RED EPIC

[Andrew Rieger]

Remember that Arri released a great digital camera, the D20, one year, before RED introduced the Red One. The D21 came after and the Alexa was developed side by side for another market. It was planned as a 16mm-replacement and a perfect choice for television-work. But... Alexa is great and used for some bug movies.

I would say, that there would be an Alexa without Red, but maybe not so cheap.

And I still say, that Red is about numbers (5k blabla 120fps blablabla) and Arri is about working on a feature film set and everything you need there. Red will need a couple of more years to develop a better working system, not ony a nice body. Everytime I can go to Arri Rental and start a project without thinking much about the body and which accessoires I want to use, it is a completely self-explaning system, developed on feature film sets and improved over some decades. Maybe in 20 years, the Red-system is at the same point.

And in 2011, we will see a new digital camera by Panavision. The Genesis is still a great tool.

Yes, Red is a numbers driven company and want to have better specs than any other system. Sometimes they sightly overlook the importance of things like fan noise, reliability and concern themselves with being bleeding edge. Red is a trendsetter. Other companies look at what they do and try to do something similar down the road when the tech has matured. In this industry, it is ok if you are second if you release a more stable product. I think it comes down to mentality. Red wants to do things that no other company has done, they want to cram a fully featured movie camera into a tiny case. Arri wants to release user-friendly reliable cameras that are familiar to their loyal followers and are ideally suited for todays distribution system rather than what may be five years from now. For them, the latest and greatest tech is not worth implementing if it is not 100% reliable. Thus we have two different companies with two very different products. Four or five years from now, Arri will release a camera with Epic specs and a micro form factor but by then Red will have moved on to some frankenstein creation that shoots 10k at 250 framers per second with a sensor the size of a Hasselblad frame. I'm glad both companies are around because it would be really boring is everyone was using the same system.

To put it another way, Red Epic is a swiss army knife and Alexa is a hunting knife. The Epic can do all kinds of cool things like shoot high fame rates, shoot in multiple resolutions, expand it's dynamic range to unheard of levels, be super compact, shoot 3d with ease an fly under the radar if you want to shoot in a subway station without permits since it looks like a DSLR when stripped down to the bare essentials. It can record high quality audio with an add on module. You can build it up and accessorize the hell out of it. It can use Canon stills lenses. It can take pictures and do timelapse. If you have the coin, it would make a cool looking bookend. The Arri is the hunting knife, solid, reliable, predictable. It can't do as many things as a swiss army knife but it is better at cutting and for many, that is more important.

You say Red will need 20 years to be at a Panavision level. Give them 5 years. I am astounded by what they have pulled off in five years. In another five, they will be one of the lead players in the industry.

[tinx]

This is a helpful article in explaining how RED's "Bayer Pattern" sensor works by John Galt from Panavision:
http://magazine.creativecow.net/article ... -of-pixels

I've had a number of RED DIT and Camera Tech jobs since build 16, and I know for a fact that RED has been way over-hyped.
I wouldn't be surprised that the Alexa outperforms even the Epic. (bigger doesn't always mean better)

Regardless, (as I've learned from all the great Cinematographers)
At the end of the day, it's not the Camera that creates a good image;
it's the man behind the Camera.

[Andrew Rieger]

This is a helpful article in explaining how RED's "Bayer Pattern" sensor works by John Galt from Panavision:
http://magazine.creativecow.net/article ... -of-pixels

I've had a number of RED DIT and Camera Tech jobs since build 16, and I know for a fact that RED has been way over-hyped.
I wouldn't be surprised that the Alexa outperforms even the Epic. (bigger doesn't always mean better)

Regardless, (as I've learned from all the great Cinematographers)
At the end of the day, it's not the Camera that creates a good image;
it's the man behind the Camera.

That is a pretty old article. John Galt is right in many respects but Bayer pattern allows for higher resolutions that are not feasible with a full RGB CCD sensor. Arri uses the bayer pattern CMOS as well so technically, the article's opinion of Bayer pattern sensors applies to the Alexa as well. Frankly, I have seen a comparison between the Alexa and the Red MX projected in 4K shooting identical subjects and they are very very close and much of the Alexa footage I have seen has the same digital characteristics that many have criticized Red for having. I think it is vogue to hate on Red but I think that is more a response to the Red fanboyism that is pretty prevalent on the internet. I am not a Red fanboy but I think that the camera can produce stunning footage in the right hands. The Social Network is a perfect example of that.

I also think that many negative opinions of the camera were formed from the early problems and Red has not been able to shake some of the bad press. I think the cost has something to do with the Red hatred as well. Is is like a Corvette that is as fast as a Ferrari. None of the Ferrari owners want to admit that a car 1/3 the price is beating their stallion. I think a lot of people in the industry see Red as trash for wannabe filmmakers and a direct threat to the film stock they love. To be honest, I think many have embraced the Alexa because it is not Red and is built by an established cinema name and not some start up run by a billionaire who has a legion of fans kissing his feet every five minutes. If you put the Alexa next to the Red, they are more similar than they are different but people like to act like the Alexa is night and day better than the Red and that digital looked like crap until the Alexa showed up. They look the same practically, the Alexa is a little more sensitive and the color rendition is a little better but it still has that ultra clean grain-free (and frankly a little plasticky) image that Red has always had and will always have. I guess I am a little curious when many harshly criticize the Red look but embrace the Alexa when, frankly, they look quite similar.

If you want to see where sensors are going, check out this video from Sony: http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/video/related- ... k_roadmap/

Sony's new sensor factors in what John Galt at Panavision is talking about but also factors in what Red says about the impracticality of a full RGB 4k sensor. Its the best of both worlds. Also keep an eye on something called back illuminated sensors, also from Sony.

[Subhadip]

In another five, they will be one of the lead players in the industry.

Given that the biggest blockbusters, the kinds that could afford any camera system, are embracing RED, don't you think that suggests RED is already one of the lead players? On the other hand, going by sheer volume of features shot worldwide, and cameras sold, RED is far and away the dominant market leader in digital cinema. It's a camera that is accessible to any feature filmmaker - the most expensive films to lowest budget independent productions.

Of course, this has nothing to do with a personal camera choice, but what alarms me is the suggestion in the last page by a fellow poster that Pirates are "sacrificing so much on the image side". Isn't the fact that Darius Wolski and Rob Marshall truly believe it is the best camera system for the project the most logical explanation?

I think the key USP for RED Epic is 3D. While the RED One vs Alexa or the Film vs Digital debate will rage on, the Epic is clearly uncannily well suited for 3D work. 3D being the major trend in the industry, I think we will see more blockbusters using Epic. As for good old 2D...

[citizen yo]

I think a lot of people in the industry see Red as trash for wannabe filmmakers and a direct threat to the film stock they love. To be honest, I think many have embraced the Alexa because it is not Red and is built by an established cinema name and not some start up run by a billionaire who has a legion of fans kissing his feet every five minutes.

that was my point, you summed everything up. Someone said if the alexa is good enough for roger deakins then it should be good enough for everyone. In that case, if the red is good enough for a director as demanding on cinematography as david fincher, then it should be good enough for anyone as well.

[Andrew Rieger]

Another thing to mention is that, at least to my eyes, movies shot on film are looking more and more digital. With newer stocks, higher-res scans, post removal of grain and DI grading, some of that traditional "film look" is going away. The lenses themselves are more sterile, artifact free. They don't flare, have better coatings and they are super-sharp. It's not a bad thing, it is a better image overall. It's a little annoying how many demonize Red and digital in general for killing the organic beauty of cinematography but if you look at the way film stock is handled today and the trends in lens design, the industry as a whole is moving away from that style, not just people choosing to shoot digitally. I recently saw the Green Hornet projected in 4K and there was about 15-20 min of material that was shot on Red MX while the rest was shot on film. I could not make out which scenes were shot on which camera and I doubt anyone else could. You can make Red look like film but it certainly helps when film itself is starting to look more Red-like. Just an observation. You need to experiment with these new digital cameras to get the look you are going for. If anything, the flexibility they offer should be embraced.

You think the image coming out of your Red is too clean and "digital"? Try some anamorphic lenses. I have seen a lot of Red footage that looked more "traditional" and film-like by simply using anamorphic lenses. There is something beautiful about oval shaped bokeh and some of the most beautiful film ever made have used them. Sure, spherical are better but I embrace the anamorphic flaws. Sometimes older, softer lenses like Baltars and Cooke Speed Panchros can look wonderful of Red. Diffusion filters can be used as well to achieve and older look. Most red footage is shot clean with new, sharp lenses but to get the best results, you need to experiment which is something a lot of younger dp's don't do. I am a firm believer in crafting a look in-camera instead of relying on the wheels of the grading suite to do the work but then again, I am pretty old fashioned, preferring miniatures and practical effects over completely 3D environments. I am just glad we have options these days.

[Andrew Rieger]

Not trying to stir the pot but the Red-bashing is going to die off pretty soon. The news of Academy Award nominations is evidence of this. In total, there are 14 nominations for projects shot on Red cameras. Out of the ten best picture noms, three are shot digitally and two are shot on Red. Red also has a best foreign language film nomination, one best cinematography nomination. Also, out of the five actresses nominated for the best actress category, three were in films shot on Red. Digital is taking over. I am sure that the next year's program will include a host of projects shot with Alexa and the Red Epic. These are exciting times no doubt.

[Roger]

Exciting times indeed!
Cinematography is more than a camera, whether that camera is a Red an Alexa or a Bolex. There is a little more to it that resolution, colour depth, latitude, grain structure, lens aberration etc. etc. etc. The lenses use for 'Citizen Kane' were in no way as good as a Primo or a Master Prime and the grain structure in that film is, frankly, all over the place. But the cinematography? Well, you tell me.

[juan namnun]

a camera is just a toll to put besides a lens yes but sometime a very expensive toll

[Andrew Rieger]

Exciting times indeed!
Cinematography is more than a camera, whether that camera is a Red an Alexa or a Bolex. There is a little more to it that resolution, colour depth, latitude, grain structure, lens aberration etc. etc. etc. The lenses use for 'Citizen Kane' were in no way as good as a Primo or a Master Prime and the grain structure in that film is, frankly, all over the place. But the cinematography? Well, you tell me.

I agree 100%. There are hundreds of masterpieces that are shot with equipment that is considered inferior compared to the gear we have today. I would take The Battleship Potemkin over 70% of the stuff that Hollywood turns out today. 28 Days Later was shot with Standard Def DV cams and it is better than the majority of zombie films that are shot on film. In the end it comes down to the story, it always has.

Still, I get a little frustrated by all the bickering between die hard system supporters. Red fanboys are calling the Alexa a sub-standard spec Red copy and Alexa fans are (and have always been) calling Red a low quality unreliable camera that produces bad footage. As I stated previously, I have seen identical subjects shot with both systems projected in 4K with almost identical grading and frankly, I really did not see much of a difference. It was so negligible. The Alexa was a little softer, more sensitive and seemed to have slightly better skin tones but this was prior to the most recent Red color science and we have yet to see Alexa compared to the Epic which should be a pretty significant improvement over the Red One with its new sensor. Alexa fans acting like digital looked terrible until the Arri showed up and Red fans acting like the Alexa is not good enough for 4K projection frankly gets on my nerves. They are just arm-chair critics looking to have someone to argue with. It reminds me of the pointless Chevy vs. Ford fights we hear about all the time.

At this point, both Red and Alexa are producing footage that is so high-quality, it seems unnatural. Its almost too sharp and clean for my taste but it is great having such high quality footage to start with. We are at a point where movie technology literally gives us no limitations in terms of what can be done. I bet that in 15 years, we will have 8K+ cameras the size of iphones with noise free footage at ISO 8000 and frame rates in excess of 500fps. With companies like Red, Arri, Aaton, Sony and Panavision all working overtime to produce the next "it" system, the skies are the limit.

[Roger]

Yes, that is probably true. Though how any human will see a difference between a 4K image and an 8K image on their cell phone is beyond me.

[Andrew Rieger]

I hope that in the not too distant future we have digital cameras capable of shooting is resolutions high enough to match IMAX film. Seeing an native IMAX production using 70mm film projection is the most spectacular theatrical experience imaginable. Unfortunately, the cameras are simply impractical for narrative work. A camera with a 65mm size chip would be amazing but I think that is a ways off. One can dream I would much rather see camera companies go in that direction than work on 3D but I guess they think 3D can pay the bills better. Anyways, I hope that watching films on cell phone size screens is not the future.

[mattgiblin]

A camera with a 65mm size chip would be amazing but I think that is a ways off. One can dream

No dreaming necessary, it's already here! You should check out the Phantom 65, which you can read about here: http://www.abelcine.com/store/Phantom-65-Gold-4K-High-Speed-Digital-Camera/ Although the Phantom camera was designed for digital high speed, it can be used to shoot 24fps as well.

Hope this helps!
Matt

[Andrew Rieger]

A camera with a 65mm size chip would be amazing but I think that is a ways off. One can dream

No dreaming necessary, it's already here! You should check out the Phantom 65, which you can read about here: http://www.abelcine.com/store/Phantom-65-Gold-4K-High-Speed-Digital-Camera/ Although the Phantom camera was designed for digital high speed, it can be used to shoot 24fps as well.

Hope this helps!
Matt

I know about the Phantom 65. I really love the sensor size and 4K is pretty much what you can expect from today's cameras but 65 mm film resolves a lot more than 4K and the Phantom certainly can not rival IMAX. I think that a 65mm sensor with 8k resolution would be a good alternative to IMAX.

[Arben]

{QUOTE} Amazing news circulatiing over the internet that Epic beats Alexa finally.

What's more to say(?) is that happened in the City of Hannover in the heart of Germany.

The multicamera test "Hands-On HD" was conducted by Nordmedia that also invited Geoff Boyle FBKS, a fellow REDUser and the boss of CML.

Some of Geoff's conclusion:

"I will say that as usual it came down to an Alexa/Epic battle and that the
very best exterior images that I saw in a week of testing were from the
combination of Epic/HDR-3stops/DV-Resolve.

Really natural results with a full detail dynamic range that was beyond
anything that I've seen before, oh I've seen greater DR but never one that
looked so good and was so manipulatable. This sequence included high speed motion."


"We thought that Alexa was going to be a clear winner, and it is in ease of
use and post, but the Epic/HDR/Resolve combination was the outright winner!

Also Leica Summilux-C won in the lens tests:

We also tested lenses using some serious analyses kit and well, yes, the
Leica's are worth the money!"