Canon and Red lining up for the best seats in Hollywood on Nov 3rd

Its funny since my post on RED vs. Canon I thought maybe RED would get the hint and stop trying to compete with Canon so directly. This is because I like BOTH companies, I like their products, and I wish they wouldn't fight. More than this their cameras aren't the same at all so they shouldn't be treated as competition for each other. In my belief RED should take the 'high road' and act like a pro camera company instead of a consumer or prosumer camera company. But what is happening now is that Red and Canon are both poising themselves for the release of their next products though (in Canon's case) some sort of Hollywood filmmaker (or indy filmmaker?) promotional event on Nov 3rd along with (in RED's case) a simultaneous announcement for their new product(s)... on the same day as Canon's event.

Like I said, I still believe RED is making a mistake by not staying with the pro market and competing with companies like Alexa and Sony- and if they 'happen' to release a pro camera (like Scarlet) that cuts into Canon/Nikon/Pentax's market share then so be it. But, this battling between these companies is just irresponsible and unnecessary because RED is a very different kind of company which has had its own unique challenges. Canon was birthed from a very different time and place in history and as a consequence many of Canon's customers aren't even going to understand RED's philosophy of business... which is a somewhat new way of doing things. This being said, the product can appear to be very similar to an un-savvy buyer. It takes a true understanding of the finished product as a photographer or filmmaker to truly see the difference.

To many who may ask, the answer is "Yes, you can shoot a professional film with a RED camera" and many in Hollywood do just that. And, "Yes, you can shoot a professional product with a Canon DSLR and many have done that"... especially as an experiment or as a film student's first project. But, how these features happened to enter the Canon DSLR cameras was by a happy accident... so I would NOT consider these DSLR's professional film or movie cameras since they were not made for that purpose. If Canon announces a camera that is made for the purpose of shooting films that would be different... and RED is free game to be challenged. RED needs to understand that the game has changed but they can't lose their poker face- they must hold their cards tight and protect not just their customers but also protect what their customers perception of them is... as a pro camera company. In other words Canon has room to try and grow upwards into a pro line of cameras but these DSLR's are not them- they are pro SLR's with some high rez video capability. Red has created a niche market for less expensive pro cameras... but they should steer clear of making their product look like a fancy DSLR with video capability as an afterthought. They need to be RED... their own beast that cannot be compared to Canon. A pro camera that makes no apologies for their super high rez, Hollywood-approved professional camera... the next panavision. Panavision would never get bristled feathers about what Canon does- they are unique cameras that create different products.

To sum it up, if you are a producer who doesn't know the difference, you need to talk to some DP's who've done both and ask them the difference... don't make the decision on your film just because you can save a few thousand on using a few DSLR's instead of using a RED. Also, if you are RED or Canon, if you don't have the confidence in your product to just let it be what it is and to focus on those best qualities, you might get taken off of your game and start thinking this is just a battle of words or advertising dollars, it is not. It is a matter of the camera to suit the product and to suit the budget. I think Canons are perfect for the beginning filmmaker who wants to shoot short subject, shoot with no crew/a small crew or is doing film school work. It's not the best on action films though and the batteries can overheat, but the Red has had overheating issues as well. In contrast, I think Red is great for feature film shooting. It makes it possible for producers who are considering their thin budget and also not keen on compromising on their quality. So they represent for me, different stages in a filmmakers life and different tools for different projects. No more, no less. Who knows what will happen on Nov 3rd, but at the end of the day the one who will have the best seat in Hollywood won't get it because of their loud mouth, they will get it because they made a great product that delivers on what it preaches.

Zacudo embarks on the Great Camera Shootout

Go here for the Shootout:
http://www.zacuto.com/the-great-camera-shootout-2011/episode-one

Zacudo, who makes pro support gear and rigs for cameras and filmmaking, has been a long-time producer of web shorts about filmmaking, dslr cameras and film on the web- and now they have embarked on their second series of tests for cameras (the first Great Camera Shootout was for DSLR's vs. Film and actually won an Emmy award).  This one is supposedly even more professional, exhaustive, and high brow- with an LA production and screens all over the world with some of the world's finest cinematographers watching the tests & weighing in on the best of the best pro digital cameras.

The cameras chosen to compete this time were consistent with their more professional approach-- the best digital cameras in the world used on MOST films being produced today- including the DSLR's and including Kodak film as well.  They tested the Arri Alexa, Red One MX, Sony F35, Sony F3, Phantom Flex, Kodak 5213, Kodak 5219, Panasonic AG-AF100, Weisscam HS-2, Canon 1D MkIV, Canon 5D MkII, Canon 7D and the Nikon D7000.  My camera the Canon 60D should be rated similarly to the Canon 7D as it comes to image quality.  This is part one of a three part series which will be gradually released in the next few months as they are being edited.

I have to say I think this is the biggest public test of this kind in the world- I just hope they did all the cameras justice and no one gets their little panties in a wad over some of the results... people can get VERY attached to their cameras of choice and I for one am surprised in a few of the results.  The Alexa did as well as I thought it would.  Film didn't do so hot in the low light but handled any available light very well.  The Sony's surprised with their high's and lows.  The Flex seemed to do badly all around, just as the Panasonic seemed to do- definitely NOT as good as the others... even compared to the DSLR's.  The DSLR's surprised as well with fairly good latitude for the price.  But, I think the Red did very well- though on par with the Alexa and with the Sony's in my view.  I suppose the biggest surprise is the fact that I feel my investment in a DSLR was still very smart AND that the next cameras for me is either the Red Epic (which is supposed to be even better than the One) or one of the Sonys.  I was very surprised in the quality of the Sonys latitude vs. some of the other cameras.  I still can't wait to see more of the Epic & I hope to use it on a film once it comes out.  It is a sad thing that they couldn't acquire one for the test.

Regardless, we should all remember the line in the end of the video from a great cinematographer, Don McAlpine, "...compared to getting a good script, a good director and a good cast... man... it's a fraction of a percent with where you're going with the result..." meaning the result of these cameras (compared to one another) is a fraction of what is really important in making a good film (compared with the importance if having a good script, director & cast).  So, true.

Red & Jim Jannard finally tell us what kind of company they are

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=660570#post660570

As I predicted in my last article RED needed to accept their place as a pro camera company & that is exactly what they did! As Jim Jannard's announcement indicates, RED is finally starting to get it and will draw the line better as it comes to what kind of company they are. Which, I think, should help them carve out a better niche for themselves. It was about time they admitted the obvious. My hope is that, now, the company will be finding its footing better and accepting its limitations even more. Then they can start to recognize who their true competition is. here's a hint... it's NOT Canon & Nikon!

My view of the digital camera markets can be compared to some degree with the old film camera markets...

Current Digital Camera Markets
1. DSLR's & prosumer cams ---> 2. Panny & Sony Broadcast Professional HD Cameras ---> 3. RED, ARRI, Panavisions & Studio developed experimental cameras.

As compared to the Film Camera Markets from back in the day...
1. Standard 8 & Super 8 ---> 2. 16 & Super 16 ---> 3. 35mm & other experimental studio tech.

Of course there are sub-markets within these as there is more experimentation and innovation (just like with Red) but these smaller markets will only flux temporarily.

This all makes sense because each of these markets are meeting distinct needs in the marketplace. Lots of filmmakers including Spielberg & M. Night back in the day started with a Super 8 shooting family events & small shorts films in their back yard- then they moved up to 16 in film school and then by that time they understood how the whole theory works and all the ensuing implications with lighting, developing, camera moves, etc. They could realistically handle the Panavisions and could deal with the greater responsibility of that. The same is now true with the DSLR's all the way up to RED, ARRI etc.

So, as you can see, my beef with RED is that they are acting ridiculous by making fun of DSLR shooters. Panavision would never be ridiculous enough to making fun of Ricoh, Rollei, Bolex or Canon back in the 70's or 80's because they shot on a smaller format and their sync-sound wasn't as good... or they weren't as smooth running... or they were too noisy to be used for proper filmmaking purposes... that is really only going to make you look like an idiot.

They, hopefully, will continue to admit they are in a different market & then they will stop making noise in the back of the classroom like annoying little brats. RED has to learn to not sling mud and to stand apart as a different kind of company. Let it be a plus that your cameras will be undercutting other cameras in your market... that is a good thing! And try not to make the Spielbergs of tomorrow feel bad for starting their careers with DSLR's...

By the way- HDR isnt that much of an advancement, RED. In many ways, no more advanced than 3D. Here's a Canon 5DmkII shooting HDR video on vimeo. Just get us a new camera that continues the next big thing in pro filmmaking... thank you very much! aaahhhh. LOL. Im just kidding!

But, all kidding aside, I do appreciate every bit of new filmmaking tech out there from your company and from ANY of these other great companies, so thank you very much Mr. Jannard- just please learn to respect your peers sir- Canon, Nikon, Panny... these other companies are still just as relevant as your company (even Panavision!). In some ways, more so. They have a more vibrant, colorful and profitable history than yours. You're the next big thing- but don't think the old guard are gone- they are just as relevant as ever.

I'm still hoping that there will be advances in digital screening technology with the help of RED at some point-- we need a slew of new high res theaters out there. IMHO it will help continue the resurgence of the theater experience for the film exhibition industry as well... then we will SEE the evidence of RED's advanced tech better as compared to the competition. Can't you see that this better screening environment will also greatly increase the amount of sales for your cameras? hmmmmm. That this isn't discussed concerns me. The screening tech must flux WITH the camera markets at some point- but, as most of use realize in this industry, there is not much innovation in the exhibition markets. LOL.

Good luck to you & congratulations on finding your niche RED!! In the meantime- I just got my hands on a Canon 60D and will be shooting what I can as a beginning director (no longer just a producer, scripty & videographer)- I'll be learning to work within the limitations of the tech & doing what I can to still tell stories. Whatever piece of equipment I can get to help me make better films... that's what I will buy. Wish me luck and hopefully by the time you come out with Scarlet- I'll be able to see how all this extra time working on it paid off! Or maybe by then you will deserve the ridicule & scorn you have heaped on others.

Finally some Scarlet talk... but what can RED do about the new DSLR Revolution?

Is RED & Jim Jannard all talky talk no action? Will the Scarlet stand up to the HD-SLR's? Should HDSLR shooters be 'ashamed'?

http://www.eoshd.com/content/255-RED-quot-DSLR-shooters-should-be-embarrassed-quot

My opinion is that there are two Revolutions & two Markets going on here... they are being formed presently & they are represented by (1) an indy filmmaking revolution using existing avenues of distribution technology -the HD-SLR Revolution and (2) a revolution in cinema technology standards with the 4-6k RED cameras (said to also include a much higher resolution with the Epic sensors) -the SHD Revolution, which still has a work to be done (and that work ISN'T 'knocking down' the Canon/Nikon/Panasonics of the world because we are talking apples & oranges here). "How so?" you say...

Since the RED cameras represent a much more substantial change to the totality of filmmaking & screening technology it is simply more time consuming (& therefore costly) down the line as this technology comes into use more (but it is a revolution that is worth it in the long run).

But the HD-SLR revolution utilizes already present technology not just in use in homes- but on the web & on your smart phone... in other words it is cheaper and easier for a filmmaker to create content because he doesn't have to be involved in revolutionizing the entire process cradle-to-grave the way RED is going to have to do- he just plugs into an already established technology.

But this issue with RED is all unavoidable because of the implications of this newer technology- I mean, it truly must be a huge, no doubt, beautiful picture at such a high res!... Now, where can we screen it? Can it even be screened? Can it be broadcast? Can it be viewed online or at home? Of course distribution has to be considered by everyone involved. In contrast, it is much more financially sound to shoot in 1080p with a $2k rig with less crew requirements and still be able to distribute!

Getting down to brass tax I think RED & their reps still have a work ahead of them to make this technology practical- to put this technology in theaters- to make it practical for consumers to consume, etc. They started this mess & they need to finish it (or rather, get the ball soundly rolling in the right direction). Admittedly, much of that great work has been done & is actively being done by many filmmakers, distributors & the studios. We just need to make sure we are on the right track & solving the right questions. We need to make sure the consumers out there can 'see the difference' between 2 and 6k & that it is worth the extra coin & worth the extra hype because they haven't even seen 6k yet & still don't even know what it is yet.

Not that RED shouldn't continue to compete on a professional filmmaking level with the HD-SLR's in order to draw that line-in-the-sand. What RED has to do is solve the problems the HD-SLR's have and assist the move towards a more cinematic experience by making 'the quintessential professional SHD-SLR run & gun shooter' in the Scarlet. But this time do it without blowing smoke at the users.

I mean, listen, it is obvious RED dropped the ball this year. Use me as an example (& this is true for so many other current or beginning filmmakers) -this is me in a nutshell... since last year I was going to buy a Scarlet earlier this year so I could start shooting my own stuff (instead of hiring out) but now I'm investing in a Canon HD-SLR rig with LED lights, Zoom sound & portable power supply instead... because of all the obvious financial reasons... doing all this costs the same amount that a Scarlet was supposed to cost this year. Isn't that great?

Well, also, as filmmakers we need to recognize (& RED needs to remember this), ART doesn't wait to get made- when the inspiration hits, MAKE IT & MAKE IT NOW! DON'T WAIT! I understand RED can't just follow this principle as a camera & software development company that has to be regulated & has to meet certain standards- you can't do what you want... but as filmmakers we have to live by this principle... we kind of can't wait for the next big thing... we have to go out & shoot our story right now & fix it later (maybe shoot it again but next time on a Scarlet- nothing wrong with that). But any business needs to remember, just like RED, if any company makes promises it can't keep, it is in danger of failing.


The PAYOFF for RED or... (for whoever makes that connection):

So, again, IMHO RED's current work is that it needs to assist the digital cinema side of the business by doing some research & making a clear path for cinemas to follow in the path they've blazed... so they know how best to utilize their technology so the consumers go back to the theaters. If they do that they will ensure the relevance of their product for years to come. After all, almost all of the major studios in Hollywood started in the 1st half of the 1900's by the distribution side of the business- like the nickelodeons, etc. and that is how the the new players in film & cinema distribution can come into their own- through the distribution side of it- of course, by following these new standards that RED has pioneered! So, whoever teams up with RED to do this on a larger scale may just end up with the big payoff. But, who these people will be in the future is still TBD! Sadly, though, the movie business has been traveling as fast as its slowest ship, which is the internet. Of course this is obviously because of the incredible potential for distribution ("What? Movie distribution pipe-lined straight to every consumer? Yowsers!"), but it is also potentially the movie businesses' worst enemy as it represents the easiest way to rip-off the industry through piracy... or is it free advertising? I'm confused! What a conundrum!


Puttin down the sauce:

My prediction on the Revolutions? Well, eventually what might happen is that (1) full HD would be the standard internet video res so consumers can get everything on the internet on their screens at home... & (2) RED's 4, 5, or 6k (what i call SHD or Super-Hi-Definition & I believe Steven Soderbergh called it that too) could be the new cinema standard that the big studios utilize IF it can finally be brought to theaters successfully(?). Pretty please? :)

The other factor is home theater. It's the gap-factor. What home theater does is in the hands of these LCD & computer manufacturers... nothing less, nothing more. They can charge massive coin to get 4k at home if need be...

But, to re-iterate, if this is achieved (internet on one end, theaters on the other) there would be a clear cut difference between these markets (2k res made by indy filmmakers with prosumer HD-SLR's for the internet/TV & 4k up to ?k resolution (SHD) made by the Major Studios with RED, ARRI, etc for the digital cinemas).

This division between technology is actually desirable for many reasons... First of all, it simplifies things for the consumer and therefore justifies a higher cost for certain products. Secondly, it simplifies things for the studios & filmmakers- since there's too many problems to solve right now as it comes to standards in technology... filmmakers & content-makers have now been engaged in this endless debate for years since the indy filmmaking surge in the 90's, since HD has come to all the networks & now the gap grows larger since the advent of this new camera technology. Currently, its all just techno-chaos for the studios so they don't know how to relate to their audience as well. In order for the studios to continue making money they have to standardize and control some niche just like any business tries to do. So do they go to 3D? Do they spend money on servers & internet distro sites like iTunes/hulu/Netflix, etc? Do they upload their product to theaters with all the new digital distribution models being touted around in that industry? What about the resolution discussion and all the new technology? How do the studios require the indy filmmakers to hold up to certain standards of filmmaking when we are all over the map here?

As it comes to the big digital cinema distribution discussion Hollywood can control its own by helping to make 4k, 5k, 6k theaters and selling the hi-res beauty of that... if they can 'sell it' good enough, people will want to see the theater version of it & will not accept a 2k pirated version as 'the real deal'. It's too large of a file to pirate (at least for most) it might even be able to be uploaded to digital theaters but obviously it would cost too much for pirates to upload it- they wouldn't be able to screen it in full 4-6k glory even if they found some way to pirate it- but don't see that as some lame excuse to let people pirate it because you think "it doesnt matter". As editing suites get better in order to edit this 4-6k content we will need to make these monitors more affordable for editors. At that point there will be pirating that will begin to make sense again because then they can view the content. But, if you control the technology, you control the doorways to the content. Problem solved. As it comes to the editing- editors will edit a low res version & then send it to a 4-6k render house to be 'developed' (sound familiar?) and in this case utilize the meta-data to help make it what it should be in its full 4-6k glory or whatever res can be offered (I keep assuming 4-6k for some silly reason). Then it can be screened for the final pass at the render house's digital theater with the producers, director & editor -etc etc.

As it comes to the original discussion of HD-SLR vs. RED... the fact is, RED was on track to keep the revolution brimming- but Canon, Nikon & Panasonic got it right by undercutting them (which is what they should do to compete). After all, it's these prosumer camera companies that started this revolution in the late eighties/early nineties because it brought the tech down to the consumer- but RED really isn't a consumer or even prosumer cam & it really shouldn't try to act like it competes in that market. In fact just the word 'cam' and RED don't belong in the same paragraph except to make the distinction. It just don't sound right... *snicker* :P

As it comes to the Scarlet- you can try to talk the talk, RED- but the caveat is that you have to buy that right by first walking the walk... So until the Scarlet hits the stores- it is the HD-SLR Revolution for me. Hopefully something of mine gets sold & then, with that happening, maybe afterwards I can afford what RED is cooking up. But I wish all of you some good testing, manufacturing & product reviews. Til then, a little more action- a little less talky talk. At least for now. But please, RED, let us know when you have something to show... we can't wait much longer... because the street cred is starting to wither a bit.

Jon