Gibby
Red Savant
Barry_Green said:
Hey Barry. We're good friends. I’m going to have to call you on this one though Barry. Granted it is the Red Digital Cinema camera, and it’s primary targeted use is digital cinema, but your statements do not jive with previous statements of Jim Jannard, Stuart English, or the current RED web site about being intended ENG-style use for RED One, if it is accessorized for such. If you follow these links and read what Jannard, English, and the RED web site have to say on that question, I think you may want to re-think those statements about RED’s intentions for the RED One camera.
From my published interview with Jim Jannard (April 06): http://www.studiodaily.com/main/news/6388.html
Gibby – “Excellent, so you could use this camera in a trucked shoot, an ENG situation, or cine-style. Essentially we have a Swiss Army Knife here, so that you just pull out the tool that you want to use, and go for it.”
Jannard – “That’s the idea here – no limitations.”
Gibby – “I’m glad to see you included an LCD with the camera, especially for the ENG-style shooters, for Run ‘n Gun, sports, news, reality, or whatever. Are we talking LCD, OLED, LCoS, or what?”
Jannard – “We’re still working on which exact screen we’re going to use. The idea is to get something larger than 31/2”, and higher resolution than what you’ve typically seen before. If there is a problem associated with shooting 35mm depth of field, it is the ability to focus, and a high-resolution display helps make critical focusing possible. So a high-resolution LCD - it may or may not in-fact be an LCD - serves double duty obviously, or maybe not so obviously, for focus and also the menus.
You also have the ability to use a larger LCD or any other monitor that the camera will drive, either separately, or in conjunction with the onboard LCD. In addition, we’re providing a HDMI digital viewfinder port for somebody who wants to add an accessory electronic viewfinder, like an AccuScene, or something else that may come up. So for those who are used to shooting with viewfinders, as opposed to LCD’s, we’re enabling that option.”
Gibby – “Or shoots with both. With convergence, a lot of shooters have to shoot cine-style and ENG-style, and accessorize the camera up, so I think that a convergent cinematographer or videographer needs to be able to use both. That segues over to the types of viewfinders. Are we talking an optical and an electronic viewfinder option?”
Jannard – “For size and other reasons we decided to delete the optical viewfinder from our first camera. We recognize that there are people out there who want an optical viewfinder, but it will not make our first model. There are a couple of reasons that an optical finder is an advantage.
One we heard about often is the ability to see outside of the recorded frame. The good news is the way we use our sensor, we can now offer that same capability. There are some other features that people like in optical viewfinder, but they’ll just have to wait for those in another camera body.”
Barry, you’ll notice that Jim had several chances to correct me in my mention of RED One for ENG-style use. He didn’t, in fact, he said: “That’s the idea here – no limitations”.
Next example: Stuart English, on DVX User, 9/9/06 (During IBC)
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=681415&posted=1#post681415
“The RED CAGE is flexible enough to be added to, or deleted in pieces, so that an “ENG” style camera - and by the way I think that we probably need to define what we mean by an ENG v's EFP camera - can be easily constructed. And with a lens and a follow focus added to that, I bet that your shoulder mounted ENG / EFP RED camera will look an awful lot like an ENG/EFP camera with a lens and a follow focus, balanced on your shoulder.
Maybe its our bad for not showing explicit examples of an ENG / EFP style configuration, but with these components its pretty easy to re-construct a classic ENG/EFP layout with EVF, shoulder pad, internal media slot, and a compact rail / battery mount system.
In summary, we are still in development, and we honesty value your feedback. But as Jim has often commented, the design sees adjustments on a very frequent basis; don’t take what you see as definitive, final. Rather it is guidance as to the final product direction. We have already solved very many difficult design issues with this camera, and with your help there is no reason that we cannot optimize the rails and cage concepts for virtually any shooting application.”
Next example: the new version of the RED web site:
http://red.com/cameras.htm
Under “RED One Is a Modular Design”
“Shoot lightweight ENG style (body less than 7lbs, in rugged magnesium) or load it up to shoot a feature film”.
Summary:
Obviously we don't need autofunctions on professional cameras, and especially not autofocus.
I have a lot more links and references I could paste up for you Barry, but I think those will suffice. We’re good friends and agree on almost everything in media business, but the statements you made seem incorrect. As I’ve illustrated, RED One may be called a digital cinema camera, but because of its intentional modularity, and the inclusion of 1080p, 1080i, 720p, and the optional 2/3” B4 lens mount, RED One is apparently intended by RED to morph into whatever kind of camera system you want it to be used for, whether that be cine-style or ENG-style. It may not be the best camera option for all genres, but it could be accessorized for use in almost all genres of production – and that has been the stated intention of the makers of RED One.
If there has been a change of philosophy by RED on their intended uses for RED One perhaps now is the time clear up the confusion. I realize RED One is a work in progress, and everything is subject to change, but everyone who is getting a RED One camera is planning their future productions, and their genres, around the capabilities of the camera.
Gibby
RED #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com
