More Red Camera falsehoods.

I've seen nice images out of RED cameras but what they have done and said to their customers is considered pretty poor behavior in almost any sphere. They have been riding on the coat tails of others and trying to take the credit and brazenly bare faced about it have said it was all American designed and built. Sorry if they were the best cameras in the world and my contention is that they are not and they would not get one penny of my money just based on their business principles alone. Or should I say lack off. Very sad.

EDIT:
Was just looking at the litany of lawsuits involving RED. Kind of sums it all up really:

Chris Young

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Digital_Cinema

Lawsuits

On August 18, 2008, Red filed a lawsuit against the electronics company LG over its use of the name Scarlet.[26] Red accused LG "... of taking the 'Scarlet' brand name from the camera company" after Red had denied LG's request to use it.

On September 23, 2011, Jannard announced that his personal email account was compromised by former Arri executive Michael Bravin.[28] A lawsuit against Arri and Bravin was filed at the end of 2011, and settled and dismissed in 2013.

On June 27, 2012, Red sued Wooden Camera, a manufacturer of third party accessories, for patent infringement.

In February 2013, Red filed for an injunction against Sony, claiming that several of its new CineAlta products, particularly the 4K-capable F65, infringed on patents the company held. They requested that Sony not only be forced to stop selling the cameras, but that they be destroyed as well. Sony filed a countersuit against Red in April 2013, alleging that Red's entire product line infringed on Sony patents. In July 2013, both parties filed jointly for dismissal, and as of July 20, 2013, the case is closed.

After a failed lawsuit by RED against the maker of JinniMag, a third party copy of the RED Mini Mag, it was revealed that RED Digital Cinema Cameras have been lying to their customers and possibly obtained their patents by deceiving the USPTO.

In May 2019, Apple Inc. filed a lawsuit against RED.COM, LLC over several patents relating to digital cinema cameras and sensor processing.
 
Last edited:
I commented on the other thread but the “revelations” in this installment are pretty underwhelming, especially for those of us who were there along the sidelines.
 
It has gone beyond a patent appeal. Apple has launched a "legal petition" vs RED at the US Patent Office, which began in May this year. Usually the first document filed in a lawsuit is the complaint (or petition), which provides an outline of the plaintiff's case against the defendant.

Definition of a legal "petition."

http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/Petition.aspx

As you can see from the documentation lodged at the United States Patent and Trademark Office — BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD That Apple Inc is listed as the "Petitioner." The petition is lodged against Red.com the patent holder. It is a trial and appeal board and if Apple don't find satisfaction to their appeal Apple can then escalate the action to another method of filing a petition which is is by writ and statement of claim which leads to a trial and which, with few exceptions, affidavit evidence is not allowed. This is usually the default way of engaging a Court to resolve a dispute.

The patent in question is:

U.S. Patent No. 9,245,314 (“the ’314 patent,” Ex. 1001) is directed to “a video camera” configured to “capture, compress, and store video image data in a memory of the video camera.”

Here is the actual "Expert Declaration" Petitioner/Exhibit as lodged.

https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/P...003-3-Ex1003___Expert_Declaration_Redcom_314/

It is interesting if you you look at the Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. 9,245,314. IPR2019-01065 | Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Filed May 6, 2019 before Judges J. John Lee and Jason Repko and then read on to where we are today, or within the last 48 hours, and you will see Apple asking for Pre-Institution Discovery determinations as to the validity of the patent filings. I think the interesting thing is that if you look at "Board Order 9: Order - Conduct of the Proceeding - Granting Patent Owner's Motion to Seal - 37 CFR 42.5 and 42.54(a)" is that Red are doing everything in their power to stop an "seal" Red's patent and to stop Apple being granted discovery.

As of 9/20/2019 in "Board Order 13: ORDER - Denying Petitioner¿¿¿s Motion for Pre-Institution Discovery Granting Petitioner¿¿¿s Request for a Reply to Patent Owner¿¿¿s Preliminary Response 37 C.F.R. 42.5 and 42.51(b)"

https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/PTAB/IPR2019-01065/Inter_Partes_Review_of_U.S._Pat._9245314/

you will see the judges have now authorized the petitioner (Apple) to file a motion for pre-institution discovery. Red will no doubt appeal against this because pre-institution discovery means Red will have to "prove" that prior to the granting of this particular patent that they did in fact have operating what they claimed to have invented. I believe they are going to fight this to the death because such discovery is, and I'm not stating that this is what will shown on discovery is that the sensor is probably supplied by Forza and that RedCode is simply an encrypted version of JPEG2000. No Red inventions involved.

As for the the RedCode part of it there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to the JPEG 2000 claim because in the early days of RedCode you could play the Red files with a commonly available JPG 2000 player. Red soon changed this and you could no longer play Red files with existing JPEG 2000 players as Red encrypted the files. If you can find an old pre-encryption R3D file, straight out of a camera, and look at it in a hex editor you will find the JPEG 2000 information number in it, just after all the time code and take information. RedCode is JPEG-2000. This was known long before the camera was released when someone from Red made an unguarded reference to "the JPEG board" in a press conference.

I think this time Red are up for a major fight. They will need deep pockets to go up against Apple.

Chris Young
 
I'm going to go on the books here and say that I really do not like RED or their cameras. I had a ONE MX a few years back and have worked with more modern cameras like the epic on freelance gigs enough times to throw a shoe at one and honestly, I just dont like them. I think the company as a whole as others have said have shady business practices and the only reason (i think) RED got a jump start was because Soderbergh and Fincher were their poster children back in the day... if you are a camera startup with two a list powerhouse directors backing what you are doing, skies the limit... not to underestimate Soderbergh or Fincher as I love them both, but come on...

I will NEVER invest my hard earned money new used or refurbished on a RED product ever.... wont even use that bogus Panavision DXL they made if I had the chance.
 
I think most of the people that attack Red now either a: never owned a red camera, or b: never were around during the 100K + 4:2:2 "1080P Cinema Cameras".

I was one of the Indies who grew up on the Sony 3CCD's Mini DV's, the original Panasonic DVX100, then the HVX200, the 35mm adapter phase and then the 5d's and the 7D's. Red came right around the time of the Hvx200/ 5D revolution, when Sony was selling the F900 HDCAM or F950, who costed about 100K and where 2/3" or slightly above in terms of sensor design.

Red appeared with a groundbreaking cinema package capable of super slow motion, 4K resolution and all this in a S35 mount. It was a computer on a camera body, with long boot times, overheat issues but what it presented was truly revolutionary. What Red did next, Bach in 2010-2011, with the DSMC1 concept , small form factor, different power options, 5K plus resolution, super slow motion and interchangeable mounts was again revolutionary- and all this fighting big media Giants, established names like Sony, Panasonic, Arri, back then experimenting with absolutely ridiculously expensive digital cinema solutions.

I've owned a Red camera since the Epic days, and have seriously been absolutely happy with every single of their cameras until now: the Epic MX, the Epic Dragon, the Weapon helium and now the Monstro.

The Red Raw workflow is simply amazing. The media, rock solid, irrespective of its internals. The cameras also built like a thank. Am I a ig fan of the "Weapon" and skull branding? Not very much. But as filmmaking and TV Commercial making cameras, they are everything I need and want for producing great content.

There are Alexas, Amiras, Mini's, Sony F55's, Canon 300 series and others mainly due to the disruption of Red. Yes, the 5D Mark II, the Panasonic DVX100 ( and 200) opened important doors for the "democratization" of filmmaking, but it was Red that truly brought an elite controlled market down to the indie, presenting really cutting edge solutions and forcing the competition to abandon a planned obsolescence roadmap.

This no one can take away from Red.

As a costumer, all I can say is that I'm more than happy with the company and will definitely be staying with the Brand and their products for the future. Obviously I will work with other cameras from other manufacturers, but for my personal cameras? Red camera all the way.
 
I always try to remind people once a month of the big impact the company has had on the industry, but at the same time I think a lot of people also feel the appreciation has run its course. And when the times change and you don't offer lower-priced products (besides the Raven), I think it adds to the disdain when controversies occur. Not that they should sell cheap cameras, but if they did then the reaction may be a bit different.

IMO, Blackmagic is more of a modern-day RED, and has had twice as much of an impact on the industry.
 
NorBro said:
I always try to remind people once a month of the big impact the company has had on the industry, but at the same time I think a lot of people also feel the appreciation has run its course. And when the times change and you don't offer lower-priced products (besides the Raven), I think it adds to the disdain when controversies occur. Not that they should sell cheap cameras, but if they did then the reaction may be a bit different.

IMO, Blackmagic is more of a modern-day RED, and has had twice as much of an impact on the industry.
Click to expand...

"And when the times change and you don't offer lower priced products ( besides Raven) "

Basically this is the main issue here: most of those complaining or those that have sour grapes with Red is basically because they can't afford them. I find it complete Hypocrisy those that are bashing Red for buying their sensors or asking companies to manufacture their sensor designs, or using third party components, when Blackmagic is using off the shelf sensors that are shared with the Z cams and others of this world. Seriously, have any other manufacturer of lower priced cameras claimed their sensor is the same as Red's , or offering similar performance? Obviously not.

Lets not forget the size and operation of these companies. Red is a Digital Cinema company, with their own cinema studio. Its a relatively small operation compared to Blackmagic, and its costumer base is much smaller. They have a lot less products to sell, in terms of volume and variety. The volume of their cameras in no way compares to the output of Blackmagic cameras. This also makes their camera selection have a very specific target market and can maintain coherent image quality and features throughout the range.

Is Blackmagic a great company introducing fantastic products? Obviously yes. But I assure that Blackmagic learned a lot from Red, as many of the other manufacturers. And if you ask a multi million film production if they would use a Arri, Red or Blackmagic, you can be sure they would go for the first two options well before going for Blackmagic.

You get professional support , service and solutions with Red. immediate. They even send you a loaner if it fails on the field. Its a different product, a different market, different demands. Blackmagic cameras are mass market cameras: they might have QC issues, they have much slower support, they are perceived as disposable cameras in a failure scenario for most productions. They produce beautiful pictures, they have evolved a lot since the first products, but they are still mass market products targeted at a completely different user base.

I own one , and in no way it compares to my Monstro.
 
I haven't followed this recent situation with RED and all of the latest developments, but my honest opinion is that a lot of RED users' extreme passion in general is a product of simply not knowing any better.
 
SPZ said:
You get professional support , service and solutions with Red. immediate. They even send you a loaner if it fails on the field. Its a different product, a different market, different demands.
Click to expand...

This may well be the case in North America, seeing that the majority of RED sales are in California but I can assure you this is not the case in many parts of the world. Support and service centers for RED are pretty thin on the ground.

https://www.red.com/locations/certified-service-centers

Chris Young
 
SPZ said:
Basically this is the main issue here: most of those complaining or those that have sour grapes with Red is basically because they can't afford them. I find it complete Hypocrisy those that are bashing Red for buying their sensors or asking companies to manufacture their sensor designs, or using third party components, when Blackmagic is using off the shelf sensors that are shared with the Z cams and others of this world. Seriously, have any other manufacturer of lower priced cameras claimed their sensor is the same as Red's , or offering similar performance? Obviously not.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's necessarily the fact of buying sensors or using 'off-the-shelf'/third party components. It's that they either said they built the stuff or heavily implied it. Then got caught RED handed. And then doubled down on it again.
 
Run&Gun said:
I don't think it's necessarily the fact of buying sensors or using 'off-the-shelf'/third party components. It's that they either said they built the stuff or heavily implied it. Then got caught RED handed. And then doubled down on it again.
Click to expand...

They do build it. They design and set the sensor target specifications, the modules, the software, the color science, and how everything comes together. Do they manufacture everything? Obviously not. Is any other digital cinema camera using the same sensor as the Red Cameras? No.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top