Looks of the camera?

[Anders Holck]

(Ok, just saw the spike render, nice refinements)
what I talked about was the small lcd on the back, and it's -18 buttons.
I might be a bit conservative but the control buttons also fits nicely on the operator side, within reach.
On the renders it's of cause protected by the cage and the magazine/ battery, I just fear the "Betacam effect" with a long rig like that. Lots of inertia to move about. Guess I just need to see it with a small prime and the rail collapsed. It's of cause notihing compared to a XTR with the 800' mag....

Of cause as I said, it might be perfect. It's just from those stills it seems to have its image plane way above the CG. On the XTR above, the image plane is just below the front of the green LCD. Very close to the shoulder of the operator.

 

[mike the beginner]

Let's also not downplay that fact that the core of the physical design is a direct result of Jim's creative drive! Love the design or not, I think that the best thing about it is that it is distinctively RED. From 20 feet away, it's hard to tell one ENG camera from another... with Red, that won't be happening.

Exactly! It must be associated with RED/Oakley Jannard style and taste.

IMHO Everything and anything has been possible except the looks. Surely the man has earned/deserves, has every right to stamp his thoughts onto how it looks.

Anders, how do you think it would feel if the red rail dipped down where the camera sits so that the middle was a good inch lower than the front and back? I have seen the photos of teh arri and i think i know what you mean when you say the body is too high.

Whoever said this was a rubbish thread is probably right, we have all been here before.

Michael

 

[lordnumberzero]

controls/operator position

controls/operator position

I have to second the notion of having the camera controls on the side of the camera. Do I have to reach under the redrail and between the battery and harddrive to get to the controls? In a tighter/shorter configuration, the controls might be hard to get at for a right hander.

red142/zoom16

 

[FatBird19]

I think Landon D Parks wants to be punched in the ovaries. :0


The REDone has a great post-modern industrial look to it.

 

[Emanuel]

Is the bitchie alive?

Useless (unless to see what the RED reservation HOLDERS are thinking on the subject) and silly thread indeed.

The REDone has a great post-modern industrial look to it.

REDVOLUTIONary :thumbsup:

 

[Finner]

I third the motion for the camera controls and panel to be on the operators side. My focus puller should always be able to see all the camera information at a quick glance and definately everytime before rolling. It is much faster for the focus puller to see the info and be able to make changes right there without having to move to the back of the camera that is sometimes jammed in a corner. I hope the RED team is hearing us here as this is the only camera I have seen without user info on the operator side.

 

[stevesherrick]

I can certainly appreciate the ergonomic feedback that people are giving, as I think they are offering years of experience shooting out in the field, what works, what doesn't. But one thing I don't buy into is the idea that a small camera means that films that shoot with it won't be taken seriously. Come on guys, that is absolutely ridiculous. First of all, there is a ton of buzz about the camera. Second, if the images that it produces are as good as we think they will be, people will quickly get used to the look and feel of the camera. The Keifer Sutherlands of the world may say they can't act if the camera doesn't look like a film camera, but honestly, I take issue with that stance because, well a good actor can act without a camera in the room.

And I agree that once you add all of the accesories, lenses, etc the camera will start to look the part more, except that it will maybe even be cooler in some ways and outperform some of the cameras that people are saying look more professional.

So Landon, make your decision based on what will help you tell your stories best, give you the look, feel, resolution you need, and push the look of the camera further down the priority list. If Red lives up to the hype, it seems like a pretty good option to me. When I read in DV magazine today that Sony expects their 4K camera to take several years to develop, that tells you how prgressive the Red guys really are.

Steve

 

[Jannard]

It is a lot easiry to make a small camera "big" than it is the other way around. RED ONE can be a small handheld unit, or dressed up to lock and load on a tripod or crane.

Jim

 

[Emanuel]

And I agree that once you add all of the accesories, lenses, etc the camera will start to look the part more, except that it will maybe even be cooler in some ways and outperform some of the cameras that people are saying look more professional.

Exactly. That's why I added my voice calling it as a silly thread. It could influence the design the camera in a crucial phase of the work. Therefore, I'd ask if is this Mr. Parks a reservation holder? 'cause if he is not, he has all the right to express his opinion but nobody can forget there are other people who invested in this camera project. And it is these people who can say what want or not. And nobody else.

 

[Deezie]

Personally, I like the look of the camera. If you're going to be revolutionary, why not dress the part. That said, as a former advertising executive I can tell you that those who insist that looks aren't important are seriously underestimating the human dynamic. When a prominent Golf Co. came to us to market their newest drivers, we ran tests on several prototypes with hundreds of golf fanatics (myself being one of them). We found that golfers were more attracted to the good looking clubs even if they were less effective than the uglier, more consistent clubs. And while they really wanted to play with the better club, they were terribly disappointed that they couldn't put the better-looking club in their bag, and felt that they were somehow settling for something inferior.

There's a dynamic called Pride-of-Ownership. Golf lovers not only wanted to play well, but they wanted to pull the club out of their bag and admire its beauty and share its virtues with their buddies like a treasured artifact. Beauty is built into our DNA as inherited software from our earliest ancestors. People are compelled to buy the best looking electronics, fashion, cars and homes because it feeds a primal need to survive and have status. Big advertising is built on playing to this premise. So no, this is not a useless thread. The Red folks are taking a big risk with their design and it could seriously hamper their ambtions to do well in the marketplace. Personally, I would advise them to strike more of balance between their design and what's currently on the market. Build your brand to a comfortable market share, then tweak the next model to more of your personal design tastes. Sometimes the first mavericks on the scene fail largely because of execution, then the second team on the scene hits big because the market is now aware of the product and ready to embrace something that appears a little less risky. People hate to take risks. Especially when buying a product. They will do more to avoid pain than to find pleasure. And if that means buying something more tried-and-true and less risky than something revolutionary that could possibly be better, than so be it. That's how humans are designed. If you don't understand this critical element of human nature, then your chances of success are severely diminished.

 

[Emanuel]

It is a lot easiry to make a small camera "big" than it is the other way around. RED ONE can be a small handheld unit, or dressed up to lock and load on a tripod or crane.

Jim

Again. It seems who didn't follow the development of the camera -- except as ordinary entertainment in silly talks with silly people in silly forum subjects, it could thought now they would have any right to participate in a party where they wished not to be. Or still better/worst: to deliberate doing the sabotage instead the revolution for the selfish deep reasons that any one could find -- corporate interests.

 

[filmmaker1977]

"There's a dynamic called Pride-of-Ownership"

sure.. the point is all these future users here didn't self-proclaimed their hate to all digital design.. it's incredible how there is who thinks may come for.. dictating general(?!) rules.. or something similar.. on the others backyard..
:violent5:

 

[alacritymedia]

It's the accessories people see

It's the accessories people see

I believe that if you removed the lens, VF and all the accessories from most of the big time cameras out in the field they wouldn't look super impressive either. Put a Cooke lens, high end Matte box & FF, etc on the RedOne and 98% of the folks on set won't have any idea it is not a Arri or whatever.

Blair S. Paulsen
RedOne #19

 

[filmmaker1977]

maybe in the digital future the manufacturers should simulate the traditional magazine only for these old fashion guys may think they're still living in the XX century..

 

[Doc Holliday]

Red does look like a professional camera. Just 10 years before the others do.

 

[Finner]

maybe in the digital future the manufacturers should simulate the traditional magazine only for these old fashion guys may think they're still living in the XX century..

They already have take a look at the Panavision Genesis. The recording unit is an extremely high end sony VTR that acts like a film mag and can be mounted to the camera in different positions just like a panavision film mag.

I have shot with it only one time and the vtr unit is pretty cool it has to record so much information that the VTR mag gets sent back to Panavision tech's to service and clean the heads every few weeks. Panavision sends you a replacement VTR just before you need to send in the one you are currently working with. The camera put out images that blew me away and got me researching more about Motion Digital cameras. That was October 22 and I learned about RED at that point and put down a reservation on the 30th.

The images of the Genesis still blow me away and if my RED 1 even comes close I will be happier then a pig in ****!!!

Does anyone really know if pigs are happy in ****?

 

[Emanuel]

Obs. Film fans & Co., I'm sorry but it has been irresistible

Obs. Film fans & Co., I'm sorry but it has been irresistible

On your last sentence I don't know but on your first part I'm happy regarding your input. Welcome specially in this thread.

Does anyone really know if who doubts is happy when in obsolescence*?

;-)

When a new, more functional product or technology supersedes the old (example: telegraph to telephone)

When the product becomes useless due to changes in other products. For example, buggy whips became obsolete when people started to travel in cars rather than in horse-drawn buggies.

When spare parts become so expensive that it becomes more attractive to purchase a new item.

Differences between technical and functional obsolescence
Technical obsolescence is when a product is no longer technically superior to other, similar products. For example, a consumer may buy the latest iPod, which has the most storage and largest screen of any iPod available. A week later, Apple may introduce a new iPod model that has twice the storage, a larger screen, and makes coffee in the morning. The new iPod is technically superior to the model the consumer purchased, which means the iPod purchased a week earlier is "technically obsolete." But that does not mean the older iPod is functionally obsolete; it can still play music and can download new songs from iTunes.

Functional obsolescence, on the other hand, is when a product no longer functions the way it did when it was first purchased. To use the iPod example again, if Apple released a new version of iTunes that only worked with the new iPod, the original iPod would be limited in its capability to download and play new music. This would make the first iPod "functionally obsolete." Fortunately, since companies prefer to maintain their consumer base, they have a strong incentive to support products for several years after their release.

Style obsolescence
When a product is no longer desirable because it has gone out of the popular fashion, its style is obsolescent. One example is "acid-wash" jeans; although this article of clothing may still be perfectly functional, it is no longer desirable because style trends have moved away from the acid-wash look.

Because of the "fashion cycle", stylistically obsolete products may eventually regain popularity and cease to be obsolete. A current example is flared-leg jeans, which were popular in the 1970s, became stylistically obsolescent in the 1980s and early 1990s, and returned to popularity in the early 21st century.

Sometimes, style obsolescence can connote that some styles have substandard characteristics of marketing.
Postponement obsolescence
Postponement obsolescence refers to a situation where technological improvements are not introduced to a product, even though they could be. One possible example is when an auto manufacturer develops a new feature for its line of cars, but chooses not to implement that feature in the production of the least expensive car in its product line.

And now... the Sony/Panasonic/JVC case study? :laugh:

Obsolescence Management
Obsolescence management refers to the activities that are undertaken to mitigate the effects of obsolescence. Activities can include last-time buys, life-time buys and obsolescence monitoring.

 

[parisrem]

The look of the camera is really not that radical. Hasn't anyone ever seen a film camera without a lens or magazine? It's just a liitle box smaller than the RED will be. They just end up being so big, as others have said, because of the accessories and mainly because of the lens and film magazine. And the only reason high end video cameras are so big is the VTR. Even the Genesis is just a box without the lens or VTR. The RED will just use a disk or flash array instead of a VTR or magazine. If for some reason they decided to make the RED-DRIVE in the shape of a film magazine and attach it to the top/back of the camera, it would look pretty much the same as everthing else from a few feet away.

 

[Landon D Parks]

Kalone

"The maximum all of those serious readers here should have is a quick laugh.

Please grow up and restrain yourself from posting such silly stuff.


"Mr. Parks" is a kid, I remember some really stupid and annoying conversations with his little playmate "Smith" on cinematography.com ( btw, I don´t bash that forum, it´s a very usefull community to me, but like here, there are jerks, too )

Edit: Oh, I have to add that he´ll surely "run back" and report how bad he got treated by this forum´s members...just wait

Don't worry; I'm not going to bash any members here for treating me bad. Everyone is entitled to there opinion of something, just like I'm entitled to my opinion.


Steven Williams

Hi Landon,

Just curious, but have you ever used a professional camera?

Stephen

(its fun to google)

No, I have not. I have however SEEN professional camera's.

Anyway, The new design of the red looks a little more "beefy" than the one RED has posted on there website, plus I didn't realize the camera was as big as it was. From RED's website, it looks like it smaller than the HVX.

I'm not judging this camera by its looks; I'm just saying I don't care for the overall design. Maybe with all the trimmings, it will take on the look of a more "bulky" camera.

As fare as what the camera OFFERS: I think it's great. 4k, 35mm sized, 12 mega pixel sensor? That’s totally killer. As I said before, the features of the camera fare outweigh the look of its design; I was just simply stating my opinion on the design and looking for other people’s opinion on the design, which I got. For the features, this camera offers everything the Dalsa offers, more than the Arri D20 and close to same specs as the Panavision Genisis. However, it cost a fraction of any of those cameras.

My only real GRIPE about this camera is the fact that none seems to know when it will be available to the "Non-Reservation Holders". If I can grab one by April or May of 2007, I will consider it over the SI-2k, however, even though I want to shoot with the RED more than anything, If it's not available to me in time to shoot the feature, I will have to go another route. I don't want too, but I also don't want to put my picture on "Hold" just because I'm waiting on "The dream camera".

Just my opinion... Bash away! :dankk2:

I just hope RED delivers what they say they will... And so fare, from the test footage, I'm NOT disappointed .

 

[filmmaker1977]

ok bash away.. peace.. but you can also verify you're here in a great minority if you're not alone.. nobody can offer you a personal camera of your own.. according your own wishes.. even jim.. lol