Arriglow

A

acoreasc

Well-known member
Could the RED viewfinder or LCD for that matter, have something akin to the Arriglow illuminated frame outlines? Has this been mentioned as a design possibility previously?

Just wondering....
 
Should not be necessary as I would imagine you can change VF guidlines for your chosen format like the HVX can. %90 marker 4:3 and maybe add Cinemascope 2.35:1.
 
Arriglow

That certainly has been noted (the ability to write frame markers in different colors so that they stand out clearly from the background video), and yes, the VF / LCD viewer specification calls out on-screen overlay markers for a variety of final delivery formats including 4:3, 16:9, 1.85, 2.35 etc....
 
no crosshair please! Distracting, irritating, useless. Encourages bad camera operators to produce awful framing. Why do so many cameramen think that they need to line up the talent in their sights?
 
allright lets put it differently. I thought that Red was an opportunity to re-examine all the legacy of our cinema and video past. A revolution in effect. Throw out useless brick and brack and keep the good stuff. Invent better solutions to problems, get rid of fetishes. Simplify, refine, go back to essentials. Also a way to react to the stuff the video monopolists have been telling us we want: fake options, automated whatever, and no easy way to assess the image on the camera (definately no WYSISWYG). Now someone wants retro marksman info on the screen.
What may I ask is the use of the crosshair when you frame? If you are using it to assess simmetrical balance of shots cutting backward and forward between actors (in Italy you call it "campo, contro campo" I have forgotton what it's called in English) then you can put center markings but out of frame let's try to keep that wonderfull high definiton frame clear please. I believe that is what we have a larger than recorded frame area viewfinder/s for. I think someone else on another thread had requested something similar.
ciao stephen
 
Last edited:
By the way I am also a pro. So dont make sweeping statements defending archaic bits and pieces defining anyone who begs to differ as an amateur. And if possible lets not make this a pissing contest.
"no crosshair? Absurd! I don't know a single pro that would agree with that."
 
crosshairs mean alot of things to different people and some people feel confused without them. Action sports guys love them, and obviously exposure readings can take place at that cross. I agree though, you should be able to turn them off if you want to though.
 
Crosshair should, like every other marker, be selectable and independent of each other.

Colors and a "bold" setting for high ambient light situations would be a nice touch.

Sony's XDCam 350s have a nice viewfinder data menu which allows individual information control for what you see in your operator and LCD viewfinders. Make it even one step easier to find and control than Sony does (lotsa scrolling and whatnot) and you've got a complete winner.

e
 
Also...

Also...

acoreasc said:
Could the RED viewfinder or LCD for that matter, have something akin to the Arriglow illuminated frame outlines? Has this been mentioned as a design possibility previously?
Click to expand...
depending on the picture - Automatic opposite blending to background would come in handy.

I mentioned that in the contest.
 
stephen natanson said:
allright lets put it differently. I thought that Red was an opportunity to re-examine all the legacy of our cinema and video past. A revolution in effect. Throw out useless brick and brack and keep the good stuff. Invent better solutions to problems, get rid of fetishes. Simplify, refine, go back to essentials. Also a way to react to the stuff the video monopolists have been telling us we want: fake options, automated whatever, and no easy way to assess the image on the camera (definately no WYSISWYG). Now someone wants retro marksman info on the screen.
What may I ask is the use of the crosshair when you frame? If you are using it to assess simmetrical balance of shots cutting backward and forward between actors (in Italy you call it "campo, contro campo" I have forgotton what it's called in English) then you can put center markings but out of frame let's try to keep that wonderfull high definiton frame clear please. I believe that is what we have a larger than recorded frame area viewfinder/s for. I think someone else on another thread had requested something similar.
ciao stephen
Click to expand...

The crosshair is often the best (sometimes only) reference point for repeating a precise composition from take to take. Center markings out of frame don't allow you to lay the crosshair over an actors left nostril if that's where the director wants the center to be. And of course, a good operator will use a wide variety of crosshair reference points to assist in repeatable composition. The capability to view outside of the frame is, of course, extremely useful for anticipating cues, etc., but doesn't replace the crosshair for much critical work. To suggest that the crosshair is "useless brick and brack" (I think you mean brac-a-brac) or "retro marksman info" is a personal opinion that doesn't reflect the daily experience of those who understand how essential the crosshair can be to exacting cinematography. Sure, turn it off if you don't know how to use it. Eliminate it? There is no good reason to do that. Quite the opposite.
 
Forget crosshair.

Forget crosshair.

How about an entire grid overlay, with user-selectable spacing?

Good not only for framing reference, but also geometric alignment and leveling.
 
All vf/lcd markings should be totally user selectable.
Something like a bitmap which you can download from a computer or memory chip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top