Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Numbered Epic's

chrislancaster

chrislancaster

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2009
Messages
441
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
46
Location
Honolulu, Hawaii
Would it be better if Epics did not have visible numbers like the RED ONE's ?

It just seems like the more info or details you put out into the public the more rumors and misinformation can be created.

Rumors saying older mx is not as good as newer mx cameras ..etc...
:001_unsure:
 
Tell me people don't feel awe when in the presence of a 6 or 7, the Eight, a 19 or 31... of course Epics should have numbers.
 
Elsie N said:
Tell me people don't feel awe when in the presence of a 6 or 7, the Eight, a 19 or 31... of course Epics should have numbers.
Click to expand...

it would mean nothing with out the people behind them ...

dino, gibby, offhollywood...etc..etc .. those guys made the numbers not the other way around



im just thinking of ways to shut down the rumor mill..
 
chrislancaster said:
it would mean nothing with out the people behind them ...

dino, gibby, offhollywood...etc..etc .. those guys made the numbers not the other way around



im just thinking of ways to shut down the rumor mill..
Click to expand...
If in fact there is a difference, maybe there should be a way for someone to know? And I beg to differ that the numbers of the cameras would mean nothing without the people behind them. The numbers identify the people behind them as futurists.
 
chrislancaster said:
Would it be better if Epics did not have visible numbers like the RED ONE's ?

It just seems like the more info or details you put out into the public the more rumors and misinformation can be created.

Rumors saying older mx is not as good as newer mx cameras ..etc...
:001_unsure:
Click to expand...

Not sure I understand how that would stop rumors or misinformation?
 
Terry VerHaar said:
Not sure I understand how that would stop rumors or misinformation?
Click to expand...


if you have a newer or older RED .. people can say things like the newer reds are better because of upgraded so and so

or the opposite way around
 
But Red has consistently upgraded any early deficiencies. Like the audio board... I constantly here that the audio board was bad, i need to then explain that that was a problem with earlier models, but has been fixed, and in the case of the early models replaced.
 
Cameras, and their serial numbers, have a long and rich history.

LeicaIIfRD02.jpg


If it ain't broke ...
 
chrislancaster said:
if you have a newer or older RED .. people can say things like the newer reds are better because of upgraded so and so

or the opposite way around
Click to expand...

I get what you mean. I just don't understand how eliminating serial numbers changes anything. People can, and WILL, say stupid and untrue things all the time. Nothing will stop that. That doesn't mean any of it is true, nor that anyone has to believe what they say. Of course, some will believe because they want to. And, nothing is likely to stop that either. What a world we live in, eh? :eek:
 
I dont feel awe in the presence of a camera unless it has shot something that I feel in awe of. So far very few REDs have done that, including my own.Even then it is a stretch to feel in awe of a tool. I would feel awe towards Gregg Toland, if I touched the camera that was used to shoot Citizen Kane...but I would be in awe of how he used that piece of equipment. Other than that I would be in awe of how a great piece of craftsmanship it was, for its age, and NOT the serial number!
Serial numbers are just hype and good marketing, and Jim has been excellent at that.
The early adopters where important for the development and survival of RED, but thats still people and not serialnumbers.
 
Jens Jakob Thorsen said:
I dont feel awe in the presence of a camera unless it has shot something that I feel in awe of. So far very few REDs have done that, including my own.Even then it is a stretch to feel in awe of a tool. I would feel awe towards Gregg Toland, if I touched the camera that was used to shoot Citizen Kane...but I would be in awe of how he used that piece of equipment. Other than that I would be in awe of how a great piece of craftsmanship it was, for its age, and NOT the serial number!
Serial numbers are just hype and good marketing, and Jim has been excellent at that.
The early adopters where important for the development and survival of RED, but thats still people and not serialnumbers.
Click to expand...
Jens, you are aweless man.
 
chrislancaster said:
im just thinking of ways to shut down the rumor mill..
Click to expand...

Probably started by owners of new cameras or people that used a camera with a problem. I seem to remember a batch of cameras that had more back focus issues than others.
 
chrislancaster said:
Would it be better if Epics did not have visible numbers like the RED ONE's ?

It just seems like the more info or details you put out into the public the more rumors and misinformation can be created.

Rumors saying older mx is not as good as newer mx cameras ..etc...
:001_unsure:
Click to expand...

I love rumors....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top