Corridor Calls Out LTT on RED Video

[DIT]

4 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

They can offset the cost by charging more for the camera sensor unit: the R&D had to be done already so why not charge more for the platform itself instead of the accessories?

 

I am not being unreasonable here I am still talking about 1/3rd of the total price of just the accessories. Red doing it the other way around, charging twice for the accessories than the camera itself, is far more unreasonable. It doesn't serves any purpose other than to push secondary sales and pretending the product is far cheaper than the competition. It still is cheaper afaik, but just not a bargain. There's no reason to build in a "gotcha!" with the accessories even if the cost of them is higher than normal, a lot higher than normal, I guarantee you that it's not 450 times higher than normal. And if t was I understand that they're selling a platform so charge more for the platform itself instead of hoping your customers have accidents or misplace accessories and come back to make a killing on secondary sales cover that upfront honestly.

I don't know, this isn't a problem within the industry that people care about. If their primary customers are okay with it why would they change anything ? 

[AshleyAshes]

I think we can easily determine why LTT really bought the Red camera and all the hardware that goes into it.

 

...Because they wanted to and they could afford it.

 

It's like any PC gamer who jumps every year from the 6700k to the 7700k and so on.  Because they wanted 'the best' and they could afford it.  Because they love tinkering with the top-top end so they wanted the absolute newest shinies.

 

I mean geez, LTT is talking about HDR content coming eventually.  Does anyone here think that HDR will help LTT gain more views or reach a broader audience?  God no.  ...It's because some people at LTT think that figuring out and working on an HDR workflow will be 'Totally awesome' and they can afford to do it. And if they have fun undertaking that kind of technical challenge for self-satisfaction fine.

 

 

[Iceyhotfire123]

1 hour ago, coolkingler1 said:

Which is what a company and Youtube channel need to grow.

 

 

Yes but then the quality goes down and the shit storm goes up. All the click bait tittles and thumbnails. Along with the not helpful ranting about products. 

 

If it's not for you Linus but your reviewing it don't say oh this is over prices and this and this. If you can afford the camera you probably have a job needed it and one that makes more then enough income to purchase. 

 

I see 10 year olds on this fourm that could come up with better content then when ltt puts out now a days.

[DIT]

7 minutes ago, The Ran said:

Then why not go all the way and just charge the full cost for the body and chuck the accessories in for free? Because not everyone will want them so it's an unneeded cost and a waste of hardware. By doing things the way they are they're actually saving people money that don't need certain accessories (as has been mentioned the cable isn't necessary), when the end cost for the people that do need them is the same what's the problem?

As I also said Linus didn't need to buy that cable. The monitor he purchased has a connector on the bottom that interfaces with the body of the camera directly removing any need to use a cable. 

 

Yet he decided to purchase the cable anyway for some reason...

[The Ran]

6 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Again this point is disingenuous: I am not suggesting a 20 bucks consumer grade display port here. I am ok with 200, 300 even 400 bucks for the specialized cable. Just not 900 that's double what it needs to be by any estimation, it's just hiding the actual cost of the unit.

Where are you even getting $900 from? According to the Corridor video it's $240.

[Guest]

Just now, Iceyhotfire123 said:

 

 

I see 10 year olds on this fourm that could come up with better content then when ltt puts out now a days.

You can too far in your hate.  I don't like clickbait titles either, but the production quality hasn't really changed at all.

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, DIT said:

I don't know, this isn't a problem within the industry that people care about. If their primary customers are okay with it why would they change anything ? 

"This isn't a problem" it is a problem. It is just not acknowledged because of the attitude that I've seen from many of you: "Who cares we're professionals, we spend millions on production of course we cannot just use peasant cables and LCD screens!"

 

None of that actually constitutes a tech reason why it should cost that much it's just marketing. Marketing can be dishonest and rich customers are often ripped off cause they care more about status and the appearance of quality than actual function.

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, The Ran said:

Where are you even getting $900 from? According to the Corridor video it's $240.

It's just an example.

[DIT]

3 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

I think we can easily determine why LTT really bought the Red camera and all the hardware that goes into it.

 

...Because they wanted to and they could afford it.

 

It's like any PC gamer who jumps every year from the 6700k to the 7700k and so on.  Because they wanted 'the best' and they could afford it.  Because they love tinkering with the top-top end so they wanted the absolute newest shinies.

 

I mean geez, LTT is talking about HDR content coming eventually.  Does anyone here think that HDR will help LTT gain more views or reach a broader audience?  God no.  ...It's because some people at LTT think that figuring out and working on an HDR workflow will be 'Totally awesome' and they can afford to do it. And if they have fun undertaking that kind of technical challenge for self-satisfaction fine.

 

 

Exactly, I'm not knocking them for deciding to buy the camera. "Why but a Ferrari when you can buy a perfectly good Ford Focus" because you want too. It's great to see someone who started of like Linus work his way up and see them all enjoy this technology and share it with the world as most people would never know it existed. 

 

Just don't complain about the prices of a tool designed for Multi-Million dollar productions not for your YouTube channel ... 

[The Ran]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

It's just an example.

But it's wrong. You're moaning about a $900 cable and saying it would be fine if it cost $300-400, but it actually costs $240.

[MageTank]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

"This isn't a problem" it is a problem. It is just not acknowledged because of the attitude that I've seen from many of you: "Who cares we're professionals, we spend millions on production of course we cannot just use peasant cables and LCD screens!"

 

None of that actually constitutes a tech reason why it should cost that much it's just marketing. Marketing can be dishonest and rich customers are often ripped off cause they care more about status and the appearance of quality than actual function.

It's not a tech reason. You are the one trying to make it a tech reason, lol. This is simply business. They charge what people are willing to pay. Hollywood is full of people that will pay premiums for what most of us consider "overkill". They will spend millions on peace of mind alone. 

 

Nobody is arguing that these cables cost hundreds of dollars to make. The point is simple: they cost hundreds of dollars because that is what people are willing to pay for them. If people were not willing to pay that price, they wouldn't be selling for that price. That is how this entire process works. 

[Misanthrope]

5 minutes ago, DIT said:

As I also said Linus didn't need to but that cable. The monitor he purchased has a connector on the bottom that interfaces with the body of the camera directly removing any need to use a cable. 

 

Yet he decided to purchase the cable anyway for some reason...

Wouldn't that just illustrate the problem I am talking about? A clever salesman looking to make a lot of sales commission on secondary sales that probably talked past to someone on LTT's side that's evidently not an expert on the subject or familiar with the product?

 

It basically confirms that it feels dishonest even if the overall cost of the platform + accessories is actually fair if seen as a whole and not separately.

[Misanthrope]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

It's not a tech reason. You are the one trying to make it a tech reason, lol.

On a tech forum, when discussing a guy that makes tech videos that made a video about tech.

 

Imagine that.

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, The Ran said:

But it's wrong. 

Fine, it is. Is why it's just an example, an analogy of the entirety of the situation. You were right, I wasn't 100% accurate I wasn't intending to be to make my point. Asked and answered let's move on.

[Iceyhotfire123]

7 minutes ago, coolkingler1 said:

You can too far in your hate.  I don't like clickbait titles either, but the production quality hasn't really changed at all.

Let's just say, they are not in their prime anymore 

[DIT]

2 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Wouldn't that just illustrate the problem I am talking about? A clever salesman looking to make a lot of sales commission on secondary sales that probably talked past to someone on LTT's side that's evidently not an expert on the subject or familiar with the product?

 

It basically confirms that it feels dishonest even if the overall cost of the platform + accessories is actually fair if seen as a whole and not separately.

So now we are just talking about a problem with society as a whole anyway, every business would try to capitalise on a way to make more money. Maybe LTT should have done some more research before they decided to spunk all that money on the camera.  It's called turning a profit - until people in the industry revolt about it, they won't change. 

 

But again we don't know the true cost of the cables - it could cost a lot more than any of us expect. We are all just speculating.

[FlightRisk]

4 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

I think we can easily determine why LTT really bought the Red camera and all the hardware that goes into it.

 

...Because they wanted to and they could afford it.

 

It's like any PC gamer who jumps every year from the 6700k to the 7700k and so on.  Because they wanted 'the best' and they could afford it.  Because they love tinkering with the top-top end so they wanted the absolute newest shinies.

 

I mean geez, LTT is talking about HDR content coming eventually.  Does anyone here think that HDR will help LTT gain more views or reach a broader audience?  God no.  ...It's because some people at LTT think that figuring out and working on an HDR workflow will be 'Totally awesome' and they can afford to do it. And if they have fun undertaking that kind of technical challenge for self-satisfaction fine.

 

 

This was my main problem with the video. it entirely missed my guess of the reason for LMG's purchase of the devices. and what I am sure if the reason they produced the 'RED camera rant' is "we thought this would be fun and entertaining to our viewers". even if the reason was for views and dat ad-sense money, WHO THE FUCK CARES!? LMG is a business which seems to genuinely care about it's employees and to a certain extent, it's viewers. They still have an audience which cares for the content whether or not others do. 

 

Other things I can agree with the video for, like buying the first party accessories when they can buy third party. Although some could argue that maybe LMG wanted that robust reliability which was mentioned about the cable and didn't want to risk third party not having the same level of care and detail as promised in the RED accessories.

[Misanthrope]

Just now, DIT said:

So now we are just talking about a problem with society as a whole anyway, every business would try to capitalise on a way to make more money. Maybe LTT should have done some more research before they decided to spunk all that money on the camera.  It's called turning a profit - until people in the industry revolt about it, they won't change. 

 

But again we don't know the true cost of the cables - it could cost a lot more than any of us expect. We are all just speculating.

Again, I am not suggesting red makes less money I am just suggesting they charge a lot more for the sensor instead. From this point forward if you continue to misrepresent my posts I will not comment further on them since I consider them covered.

[MageTank]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

On a tech forum, when discussing a guy that makes a tech video that made a video about tech.

 

Imagine that.

The context of the video is cost. Imagine that. That was the entire context of Linus' video. Your entire point is "it costs too much" when everyone else is trying to explain that the cost is justified given the environments in which these products are used. They pay a premium for peace of mind, so that saving a buck on X piece of equipment doesn't come back to haunt them later on.

 

Face it. You are the only person that has a problem with the cost, and your entire problem is full of over-exaggerations and points that have been refuted several times over. You are arguing over the prices of superfluous products that are not intended for nearly all of your average consumers, because it "shouldn't cost that much". You seem to understand almost nothing about the business side of things, because you've failed to grasp what I've explained two times now. 

 

Just now, Misanthrope said:

Again, I am not suggesting red makes less money I am just suggesting they charge a lot more for the sensor instead. From this point forward if you continue to misrepresent my posts I will not comment further on them since I consider them covered.

It's not misrepresenting your words. You just don't know how to word your arguments properly. You came in with an over-exaggerated figure, used it as the foundation of your argument, and then kept refuting any counter to it by saying "well, it shouldn't cost that much". Your opinion over what something should cost, means very little if the entire industry in which the product is targeted, pays for that product with no questions asked.

 

That's not the only exaggerated part of your claims. Now you are trying to spin it in a light that Linus somehow didn't sign off on the purchase, or that he didn't look it over himself. Fun fact: if you are making a $40,000-$60,000 purchase, your boss is certainly going to want to know about it beforehand. Now it begs the question, do you consider Linus to be a camera novice? Do you think he didn't ask his camera guys for input before making the purchase? Do you honestly think it's a companies job to make sure their user researched before allowing them to complete the purchase?

 

Seriously, what are you even arguing for at this point?

[DIT]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

Again, I am not suggesting red makes less money I am just suggesting they charge a lot more for the sensor instead. From this point forward if you continue to misrepresent my posts I will not comment further on them since I consider them covered.

Because I just don't agree with your reasoning - then you or anyone could easily say "oh damn this camera is way too overpriced" when they factor in adding $8,000 to offset the cost of other add-ons. 

 

[The Ran]

2 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Again, I am not suggesting red makes less money I am just suggesting they charge a lot more for the sensor instead. From this point forward if you continue to misrepresent my posts I will not comment further on them since I consider them covered.

I addressed that point in a previous reply to you, take a look back if you missed it. In the end it makes no difference, the total cost is the same if you get the cable and is actually slightly higher if you don't get it. The only difference it would make is if someone bought a spare cable (since the added extra cost to the body is only for one cable) but in that situation we're talking about such a small amount of money (relative to the total cost and how much production companies are willing to pay) that it's pretty much irrelevant.

[Jonkree]

I watch both Corridor Digital and Linus Tech Tips for quite some time now, but I never really had the reason to post something on their respective communities, but doesn't Linus already explain the reason why the RED camera is so expensive in the "GeForce vs Quadro as Fast As Possible" Techquickie video? It's for companies with a lot of money, that want to make more money, so the manufacturer demands more money (also it costs more to make) and it fuels RND. Also everyone does it...

[Mira Yurizaki]

2 minutes ago, Jonkree said:

I watch both Corridor Digital and Linus Tech Tips for quite some time now, but I never really had the reason to post something on their respective communities, but doesn't Linus already explain the reason why the RED camera is so expensive in the "GeForce vs Quadro as Fast As Possible" Techquickie video? It's for companies with a lot of money, that want to make more money, so the manufacturer demands more money (also it costs more to make) and it fuels RND. Also everyone does it...

Quadros were also designed for working hard in cramped server environments, possibly 24/7 for days.

 

A GeForce will die a quick death if you put it under the same conditions.

[Misanthrope]

17 minutes ago, DIT said:

Because I just don't agree with your reasoning - then you or anyone could easily say "oh damn this camera is way too overpriced" when they factor in adding $8,000 to offset the cost of other add-ons. 

 

Is not that you disagree you're stating things I did not say and went out of my way to clarify over and over. 

[Misanthrope]

11 minutes ago, The Ran said:

I addressed that point in a previous reply to you, take a look back if you missed it. In the end it makes no difference, the total cost is the same if you get the cable and is actually slightly higher if you don't get it. The only difference it would make is if someone bought a spare cable (since the added extra cost to the body is only for one cable) but in that situation we're talking about such a small amount of money (relative to the total cost and how much production companies are willing to pay) that it's pretty much irrelevant.

I do not think it's irrelevant but I can concede that Linus did not state my point at all, it's more implicit in his decision to ultimately buy the equipment but still an assumption on my side, until he decides to clarify and if he does of course.