« Apropos of nothing | Main | Sam Abell: The Life of a Photograph »

Thursday, 13 November 2008


Now that's cool. Talk about "the Borg". Someone's been up all night thinking. I wonder if it actually works?

I really wish they would build a smallish still camera.

These people as they say...got it goin' on.

This is how all camera systems should be. Except I shouldn't have to mortgage the house (and my parents house).

Is it OK to use the word "lust" in reference to a camera system? I have absolutely no need for anything Red makes, and probably wouldn't use it much, but I still want it.

Surprisingly, the maximum pixel size is only 6.0 micron, even on their largest sensor.

Or you could convert your D90/5DmkII with one of these: http://www.redrockmicro.com/redrock_dslr.html

I love the .sig they're using in their blog posts: "Everything in life changes... including our camera specs and delivery dates..."

There are a couple of people I'm on a mailing list with who are using the $18k high-end video camera and think well of it. And Steve Jackson was using their cameras for a recent project. It looks to me like they're trying to seriously challenge the existing film camera companies.

A longer article at Wired which looks into Jim Jannard and how he got into starting RED:

The only thing I don´t uderstand is the exclusion of the PK or the 645 mounts. Does not make too much sense to me, as it does indeed open to lenses that give "character": Helios, Jupiter, Voightlander, Zenitar, and the Limited series.

And the sheer avaliability of 645 lenses over Mamiya/Fujifilm of them.

too freaking cool.

Wow. Just wow. Jim Jannard is a guy who knows how to do it right.

The jaw drops....the mind reels.....the lips
flap noiselessly......#$%^&*@...is this for real...??...O dear god... the earth is tilted and become slippery....gnashing of teeth, pulling of hair, beating of chest can be heard coming from the backrooms of Imagery Equipment Purveyors worldwide.......
all this because of a guy who started out making motorcycle grips in his garage.....
I absolutely love this explosion of technology...I am dumbfounded and flabbergasted by the claimed dynamic range in the 'teens....sweet mother of god, but that is going to make some fine images....

Chad - That's not really the same thing, and missing part of what's astounding (to me) about the Red system. The 5DmkII takes 1080p video at 30 fps. The same sized (approx.) sensor in the Red cameras will do ~24 megapixel video at up to 30 fps (100 fps for the more expensive version!!), in a RAW format that can be tweaked, developed, and down sampled to any format you like. It's a much higher level and quality than the likes of a 5DMkII. Of course, it's quite a bit more expensive as well, but much less expensive than that type of quality used to be, as far as I know; Though I'm no video expert.

I've been following the Red System for some time now and have to say that their web presence sure smells of a scam. Despite the smell I suspect that they are for real.

I think it might be useful to point out that Video might be new to still cameras but stills have been with Video cameras for some time now.

Another interesting point of view is that a still camera with "Live View" has already got the pieces in place to make a Video camera.

That has to be the absolutely ugliest camera I have ever seen. I totally want to play with it.

This must be the ultimate wet dream for any A/V rental business and their customers. You mail the rental configuration of your choice, let them assemble and pick it up for the job.

Someone enlighten me, is the true significance of this camera system simply the fact that it has the capability to shoot video in raw. Seems like that wouldn't be a very difficult feature for other manufacturers to include. Doesn't everthing start out as raw and then get converted in camera to jpeg or whatever. Also, can one simply pluck stills out of the video stream that are of equal quality to a "normal" still. If that is the case, seems like it could be a real boon for journalists and others, no more decisive moment, just right place right time, but a shot like Behind Gare Saint Lazare becomes ho hum, although I suppose cameras that shoot 9 frames a second do that anyway. ch

Its not just a question of raw capture, but moving the data. A 10mpx (approx 4k) sensor generates 24-30 16mp images every second about 480 mp/s. Lossesly compressing, moving and storing that amount of data is not easy to do. The processors of cameras like canon's 5dmk2 can process something like 8 -12mpx raw captures a second. The video capability of the canon is 2k (1080x1920) mpeg compressed (fully baked). a big reason for this is storgae-- memory cards can't handle it.

The RED Epic/Scarlet is awesome, but whatever happened to Sinar M? Now, that was a really nice modular system (on paper at least) but I never heard of anyone actually using it...

Three words: Expensive, expensive, expensive. All those modules, individually priced? You'd have to be a higher-end pro or wealthy enthusiast to go down this road.

Actually, isn't the Red One considered INexpensive? Compared to the cameras they usually shoot feature films and commercials with? I don't know, just asking. It's not my field.

The chief reason Red is interesting to me is because of the DSLR that's rumored to be in development.

Mike J.

It's not my field either, but it is my brother's, and yes the Red is considered inexpensive. You can buy one outright as part of one project, where previously you would have rented comparable gear for similar money.

(I presume this means film gear, rather than digital. And I don't know how long a piece you'd have to be shooting for this to be true: presumably not an advert, but maybe not a whole 2-hour feature.)

It will be interesting to see if they have a go at the DSLR market. They claim to have lens adapters that couple electronically to all the makes, whether that includes AF or not I don't know. Maybe we'll get a FF EVIL camera?

But, in the end, I'll believe it when it exists. I'm not sure everyone is fully appreciating that these pages about the Scarlet are computer renderings, not even mechanical mock-ups, and renderings of pretty generic square blocks too. I know Red has made things nobody thought they would before, but the previous, completely different, Scarlet got to this stage of plausibility too.

Indeed, basically Red is replacing full cinema quality at a tenth of the price. Not to mention the price of not having to develop film.

Re the pixel site size: it seems Jim Jannard is addicted to high resolution. (If it was me I'd make a version with lower rez, but super-low-light capability too.)

If they can put 13 stops dynamic range in a reasonable compact still camera: wee!

I also lust for these things, they have a stark, minimalist beauty. For some reason they are much more attractive to me on the whole than, say, Hasselblad. The whole concept has a raw power of intention.

Dey don' look like no computer renderings to me.

The comments to this entry are closed.