Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: DSMC Release v7.0.0

Reply to Thread
Page 25 of 26 FirstFirst ... 15212223242526 LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 252
  1. #241  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Sauve View Post
    Same thing with me. All 3 above.
    Got the same on the Epic-W. minus the screen tear

    Also one change I noticed the shared display output on side.
    I used the port to plug in the Red monitor to check exposure/etc. when mounted on gimbal/drone and
    when I unplugged I could have the hdmi to feed out a signal with it's own settings (no overlay etc.)
    That's not possible anymore, the top display port has to be used.
    Last edited by Stefan Kraus; 12-03-2017 at 10:51 PM.
    Aerial Cinematography


    www.skypixels.com.au
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #242  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    264
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    I can't find anything about any $100 upgrade, so I don't know what that's about. However, if the solution to the problem is a $100 paid upgrade that's just bullshit. Red blames WC and WC needs to us to pay for an upgrade. Why don't Red and WC just honor the third party collaboration that Red marketed so heavily before? I do not deal in workarounds, this is a broken deal. If I would have known that Red and WC after some time wouldn't collaborate I would have found another solution. You mean to say that when Red earlier said that they were in talks with WC, that was about getting WC to get out a $100 upgrade?

    Can someone tell me why Red just can't implement support for WC's battery plate code into their firmware? What's the deal here? I understand that it's up to WC to provide it, but whenever they do Red would surely implement that into the next firmware? I'm no coder, but I have a hard time understanding what the problem actually is here?
    Hi Christoffer,

    See post #44 of this thread.

    I can understand you being a bit annoyed at having to spend again on a product you already have, but it seems from post #44 that WC reverse engineered Red's protocols back when the two were not in a third party product agreement. It seems Red has now released communication protocols to WC and other third party product manufacturers as they have started to invite them to make compatible third party products. Pretty generous in my opinion. That these official protocols don't mesh up with WC's previous reverse engineering efforts on which they based previous products is not Red's fault or problem. Red had no control over WC's previous efforts. The way I understand it is WC had a go at making accessories based on their observations of Red's unreleased protocol at that time. A good effort and it sold their products. Well done WC. Red has now formalized an official third party protocol that WC and others can follow and can submit their offerings for Red to approve. That previous WC reverse-engineering no longer works with this new official protocol is something WC is responsible to sort out. It sounds like they are offering a $100 fix for your particular product as I understand it.

    No-one's at fault here. Least of all Red. WC did some innovative work and made some unofficial (from Red's point of view) Red accessories that worked very well. Now they're part of the third party program and must use official protocols. So from now on, their Red accessories are guaranteed to be compatible. Your product (apparently) came before this agreement.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #243  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    698
    I have the diagonal screen tear, but I had that a lot on the previous build as well. No other problem so far, but I just updated and have only used it on one small production
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #244  
    Senior Member Christoffer Glans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    3,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Smith View Post
    Hi Christoffer,

    See post #44 of this thread.

    I can understand you being a bit annoyed at having to spend again on a product you already have, but it seems from post #44 that WC reverse engineered Red's protocols back when the two were not in a third party product agreement. It seems Red has now released communication protocols to WC and other third party product manufacturers as they have started to invite them to make compatible third party products. Pretty generous in my opinion. That these official protocols don't mesh up with WC's previous reverse engineering efforts on which they based previous products is not Red's fault or problem. Red had no control over WC's previous efforts. The way I understand it is WC had a go at making accessories based on their observations of Red's unreleased protocol at that time. A good effort and it sold their products. Well done WC. Red has now formalized an official third party protocol that WC and others can follow and can submit their offerings for Red to approve. That previous WC reverse-engineering no longer works with this new official protocol is something WC is responsible to sort out. It sounds like they are offering a $100 fix for your particular product as I understand it.

    No-one's at fault here. Least of all Red. WC did some innovative work and made some unofficial (from Red's point of view) Red accessories that worked very well. Now they're part of the third party program and must use official protocols. So from now on, their Red accessories are guaranteed to be compatible. Your product (apparently) came before this agreement.
    I'm failing to see how a $100 upgrade for something to work as intended upon purchase is generous at all.

    Also, the WC V-Lock Cable-less blueshape came out after the third party collaboration agreement from Red, no?
    "Using any digital cinema camera today is like sending your 35mm rolls to a standard lab. -Using a Red is like owning a dark room."
    Red Weapon 6K #00600

    Links
    Epic Dragon & Canon CN-E street test
    Red Epic - Noise Reduction Test - Stockholm 2014
    Red Epic - Stockholm HDRx Test
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #245  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    264
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    I'm failing to see how a $100 upgrade for something to work as intended upon purchase is generous at all.
    I was talking about Red being generous. They made their intellectual property available to third parties so that the latter could make money selling Red-approved accessories, presumably for the greater good of Red accessory infrastructure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    Also, the WC V-Lock Cable-less blueshape came out after the third party collaboration agreement from Red, no?
    If so, that would be WC's culpability. If they knew ahead of time what it should be but didn't do it and still expect you to pay $100, then that's their issue. That's why I would doubt that being the case. But you should ask WC about it. I personally don't think anyone's being dishonest here. Sometimes you just have to upgrade.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #246  
    Senior Member Brendan_H_Banks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Rhode Island/NYC
    Posts
    718
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Berenato Jr View Post
    Hello all to the WC Mount Crew! Last night I wrote a nice e-mail out to info@woodencamera.com and received an e-mail back fairly early this morning. I'm going to share that below, as I feel like this is the proper space and with consideration of informing customers so they know how to plan ahead. I'm posting this with hopes that it will not disrupt any lines between RED and WC within the third-party program, but merely because there are a lot of people asking questions with absolutely no concrete answers... So, I did what Brent mentioned and asked them directly.



    That's all I've got. Hopefully it will calm the fire instead of start a new one. I think a $100 board replacement is okay with me (especially considering how much use I've gotten out of my current one), but I'm also a little bummed that RED couldn't keep that bit of code in-tact until that board offering was made by the end of the year... Granted I know that every little bit of old code cutting counts in regards to adding new features to a camera's boards.
    Quote Originally Posted by TD Wood View Post
    So...

    RED has stated in this and other threads (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...0-0RC4/page2):
    "As RED, I cannot speak to what third party modules will or won't work with our system. That is a "them" question, not a "RED" question."
    "This has nothing to do with WC on our end. RED updated communication protocols, period. If those changes were not accounted for by ANY third-party manufacturer, then the data would not be assimilated."
    "As has been said in other threads, RED is actively working with WC as a member of our Third-Party Hardware Development Program. As to if/when their product will be compatible with our current protocols, that is up for them to state, not us, as it is a WC product we are speaking of here."

    Then WC says:
    "Start a support ticket at RED.com using the link below to ask for them to enable communication for the Cable-less Battery Module. This would be the quickest and easiest solution as it would only require them to add back a few lines of code to their firmware."

    Hmm.
    My conclusion: WC is subtly suggesting that the only real solution will be to buy their new PCB (option 2) whenever that is ready.

    P.S.: Thank you Anthony for this info!
    Quote Originally Posted by Brent@RED View Post
    I don't have much more to say on this topic aside from what I have posted previously (yesterday as well as prior to that). But let me be VERY clear that sending a support ticket to RED will be a complete waste of your time and our time.

    But I will reiterate - this is very, very simple. RED improved our communication protocols, among other things in this firmware version. Any third party product who may have reverse engineered our prior protocols would not be supported. The onus would be on that third party to join our Third Party Hardware Development Program to ensure compatibility moving forward. As I have stated, you can see on our Approved Third Party Product page that WC and RED are engaged. Also remember, Third Party RED approval is on a product-by-product basis, not blanket approval on every product a company makes.

    It is very frustrating to read "it would only require them to add back a few lines of code to their firmware". As you can imagine, in this IPP2 version of firmware, there is a shit ton of code behind the scenes. Would you guys be okay if we crippled some of that to go back to our prior gen protocols to support a product that is not a RED approved product? That is very myopic.

    You cannot praise us for innovating, yet there being shock and dismay when a third-party product RED never approved (ie, including providing our communication protocols) loses functionality.



    I don't know how many ways/times I can say it is very clear RED and WC are engaged. This is THEIR product, not RED's. If you want a product supported by RED, buy ours or an approved third party product.

    I am going to stop now before I say something I will regret later.
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    I can't find anything about any $100 upgrade, so I don't know what that's about. However, if the solution to the problem is a $100 paid upgrade that's just bullshit. Red blames WC and WC needs to us to pay for an upgrade. Why don't Red and WC just honor the third party collaboration that Red marketed so heavily before? I do not deal in workarounds, this is a broken deal. If I would have known that Red and WC after some time wouldn't collaborate I would have found another solution. You mean to say that when Red earlier said that they were in talks with WC, that was about getting WC to get out a $100 upgrade?

    Can someone tell me why Red just can't implement support for WC's battery plate code into their firmware? What's the deal here? I understand that it's up to WC to provide it, but whenever they do Red would surely implement that into the next firmware? I'm no coder, but I have a hard time understanding what the problem actually is here?
    From the earlier pages, it's super documented back there. I know this is a long thread so I included some of the important info.
    Brendan H. Banks
    Cinematographer
    Epic-W #796
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #247  
    Senior Member Audy Erel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Jakarta-Bandung, Indonesia (Bali)
    Posts
    124
    Release Build 7.0.1 is already here!

    https://www.red.com/downloads?catego...&release=final

    Nice improvement in record start response time (from ~2 seconds to just a second fast! | Scarlet-W), Thanks RED!
    SCARLET-W #004760
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #248  
    Senior Member Donald MJ Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    450
    Fixed Record Start/Stop sounds enable
    Red One #3**
    Epic-W
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #249  
    I couldn't get the 7.0.1 firmware to install off a UDF formatted card.

    Had to switch back to fat32 to get it to load in. Just throwing this out there for anyone who might run into problems.
    a.k.a. Lochness Digital
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #250  
    Senior Member Ryan Sauve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    818
    After the latest firmware update (from 7.0.0 yo 7.0.1), my Epic-W startup time went from about 53 seconds to 48 seconds. Sooooo is this going to be normal and expected boot time for the camera going forward?
    Ryan Sauvé | @sauvedp
    Epic-X Dragon #5343
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts