RED wishlist

[fomoDVXpal]

From important to less important

· 12 or more f-stops of dynamic range
· super light sensitive
· ISO setting change
· JVC HD100 size and form (allows for shoulder mountable but small)
· auto focus assist - digitally zoomed in image to see your focus better
· excellent codec 10bit (at least)
· all the frame rates (PAL and NTSC compatible too)
· cheap lens options
· a professional viewfinder
· light as possible
· 4 or more audio channels
· varying codec output
· ability to change the sensor size thus changing the DOF
· 24 bit audio
· cheap storage solution
· laptop monitoring (as an extra not necessity)
· rugged
· genlock
· LCD mounted





some are pretty hard to implement but i said them non-the-less.

thanks
Fo

[John_Moore]

Another for the list:


Realtime framerate changing.

That would yield some sweet effects.

[spencer]

good storage, and maybe a couple of different ones for different definitions, like the HVX, except with no tape.

Didn't they say something about blu-rays connected to storage in another thread? that may be neat.

[Gordon JL]

Wasn't there a big wishlist thread created for the HVX200? I'm sure some of that stuff could apply to this camera.

[cineasta_dom]

Panny missed the boat on the HVX, lets make it happen with this one.

please include the jetpack!

=)

[Filmjunkie677]

2:35:1 in camera.

[angrynerdrock07]

Jetpack!!!

[Evan S]

Jetpack!!!


Screw that. I want a cup holder.

[Luis Caffesse]

Histogram overlay.

Onboard recording (I don't want to be tethered to anything if I don't have to be).

NONproprietary recording media.

All measurements and settings readable in actual 'real world' measurements.
(ie. Focus in feet/meters, white balance in kelvin, etc).

Ability to dial in White Balance (along with setting it through the lens).


Hmmm, I'm sure I'll think of more as time goes on.

[Barry_Green]

Tapeless recording.

In-camera waveform monitor.

Everything the HVX has.

Interchangeable lens mounts -- for PL, and for still-cameras (Contax & Nikon at least).

Complete remote control capability, similar to how Canon's "Console" program lets the user control just about every aspect of it through firewire.

[Luis Caffesse]

A thought out and efficient post workflow.
I realize that's a broad statement... but my point is that a 'kick ass' camera isn't enough.
It needs to mesh into existing workflows, and with existing NLE's.

Codecs need to be supported, archiving options need to be available, etc.
Aquisition is only the first step.

[Shaw]

- Several fully customizable zebras
- Every focus assist feature that can be thought up! The more options the better as it would allow a variety of work styles and uses.
- The ability to capture select parts of the imager only. So, for example, I could shoot 2.35 without the added cost and storage for a full 16:9 UHD image.
- Maybe work something out with one of these holographic storage companies? A product would need to be out of course (which they seem to be taking forever on) but if a camera had slots (similar to the P2 idea) for 10 super high capacity holographic discs - that would rock!

[toke lahti]

Histogram overlay.
Ability to dial in White Balance (along with setting it through the lens).

If it would record raw, then you could dial white balance in the post.
Histogram is a must, but when recording raw, it should take the histogram from that.
Most DSLRs show histogram from jpeg conversion even if you are shooting raw.

[Luis Caffesse]

XLR audio inputs (goes without saying, I know..)
Line/Mic switchable

No need for a built in camera mic (I don't think) - but a well placed XLR input for a camera mounted shotgun would be nice.

[Luis Caffesse]

If it would record raw, then you could dial white balance in the post.
Histogram is a must, but when recording raw, it should take the histogram from that.
Most DSLRs show histogram from jpeg conversion even if you are shooting raw.


Granted, you could dial it in in post if you're shooting RAW.
But, if this camera is going to shoot more than just RAW (which I hope it does) then the white balance feature would be a really handy one to have.

I agree on the annoyance of the jpeg conversion histogram, my D70s does that.

[fomoDVXpal]

if this is the officail wishlist then i might as well say it again:

Shoulder Mount
Great if implemented whilst still keeping the camera small. However if it is a handy-cam form factor with a fold out shoulder mount then:

"It would be OK, but not perfect because the weight distribution will still be landing on your wrist. Ever used the Canon XLx series? NEVER AGAIN. If there's gonna be a shoulder attachment let it have a compartment to put extra weight (e.g batteries etc) in it so the centre of gravity is directly on your shoulder."

thanks
Fo

[Glenn_Gipson]

Price. If the price is not affordable for the average HVX200 buyer, then there is NOTHING revolutionary about this camera, no matter what features it has.

[fomoDVXpal]

another possible focus assist that seems nice is the one Sony used on their handycam a few years back. The LCD was touch screen so you touched on the part of the screen you wanted focused and walla!

You could combo that with the JVC focus assist and wherever you touched on the screen the zoomed in square would move to thus you could then manually focus that.

hope that helps
Fo

[toke lahti]

But, if this camera is going to shoot more than just RAW (which I hope it does) then the white balance feature would be a really handy one to have.
Yep, for live shooting and hasty ENG work there needs to be at least an optional module for other codecs and then dial-in WB would be useful. It should include both Kelvins (blue-orange axis) and cyan-magenta axis.

[roxics]

I second Barry's suggestion for an Interchangeable lens mount. Perhaps the entire imaging block can be adjusted foward or backward to account for focus to infinity on various lens mounts. Maybe use an allen wrench or something to mechanically adjust it and have a little indicator needle on the side to state it's position in millimeters.

I also agree with price. It has to be affordable or it means nothing to me. If it's going to be more then $10,000, which I kind of assume it will be based on specs, then it's out of my ballpark. Then it just becomes another viper, arri, panavision, I-don't-care-because-i-can't-afford-it camera. Even though I know somebody else could. But to me and probably 90% of the other people here we would be getting excited about nothing. Please don't disappoint us there.

[toke lahti]

I think it is a bit unrealistic to expect to get digital cinema camera below $10k.
First models are propably manufactured with low volumes, which also increases the prices.

One idea to get usable but cheap enough FF lenses might be customizing eg. EOS lenses.

[marko5000]

Probably some umpopular suggestions but I don't like the digital trend to more and more options. I would like to see:

An imaginative, unique but well thought out form factor.
A box of custom RED prime lenses.
P2 like storage but bigger and cheaper.
Large View Finder or an articulated arm.
Included Matte Box.
Filters.
Maybe a collection of different handles and mounts so you can hold the camera however you want. I hate the idea of a shoulder mounted camera if it's uncomfortable off the shoulder.

I want an artists tool. Something that inspires its user rather than the drab cut and paste designs we are currently stuck with.

Of course it should work with all third party accesories like rigs and tripods but can't we have something more inspired than an XL2 and more filmic than a DVX.

And most important of all a European release at the same time as the US one (this is probably irrelevant with UHD but it irks me none the less).

[marko5000]

Oh and could they throw in a hitherto unimagined super Apple Power Book.

I edit SD with a Power Mac with Two 2.7 gig G5s and 2 Gig of ram and I can still get the real time to panic in Motion 2 and FCP. The thought of RAW UHD at 100 FPS is like the thought of naked women when you're 13 - exciting but terrifying.

And where do I hang the Cinema Displays?

[mmm]

- HDV

- Focus rings like the XL1

- Mini-Jack audio

- Cineframe

- On board battery charging

- and most importantly, gotta have the 800x digital zoom!

[marko5000]

Don;t forget the Sepia mode.

Love that old timey feel.

[Don Tucci]

Why not 3 P2 slots and tape options .For those of us that shoot tv ads.Panny has paved the way for a usable work flow in true 1080p why not use it.don

[Glenn_Gipson]

I think it is a bit unrealistic to expect to get digital cinema camera below $10k.
First models are propably manufactured with low volumes, which also increases the prices.


Well then DVX User might as well open up a section for the Viper as well.

[Andrew M]

Oh and could they throw in a hitherto unimagined super Apple Power Book.

I edit SD with a Power Mac with Two 2.7 gig G5s and 2 Gig of ram and I can still get the real time to panic in Motion 2 and FCP. The thought of RAW UHD at 100 FPS is like the thought of naked women when you're 13 - exciting but terrifying.

And where do I hang the Cinema Displays?


I think with the resolution we will get out of the Red Camera (assuming you want to do online full rez editing) you can forget about editing on a home workstation - this kinda thing sounds like it calls for Avid Adreneline and the like - my 2 cents - find a post house with nice editng suite and make friends with them.:thumbsup:

[Joe Kras]

I know that it's already been mentioned, but if this cam is going to be hot for indie film makers (who often do event stuff with minimal crew to pay the bills), then paying attention to good on board audio is a must.

The increased quality of the DVX100 audio to it's competitors was a big selling point to me. As big as the 24p and the increased control of gamma settinngs.

So 2 (or 3, depending on the layout) well placed XLR inputs, decent onboard preamps, and 24 bit audio are all things that I'd like to see.

[Shaw]

I'm not sure Andrew. It seems like you should be able to do all your editing offline and then bring in the huge files for color grading etc. Seems to be a typical workflow, though I have no idea how current computer software would respond to video at 11.4mp a frame....

[mmm]

1080 is enough for me.

[zuvis]

1080 is enough for me too, but on another hand - it´s good to have possibility to expand..

[Jay Jay]

cruise control

[Andrew M]

Exactly, it would be comforting to know that if you needed more resolution you could have it (ie you want to do a film out on a certain project). Options are good.

[Shaw]

It would also be nice for those of us that like to shoot 2.35:1 and don't want to crop 1080 footage =)

[Andrew M]

:thumbsup: Boy, do I agree ... Scope is where it's at.

[starway2001@mac.com]

Scope is the place to be!

But I'm still pretty happy with cropped 1080P. However, an option to use anamorphic 35mm lenses that target a 4x3 area of the sensor at 4k would be killer. I absolutely adore the anamorphic look -- distortion, curvatures, flares and all!

[marko5000]

To be honest talk of event work and shooting for TV diminishes my interest in this. If that's your thing then surely the HVX is more than enough?

Give me a dedicated replacement to shooting on film. Keep it simple, maybe with pre-programmed setups to replicate a choice of film stock. Could a black and white setting improve quality?

As for editing I am joking really. By 2007 we should have power macs with 4 dual core 4 gig CPUs 32 gig of ram and 40 inch displays. That should just about manage.

And as mentioned by others make it rugged. I want to shoot on the marshes in the rain and not worry too much if I drop it. (I once left a college Bolex on a tripod whilst we broke for Tea and it fell over Managed to break the Lens and the Mag off).

It should be mentioned that I currently shoot on a single chip JVC, I am waiting on my first DVX and couldn't possible afford any of this stuff for a couple of years, so please ignore me.

[Andrew M]

To be honest talk of event work and shooting for TV diminishes my interest in this. If that's your thing then surely the HVX is more than enough?

Give me a dedicated replacement to shooting on film. Keep it simple, maybe with pre-programmed setups to replicate a choice of film stock. Could a black and white setting improve quality?

As for editing I am joking really. By 2007 we should have power macs with 4 dual core 4 gig CPUs 32 gig of ram and 40 inch displays. That should just about manage.

And as mentioned by others make it rugged. I want to shoot on the marshes in the rain and not worry too much if I drop it. (I once left a college Bolex on a tripod whilst we broke for Tea and it fell over Managed to break the Lens and the Mag off).

It should be mentioned that I currently shoot on a single chip JVC, I am waiting on my first DVX and couldn't possible afford any of this stuff for a couple of years, so please ignore me.

I agree with you. This camera is going to be for cinema - if you are an event videographer look elsewhere (when's the last time you saw a wedding videographer with a focus puller at his side).

BUT - I suggest you read up on the Viper. The Viper is an existing 4K cam with many of the proposed functions of the red camera. The viper has a minimal amount of in-camera manipulation options (I believe it even lacks white balance) - the Viper was made this way to ensure the cleanest most unprocessed footage for post - I think the red camera should be designed in a similar fashion - keep it simple and clean in camera, and let us mess with the footage in post!:thumbsup:

(so therefore I believe we shouldn't even have the film stock replicator)

[Luis Caffesse]

I think the red camera should be designed in a similar fashion - keep it simple and clean in camera, and let us mess with the footage in post!:thumbsup:

I don't see why anyone would want to limit options.
It would be simple enough to have options which can be bypassed.
If you don't want white balance or gamma manipulation simply don't use it.

From what has been said so far this camera is all about options - not everyone will shoot 4K resolution. Many will shoot 1080P or 720P, hell some may even shoot 480 if there is a reason for it.

Options.
I'm all for em!

[Andrew M]

I don't see why anyone would want to limit options.
It would be simple enough to have options which can be bypassed.
If you don't want white balance or gamma manipulation simply don't use it.

From what has been said so far this camera is all about options - not everyone will shoot 4K resolution. Many will shoot 1080P or 720P, hell some may even shoot 480 if there is a reason for it.

Options.
I'm all for em!

Well Said. I've got 4K on the brain though- man will that be sweet.
But yeah, so long as you can bypass them if you don't need them I guess I agree with you - options are good.

[marko5000]

I understand why people want so many options. If you make movies and shoot weddings you don't want to have to buy and learn two cameras. I suppose the Irony is that any camera that's dedicated to one job would have a smaller market and so would be out side of my reach anyway.

Really we all want something that can eventually rival 35mm but is still mass market enough to come in at 10 or 20 grand. Guess I can settle for that.

[marko5000]

I understand why people want so many options. If you make movies and shoot weddings you don't want to have to buy and learn two cameras. I suppose the Irony is that any camera that's dedicated to one job would have a smaller market and so would be out side of my reach anyway.

Really we all want something that can eventually rival 35mm but is still mass market enough to come in at 10 or 20 grand. Guess I can settle for that.

not sure why that posted twice.

[_MR_]

Okay, my quick 2cents worth before I loose my job for posting on web-boards during work time...

Colour - comes in any colour...so long as it's red? Very dark (dark) red I could accept, bright no good (reflections...distractions). Custom colours all good :)

Style - based primarily on ergonomics and functionality...can't have it looking like modern art where the operator plays twister everytime they want to hit record.

Simplicity - Keep the outside nice and simple...and water resistant. The more switches and buttons on the outside, the more annoying it becomes. Keep menu controls handy, but don't litter the outside like a handycam button fest.

I tend to cameras almost every day of the year in a rental house here in New Zealand. New Zealand has wonderful beaches. Any nook and cranny capable of capturing sand, will. Think about it.

Attachments - I love the VF gadgets F900 handle - you can screw almost anything into it, and clamp almost anything onto it....

Anyway, better go back and do some work.

More ideas as they come :)

[Zig_Zigman]

The one thing the camera absolutely HAS TO HAVE to capture the non-hollywood filmmaking community -

Portability. It has to be light enough to be hand held.

[fomoDVXpal]

in terms of a focus puller; why don't the Red crew implement something that moves either the chip or the lens forward and/or back and thus we use less of the chip and we receive a much deeper depth of field. thus if there’s a wedding to be done people won't panic over the focus.

Or alternatively removable and replaceable chips of various sizes.....that would be hot....will definitely be used on narrative film too.


p.s have I blown the budget? I know I have.

[FatBird19]

-jpeg2000 video codec :cheesy:

[Graeme_Nattress]

JPEG2000 is not bad for hardware implementation, but I've not seen it playback very smoothly in software on the Mac for instance. It's rather processor intensive.

Graeme

[FatBird19]

JPEG2000 is not bad for hardware implementation, but I've not seen it playback very smoothly in software on the Mac for instance. It's rather processor intensive.

Graeme


can jpeg2000 be brought up to 12bit? (all the stuff I've found online on the subject is really vague)

[Graeme_Nattress]

I think the JPEG2000 format covers up to 16bit per channel, but the only software implemention I've used, in Quicktime, is 8bit.

Graeme

[filmstox]

All of these suggestions sound great, and I would dearly love to have an optical viewing system. At these resolutions, there is no better way to focus IMHO. Possibly have it be a dual mode optical / electronic with a flip of the prism. And as an Aaton owner, I think a nice hardwood handgrip would be cool! :)

Can't wait to see how this one looks... I still want my HVX though!

-David C. Smith
LA / OC D.P.

[MarcusX]

I would like to have a visual feedback - like the zebra feature - which part of the picture is in focus.

[kprince]

1080p isn't this just roughly 2mp? RED's offering 4k full frame that's awesome, I love forward thinkers! Canon 5D 12.8mp DSLR at 3500. for the body. Things are becoming much more affordable for the creative mind.

[goldyprog]

Currently, I really like the form factor for the GY-HD, with a Dionic 90 on the back for the balance. It feels like a light-weight professional cam, and not nearly as heavy as a Cine Alta. Small enough, and comparable in size (only a little larger) than a Sony Z1U.

Try aiming for something in form similar to the GY-HD-- and it would be understandable if it was a few inches (camera body only) longer!

[Erik Olson]

Forgive me if someone already suggested - available SD monitoring in all shooting modes.

Having multi-format monitors for everyone on the set is spendy!

e

[Graeme_Nattress]

How useful though, is SD monitoring when you're shooting 4k or HD? SD has a different colour space and not enough resolution to accurately monitor either.

Graeme

[toke lahti]

How useful though, is SD monitoring when you're shooting 4k or HD? SD has a different colour space and not enough resolution to accurately monitor either.
You could ask that for every film shooting.
Most of the time it's just important to see what's in the frame.
Let the focus puller worry about sharpness and color is anyway done in the post.

[Graeme_Nattress]

With RAW, colour really isn't an issue until you get to post at all, and indeed, a focus puller can do focus, but with video, I still find it best to have a display of enough rez to check focus. If you're recording HD, not RAW, it's going to be useful to check colour though.

The key thing is to capture as much dynamic range as you can!

Graeme

[toke lahti]

Ideally it would be nice that all the crew would have wireless 4k video goggles (made by guess who? :-), but in real life you still can't even find fullHD electronical eyefinders everywhere. And most of the productions can't carry lots of something like apple's-forthcoming-40"-4k-display-$10k/piece around all the time.

But for RAW recording, there could be at least one lo-fi realtime converter for colors in the set.

[Erik Olson]

Oh, yeah... my request is not an instead of, but an "in addition to".

Look, I just finished a dozen-plus camera HD (CineAlta / Z1U) show and the lack of monitoring options (outside of one or two MultiFormat monitors) was a real issue. We shot a,b,c,d... units "untethered" - with no truck for the director or network staffers, so everyone was crowded around a cluster of tiny 9" HD Multiformats. How much easier it would be to break out a low-cost SD feed to anyone who wanted it from a common composite DA!

For prosumer monitoring or capture monitoring, as in HDRack or some other laptop-based application, full resolution won't be achieved anyway within the tiny GUI component-laden interface.

There are a lot of legacy SD 16:9 underscan monitors out there that could at least be put to use for framing and redundant on-set monitoring. These will continue to drop in price as LCD (almost certainly unable to support 4k anytime in the foreseeable future) solutions further saturate the crafts.

e

[melloyello]

someone said that the ability to control via laptop would be good, I agree to a point. I would like to see that ability but would like to also see a compact flash card slot to be used as a port for setups. a DP could have 10 or 12 cards (low memory=low cost) that have their favorite setups on them. one for a bleach bypass look, one for a kingdom of heaven look, one for a uber saturated high contrast look, one for a kodachrome look, etc. these cards could have the virtual filmstock and the virtual post processing look saved onto them and could be swaped out at a moments notice. the filmmaker could have a ton of setups saved to his computer and just put the ones that he might need on the CF cards.

[zem]

I think the JPEG2000 format covers up to 16bit per channel, but the only software implemention I've used, in Quicktime, is 8bit.

actually, according to specs, JPEG 2000 supports a gazillion of colour channels (well, 214), each with up to 38 bits.
don't know any application that uses more than 4channel (RGBA) at 16bit either though.. and as so often, quicktime is only 8bit (but at least has alpha).

but you're right, without hardware acceleration it's pretty slow, so it's not a good editing codec for low cost systems.

++ chris

[Graeme_Nattress]

Thanks Zem - the spec of JPEG2000 is fine, but I've not found an implementation in hardware or software that lives up to the ideals of the design. Anyone know better?

Graeme

[zem]

mike over at hdforindies has posted quite a lot about jpeg2000 specs for digital cinema... they have quite impressive resolution, bit depth and frame rates specs, so for hardware implementation there's definitely some high end stuff out there. but then again, they have some serious cash to spend on each system.

as for software, there are a few obscure image applications (ok, photoshop too to some degree) that have implemented it, but as said most of them are only 4channels 16bit... i guess the reason it didn't take off is that storage got too cheap to worry about a few MB, and .tiff and .psd dominates the print world anyway, and provide a lot of extra features (who wants to discard all layers everytime he saves a pic?).

and as a software codec for video, it's simply too processor intensive :/
++ chris

[zem]

btw, all this got me thinking about one of my major concerns about the red camera..
(and you're probably the right person to exchange ideas about this, since you're now in the red team ;)

to me the major problem to keep this an affordable solution is data throughput/storage...

highest quality/lowest storage would of course be to shoot raw and do the image processing later on with high quality de-bayering.
but that's 394mb/sec on a full size mysterium sensor with 12bit... simply wont be an option for most of us.

so let's say there's a high quality debayering and resampling algroithm that does 1080P in real time. we're now in RGB though, and we would at least wanna keep 10bit, which means uncompressed that's still 178MB/sec. again, i can't think of an affordable solution to store this to any portable digital mag (ok, uncompressed is overkill most of the time).

putting this through a HD-SDI (or two) is of course cool for monitoring and for studio work (direct to computer recording), but again renting a HDCAM SR recorder simply wont be an option for most of us, and rather cumbersome for location shots.. and just the cost of the tapes make me cringe ;)

so it seems to me that the key is finding an affordable capture medium, which doesnt carry huge post-production costs (ie no tape format).

the best thing i can think of atm would probably be a raid0 of some (four?) 2.5" drives. they should be small enough, provide capacity up to 400GB and be able to handle some pretty high data rates (probably over 100MB/sec over the entire range). that would mean we'd need a codec that does realtime compression of full raster 1080P with about 1:2, possibly lossless (one can dream, can't we). that would give us about 1hour of footage per mag - and those could probably be built for about 1000 bucks).
convenient storage (with backup) would run into about 500USD per hour.
(and of course 20-30MB/sec full raster codec would be really nice too, for all those who don't plan for a filmout ;)

one other option would be to use only the center part of the image (about 2K) and record this as raw, with the upshot that we could use affordable c-mount lenses.
this is also around 100MB/sec at 12 bit though.

maybe by the time the camera ships a CF card raid would be an option, a 40GB raid with 100mb/sec should be doable for 2000usd by then i guess... and give us 7mins runing time at 1080P 12bit rgb with 1:2 compression.

oh well, just some thoughts
++ chris

[Graeme_Nattress]

Zem, what you say is very interesting. I don't see why you need everything uncompressed though. SR is still compressed, and if that's good enough....

Graeme

[zem]

Graeme,

i don't really need uncompressed myself, i'm just thinking that if somebody designs a camera with a 4K sensor, there should be an affordable way for to shoot at least full raster high quality 1080p (with target: filmout). and it should be nearly uncompressed as more and more films need greenscreen footage (a clever 1:5 compression would probably be acceptable though).

the problem i see is that there is no affordable industry standard high quality full raster HD codec.. D5 and HDCAM SR are tape formats, but afaik on disk you always work in either a proxy resolution or uncompressed (or is there such a thing as a HDCAM SR codec on disk? and if yes, is it available for any low cost editing suite?). HDCAM is not even full raster (and not really an editing codec either). DVCPRO HD is the most interesting codec to me because you can edit natively on low cost systems, and only bump it up on your final grading (similair to what DV did for SD) but is only 8bit and 1280x1080px.

to extend that coparison to the SD situation about 10 years ago
(i remember editing in 1:2 compression on a 30K Media100 system which could hold 1 hour of footage):

HDCAM SR and HDCAM = Digibeta
meaning, it's a tape format, protected by sony and has to be brought into the computer with expensive hardware/interface

DVCPRO HD and HDV = DV
cleverly compressed footage that still looks good, can be captured and edited with consumer hardware, but falls apart on heavy manipulation .

what we're missing is something like DVCPRO50, ie a compressed codec that is cheap to handle, virtually transparent, can be captured and edited in online resolution for the whole process (no recapturing needed for final output).. . Cineform would probably be the closest that i know of (supporting 10bit), i just feel uncomfortable that it's not available for mac, and i dont think that the support in the professional post houses is very big. so you very likely would have to record to a self-designed codec, which means generating proxy files for editing, and a lot of data management issues on longer projects (i'm sure you've been there ;)

maybe one could have the camera generate a standard "offline" resolution file at the same time (preferably DVCPRO HD 720p) so that some stuff can already be edited on the field on a laptop. or maybe you can generate a codec that hooks right into quicktime (that would be sweet)!

but my fear is that the camera will get too expensive if it's got to do all this realtime conversions/compressions, personally i'd be perfectly happy with a camera with a 2K sensor that records RAW 2K and DVCPRO HD 1080P.. (as long as it stays around 10'000usd and uses a reasonable storage system)

++ chris

[Graeme_Nattress]

Thanks Chris. You've really pointed out the issues with the choices of codecs, and especially how tape based codecs are not suitable in today's non-tape-based world.

Graeme

[zem]

ok, since the topic reads "wishlist" and somebody seems to be actually reading this i thought i'll add a few thoughts about the camera design rather than all this codec talk (being a cinematographer rather than a post-production guy)..

there are several types of projects, all having different needs:

first, the indie filmmaker (which what i would count me in):
shooting unter controlled conditions, they look for a camera which has full manual control, possibly with a standard lens mount, a 35mm sized sensor. you could skip autofocus, automatic exposure, basically it sould be a film camera with a diital mag etc...
the most important thing here would be high quality and affordable! which means cheap standard recording media (atm, hard disks seem the only way), cheap monitoring (DVI instead of HD-SDI out?). since you'd probably record RAW anyway (although not at 4K, as pointed out before) you wouldnt need a 30'000 HD production monitor for color/exposure (btw, built in histogramms for exposure are a MUST!! it's standard in still photography, why not in film?).. being able to hook up a high res LCD for focus checks would be great though.
camera should be designed like an Arri SRIII or even better an Aaton XTR. heavy and sturdy. optical viewfinder would be great but probably make it too expensive.
there's not a single camera out there which is sutable for this kind of work (maybe the kinetta does once it ships)


then we have the professional filmmaker for theatre release:
to them, quality, reliability and compability with existing workflows are more important than specs and money. think dual HD-SDI, HDCAM SR on the low end, and Arrri D20 on the high-end. they rent anyway, and the crew (and actors) will be much more expensive then the camera - if there's a technical defect that delays shooting a few hours, or some data loss, it will be terribly expensive. so everything is built like a tank, even if it costs a fortune (think paraniod).

professionals for tv shows:
not much experience there, but afaik most important factor is ease of workflow... episode has sometimes to be shot in one day, and often edited in real time! sony, panasonic et all will always win in those markets since they are optimised for that sort of work.

broadcast/news/docu type of camera:
actually a full size 35mm sensor doesnt make a lot of sense for that... focusing would become an issue as well as way too much data. basically ENG form factor cameras with tape recording (HDCAM or DVCPRO HD) would be much more suitable for that, since you dont have to worry about data management. all the automatic functions (autofocus, image stabilizer etc) would be rather difficult to design i guess. plus, there's a lot of competition out there already.

typical prosumer, doing cooperate ads, weddings etc:
actually this kind of person would be best of with a HDV camera, nobody will ever notice the difference :) - but a lot of them take great pride in delivering the best possible quality (cant blame them). but again they'd need autofocus etc, and a full size sensor would be rather problematic, not to speak that nobody would have the capacity to work with and store the huge amount of data.


hmm, i'm sure i forgot some applications, personally i'd think the indie filmmarket would benefit the most from such a camera, but only if you can find a way to make it affordable and find a solution to the high data rates. alternitavely, you could try to compete with the D20, but then stuff like optical viewfinder etc would probably throw it out of reach for most on the people on this board.

well, just a few ideas
++ chris

[im.thatoneguy]

In a year or so I would expect a 150 gb 10,000 rpm Sata drive to cost about 200 bucks. Now if there was a way to raid 0 four of them at about 210MB/s you have enough for uncompressed 1080p (10bit). At 800 bucks for a 'mag' of 600 GB (almost an hour). You have yourself a pretty nice storage system. The problem though: 3.5" hard drives aren't designed to operate while moving. They're also not exactly energy efficient, you would probably need to run an extension cord to your RED. And even then you're looking at the whole shock issue, although I would assume this would be remote and in a backpack of sorts.

I guess what I'm saying is... wishlist: Functional SATA Raid brick.

[ericyoung]

Able to save ALL user configurable settings (not just "film looks") to say widely available compact flash or SD card?

Useful for storing your own scenefiles for different shooting styles, matching multiple cameras, minimising setup time with rental cameras, reshoots etc.

Also able to print out settings, or save to industry standard metadata files.

[ericyoung]

Bit pie in the sky but how about - Advanced interval/timelapse recording options? Eg. ability to change iris/gain/shutter/focus/zoom settings over any recording period up to several days or unlimited? Either straight ramps, or if linked to a laptop program, even tweakable curves for individual frames or between multiple in/out points?

Set the tape length and recording period and it automatically calculates the required interval between frames.

Some sort of Output which could be used to trigger external kit like motion control camera mount, flash lights, etc.

Some sort of Input which can be used to trigger the camera to record a frame, or record video continuously, or for a user set period? Useful for wildlife filming?

[Graeme_Nattress]

I guess this kind of detailed control would be better implemented on a laptop that can control the camera? To be able to program this direct into a camera would be painful indeed, whereas if there's an API for the laptop, you could, I guess, write like a shell script to make it do your bidding? Thoughts?

Graeme

[ericyoung]

I guess this kind of detailed control would be better implemented on a laptop that can control the camera? To be able to program this direct into a camera would be painful indeed, whereas if there's an API for the laptop, you could, I guess, write like a shell script to make it do your bidding? Thoughts?

Graeme

Absolutely. But rather than leave it to a third party, it would be great if there was a general purpose GUI written by Red that could access camera parameters, and do all this? But I guess this is getting too specialised and wouldn't be of use to the majority of users, so an API would also be a good idea.

[ericyoung]

Handle strong enough to mount on a Steadicam with a low mode handle clamp.

Handle removeable/replaceable - offers more mounting options, lower profile, replaceable if damaged.

Baseplate stronger than the DVX100's, but also replaceable rather than part of the casting in case it does get broken. Perhaps an extra 3/8" mounting screw socket in addition to the usual 1/4" one, further away from the tripod locating pin. This would offer more security and less "twistability" on a professional quick release plate.

[hominid]

I have a few ideas that would be useful to have in a 21st century camera.

This camera could do for video/film what digidesign protools did for the audio industry. Why not everyone building their own workflow around a common platform? This divide between the pros and independents is so 20th century. And in that light how about:

All camera functions and operations controllable wirelessly through your PDA.
Automatic shot logging to that same PDA.
Camera functions upgradable in software as plugins.
Camera "software plugin" functions available to third party developers with an extensible API
Camera generated meta-data (i.e. GPS info) that could be used for aiding camera matchmoving in 3D applications like Maya. Or future lenses that provide depth information for real-time compositing.
Many camera functions adjustable remotely to allow for automation (i.e. Operator settable parameters which can be animated over time.) such as user defined changes in frame rate or exposure or operation remotely. Or how about ramping various operations with a user defined curve. Such as ease-in or out when animating a color balance? This would also aid in using the camera in inaccessable environments such as underwater housings.
How about several image sensor options and the ability to plugin a new sensor at any time. This would also enable spare image sensors to be carried as safety backups in remote locations. Or image sensors tailored towards different projects. No different than alternate lenses or microphones for varying projects and budgets. Not everyone will need 4k output.
It would be very cool to be able to customize the monitoring functions on a per shot basis. How about real-time superimposition of a histogram in the operator’s monitor.
Since focusing is a huge issue, how about a monitor output that analyzes the picture and automatically shows areas of hard contrast to aid in focusing.. something like a zebra display but designed for aiding focus. Something that can indicate when maximum focus is achieved in a given area of the frame or some form of display which isolates edges and gives feedback on how sharp the focus is on those edges. And why not allow 3rd parties to develop additional monitoring types?Basically I think the key is to allow the users to customize the camera for their own needs and allow their inventiveness to drive the cameras’ evolution.

Cheers,
Pete

[taubkin]

I'd like a marker, just like the HVXs, but with a smaller target zone. A true built in spotmeter.

And I'd like if the camera had a program that could calculate DOF, if the lens trade some info with the camera, such as focus distance, aperture and focal lenght then the depht of field could appear in a corner of the viewfinder... (how cool would that be!) You can change the COC in a menu. That'd be a revolution!

[CamDiver]

On board laser range finder? Actors would of course have to have some kind of protective face shield when in use. Great for wilderness filming etc.

[WesVasher]

On board laser range finder

Buy one, attach to cage, now on board, done.

[taubkin]

Buy one, attach to cage, now on board, done.

But I want to point my laser to other places! If all I wanted was to know the distance of stuff in the center of the screen, I'd use autofocus! :)