Clint Johnson
Active member
The newer pictures on Red.com show it with smaller rods mounted higher and closer to the body - and they look plenty close enough to the lens mount for a clean follow focus setup.
How's this?
- Thread starter Jannard
- Start date
Can people think about their questions before they ask them?
Can people think about their questions before they ask them?
Does everyone realize that all these mock-ups and photos are just examples of what can be done and that the camera isn't going to be welded into place like that? If the rig looks top heavy, don't set it up that way! Also, as you can see, these examples aren't meant for ENG setups. The camera would look and act completely differently if it was set up for what some people close-mindedly call "real world situations". If you had a 2/3" video lens with a built in motor drive, you wouldn't use the handles, rail, or the cage. You would hold the lens like you always did. You also wouldn't be shooting 4k. You would have to use the 2/3" adapter and shoot windowed 1080, maybe 2k.
If you want to shoot handheld cine style: 4k with 35 lenses, you usually use the rails and the handles. If you want zoom and focus motor drives, you buy or rent them. They don't come with the camera. They're accessories. The only thing that would come with the camera is a remote start and stop and a port for remote menu controls. If you want a fizz unit or a microforce you buy or rent them separately just like lenses, a matte box, cinetape, monitor etc.
I don't know what Jim and Red's exact focus is, but I'm guessing that it's to create the things we have been seeing, first. They're making a 4k capable camera with a standard 35mm PL mount for film production. You will be able to put an adapter on the camera for other lens mounts and make it suitable for other shooting styles/needs. But the adapters are not the main focus. They'll come later.
Can we all just ask Jim well thought out questions, so he'll keep listening and replying. He's a busy man and the more time he has to spend wading through impulse and knee-jerk questions/comments the less time he has working on the actual camera. Please Jim, don't stop listening! There are some good points and suggestions that actually make it through. Like the question about the control panel. If we might be more apt to rear mount many things, battery, raid drive, would the control panel be in a better position on the operator side of the camera instead of on the back? Also, do you have plans to build in a port for remote on/off and menu functions? One compatable with 2/3" lenses?
Thanks for listening Jim
Can people think about their questions before they ask them?
Does everyone realize that all these mock-ups and photos are just examples of what can be done and that the camera isn't going to be welded into place like that? If the rig looks top heavy, don't set it up that way! Also, as you can see, these examples aren't meant for ENG setups. The camera would look and act completely differently if it was set up for what some people close-mindedly call "real world situations". If you had a 2/3" video lens with a built in motor drive, you wouldn't use the handles, rail, or the cage. You would hold the lens like you always did. You also wouldn't be shooting 4k. You would have to use the 2/3" adapter and shoot windowed 1080, maybe 2k.
If you want to shoot handheld cine style: 4k with 35 lenses, you usually use the rails and the handles. If you want zoom and focus motor drives, you buy or rent them. They don't come with the camera. They're accessories. The only thing that would come with the camera is a remote start and stop and a port for remote menu controls. If you want a fizz unit or a microforce you buy or rent them separately just like lenses, a matte box, cinetape, monitor etc.
I don't know what Jim and Red's exact focus is, but I'm guessing that it's to create the things we have been seeing, first. They're making a 4k capable camera with a standard 35mm PL mount for film production. You will be able to put an adapter on the camera for other lens mounts and make it suitable for other shooting styles/needs. But the adapters are not the main focus. They'll come later.
Can we all just ask Jim well thought out questions, so he'll keep listening and replying. He's a busy man and the more time he has to spend wading through impulse and knee-jerk questions/comments the less time he has working on the actual camera. Please Jim, don't stop listening! There are some good points and suggestions that actually make it through. Like the question about the control panel. If we might be more apt to rear mount many things, battery, raid drive, would the control panel be in a better position on the operator side of the camera instead of on the back? Also, do you have plans to build in a port for remote on/off and menu functions? One compatable with 2/3" lenses?
Thanks for listening Jim
Clint Johnson
Active member
No need to get snippy SF Geek, I’m pretty sure that most here know that this is a design in flux and that it will change over the coming months. The reason that I dropped that picture in there was for one specific point - some were worried that the rods were too far from the lens mount and were thinking that the lens mount would have to be relocated or the body would have to go through some other modification. I was merely pointing out that they have addressed this already with a couple pictures showing an example of rods mounted higher and closer to the body than most of the other pictures show.
The position of the control panel or compatibility with 2/3” lenses actually seems to be slightly less salient than the positioning of a follow focus system when it concerns a camera coming from Red Digital Cinema Camera Company. Just sayin’
The position of the control panel or compatibility with 2/3” lenses actually seems to be slightly less salient than the positioning of a follow focus system when it concerns a camera coming from Red Digital Cinema Camera Company. Just sayin’
Sorry Clint. I wasn't talking about you or anyone in specific. I just happened to post that after your posting, not in response to it. I think Jim and red will try to keep the lens mount at the right distance from the rods so the camera will be able to use existing follow focuses and matte boxes. You had a valid question. What I don't like is when Jim shows people different options for how to configure the camera for many specific situations and people complain about how it doesn't work for another situation. I just want people to think things through. That's all.
firewallet
Well-known member
Take your experience (and others), take the aggregate work, statements, posts and the benefits of the configurable nature of the R1 are apparent. (this not meant to slag nor to say not to suggest- but dvxuser is a great resource of what has already been said)
Also, Jim has stated that they are 20 renditions down the road on design and configs. We are lucky. These are incredible times.
I would have my # if not for fax snafus.
ps Mike the B... I will write back soon, its a long one.
Gibby
Red Savant
There will be literally hundreds of possible equipment configurations with a modular camera system like RED. Each render is just a depiction of one possible configuration. I do believe that longtime shooters are so used to the limited options, pre-planned, "here's our camera, now use it" form factor and utility approach from manufacturers over the years, that it is hard for them to wrap their minds around the concept of a truly modular camera. RED will not have many limitations in potential configurations - the limitations will lay in the imaginations, biases, and limited skill sets of its users.
Jim and staff could render out hundreds of potential setups for RED, and due to the three user limitations I've listed above, someone would still come up with "But why can't it be this way?" comments. You can have it that way - just start with the central camera, and accessorize it into what you need. The renders are not cast in concrete - they merely depict individual ideas for design features and equipment setups.
Gibby
RED #8
www.cut4,tv
www.4umat.com
Jim and staff could render out hundreds of potential setups for RED, and due to the three user limitations I've listed above, someone would still come up with "But why can't it be this way?" comments. You can have it that way - just start with the central camera, and accessorize it into what you need. The renders are not cast in concrete - they merely depict individual ideas for design features and equipment setups.
Gibby
RED #8
www.cut4,tv
www.4umat.com
Last edited:
taubkin
Veteran
Well I'm sure people mean no disrespect, but if a design is shown to public scrutiny, we better give them what is worring us. Afterall, that's why we're shown theese things. Now of course I never seen one of them REDs live, so I can't have a final opinion on them, the people at RED are better suited to make every decision necessary. But if they can find something out they were goint to miss in the process, the better. It's a company with a very small staff, and they depend on us too to create
a better product. They have so much on their hands, it's not impossible one or another minor detail can escape their sights.
Apple doesn't like people commenting their designs. They simply work absolutely behind closed doors. RED has the right to do so, if it gets too unconfortable. I don't think you really have to defend them for our critiscisms, even the ones that are far innacurate either by ignorance (somebody who never shot film who wants an autofocus button, or who thinks a bartech focus device is a must-have acessory) or because it is being posted from the other side of the world. Just let it be. They will make the best out of the best comments and discard the worst.
Cheers!
a better product. They have so much on their hands, it's not impossible one or another minor detail can escape their sights.
Apple doesn't like people commenting their designs. They simply work absolutely behind closed doors. RED has the right to do so, if it gets too unconfortable. I don't think you really have to defend them for our critiscisms, even the ones that are far innacurate either by ignorance (somebody who never shot film who wants an autofocus button, or who thinks a bartech focus device is a must-have acessory) or because it is being posted from the other side of the world. Just let it be. They will make the best out of the best comments and discard the worst.
Cheers!
Gibby
Red Savant
I think you missed the point of my post Taubkin. It's obvious that RED is seeking input, otherwise they would be designing the camera system in secret like most other manufacturers. What is also obvious, if you check through all these threads since December, is that with each batch of renders, RED has to explain over and over that nothing is finalized, that it is a work in progress, that there are many possible configurations even after the camera specs are finalized, that it is a modular camera, etc. At some point those statements of RED should sink into our consciousness, don't you think? Internalizing those details will avoid repetitive posts by us, and the resultant need for RED to repeat their "nothing finalized, work in progress, and modular camera" statements.
Input is great – but if more people would use the search function, and take the time to read through the threads here, and internalize the caveats RED has stated many times, RED could devote less time to repeating themselves, and spend more time on analyzing new suggestions and refinements.
Gibby
RED #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com
Input is great – but if more people would use the search function, and take the time to read through the threads here, and internalize the caveats RED has stated many times, RED could devote less time to repeating themselves, and spend more time on analyzing new suggestions and refinements.
Gibby
RED #8
www.cut4.tv
www.4umat.com
Last edited:
Clint Johnson
Active member
SF Geek, reading my own post this morning and it looks like I could probably have tried to come across as a little less snippy as well.
I wonder if it would be clearer and easier to follow if they started versioning the renderings? Not wanting to make more work for them but if the latest images came with a burn in on the lower right saying “Beta Version 0.1.5” or some such then people might internalize the transient nature of the design- as well it would let us know when a particular render has been superseded.
Most certainly not saying that they should do this since the Red Team has been going way above and beyond what can be expected of them... just that it would be nice and help keep things clear.
I wonder if it would be clearer and easier to follow if they started versioning the renderings? Not wanting to make more work for them but if the latest images came with a burn in on the lower right saying “Beta Version 0.1.5” or some such then people might internalize the transient nature of the design- as well it would let us know when a particular render has been superseded.
Most certainly not saying that they should do this since the Red Team has been going way above and beyond what can be expected of them... just that it would be nice and help keep things clear.
Ranger
Well-known member
Thought I beat this dead horse again reference the rail grips.
In the picture below, the handle is facing in the wrong direction in order to show the button/controller layout (this actual controller comes off an F18). Topgun jokes aside, I think this idea merits thought for the following reasons:
* Ergonomic hand design (hand straps could be attached for additional security as well as reducing strain to the hand muscles)
* Multiple controls for:
- zoom, focus, record, menu control, etc.
* Immediate camera function response within your fingertips while maintaining positive control on the grips
In the picture below, the handle is facing in the wrong direction in order to show the button/controller layout (this actual controller comes off an F18). Topgun jokes aside, I think this idea merits thought for the following reasons:
* Ergonomic hand design (hand straps could be attached for additional security as well as reducing strain to the hand muscles)
* Multiple controls for:
- zoom, focus, record, menu control, etc.
* Immediate camera function response within your fingertips while maintaining positive control on the grips
taubkin
Veteran
Gibby said:
Sorry Gibby, I forgot to quote the original poster. I wasn't replying to your post in particular. In fact I think I was replying to Clint's post.
And the point is that I agree with you, that we should make an effort to post useful feedback, but I just don't see why people are getting frustrated because of the useless feedback. It's bound to happen, and it's a downside of the system they chose. Besides, they are not wasting time here, they are spreading the word to thousands of pottential buyers, even when they are answering to less informed posts.
All I'm saying is that filtering through all this content, is their job too.
Cheers!
