God damn how did linus afford this. LMG must be doing well enough which could justify spending that much.
For something that expensive, that camera better be able to cook for me, drive me to work, and do my taxes!
[QUOTE=General J;52178328]Don't they realize that more reasonably priced 8K recording solutions might pop up in the time it takes for 8K viewing to become commonplace?
Because that seems a ways off since 4K isn't even there yet.[/QUOTE]
It's not necessarily for 8k viewing, you can do a lot with an ultra-high bitrate 8k image in post production. For one, scaling it down to 1080p will give you an unbelievably good looking image, and aside from that you can crop/move the frame in post without losing image quality. It also helps with special effects, as more detail and more informations means better matchmoving and more seamless CG integration.
Still waiting on that Lytro cinema camera though, which should be even better for VFX because it's engineered with literal scifi technology and can key out backgrounds without a greenscreen, it has built-in motion tracking, you can change the shutter speed of the camera to remove/add motion blur and you can FUCKING CHANGE THE CAMERA ANGLE IN 3D AFTER THE SHOT. Now THAT would be worth $100k+
[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_shot_on_digital_video_prior_to_2015"]For anyone curious, here's a list of films shot on digital recording equipment prior to 2015. [/URL]
Sort by cameras, look for Red. It's one of the go-to camera companies for shooting blockbusters.
[editline]2nd May 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=FreezingStorm;52178551]For something that expensive, that camera better be able to cook for me, drive me to work, and do my taxes![/QUOTE]
If you make a really good movie with it (Guardians of the Galaxy, for instance) you can hire someone to do all that for you.
[QUOTE=Qwerty Bastard;52178559]Still waiting on that Lytro cinema camera though, which should be even better for VFX because it's engineered with literal scifi technology and can key out backgrounds without a greenscreen, it has built-in motion tracking, you can change the shutter speed of the camera to remove/add motion blur and you can FUCKING CHANGE THE CAMERA ANGLE IN 3D AFTER THE SHOT. Now THAT would be worth $100k+[/QUOTE]
I don't think I've heard of a camera where the phrase "color me skeptical" sounds more appropriate.
It'd be really neat if all of that actually worked even half as well as proclaimed, but I have my reservations.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52178577]I don't think I've heard of a camera where the phrase "color me skeptical" sounds more appropriate.
It'd be really neat if all of that actually worked even half as well as proclaimed, but I have my reservations.[/QUOTE]
Lytro's got a track record. Their weird light field tech has been proven to work across two consumer cameras, a VR photogrammetry camera, and now the cinema camera. If I understand it right, it creates depth models that can be manipulated in post-production.
That's not a new idea. Facebook's doing it with their VR capture rigs using normal cameras. Lytro's using light field sensors, but at the end of the day it's not that different from the photogrammetry you can do with a phone and a tripod. The only real difference is you have one capture point instead of several, and you're pulling in a lot more detail (755 megapixels).
[QUOTE=PieClock;52178452]Man, I'd feel so nervous just holding that thing in case I broke it.[/QUOTE]
insurance, there has to be one for this.
2.7k for a 7 inch lcd lmao
[QUOTE=gaboer;52178392]As someone who works in production, no, it's not made to market rich kids. During shoots we typically rent out cinema cameras and other equipment that we need for the shoot. The quality and footage we get is worth our rental cost. This is the market RED markets to, digital cinematography with companies, rental houses, and film production crews.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=FreakySoup;52178276]guys these cameras aren't meant for rich kids youtube videos, they're literally the super high def digital cameras used to shoot real fucking movies
typically they're bought by an equipment house who rent them to film productions; ie the companies with millions of dollars to actually pay for them[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=meppers;52178363]I guess guardians of the galaxy 2, transformers 5, the martian, and the hobbit 3 are movies filmed by "rich kids"
[URL="http://www.red.com/shot-on-red"]http://www.red.com/shot-on-red[/URL][/QUOTE]
its [i]market[/i] is rich kids, and it just so happens that a spattering of actual film companies have use for them as well. even then, they're rented and not bought outright. equipment houses may buy 10 or so of these and that's still barely anything compared to the hundreds being sold to individuals with more money than sense. a yeezy shirt is still a shirt, and poor people can still buy one, but it's obvious what their intended market for sustained income is.
it's a matter of "i have the money, so who cares if it's massively overpriced"? it's completely inaccessible for average indies when the entire thing costs as much as an entire house.
i'm not bashing 8k cameras, i'm bashing them for charging $950 for a goddamn handle. they can charge such prices because there isn't any competition, not because they're barely going to make ends meet otherwise. if they were selling as many cameras to productions as claimed, then why do they need all the money-milking proprietary cables that cost hundreds of dollars to "make ends meet"?
Is it just me, or has Linus's quality really dropped over the past few months. Why the fuck is he even reviewing [I]film equipment[/I]?
Not to mention whinging about the cost - these damned things are a fucking miracle considering that before that, you'd need to rent out cameras that cost near about 200,000 [I]per camera[/I], which was ridiculous. At the price point these things are at, given the quality, the chance to own the fucking thing outright is a godsend for those serious about filmmaking. Not to mention 8K is pretty amazing, especially since standard (preferred) practise to my knowledge atleast is to record in a higher resolution and then downscale, with the ability to release the full scaled version at a later date.
That having been said, as Jund pointed out, charging 950 bucks for a fucking handle is like Apple-level scalping in a monopoly market. All it'll take is for a rival to enter the scene and things will even out pretty quickly.
[QUOTE=Jund;52179927]its [i]market[/i] is rich kids, and it just so happens that a spattering of actual film companies have use for them as well.[/QUOTE]
Their market isn't rich kids to any sort of extent whatsoever, the market is production houses. These are not consumer or prosumer products, or anything like a Leica
The high prices are necessary since Red is a company that only makes cinema cameras and for the insane amount of r/d involved in producing cutting edge equipment
And they do have rivals, there's plenty of competition. Most notably Arri, but other companies like Canon and Sony also make cinema cameras. Productions don't use Red because it's the only option, they use it because it's the best one for their needs
Indies could probably just buy a blackmagic ursa mini
[QUOTE=Jund;52179927]its [i]market[/i] is rich kids, and it just so happens that a spattering of actual film companies have use for them as well. even then, they're rented and not bought outright. equipment houses may buy 10 or so of these and that's still barely anything compared to the hundreds being sold to individuals with more money than sense. a yeezy shirt is still a shirt, and poor people can still buy one, but it's obvious what their intended market for sustained income is.
it's a matter of "i have the money, so who cares if it's massively overpriced"? it's completely inaccessible for average indies when the entire thing costs as much as an entire house.
i'm not bashing 8k cameras, i'm bashing them for charging $950 for a goddamn handle. they can charge such prices because there isn't any competition, not because they're barely going to make ends meet otherwise. if they were selling as many cameras to productions as claimed, then why do they need all the money-milking proprietary cables that cost hundreds of dollars to "make ends meet"?[/QUOTE]
No, it's not. The market is for working media professionals. If you think it's marketed towards rich kids, then why aren't the Instagram celebs endorsing it? The real people who are endorsing it are media professionals such as cinematographers and film makers.
The vast majority of people who have RED cameras and the like are working professionals in film, TV, corporate, music videos, advertising, etc., etc. The TV industry are adopting the use of RED cameras and the like for various reasons, some of which have been mentioned in this thread already.
These sorts of high end cameras are both bought and rented. It really depends on what is cost effective to whoever is using it. Some buy it because it's something they use frequently and renting something you'd use frequently becomes less cost effective.
Average indies have a large assortment of options, but renting a RED package from a camera rental company isn't as far fetched as you think, depending on their budget. That's literally why camera rentals exist, for you to get fancy camera gear for whatever the project is for a much lower price than buying everything.
And if you think for a second that RED is pricy, take a look at the other cinema cameras on the "rich kid" market. ARRI, Panavision to name a few, goes into the $100,000+. So before you think RED is overpriced, it's literally the tip of the iceberg that you don't know anything about.
[QUOTE=snookypookums;52179954]Is it just me, or has Linus's quality really dropped over the past few months. Why the fuck is he even reviewing [I]film equipment[/I]? [/QUOTE]
It's Linus [B]Tech[/B] Tips. Computers, phones and peripheals are not the only things which fall into that category.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52178421]That being said, and it's been brought up before: many film studios tend to [b]rent[/b] these cameras out, as opposed to own them outright.[/QUOTE]
Unless your name is Tommy Wiseau but he's special.
[QUOTE=Jund;52178161]no one who actually needs this would be stupid enough to pay for it
literally made to market to rich kids[/QUOTE]
RED is living proof of why capitalism is wrong. Some chinese kid worked for no pay assembling these overpriced plastic toys, material cost like below the 100 USD, but they put the final price at multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars for a barely functional camera. What is this bullshit?
Hitmen work for less money than the basic parts for this camera alone costed.
[QUOTE=snookypookums;52179954]Is it just me, or has Linus's quality really dropped over the past few months. Why the fuck is he even reviewing [I]film equipment[/I]?
Not to mention whinging about the cost - these damned things are a fucking miracle considering that before that, you'd need to rent out cameras that cost near about 200,000 [I]per camera[/I], which was ridiculous. At the price point these things are at, given the quality, the chance to own the fucking thing outright is a godsend for those serious about filmmaking. Not to mention 8K is pretty amazing, especially since standard (preferred) practise to my knowledge atleast is to record in a higher resolution and then downscale, with the ability to release the full scaled version at a later date.
That having been said, as Jund pointed out, charging 950 bucks for a fucking handle is like Apple-level scalping in a monopoly market. All it'll take is for a rival to enter the scene and things will even out pretty quickly.[/QUOTE]
I noticed the advert audio was much lower than everything else.. like come on LTT editors..
[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;52180382]Some chinese kid worked for no pay assembling these overpriced plastic toys, material cost like below the 100 USD, but they put the final price at multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars for a barely functional camera. What is this bullshit?[/QUOTE]
the heck are you talking about dude
[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;52180382]RED is living proof of why capitalism is wrong. Some chinese kid worked for no pay assembling these overpriced plastic toys, material cost like below the 100 USD, but they put the final price at multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars for a barely functional camera. What is this bullshit?
Hitmen work for less money than the basic parts for this camera alone costed.[/QUOTE]
that's great, but this is an 8k camera. 8k as in, this
[t]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VkU0bjZwJ0o/maxresdefault.jpg[/t][t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4qf8PiCQAA6Tt4.png:large[/t]
The resolution is maximized beyond what any consumer (Including Linus) would ever need in any practical use. They aren't selling it to dudes like Linus, they're renting it to massive multi-billion dollar companies that have a demand for their supply.
it's literally specialized equipment for film making. That's exactly the reason it exists. It doesn't have audio stuff and certain features because it's designed to be specialized to excel at one thing better than anything else out there. It's designed so that film makers, while editing, can negate virtually all existing defects when down scaling the video.
It's not a sign of anything wrong with capitalism, it's just how capitalism works. When you're in the market for specialist and commercial shit you pay a very large premium because you're buying something that isn't mass produced. Companies buy special machines that cost a premium all the time because they don't want the things to break out of the fucking blue.
Lets not forget that higher resolution equipment (monitors, cameras, etc) cost more and more the crazier they get. 4k monitors alone aren't costly because 'capitalism is bad'. In fact, without capitalism, we wouldn't have had any of this shit.
The red is a great piece of hardware.
Their accessory prices are still criminal, especially all those proprietary shit.
In the end they just know they can get away with it, being the "cheapest" camera in its bracket.
[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;52180382]RED is living proof of why capitalism is wrong. Some chinese kid worked for no pay assembling these overpriced plastic toys, material cost like below the 100 USD, but they put the final price at multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars for a barely functional camera. What is this bullshit?
Hitmen work for less money than the basic parts for this camera alone costed.[/QUOTE]
1. What are R&D and other non-material costs
2. REDs are manufactured in California
[T]http://www.redgrabs.com/up/1317291935.jpg[/T]
Doesn't look like a sweatshop full of child workers to me.
[QUOTE=Jund;52179927]its [i]market[/i] is rich kids, and it just so happens that a spattering of actual film companies have use for them as well. even then, they're rented and not bought outright. equipment houses may buy 10 or so of these and that's still barely anything compared to the hundreds being sold to individuals with more money than sense. a yeezy shirt is still a shirt, and poor people can still buy one, but it's obvious what their intended market for sustained income is.[/QUOTE]
This argument is so disjointed and stupid I can't even comprehend what you're trying to say
you'd have a point if we were talking about garbage like beats by dre but they aren't marketing towards random people, it's literally specialist equipment. It doesn't have some dumb assholes name slapped onto the marketing. they aren't showing these off to braindead kids and saying "Yo this is the next hottest thing haha buy it like its some kind of fucking ipod nano with gold infused micro-processors". They're advertising it to a very unique and wealthy market.
Like saying its overpriced is one thing but oh my god what are you doing. No shit people are going to buy things like this without thought, this happens to every expensive product on the market.
[URL="http://www.red.com/store/products/weapon-brain-with-helium-8k-s35-sensor"]To further drive the point in look at the product page[/URL].
[QUOTE=FreakySoup;52178276]guys these cameras aren't meant for rich kids youtube videos, they're literally the super high def digital cameras used to shoot real fucking movies
typically they're bought by an equipment house who rent them to film productions; ie the companies with millions of dollars to actually pay for them[/QUOTE]
they dont even use these all the time for movies, loads of action scenes in the avengers were done with canon 5ds and 7ds.
160k is one thing but why is the design so gaudy and childish. Carbon fiber? Skulls? Come on
[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;52180382]*aggressive ignorance*
[/QUOTE]
if you actually think cameras cost below 100 US then i don't even know
you realize we're talking about cameras and not Tshirts, right??
[QUOTE=mokkan;52180538]they dont even use these all the time for movies, loads of action scenes in the avengers were done with canon 5ds and 7ds.[/QUOTE]
Source on that?
I don't see why they'd use cameras not capable of 4K for stuff like that.
[editline]3rd May 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mining Bill;52180976]if you actually think cameras cost below 100 US then i don't even now
you realize we're talking about cameras and not Tshirts, right??[/QUOTE]
No, you see, these camera sensors are literally found outside on the streets.
they just put it in a plastic box and then sell it for $100 000 - total scam! :sax:
Well i guess you can make pretty dope digital zooms in post with that thing.
[QUOTE=Eric95;52180043]
And they do have rivals, there's plenty of competition. Most notably Arri, but other companies like Canon and Sony also make cinema cameras. Productions don't use Red because it's the only option, they use it because it's the best one for their needs
Indies could probably just buy a blackmagic ursa mini[/QUOTE]
most 8k cameras are prototypes or not for sale
[editline]3rd May 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=J!NX;52180437]
you'd have a point if we were talking about garbage like beats by dre but they aren't marketing towards random people, it's literally specialist equipment. It doesn't have some dumb assholes name slapped onto the marketing.[/QUOTE]
that's why they's selling proprietary form factor SSDs with half the r/w speed at 15 times the price right
What is linus trying to be? A sarcastic reviewer or a spoiled rich kid?
Because I cannot categorize his ignorant rant. It's not entertainment, neither tech tips.
It's a pile of forced shit with the obnoxious loud speaking and no value other than "oh yeah it costs this much".
Does he even know why camera systems are sold this way?
"You have to buy lens separately"
No shit, do you also whine when you buy a ILC body without kit lens? Because you are supposed to have lens if you just buy the body.
What's next? Will he rant about some office grade PC build not having a dedicated gaming videocard? Jesus fucking christ, cut this dude's advertising money and views already.
[QUOTE=Jund;52181013]
that's why they's selling proprietary form factor SSDs with half the r/w speed at 15 times the price right[/QUOTE]
I'm willing to bet this is yet another thing that is specialized towards a specific market, I'm guessing its for the camera and has enough space that works with the speeds. Regardless, over-priced garbage or not these things are costly because they use experimental tech and are very, very hard to make. Regardless of whatever asinine reason they have, them selling SSD's like that have nothing to do with their marketing. That doesn't mean they are "Selling to rich kids". You are completely just missing the fucking point as to why this, a [U]FILM[/U] camera exists. It isn't some 40$ walmart camcorder you buy and then throw away when the screen gets chipped.
Several connectors on the camera could HAVE to be proprietary due to it being such a higher quality of camera. This isn't some wild thing to think about. This isn't exactly an iPhone where you aren't buying it as a full package and its a hyper-common mass production product where Apple shells out a fuckload of them and require 80$ cables to artificially inflate costs.
The 8k camera and lens itself should be expensive for obvious reasons. Everything else is as pricey as it is because they aren't mass production (There is no way that you can mass produce a camera like this), which is the cost of buying mass production. Not only that but it's using things found in the film industry, not shit that you, me, or Linus is going to have lying around. They aren't able to just connect whatever the fuck they want into it because their camera is all geared towards a specific usage.
Lets not forget that they're a cinema camera company above anything else. They have costs this high due to research and development, and likely to prevent companies from fucking them out of their cameras.
[editline]3rd May 2017[/editline]
They aren't marketing it for you dude. Nor are they marketing it to dumbass kids with too much money.
It honestly doesn't matter who buys this anyways because they still are marketing it for what it is, a fancy ass camera.
I would bitch about the costs myself but this isn't being sold towards 'civilian' but corporate/company use.
Honestly, I really don't like this new linus with all the swearing and blowjob jokes. It's not funny for anyone who isnt 12 and I don't come to his channel for funny stuff, I come to his channel for tech stuff. If I wanted to see funny stuff, I would just go to Dunkey's channel or Critikal's channel.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
