is how bad SD television footage looks when displayed on it's native 1080i raster.

It's blocky and pretty ugly. I expect that's the result of mapping the SD pixel array to the HD native rez of the screen.

Up-conversion seems to be a lot more friendly than down-conversion to picture quality.

Anyone else experience this?



Return to posts index


jiri vrozina
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 1:53:45 am

[Bill Davis] "Up-conversion seems to be a lot more friendly than down-conversion to picture quality.

Anyone else experience this?"


Exactly-same here.
HD is good if you stay in HD.Also I find some tapless forms of HD and SD to have "plastic" look and skin tones.That is if one looks on CRT HD Monitor.
I am sure now if you want to have better HD picure then leading SD cameras-then it really starts with HD cameras like HDCAM 900R or HDX900 or new Pana 3000....there is a step forward.


Return to posts index

Mitch Ives
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 2:32:24 pm

[Steve Wargo] "The HVX can do both but it only has a SD chip anyway so Panasonic increases the resolution electronically. Is that really what we should be doing? "

You really need to quit saying that, as it isn't correct...


Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 15, 2007 at 1:57:50 am

Mitch, Mitch, Mitch

Is the following statement true?

"Detail and sharpness: The HVX200 has 960 x 540 CCDs, so its limiting resolution is low; adding detail enhancement improves the apparent sharpness of the image."

I do not consider anything under 720 to be HD. Not in 2007. Maybe 25 years ago, but not now. If you look at the history of television, you'll find that, at one time, anything over 405 lines of horizontal resolution was considered HD. France had a TV standard of 815 lines at one time.

One question though. Because PAL is 625 lines, is a widescreen PAL camera an HD camera? If not, why not? I just refuse to buy into Panasonic's bag of tricks. 540 lines is 540 lines unless your brand of math is different than mine.


SD PAL 16x9 widescreen would be 1,111x625, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Definition_Television



Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It's a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut Pro systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck


Return to posts index


donatello
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 15, 2007 at 4:52:23 pm

come on - you're not up on the latest !!
the HVX is really a "2k HD native resolution" camera ..
you all need to learn the new math from reel stream ( hydra HVX camera) ...

http://www.reel-stream.com/



Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
To Clarify something
on Sep 15, 2007 at 5:37:47 pm

By no means do I fault Panasonic for anything. I think they put out a fantastic product for the price and the way they developed the 24p thing in an NTSC signal is somewhat amazing at the least. However, unless you start with a 2007 HD spec chip, the rest is electronic enhancement like pixel shifting or whatever the process may be.

Two things on the HVX do not work for me. 1. The fact that overblown highlights turn yellow. 2. The P2 workflow. I think P-2 is absolutely the answer for news and short clips, but not for long form production.

That being said, we are going to take a serious look at the EX when it's available. Did everyone, and you know who you are, read that part? "When it's available".

Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It's a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut Pro systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck


Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
An answer for Mitch
on Sep 18, 2007 at 5:36:09 am

Tim Kolb lays it all out in terms that I could not...

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/126/858151

Once again, I am not saying that the image from the HVX200 is not very good, the cips are waht they are and the processing is what makes it all happen.



Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It's a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut Pro systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck


Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
Re: An answer for Mitch
on Sep 18, 2007 at 5:37:36 am

[Steve Wargo] "the cips are waht they are"

"the chips are what they are" sorry bout that



Return to posts index

Leo Ticheli
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 12, 2007 at 8:45:22 pm

Just to get the 16x9 thing out of the way, if you're not prepared to shoot wide screen, you're hanging out with dinosaurs in the bright light of a rapidly descending meteor. Monitors in the 4x3 format are on the way out, thankfully, since 16x9 is far more aesthetically pleasing.

The RED camera will fill a certain segment of the market, and by the way, it's not just about higher resolution, it's about shallow depth of field, variable frame rates, and overall image quality. Those who imagine it's all things to all men are mistaken. I don't believe RED has marketed thus, but some fanboys have been, well, expansive.

I believe the RED body weighs around 15 pounds; add my 18-100 Cooke at 12 pounds and throw on an Anton Bauer battery, LCD screen, viewfinder, gigantic matte box and follow focus, and you've got your hands full. Yes, you can configure it lighter for applications like SteadiCam, but it's no DVX200.

There is a plethora of relatively inexpensive cameras for those applications that do not require the highest possible image quality but do require rapid, small-crew production scenarios. I happen to think many of them do an admirable job and they just keep getting better. RED is not going to change that.

The fine folks at RED have announced that they are working on a "pocket RED;" if they bring the same kind of innovation to that, they could put a serious dent in that market as well, but for now it's just speculation.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 12:03:10 am

I understand where you're coming from, but I couldn't disagree more. It's exactly this kind of "if you're not doing digital cinema, you're out of the loop" thinking that I'm trying to address here.

For instance, my single most profitible job last year was a video project for a large corporate client where we shot a couple of dozen content experts against greenscreen, packaged a series of 100+ short clips as "knocked out" avatars to run against still images for excellent compression results via FLASH web delivery.

The useful part of my delivered video was simply the talking heads. I would have gained NOTHING by shooting this on 16x9. But I DID need the better color space and resolution of a pro camera.

Again, I told that long story about my weekend because it struck me that the reality of the DELIVERY medium we're all faciing is changing a LOT - and a huge chunk of those opportunities are still NOT in the higher rez larger screen space, but rather in the smaller screen/lower resolution spaces.

And I think that's worth discussing.

Yeah, I saw one VERY HUGE ULTRA HIGH REZ screen while in VEGAS. I also saw about a thousand 16x9 plasma or LCD screens and you know, most of them were NOT showing actual High-def content. They were largely standard def matted into digital signage. High def STILL IMAGE signage, or SD enlargements.

And it would be hard to convince me that any of that signage/display stuff would pop more if they tried to serve high-def. (any more than the little display ads bordering this page right now would "pop" more if their resolution suddently trippled at their current size.)

I KNOW what Red is going to be GREAT for. Indy feature and Digital Cinema Stuff. But I'm looking for how it's going to affect the WIDER production industry.

And backwards compatibility with the HUGE bulk of current US screens is a pretty big issue, isn't it?



Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 2:38:26 am

I couldn't agree more with the concept of "what is our bread and butter". Almost all of my big paying jobs are SD and only about 25% are 16x9. But, that is changing, quickly.

The TV commercial market is no longer SD unless you're talking local. We have been shooting 16x9 HDCAM since September 2002 and 50% goes to 4x3 SD downconverts. A lot of the remainder goes to SD letterbox 4x3 but we get the full 16x9 across the screen. Everybody, please don't give me a lecture on why we do what we do. It's not my call. It's the client who ultimatly decides. Many times. they want the black boxes for graphics. We prefer other ways but they still come in wanting quad splits. I think they went out with black and white.

Sone decided to make the EX an HD only camera because it already had an HD chip set and they save money by limiting the functionality.

Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It's a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut Pro systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck


Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 7:57:45 am

[Bill Davis] " I saw some news about the XDCAM EX and was a bit disappointed to read that it


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 5:10:05 pm

Ok, Gary.

SD is dead. I'll note that to my cable company (still feeding 90% of it's offerings in 4x3 SD), my local mall (90% of digital signage in 16x9 SD) my kids school (100% SD classroom displays) and my biggest clients (aggregately about 2200 retail stores running all their VHS/DVD/and CBT training via SD content - that their needs aren't important to me. And that they all have to change to HD or the industry won't provide content services for them.

Silly, huh.

Look, I know HD at high rez is the future. But I keep getting FOOLED about when that future is going to be a reality - and I don't think a single camear - as revolutionary as it is, is going to change that too much.

Just look at the LONG, drawn out, ongoing change to HD from standard def SD. Rather than RUSHING to it, the great consumer population is being dragged ASTONISHINGLY SLOWLY towards it.

How many times has the FCC had to back off it's spectrum shift deadlines? 4? 5? 6?

Seems to me that in the last 10 of the 20 YEARS of my NAB attendence I've been constantly told to prepare for an all HD world, but in practical reality, only 2 out of the 5 major broadcasters in my market (Phoenix) have switched to HD broadcasting as of TODAY! And look who hasn't. CNN, MSNBC, (heck, if i listed them all here I'd be typing for a week...)

I understand preparing for the future. I also understand not getting AHEAD of the future.

All I'm trying to say - particularly for the fence sitters reading this thread - is that for practitioners, even PROFESSIONAL practitioners of the video industry - there are compelling reasons both TO adopt and NOT TO bet your future on an investment in significantly higher rez production.

And my reasons for saying that are based on looking less at current Hardware capabilities - which is undeniably where the big HD revolution is happenng, but rather at DELIVERY opportunitis - at what is being PAID FOR by real world clients right now.

If you want to try to break your way into the movie distribution system - by all means GO FOR IT. If your practice is CURRENTLY delivering to high def screens - whether they're Plasma's in dentists' offices or submitting for Discovery HD - again, GO FOR IT.

But for the VAST majority of working producers, these aren't particularly large or (and this is critical to my thinking) DEVELOPABLE markets ... YET. Not compaired to the INCREDIBLE number of people still consuming SD video. So an investment in high rez high def ONLY tools, requires a CAREFUL approach.

I've seen lots of friends in the industry invest in gear that didn't produce a significant return compared to other investments they could have made. Modest priced specialty items like Teleprompters, Spider Pods, or HMI lighting don't necessarily return much to the bottom line UNLESS you have clients that regularly need them.

And I think very high rez camera equip is a bit the same right now.

I have a business that can easily afford it - but not a client base that currently cares about it. And when I need it, the Rental Houses will probably serve me well until the need actually develops in my practice.

My current thinking, anyway. It could change tomorrow if a client asked for it. But not until then.

FWIW.




Return to posts index

Leo Ticheli
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 6:32:07 pm

Hi Bill, my dear Luddite friend,

This is really very simple; we're talking about acquisition. It always pays to begin with the highest quality possible, especially when both HD and the rapidly dwindling offerings of SD are so similar in price.

The central flaw in your argument is the assertion that HD cameras are somehow less suitable for SD delivery. Nothing could be further from reality. In point of fact, HD cameras produce better SD images than SD cameras.

Perhaps you will never produce a job destined for HD display; you will still be better off capturing the images in HD. When the HD job is presented to you, you'll be ready.

I'm not saying a fully tricked out RED is right for you, but there are many HD choices covering a full gamut of price levels.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo




Return to posts index

jiri vrozina
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 8:54:15 pm

[Leo Ticheli] "The central flaw in your argument is the assertion that HD cameras are somehow less suitable for SD delivery. Nothing could be further from reality. In point of fact, HD cameras produce better SD images than SD cameras."

This is not true.Last 2 months i have been researching this.Please name me one HD camera which has got better SD pictures then Pana SDX900 or Thomson SD cameras.I really tested most of them last 2 months.


Return to posts index

donatello
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 9:16:13 pm

if your clients are all SD and you see future clients as SD then it seems pretty clear on what camera to buy ...
i have alway found the BEST camera is the one you buy ( doesn't matter what it is sony or pixel vision - you buy it - it's the best)





Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 10:08:15 pm

One very important thing to remember here: The client will be much more inclined to stay with you and possibly pay more if they know that you are shooting on the latest technology. As I said in an earlier post, most of my HDCAM gets directly dropped to DVCAM SD 4x3. And why? Because the producer has convinced the client that it is better for the product if it is shot in HD, sort of like shooting on film. How many commercials, shot in 35mm are ever transfered to anything better than DigiBeta? So, why shoot in 35? Might as well shoot with an SDX900.

Does it make total sense? Not really - to the average person. But to clients who want the best, You bet it does.

You know Bill, that client of yours with 2200 outlets was my client for their first ten years in business but they kept squeezing and squeezing for a discount here and a discount there and one day, I said good by and haven't looked back since. They've had a changing of the guard and you are obviously charging more than they were willing to pay back then (87-97)and maybe they'll pay another 10% if you start shooting in HD. It could lead to a lot more stuff. And, sooner or later, everyone else is going to want it or they'll feel cheated. I started my company in 82 or so, shooting with a single tube camera and portable VHS deck. All of my clients since then have asked for something a little better.

By the way, all of our digital signage jobs are done in 720p HD. The clients feel as though they have the best there is, because I told them so, and it doesn't cost me a dime more to produce it.

Next time I can tell you about my WalMart story.



Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It's a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut Pro systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 11:50:10 pm

Just to keep the record straight, Steve, the particular client you're referring to is only currently up to about 980 stores. The balance come from other retailers I work with. But I agree with a lot of your central points.

One of the l professional speakers I used to regularly tape during my days shooting for the National Speakers Associaiation used to talk about how Soutwest Airlines built their business. While other airlines were promising at a level of 60 and delivering 40. They were promising 30 (peanuts) and delivering 65. It's a sound business strategy.

A lot of people are thinking that Red and other technologies will allow them to promote a HUGE bump in quality. But I'm not so sure. Because it's NEVER the camera itself that produces quality - it's ALWAYS the brain behind it that does.

In the hands of quality operators, the Red is a dream come true. And it will serve incredibly well the slice of operators who already have paid their dues and are prepared to take the next step up.

For everyone else, I don't think RED or any other camera is going to make a whole lot of difference.

Because if you don't know how to shoot superb content with an XL-1, you won't be able to do it with a RED.

When I was on the road lecturing for the magazine for all those years, the best received lecture line in my presentation was always: "It's not the PIANO, it's the piano PLAYER that matters."

Still true in the era of RED.


Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
Sorry Bill
on Sep 14, 2007 at 1:27:25 am

Sorry Bill, I wasn"t talking about you and Red. I Was talking about you and something above SD, with a JVC 250 or 200 being the unit of choice.



Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It's a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut Pro systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Sorry Bill
on Sep 14, 2007 at 6:01:48 am

Steve,

I didn't take anything you said as anywhere near requiring an apology.

And I hope I didn't post anything misinterperatively offensive or even vaguely techy either.

It's an interesting discussion and I'm enjoying it.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 11:23:06 pm

Leo,

Hold a moment while my wife stops laughing....

The fact that someone would accuse me of ANY resemblence to any of old Ned Ludd's followers is a hoot, surrounded as I am daily with a studio full of state of the art technology.

But that aside, it's pretty hard to defend paying for very high rez or high def equipment, if your eventual delivery modality is going to typically consist of substantially less rez.

It's like being in the photograhy business and knowing that the VAST majority of your work will be published halftoned in the local paper at 65dpi, but insisting that all the work be shot on an 8x10 View camera.

The tool doesn't match the need.

If you're going to buy that tool, you SHOULD be aiming your work at web presses or, (bringing the analogy back to video) high rez display screens.

Something that there are still VERY few of out there.

Note the total lack of full 4k workflows being discussed, even tho there is now a camera fully capable of producing footage at that rez. EVERYONE is having to downrez for editorial or adapt a proxy based workflow.

That will change. But it's clear that currently the camera is producing HIGHER rez than the market typically needs. We'll see how time changes that.

Fun discussion, anyway.

(and thanks for making my lovely wife laugh - it's among my favorite sounds!)



Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 2:42:54 am

[Bill Davis] "t's like being in the photograhy business and knowing that the VAST majority of your work will be published halftoned in the local paper at 65dpi, but insisting that all the work be shot on an 8x10 View camera.

The tool doesn't match the need.
"



Being a former shooter ( and still owner of an 8x10 view camera)

that is a correct analogy - with the wrong conclusion, that tool (a view camera) was chosen for the need for the meticulous detail and controlled production needed. NOT for the final output.
in this case the tool was chosen for the onset need for this level of production - not the final output. Kinda Like shooting film for broadcast TV....or HD.



gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows


Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 2:34:54 am

[Leo Ticheli] "Hi Bill, my dear Luddite friend, "

Ouch... < but astute >

"I'm not saying a fully tricked out RED is right for you, but there are many HD choices covering a full gamut of price levels. "

Agreed, the work is out there, I have not done anything but HD since 2001, I have never looked back, I you are waiting for some miraculous switch to be thrown enabling HD for all?

Do you own an HD Receiver? do you watch it at home? IF your not a consumer of HD you should not be shooting it either,




gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 5:55:58 am

[Leo Ticheli] "Hi Bill, my dear Luddite friend, "

Ouch... < but astute >


BTW, not to belabor the point, but if you remember much about the Luddites other than the name and the general anti-technology reference, you might recall that a lot of what made them famous was NOT necessarily their anger at the rise of machine weaving over hand operation in and of itself, but rather the fact that that change directly led to DOWNWARD pressure on weaver WAGES.

They were MORE concerned with the new technology LOWERING THEIR STANDARD OF LIVING than they were with the techology itself.

THAT might be a lesson in the current technology shift that's actually worth studying.

A herd of new RED RANGERS entering the marketplace with kits costing significantly less than the existing practitioners???

I sure hope it's not gonna affect day rates at the top end of the production spectrum in the same way that, for example, lower cost computerized typesetting tools affected the Linotronic shops of the 90s when desktop typesetting pretty much gutted the existing professional typesetting industry in the space of a few years.

Worth considering since we're on a historical bent in the thread.




Return to posts index

Eric Susch
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 3:48:41 pm

[Bill Davis] "I know HD at high rez is the future."

Bill,

Our industry isn't changing from one thing to another (SD to HD.) It's changing from one thing, to everything. SD's not going to go away just like radio didn't go away in the 50's when TV came on the scene.

You need to integrate the other point you made in your original post about YouTube. That's not a separate industry. It's all the same.

Check out these well known video podcasts.

http://www.rocketboom.com/
http://geekbriefwp.podshow.com/
http://pixelcorps.tv/macbreak

They're all shooting in HD, delivering to iPods, AND delivering HD (to computers and AppleTV) simultaneously. You need to shoot in a high quality format not because of any high-rez delivery market, but because you need the flexibility to deliver in ALL formats, possibly ones that don't even exist yet.

I do agree however, with your general inference that you need to keep a low overhead to survive as a business.

____________________________________

Eric Susch

http://www.LetsKnit2gether.com

http://www.ElectronicSprocket.com




Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 4:34:33 pm

So Eric, is the idea here that Andrew Barron and the team at Rocketboom would be somehow better served switching to acquisition via RED in say 2k - as opposed to their current business model that shoots on "consumer level" camcorders that happen to have a 16x9 mode?

I'm pretty sure they're shooting SD widescreen - NOT HD (even HDV unless they're transcoding prior to injest.

All I'm trying to say is that there are produdction targets (features, large screen projection, scientific imaging, etc) where REDs design promise is both important, revolutionary, and well worth persuing. And a LOT of production targets ( I suspect MANY more) where it just doesn't fit very well.

That SAME thing can be said about those who try to achieve the things that RED promises to do so excellently (moviemaking) with cameras at the wrong rez, (XL1s etc)

In the absence of the early reports that we're all waiting for from the early adopters, I'm just trying to generate some discussion that moves away from the well deserved HYPE of the RED SYSTEM - and talks about the REALITY of the camera's featurs and workflow and where it fits.

Surely you're not arguing that RED has any place in the workflow of the vidcast shows you mention. I don't even want to imagine the massive server farm needed to archive a DAILY show's RED generated production output on HDDs

The mind boggles!



Return to posts index

Eric Susch
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 14, 2007 at 8:32:21 pm

[Bill Davis] "I'm pretty sure they're shooting SD widescreen - NOT HD (even HDV unless they're transcoding prior to injest."

Well, I actually know Andrew. I'm in NY too. He shoots with a Sony HC1. They've been shooting HDV 1080i for over a year and 1/2 now.

http://www.rocketboom.com/vlog/rb_06_feb_27

Of course footage from their field volunteers and the web stuff is "whatever" resolution. Check out their HD feed if you want:

http://www.movedigital.com/go/rocketboom

The HC1 is small, not intimidating, and good for the type of thing they do at Rocketboom. RED would not be good for them but that has nothing to do with its resolution or picture quality.

We actually use an HC1 for our show too:

http://www.LetsKnit2gether.com

...for the "field trip" episodes.

As a side note: Our newest and possibly best field trip episode is going up tonight or tomorrow depending on when I stop typing this and finish the color correction! We actually go to a Mets baseball game at Shay stadium. I shot lots of interviews actually right in the stands with people watching the game. The small light camera and my exceptional contortionist abilities made that possible. Not something you could do with a RED.

Our other camera though is a JVC HD-110 which we use for all the demonstration shows. RED could work well for this type of work. I actually looked into the Silicon Graphics camera before I bought the JVC but they weren


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 21, 2007 at 6:14:15 pm

Some interesting points, Eric.

I don't know about the NY stuff, but I did a presentation last year at the SF School of Digitia Filmmaking where most of the Pixel Corps stuff is shot and saw their setup in person. When I was there, they were using one 950 and one 900. Also, their production flow was to shoot a whole bunch of shows in a single day and their goal is to squeeze as much production efficiency as possible out of each booked studio day. They were recording direct to hard drives, and yes, mastering in HD, but I dont' believe they ever delivered that original HD content anywhere. It was just on the drives, and all their show was always delivered substantially "compressed" for web delivery. I have to question whether that's the best approach. For a program that has real chances of HD delivery, like a sitcom or digital feature, it makes sense, but for a technology show where the content is constantly being made obsolete by hardware advances, I find it kinda strange.

They're left with stacks and stacks of raw drives as their backup system. (IIRC, they use cheap drives with a snap on interface, and after the shoots, they archive the footage by archiving these drives)

That's a process that makes me VERY uncomfortable.

Again, I'm not arguing against HD, just trying to find it's proper place in the overall scope of video production. And I do think a lot of folks go HD simply because the technology is cheaper these days, without thinking about whether they really need to DELIVER on HD.

Some folks may want to spend now for "future compatibility" - but I quesion whether anyone is going to need access to a 2006 webcast of MacBreak in HD in the future. (and believe me, I've been a fan of Leo and crew for a long time now via iTunes)

I just don't see the NEED to access that kind of info-content in HD resolution, years after it was produced.

I also think that part of the reason they produce MacBreak like they do, is that the people involved see it as much as a leading edge experiment in new technology as much as a functioning, moneymaking endevor.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with doing both, simultaneously!



Return to posts index

Eric Susch
Re: The Red Shift.
on Oct 6, 2007 at 1:22:00 pm

Sorry I couldn


Return to posts index

Barend Onneweer
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 9:04:49 am

What's next - recording directly to YouTube?

Given the choice I'd rather shoot at higher quality than the final deliverable.

Bar3nd


Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
Re: The Red Shift.
on Sep 13, 2007 at 12:07:34 pm

[Barend Onneweer] "Given the choice I'd rather shoot at higher quality than the final deliverable."

Isn't that what we all do?

When we shoot a project that might possibly go HD at a later date, we process it in HD as far as possible and then do a downconvert. We'll usually run a copy of the final onto the last production tape (HDCAM), if possible.

I think we're 6 months away from having more experience and a little better view of the future with an advanced Red product and the other offerings from the big 3 or 4 or 5 or ?? companies.

I just shot a job on a mountaintop near Colorado Springs and the news guy covering it was crying about how heavy his 350 XDCAM was. I asked one of the girls to carry it for him and he got a little tweaked about that. Poor baby. I won't go into how whiny wimps turn my stomach. Or crybabies, either.



Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It's a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut Pro systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]