4 ms·
I think the bits of negativity are more about their methods than their products. There aren't many people who find much to fault in the actual cameras, but the
by lcrs 13y ago
I think the bits of negativity are more about their methods than their products. There aren't many people who find much to fault in the actual cameras, but the way they are marketed and supported is maddening to people used to dealing with the older-school cinema companies like Arri and Panavision.
The attitude is even evident in this last post:
"In 2005, I could see that the powers that be (Sony, Arri, Panavision) were going to attempt to persuade the film industry that 1080P was going to be the digital replacement for film." - for fifteen years years people have been aware that 4k was a sensible equivalent resolution. The first digitally restored film was done at 4k in 1993! The Panavision Genesis (with a Sony sensor) had a 6k horizontal sensor pixel count! The Arri D20 had a 2.8k sensor!
"Sony's digital cinema cameras were $200k+" - cinema cameras are always rented, not bought. Very few people care or even know about their list price. At the time it was bizarre to market a camera like this to the public rather than to rental houses.
"The only way we could do that was through incredible compression technology" - they use JPEG2000. Not even something more specialised like CineForm, which already existed.
"I should mention here that there were many color science and feature upgrades... for free. Again, what company ever offered that?" - cameras rented from a rental house have always had regular firmware upgrades, doing the kind of things Red's upgrades did.
Compare the technical documentation from Red to that of Arri - Arri will shower you with whitepapers full of numbers and graphs, and tell you exactly what is going on in their cameras. The Red colour science is still secret. What are the primaries of the sensor? It's secret. What do the F-LUT controls do? It's secret.
Enough moaning. Red were the first cinema company with a real marketing budget and it was all very strange to people who were all about the right tool for the job, most of those tools being made in limited runs in extremely practical packaging without shiny logos on every corner...
- HNLogInShit 13y agoYes, Red's branding and marketing could have been fairly called anything from unprofessional to infantile. However, they called Sony out for selling video cameras at cinema-camera prices. The point wasn't even the the price; it was the quality. 1080P crap is not cinema quality or archival quality. Look at all the historic events shot with interlaced SD video, which we'll never have decent images of. That's sad. We can go back and scan film at higher resolutions. You can buy Twilight Zone on Blu-Ray now, looking better than anyone has ever seen it. That's what we should be going for, and that's what Red was about.