Bolex D16: RAW, 16/Super 16 sensor size, costs less than MkIII

[adkimery]

Razz: Ideas are ideas. The camera does not exist at this point. As noted above, the footage provided until now was not a camera but a security cam linked to a pc via ISDN. Until we see footage, its all talk. RED and IKONOSKOP did have ideas initially before their ideas were manifested into a working camera.

While not quite the same thing as a Kickstarter campaign RED did start a pre-order system about two years before the camera ended up going into general production. For a $1000 deposit you could reserve a place in line to get a RED ONE (deposit was fully refundable at any time). This was during the same time frame that people were labeling RED as vaporware and the deposit as a scam.


-Andrew

 

[Razz16mm]

Razz: Ideas are ideas. The camera does not exist at this point. As noted above, the footage provided until now was not a camera but a security cam linked to a pc via ISDN. Until we see footage, its all talk. RED and IKONOSKOP did have ideas initially before their ideas were manifested into a working camera. The contradiction is that both companies did not accept cash upfront for an unfinished product that was merely an idea. As far as I'm concerned, this was a lot to ask for just an idea that in reality, was an admiration of the design of the Ikonoskop and the belief that such a camera could be made simply. I'm not saying the DB is an outright scam, as this would be ignorant of me to make this assumption, since in reality, none of us really know whether this is the case or not. However, IMO, the way the company is behaving, is a little shady, seemingly spreading itself very thin regarding the set price of the camera, the t-shirts, posters, toys, etc... without even a working prototype... Perhaps the DB will fly, but IMO, regardless if it does or does not, their business model seems flaky, not focused, and literally all over the place... As I told Mr. Bloom before he banned me on twitter, it is really not so wise to be putting so much faith and advertisement of this venture, when the IKONOSKOP exists and can be tested for review but more often than not, is ignored in comparison to the DB.... which is an idea based on the IKONOSKOP's design... and nothing more.

It is not based on Ikonoskop's design at all. Completely different circuitry, mechanical design, and feature set. Even the sensor is a different model though in the same series. The only things they share in common are that they shoot Cinema DNG raw and they use the same series of Kodak/Truesense CCD.

You are right the camera does not exist as a completed ready to shoot production model yet. It is still IN DEVELOPMENT.
The body exists in its finished mechanical form for assembly and testing. The circuit boards exist in their final design stages bench tested for function and ready for mechanical assembly into the body prototype. If there are mechanical issues that crop up as happened with the sensor and processor board and the lens mount design, there will be another round of prototypes to solve those issues. If there are electronic issues with the assembled camera that didn't show up on the bench tests, such as EMI noise issues between boards or cooling problems there will be another round of prototypes to solve those.
Between the partners involved in the project, they have the necessary financial backing, technical knowledge, and business experience to bring the camera to market.
You have to set schedules and deadlines for any engineering project, but there is no guarantee with a complex new electronic product design that everything will go perfectly so you can meet the intended schedule.
If Joe's approach seems flaky or unconventional to you, well maybe that is exactly what is needed for a low production volume niche market camera being developed by an international team of hardware and software companies.

 

[supergrafx]

It is not based on Ikonoskop's design at all. Completely different circuitry, mechanical design, and feature set. Even the sensor is a different model though in the same series. The only things they share in common are that they shoot Cinema DNG raw and they use the same series of Kodak/Truesense CCD.

You are right the camera does not exist as a completed ready to shoot production model yet. It is still IN DEVELOPMENT.
The body exists in its finished mechanical form for assembly and testing. The circuit boards exist in their final design stages bench tested for function and ready for mechanical assembly into the body prototype. If there are mechanical issues that crop up as happened with the sensor and processor board and the lens mount design, there will be another round of prototypes to solve those issues. If there are electronic issues with the assembled camera that didn't show up on the bench tests, such as EMI noise issues between boards or cooling problems there will be another round of prototypes to solve those.
Between the partners involved in the project, they have the necessary financial backing, technical knowledge, and business experience to bring the camera to market.
You have to set schedules and deadlines for any engineering project, but there is no guarantee with a complex new electronic product design that everything will go perfectly so you can meet the intended schedule.
If Joe's approach seems flaky or unconventional to you, well maybe that is exactly what is needed for a low production volume niche market camera being developed by an international team of hardware and software companies.

While not quite the same thing as a Kickstarter campaign RED did start a pre-order system about two years before the camera ended up going into general production. For a $1000 deposit you could reserve a place in line to get a RED ONE (deposit was fully refundable at any time). This was during the same time frame that people were labeling RED as vaporware and the deposit as a scam.


-Andrew

Andrew: I was unaware that RED had a $1000 deposit to reserve a spot for the R1 while it was in development, so I apologize for not knowing this information prior to my post. However, Jim Jannard, a proven successful businessman and millionaire w/ the Oakley brand, seems a lot less shady than these guys in that he had a proven track record whereas these guys seem to be totally unknown for the most part. I'm going out on a limb here, but for the R1 deposits, there were guarantees that those deposits would be refunded to the place holders hadn't the R1 come to fruition?

Razz: Yes, I understand the that the camera's innards of the DB would have to be designed from the ground up. It's not as if the Ikonoskop team would just hand over their design to the competition. But I firmly believe that the concept of the DB was mirrored after the IKONOSKOP. Had there been no A-Cam DII, these guys would have never existed. The newer kodak/truesense ccd that actually covers true super16 that the DB is supposedly implementing in their cam, had already been discussed on the Ikonoskop forums after that sensor came out after the Ikonoskop was delivered w/ the older sensor. My point is, since it was already made known on the web before this Joe & Elle came to be known w/ such popularity, I'm being pessimistic in thinking that they were reciting this very thread (regarding the newer Super16 size ccd by Truesense), as if it were there own idea. Look at their forums as you are very aware as you partake in the conversations over there. Many of their ideas come from not themselves, but user input. Which is a good thing, generally speaking, to have open communication w/ its user base similar to how RED has been over at Reduser. However, IMO, these guys are SO OPEN in that little is their own idea or design. I mean, with the inexperience they have in making any camera for that matter, now trying to design their own lens mounts through that 3d printer device/software they just bought? Why not just use the P+S technik IMS mount that Ikonoskop uses in order to focus more on just their camera body? This is what I mean by spreading themselves too thin. This is why I believe they do not have the maturity and focus to get this thing in the air. To make matters even worse, as I know you are aware of Vitaly's skepticism over at Personal-View, supposedly this Lenso company has had prior failures in that it was unsuccessful with its past ventures as a business and has nothing to lose by accepting money from kickstarter and others as you insist are helping w/ the development of their camera. If indeed and I'll re-quote you here in these brackets: (The body exists in its finished mechanical form for assembly and testing. The circuit boards exist in their final design stages bench tested for function and ready for mechanical assembly into the body prototype.), lets see some footage. It really doesn't have to be perfect. It can be ugly in fact, but lets see something! Showing some Texas Instrument board that looks like and arcade game pcb and another pcb w/ the truesense ccd just doesn't cut it. As far as a niche market, I totally approve of this. I am an A-Cam DII owner and I love the organic ccd global shutter camera compared to these mass produced cmos cams and not to mention a "camera made by film-makers." But even here, this quote, DB has taken from IKONOSKOP as the same quote, "a camera made by film makers," is written on the DB website. I just don't buy it in reference to the DB. I think they've been riding on the A-Cam's wave for awhile, just not too many folks realize it just yet.

 

[Barry_Green]

Andrew: I was unaware that RED had a $1000 deposit to reserve a spot for the R1 while it was in development

Yes, Red was launched with a pre-order system and a deposit to hold your place in line. Those who pre-ordered (at least the first, I think, 1,000 of us) got a titanium "R" souvenir as well. We got the right (but not necessarily) the obligation to buy when the Red One was released in beta form. We were told we could delay our purchase until it was in what they considered "released" form, or we could get it right away and go through the beta stage.

However, Jim Jannard, a proven successful businessman and millionaire w/ the Oakley brand, seems a lot less shady than these guys in that he had a proven track record whereas these guys seem to be totally unknown for the most part. I'm going out on a limb here, but for the R1 deposits, there were guarantees that those deposits would be refunded to the place holders hadn't the R1 come to fruition?

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. At the time, Red was labeled as "a scam", that those of us who put down deposits were "fools", that Jannard had made sunglasses so what the heck did he know about making cameras, that it would never happen, that he would get bored and move on to something else, and on and on. Red always said from day one that any deposit that was placed with them, was fully refundable at any time. But, as anyone who's been around the block a few times will tell you, a promise is only as good as the guy who's making the promise, and at the time Red's word was not good enough for lots and lots of people. The early diatribe back and forth was pretty ugly at times.

In the end, Red did deliver, and anyone who had a deposit was able to either apply it towards actually receiving a camera (as I did) or they could request their deposit be returned to them. In the end it functioned exactly as it should. But even though Jim Jannard was a billionaire, there were still many people who thought that the whole thing was implausible, a scam, etc. There wasn't a tremendous amount of trust flowing around back then.

 

[Razz16mm]

Ikonoskop pioneered raw cinema DNG in a digital video camera. No question. They were the first. Doesn't mean others shouldn't produce a different camera design for the same purpose using available off the shelf hardware. We are several years down the road with better processors and better non-proprietary media options available, not to mention custom raw processing and file management software to go with it.
Most of the camera's basic design and features are still Joe's brainchild. The biggest change from outside input has been to add the HDMI output board to better support aftermarket EVF's and implement in camera playback, (still B&W, no in camera debayer processing for color). A lot more thought has gone into the design than seems evident at a glance. And remember a major goal is to keep the price in a range comparable to the better DSLR's and the BMCC.

We will see new footage when they have an operating production prototype using their own software. Until then what would be the point?
I am interested in seeing how well their sensor calibration and firmware color matrix compares to the Ikonoskop and the BMC. This is something Ikonoskop has struggled with a bit IMO.

 

[cinebuddy]

But even though Jim Jannard was a billionaire, there were still many people who thought that the whole thing was implausible, a scam, etc. There wasn't a tremendous amount of trust flowing around back then.

I thought to myself that history is repeating itself regarding these new cameras and the "now" expectation. Lesson learned...don't give a date. BMC and Bolex will deliver with inevitable delays.

 

[Barry_Green]

Lesson learned...don't give a date. BMC and Bolex will deliver with inevitable delays.

Don't give a date, and don't even tell anyone you're developing it, until you're ready to ship. Burst on the scene with a finished product and you'll be a hero. Talk about what you're planning on doing, or what you're going to do, and you'll be scrutinized and nitpicked to death until your carcass is picked clean of every morsel of meat and you're a rotted dead skeleton twisting in the wind, and at that point, the internet intelligentsia will point at you and mock you and say "see, I told you it was a scam."

My advice for anyone wanting to enter any manner of competitive field: shut up and build the product. Don't mention it, don't breathe a whisper about it, until it's ready to be released...

 

[pulpfiction007]

I completely agree.....but in the case that you've launched a very visible kickstarter campaign - be extremely transparent and visible with constant updates so that people know what's happening. That murky middle ground and dead space gives wandering minds just enough curiosity to fill in the blanks with possible reasons why you're not "around". I've been following the live streams from the Digital Bolex team- it is a good idea for them to do those...to answer all the questions and keep the interested parties informed.

 

[cinebuddy]

Don't give a date, and don't even tell anyone you're developing it, until you're ready to ship. Burst on the scene with a finished product and you'll be a hero. Talk about what you're planning on doing, or what you're going to do, and you'll be scrutinized and nitpicked to death until your carcass is picked clean of every morsel of meat and you're a rotted dead skeleton twisting in the wind, and at that point, the internet intelligentsia will point at you and mock you and say "see, I told you it was a scam."

My advice for anyone wanting to enter any manner of competitive field: shut up and build the product. Don't mention it, don't breathe a whisper about it, until it's ready to be released...

Yeah we need a giant like button for that statement brother!

 

[Ted Ramasola]

Don't give a date, and don't even tell anyone you're developing it, until you're ready to ship. Burst on the scene with a finished product and you'll be a hero. Talk about what you're planning on doing, or what you're going to do, and you'll be scrutinized and nitpicked to death until your carcass is picked clean of every morsel of meat and you're a rotted dead skeleton twisting in the wind, and at that point, the internet intelligentsia will point at you and mock you and say "see, I told you it was a scam."

My advice for anyone wanting to enter any manner of competitive field: shut up and build the product. Don't mention it, don't breathe a whisper about it, until it's ready to be released...

Likes this.

 

[Fluoro]

Don't give a date, and don't even tell anyone you're developing it, until you're ready to ship. Burst on the scene with a finished product and you'll be a hero. Talk about what you're planning on doing, or what you're going to do, and you'll be scrutinized and nitpicked to death until your carcass is picked clean of every morsel of meat and you're a rotted dead skeleton twisting in the wind, and at that point, the internet intelligentsia will point at you and mock you and say "see, I told you it was a scam."

My advice for anyone wanting to enter any manner of competitive field: shut up and build the product. Don't mention it, don't breathe a whisper about it, until it's ready to be released...

I totally agree with this. What was BMD thinking? Was the plan to stop people buying other cameras while they wait for the BMC? Is it about finding out how much demand there is so BMD can order the right number of parts? Is it to make sure they are not beaten to punch or looking to be following another company that announces something similar? Any way you look at it it doesn't make sense to me and seems to be born of fear. Image if they'd have just waited and announced at next years NAB and where the BMC would be by then.

 

[Samuel H]

If you're doing something like this, keeping your mouth shut about it is REALLY hard.

 

[Greg Smith]

If you're doing something like this, keeping your mouth shut about it is REALLY hard.

It also pretty much eliminates Kickstarter or any other crowdsourcing for funding, and makes it a lot more difficult to find investors in general, unless you are already a large and established company, or can finance it out of your own pocket. There has to be a balance between building enthusiasm and support for a new idea, and promising more than you can deliver. I'm not sure anybody in this business has exactly hit that sweet spot yet, although Red probably came closest (but they had a wealthy backer to fall back on).

- Greg

 

[Gabrobot]

I totally agree with this. What was BMD thinking? Was the plan to stop people buying other cameras while they wait for the BMC? Is it about finding out how much demand there is so BMD can order the right number of parts? Is it to make sure they are not beaten to punch or looking to be following another company that announces something similar? Any way you look at it it doesn't make sense to me and seems to be born of fear. Image if they'd have just waited and announced at next years NAB and where the BMC would be by then.

Their plan was to be shipping tons of cameras right now. What they didn't plan was getting screwed over by their sensor supplier.

 

[Gary Huff]

Their plan was to be shipping tons of cameras right now. What they didn't plan was getting screwed over by their sensor supplier.

And bringing up the BMCC as a comparison doesn't really work. Both Frank and Kholi have models and are shooting with them. They are just trickling out, it's not like they're not in the hands of third-party users whatsoever.

 

[cinebuddy]

And bringing up the BMCC as a comparison doesn't really work. Both Frank and Kholi have models and are shooting with them. They are just trickling out, it's not like they're not in the hands of third-party users whatsoever.

But it does compare. BMCC, let's assume, has far more capitol to play with than the bolex team and look at the issues they are having with their supplier. Head over to the forum, people are just as heated even though the camera's are out in the wild. I guess what i'm saying is you're gonna have unforeseen issues regardless of your capital or your intentions. It doesn't make your end user any more understanding, but hey shizzle happens.

BTW I don't have a pony in this race so i'm not defending...I simply understand

 

[Gary Huff]

But there hasn't been a single frame shot with an actual DB, while there are third-party users shooting footage with the BMCC. That's a huge gulf of difference right there.

 

[Razz16mm]

But there hasn't been a single frame shot with an actual DB, while there are third-party users shooting footage with the BMCC. That's a huge gulf of difference right there.

We didn't see any BMCC footage at all until the camera was finished except for firmware/software development and Beta prototypes were given to JB and a few others.

We will see D16 footage when it reaches the same stage.

When you are an established company you can afford to be secretive about new product development.

When you are a small niche market startup, you need to show at least basic product concepts in advance and have some way to gauge market interest. Otherwise how would you know whether investing a lot of money to develop a product is worth the effort?

 

[jdv]

Razz, I think you and Barry are both right: A new company - esp one needing start up cash - can't be silent. Without some buzz and some investments, the camera simply wouldn't be possible. On the other hand, RED and BMC has clearly shown the dangers of missing dates.

Perhaps the lesson is really to double or triple the time of any announcement of a time table - if you think it will take 6 mos, say it will take 18. Maybe more. That way, you'll have more time and if you come to market sooner, you'll look like a hero.

But remember, even the big boys aren't immune to delays or recalls - the massive flooding which took place last year certainly altered many large tech companies timelines.

 

[Samuel H]

Yes, and I still think the DBolex guys got it wrong, and BMC did what they had to do and were unlucky.

I would design the camera in silence. You don't really need that much money in this stage.
Then, when there's a working camera, I would still be silent: I would search for funds and make 3 or 5 more, that I can pass around to respected figures so they can shoot with them and give me feedback.
Only then would I go open: this is my camera, this is what it can do, this is what it costs. These people have shot with it, go to their sites to see footage and comments. And preorder if you wish, because we need that money to actually manufacture the cameras.

As BlackMagic has shown, things can still go wrong in the manufacturing phase. But that's bad luck. Things ALWAYS go wrong in the development phase.

Also, consider an experiment I read about in Dan Ariely's Predictably Irrational:
Take a decently large group of people. Describe a task to them. Then take them out individually and ask them a question, randomly chosen between the following 3:
1: How long would it take you to do this task?
2: Best case scenario, how long would it take you to do this task?
3: Worst case scenario, how long would it take you to do this task?
The answer from people who got question 1 is statistically the same as the answer from people who got question 2. The answer from people who got question 3 is different.