3 ms·

I'm sorry but I don't understand, you seem to be saying that RED produce bad cameras, encode their files in a trivial way and then provide crap post-processing

I'm sorry but I don't understand, you seem to be saying that RED produce bad cameras, encode their files in a trivial way and then provide crap post-processing tools. They weren't even first to market. So why does anyone use them?

_underfl0w_ 7y ago
You seem to be expecting consumers to make completely logical decisions on these matters. Past a certain saturation threshold, name recognition alone can be enough to tip the scales of consumer preference. That's exactly why people still buy Apple hardware at all anymore - their friends/peers already have them. It's surely not due to superiority by any metric for the price point.
- kmlx 7y ago
  "That's exactly why people still buy Apple hardware at all anymore - their friends/peers already have them. It's surely not due to superiority by any metric for the price point." I challenge this assumption. The iPad Pro is by far the best computing device for a certain subset of the market, not to mention the extremely fast Apple-made CPU. The Apple ecosystem is also leading in some of their features. And privacy-wise they are a step ahead of their competitors.
- sam_goody 7y ago
  I disagree about Apple. Their laptops are junk hardware, agreed. But the iMac is competitive for a machine with its specs, especially if you add in the advantage of OSX (IMO, better than Linux or Windows for a large-screen desktop). And the iPhone/iPad line are the only mobile devices with decent specs, decent apps, and not built on Adware and privacy leakage. Worth money if you can afford it.
  - Spivak 7y ago
    I really want to know what plane of existence you're at where Macbooks are junk. If all you care about is spec sheet per $dollar then sure you can do a little better with other consumer laptop vendors I don't think I would ever call them junk. Pricey for sure but leagues above similar HP/Dell/Lenovo sets.
KaiserPro 7y ago
Correct. When they first came out, they had some excellent promise. They were the first digital 4k movie camera. So if you wanted a digital end to end 4k workflow, for about 4 years, RED was the only show in town. However, if you wanted to use normal lenses and dump direct to a normal plate format, the alexa was what you really wanted. A rundown: Firstly, you couldn't buy or hire one, you had to know someone. Secondly you had to get a bunch of adaptors for _everything_, which drove up the cost significantly Thirdly no global shutter meant that it wobbled horribly when you panned left and right. Fourthly its colour was off, and noisy as hell(visual noise) (some later generations are practically colourblind. cough hobbit cough) If they had actually produced and shipped the RED one, when they said they would, then my opinion would have been different. If they'd shipped the epic on price and spec, again, they could have transformed the film industry. But they didn't. By the time 4k digital workflows were practical for most people, RED had lost its shine. Why do I personally dislike them? Because, whilst there are some lovely people that work there, the level of cultism and secrecy is frustratingly annoying. I'm trying to do VFX on a shot, I've been given a couple of TB of .r3d files, it takes 30 second a frame to put into a useable format. Even then I have to fiddle with it, because the colour profiles are all messed up, or some other stupid issue. I talk to the RED team, they try and sell me a $5k card that only works in a mac (I was working at a linux shop at the time) Fortunately Nuke 5/6 had native .r3d handling, which meant that we could drop out to the farm and blast through all the footage at once, with decent conversion options. Why did people used them? Size They are much smaller than a film camera. Its practical to mount them on a moving rig, hand operate, etc, etc, etc, without loss of quality Mobility Because there is no film, you can bump them, wobble them, sit them next to explosions and not worry that the film is warping. 4K way more resolution to play with. This means that you could push the ISO more and just half the resolution and get usable footage. which you had to do, making it basically an Alexa competitor The key difference between the RED One and the Alexa, is that the Alexa couldn't record to an onboard device, the RED could. Also the resolution of the Alexa's sensor was lower, but the sensor size was correct. It also had a much greater usable dynamic range than the RED one. The concept was nice, the company, and the fanboys can get to fuck.

_underfl0w_ 7y ago

You seem to be expecting consumers to make completely logical decisions on these matters. Past a certain saturation threshold, name recognition alone can be enough to tip the scales of consumer preference. That's exactly why people still buy Apple hardware at all anymore - their friends/peers already have them. It's surely not due to superiority by any metric for the price point.

kmlx 7y ago
"That's exactly why people still buy Apple hardware at all anymore - their friends/peers already have them. It's surely not due to superiority by any metric for the price point." I challenge this assumption. The iPad Pro is by far the best computing device for a certain subset of the market, not to mention the extremely fast Apple-made CPU. The Apple ecosystem is also leading in some of their features. And privacy-wise they are a step ahead of their competitors.
sam_goody 7y ago
I disagree about Apple. Their laptops are junk hardware, agreed. But the iMac is competitive for a machine with its specs, especially if you add in the advantage of OSX (IMO, better than Linux or Windows for a large-screen desktop). And the iPhone/iPad line are the only mobile devices with decent specs, decent apps, and not built on Adware and privacy leakage. Worth money if you can afford it.
- Spivak 7y ago
  I really want to know what plane of existence you're at where Macbooks are junk. If all you care about is spec sheet per $dollar then sure you can do a little better with other consumer laptop vendors I don't think I would ever call them junk. Pricey for sure but leagues above similar HP/Dell/Lenovo sets.

KaiserPro 7y ago

Correct. When they first came out, they had some excellent promise. They were the first digital 4k movie camera. So if you wanted a digital end to end 4k workflow, for about 4 years, RED was the only show in town. However, if you wanted to use normal lenses and dump direct to a normal plate format, the alexa was what you really wanted. A rundown: Firstly, you couldn't buy or hire one, you had to know someone. Secondly you had to get a bunch of adaptors for _everything_, which drove up the cost significantly Thirdly no global shutter meant that it wobbled horribly when you panned left and right. Fourthly its colour was off, and noisy as hell(visual noise) (some later generations are practically colourblind. cough hobbit cough) If they had actually produced and shipped the RED one, when they said they would, then my opinion would have been different. If they'd shipped the epic on price and spec, again, they could have transformed the film industry. But they didn't. By the time 4k digital workflows were practical for most people, RED had lost its shine. Why do I personally dislike them? Because, whilst there are some lovely people that work there, the level of cultism and secrecy is frustratingly annoying. I'm trying to do VFX on a shot, I've been given a couple of TB of .r3d files, it takes 30 second a frame to put into a useable format. Even then I have to fiddle with it, because the colour profiles are all messed up, or some other stupid issue. I talk to the RED team, they try and sell me a $5k card that only works in a mac (I was working at a linux shop at the time) Fortunately Nuke 5/6 had native .r3d handling, which meant that we could drop out to the farm and blast through all the footage at once, with decent conversion options. Why did people used them? Size They are much smaller than a film camera. Its practical to mount them on a moving rig, hand operate, etc, etc, etc, without loss of quality Mobility Because there is no film, you can bump them, wobble them, sit them next to explosions and not worry that the film is warping. 4K way more resolution to play with. This means that you could push the ISO more and just half the resolution and get usable footage. which you had to do, making it basically an Alexa competitor The key difference between the RED One and the Alexa, is that the Alexa couldn't record to an onboard device, the RED could. Also the resolution of the Alexa's sensor was lower, but the sensor size was correct. It also had a much greater usable dynamic range than the RED one. The concept was nice, the company, and the fanboys can get to fuck.