How will the SI-1920HDVR compete against RED

[Jerry Waters]

Thanks to you guys. I thought I might be tarred and feathered for my comments but someone should be saying, "The Emperor is running around in his underwear." I think it is great that companies are pushing the envelope. Nothing but good can come of it but while Red talked, SI walked - and very well indeed. Shoot it, edit it and put it out. They have the answers.

Two years ago I went to NAB expecting JVC to follow up their 1 chip HDV camera with a 3 cccd model. They had a year to get it out but they didn't. They had a year head start on Sony but Sony came out with the FX1 and Z1 - even the A1U - before JVC got their 3 ccd HDV camera out. I hear it is a nice camera and I'd like progressive but I've bought a Z1 and an A1U in the meantime. He who hesitates....etc., and Red hesitated way too long. At least that's what I think.

[Tom Wills]

I had an entire post typed up, around 2 pages, about why the RED camera in my opinion may be a better choice than the SI, but I decided not to post it, because really, the last thing we need is a flame war.

Please people, realize that although the SI is great, the RED is too. The RED is revolutionary in the same way that the SI is. The SI's a fine camera for indies. The RED is too. The SI will make it's way onto some higher end productions. The RED will obviously do that also, possibly more thanks to the higher resolution and 35mm lenses, but those things may also keep some indies out of it.

So, the way I look at it is that the RED and the SI are actually not so much competing as they are co-existing. For someone who wants to just be shooting now, and have a camera to last them a decent time, and who will then upgrade when the time comes, the SI's a perfect camera. It's also cheaper. But, the RED is aimed at people who have the money to put up-front to be able to keep a camera for a good long time, continually preforming small software updates and a sensor upgrade eventually, keeping it alive and kicking butts beyond where the SI may, but it does cost money up front, and may cost more money to use because of higher lens costs, and differing ways of storing data. The RED also will be working as a good ENG camera, something which I don't feel the SI would be suited for at all.

So, if you look at it that way, the SI and RED, while having many similar features, aren't exactly aimed at the same customer. Sure, there's some overlap, but that's unavoidable.

Thus, let's all just stop bashing each other's cameras, just sit back, relax, and make films, and be happy with the camera that we have, or will have.

Alright guys, enough for my peace-fest of a post, now I've got to get back to actually doing some schoolwork.

[Don Donatello]

"Red is vaporware with many unanswered questions about workflow and cost. If I had money to spare for the SI camera I'd buy it in a heartbeat with no second thought about what Red might offer someday, if it ever ships"

it all depends on where ONE is sitting ...
very easy to say i would BUY X camera ( or anything for that matter) IF i had the $$ ..

when you HAVE/get the $$ then you'll look at it from a totally different POV ..
when you write a check for $20,000.00 plus tax in CA... you think/talk different when you know you're not going to be writing a check ...

bottom line = we all try to get the most camera for the amount of $$ we spend. if you have 5K you look at that price range .. if 12K you look there .. there is a camera in just about every price range ..
if you need a camera NOW you look at what is available TODAY .. if don't need a camera till next June then keep your eyes open and next May see what is available ...

[Ari Presler]

[QUOTE=Tom Wills] having a completely RAW workflow really makes me an ideal candidate to not buy this camera. If I can't take the footage right out of the camera, put it into Final Cut, and 20 minutes later have a rough cut of a few shots to show a client, without compressing, adjusting color spaces, and all that jazz, I can't work with it. So, for me, the RAW is actually a disadvantage. Maybe it's not for some of you filmmakers out there, but for me, doing Documentary/ENG work, I want a high quality D-Cinema camera, but I don't want to have to wait for "dailies". So, in my mind, that's not as big of an advantage as you're touting it to be. RAW isn't for everybody. [QUOTE]

Tom,

Are you aware that, today, you can shoot a file(s) with our camera and hand a USB Thumbdrive to your client and have them instantly play the file in Windows Media Player on their laptop...no compressing, no rendering, no ingesting, no coloring, none of that jazz?

These is the difference in shooting with RAW and CineformRAW.

The CineformRAW file (today as an .avi) can be directly used for DAILIES or could I say HOURLIES? The files are not only the quarter resolution proxy for viewing and editing, they also contain the full resolution 1920 by 1080 data within them. This means you dont even have to refer back to original footage to do an edit or composite; the data is ALWAYS in the one file.

Another important point is the codec can run on simple PC's and do not require any special dual-core PC hardware. That means you can watch the clip directly on the notebook you purchased last year or maybe even the year before that.

So, if your concern is operating in CineformRAW from a workflow perspective, you really shouldnt. The benefits of file communcation speed, image quality and production flexibility are far superior to any traditional pre-encoded, pre-colorized and/or highly compressed format.

If you want the resolution, detail, dynamic range, 10-bit-depth and workflow....

Shoot it on SILICON!!!

[Ari Presler]

Originally Posted by Tom Wills

I had an entire post typed up, around 2 pages, about why the RED camera in my opinion may be a better choice than the SI, but I decided not to post it, because really, the last thing we need is a flame war.

Please people, realize that although the SI is great, the RED is too. The RED is revolutionary in the same way that the SI is. The SI's a fine camera for indies. The RED is too.

Tom,

I appreciate your commentary and participation in the Silicon Forum (and please do continue).

However...!!!!! Please try to make your statement in correct present terms, with supporting facts and without hypothesis (unless stated as such).

Today, you are absolutely correct...

Silicon IS Great
Silicon IS Revolutionary

Any comment about other products should also be in present terms. Therefore:

Competitor-A MAYBE Great (at some uknown time in the future...)
Competitor-A MAYBE Revolutionary (at some uknown time in the future...)

I would not state "Silicon IS Great and so is Competitor-A"? Have you seen images, footage, user interface, controls, displays, proxies, workflow, networking, storage, upgradability, flexibility or ANYTHING in operation?


Conclusion:
Today, your only choice IS

SHOOT IT ON SILICON!

[Mathieu Kassovitz]

Originally Posted by Ari Presler

Silicon IS Great
Silicon IS Revolutionary

Any comment about other products should also be in present terms. Therefore:

Competitor-A MAYBE Great (at some uknown time in the future...)
Competitor-A MAYBE Revolutionary (at some uknown time in the future...)

I would not state "Silicon IS Great and so is Competitor-A"? Have you seen images, footage, user interface, controls, displays, proxies, workflow, networking, storage, upgradability, flexibility or ANYTHING in operation?


Conclusion:
Today, your only choice IS

SHOOT IT ON SILICON!

What's this? Advertisement? With the due respect, including reporting your enthusiasm, it's not the best way to convince anyone of the advantages of your product. Maybe, I will rent or buy this camera and there isn't need to this bad consumer banners . . .

If you want to sell the idea of shooting on your cinema camera after all to the professional people . . . As trustful goals: product (quality, form factor, ease, innovation, etc.), reliability and support will be enough.

[Yasser Kassana]

Well, Silicon is revolutionary but what is the benchmark for calling it revolutionary? Are you basing that in price vs ergonomics and efficieny, if so with what?

May I suggest, as I have suggested before. Silicon is obviously something for the indie market as well as big budget teams. Who can Silicon honestly be compared to, the D20, Genesis, Viper? I don't know. It's all good having a table saying what Silicon has above the competitors, but real world tests will prove that this camera is above and beyond what us consumer hope.

I'm pretty sure Arri and Panavision would be fully compliant to test their product with yours, if not just rent, it's worth the expense.

[Carmen Stern]

i'm a bit irritated too ari..you have a great product, no need to fight over who's got the bigger b*lls...i think both cameras will coexist..and there will be quite a few more entering this market next year at NAB i bet, now that you've proven it works ;)

the dislikes i have with RED has to do with their marketing..and the artcenter-sissy-design...the renderings you saw at NAB takes a small group of designers and a coupleadays of 3d modelling..if you look at them, you see many things have not yet been thought through..anyway - many like the design and i'm sure jim's team will fix all - the big work is 'round the sensor and electronics anyway.

so you got a great product, no need to convince us all..i also like very much the testing that's done on it. i wish the red would not be in such a hurry. look at arri and their D20. it's been around for quite a while but they collect all the data and inputs from the DPs around the world b4 they go into bigger production

[Tom Wills]

Ari, thanks for popping your head in to make a few posts. Yes, on the RAW issue, I was corrected. I completely stand corrected on that point, and I take back what I did say earler on that point. I was simply unaware that the Cineform codec could allow you to do that.

As to the "Is" versus "Maybe" game, well, that's all fine and dandy with me. I guess a good way to put my opinion into terms is that yes, if you need to shoot something now, "SHOOT IT ON SILICON!", but if you're looking for the next big new camera and can wait until, let's say October or November, Why not see what the RED has to offer, eh?

Now to all of you irritated at Ari, let's all just cool our heads. Everybody's got a right to toot their own horn when they've designed, built, and brought to market a D-Cinema camera. :)

[Jason Rodriguez]

Okay,

This thread is getting out of hand.

The whole premise of the thread is wrong . . . a user coming to us wondering how we're going to "compete" with a non-existent camera, that when I happen to list the specs for (based on what I'm seeing as their responses on the threads in their forums across the net), the maker comes to me and says it's all speculation!

So frankly, we can't compete with speculation . . . there's no need . . . we simply need to hunker our heads down right now and make the best camera we can at this point in time for release in Q3.

Your feedback as poential end-users has been invaluble, and will continue to be-we can't make the camera you want without your input.

So let's stop this thread, and start up something more productive, like features you want to see, form-factors you want to see, problems with the current crop of gear (from other manufacturers) that are really annoying you and you want fixed, etc.

That's the only way we'll really be able to make a "revolutionary" product.

Thanks again for everyone's support.

[Glenn Gipson]

>>Ari, thanks for popping your head in to make a few posts. Yes, on the RAW issue, I was corrected. I completely stand corrected on that point, and I take back what I did say earler on that point. I was simply unaware that the Cineform codec could allow you to do that.<<

This is exactly why this thread is a GOOD thing, and not simply a flame war. There is a lot about the SI that we didn't quiet understand...until this thread came along.

EDIT: Jason, I posted this right as you posted yours above me. If you want to delete the thread it is up to you, of course. But I think this thread has served its purpose in terms of informing people about the SI camera and it also highlights many ASSUMPTIONS people are making about the RED camera.

[Jason Rodriguez]

No, no, I'm not deleting anything . . . I just want to get back on-topic . . . :)

Your user feedback is the most valuable asset we have . . . debating the featuers of RED, which even if you quote the boards is said to *still* be speculation, is not really very productive. You're completely right, RED is actually ALL ASSUMPTION at this point in time.

So, when the real RED comes out, then fair comparisons can be made . . . but the best thing for us will be the have the features all of you want . . . THAT will be the best way to compete or co-exist . . . we're not going to be around very long if we're not listening to you guys, making improvements, and evolving our product.

[Bob Grant]

One thing I'd like to see on the SI camera (if not there already) is a DVI port to feed 1080 to a decent sized monitor. Everyone is getting excited about shooting with shallow DOF but without a decent monitor to see exactly where focus is that can be a two edged sword.

Another issue I don't think receiving enough attention is the quality of lens mounts and the whole engineering of the sensor to lens matching, my understanding is that this is a major cost component in (good) camera design.

I guess a decent back focus adjustment system would also be on the list for those who are going to be swapping lenses. Might not be an issue, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about!

Reason I raise these issues is we're contemplating the purchase of one or more SI cameras for rental but rental kit needs to be pretty bullet proof. Reading some blurb from one rental company in the USA the issues I've raised are significant factors with the F900 and so far I don't see these issues getting enough attention from RED or SI.

Is it possible these are the things that contribute to the much higher costs of cameras from Arrie and Panavision?

[Jason Rodriguez]

Hi Bob,

We have a DVI port feeding out 720P right now . . . it's at this resolution so that you won't loose sync to the on-board LCD/touchscreen interface which can't run at 1920x1080.

We've investigated doing two different resolutions to two different screens, but have found it takes up too many system resources to do the rest of what needs to be done in the system, like real-time compression to CineForm RAW.

But you can run "large" monitors at HD resolution, again, just make sure the monitor is capable of 720/60P.

Also in regards to the back focus system, we have a very robust system that allows you to set the back focus, and then clamp the lens mount down so that it's not going anywhere. It's actually much more robust than the plastic/metal combo of the Sony F900.

Hope this helps.

[Yasser Kassana]

The way I see it is, with something like Silicon if you want to make a big budget or small indie flick and blow up to 35mm, it will look good. No evidence for that, but if the F900 can, so can this, and that is that. What we have here is a PRO camera that MIGHT deliver what the D20, HDCAM and Vipers can deliver. Period. Is RED better, I don't know, I don't care, who cares!