Don't forget...

[Ketch Rossi]

Instead of distancing oneself, (as in, "that's not my bag, baby") perhaps one should take the opportunity and embrace alternate types of shooting environments by doing research in those areas as well. It's a huge internet out there.

Here's a head start:
http://tinyurl.com/86mbb6

;-) Meant in good fun, with perhaps a point to be taken. (And intended for plenty of people other than yourself). Understanding other shooting environments can only help one become more well-rounded and professional. They also are used more and more within Cine style productions these days as Gibby alluded to.



As someone who also has worked on a few of these types of productions, I can understand where you are coming from. The atmosphere and etiquette is quite an interesting thing and varies from production to production. Often, there can be very high pressure situations, with very little time for explanation. Even so, I would say that the above comments you receive ("what are these bullshit RED plugs?", etc.) arise out of a combination a several factors, and not just that the RED ONE Camera has some unique, shall we say, design choices.

For instance:

1) Digital / Film: As we know, there are plenty of DPs, Operators, ACs, etc, that are resisting Digital at any chance they get. Whether this is job security, not wanting to learn new technology, or just having a passion for working with film, this can often times encourage people to zero in on something that isn't as big a deal as they would make it out to be. While slightly inconvenient, I'm sure some people have gone out of their way to make it seem like a bigger deal than it is.

2) Youth: Treating the new guy with a lack of respect or giving him/her a hard time just seems to be something that is part of the human condition. This can be amplified in this industry and especially on big budget sets. If you are young and in a highly technical position, sometimes this can make other people feel uneasy or threatened, even jealous. Keep in mind that as a DIT or Data Capture Technician (and a young one at that), you may be earning more money than many crew members on the set that have been in the business for many years. Most people realize this and may or may not be that thrilled with the idea. In my first few years, I experienced this, but now to a much lesser degree.

3) Personalities / Perspective: It would be good if all Film Schools had a mandatory Psychology program as well. On set, it gets much easier as you realize how and when to deal with people the more and more you do things. One thing that is good to keep in mind, is that it's just a movie (or other form of production). As crazy as the environments can get, at the end of the day, people go home to their families and continue their lives. You will find that no matter the situation, you get through it, the show goes on, and you come back another day to make the magic all over again. While you want to try your best every day, it's not always necessary to get too defensive when you are being questioned. A lot of times, I think people can see a new face and think it's a chance to test the person. If they get a reaction, then they may try and push your buttons more. If you realize this is nothing new, and shrug it off, you'll probably have an easier day. Also, at the same time, having a respectful attitude and taking a modest approach can go a long way to not ruffling feathers.

4) Comfort Level: Your not always going to be able to please everyone or make everyone understand. It also may take a much longer time for others to come to the conclusions you have about the technology. I have some colleagues that are well respected throughout the industry that are slow adopters. For me and my situation, RED fits perfectly and I can use it and recommend it knowing it is the right tool for the job. I also am used to certain work-arounds or workflow conditions. I accept them. Someone else may not consider that within their comfort zone (yet) and may resist the technology until it is. I know several people that have changed their minds after certain features were enabled or workflow options were released.

I'm happy to see these discussions taking place and think for the most part they are very constructive. RED certainly would not be what it is today without the community that surrounds it and continues to grow. Thank you to everyone who continues to contribute to these thoughtful discussions. Let's keep them going and try to consider many points of view while doing so.

Great Post Casey, and even so I haven't been on set as a assigned position as much of many of you have, I in did been in sets likely more then some of you, simply because I loved the Art from as far as I can remember, and starting in CineCitta' (Italy) to Hollywood, it is all the same, the atmosphere on set can same times be frustrating to be in, especially when dealing with stuck up Professional which arrogance far supersedes their knowledge and talent.

Yeah, I know that some times I can be a pain myself, but I have truly learned that Technology stubborn Directors and other PROs on set, do try sometimes to put down Digital and make it as difficult to work with as they can, for both luck of interest in learning new Technology and for simply been to used to Film.

Now on the other end I can say the same for many that have gone used to Digital and absolutely make life miserable on sets were Film cameras are used.

Adaptation is always the key for me, I switch from Film to Digital first in Photography with tone of stuff to learn,especially on the Post front, and now doing so with Cinematography, but I adapt, and foremost important I respect the arts and the people in them, this is a Fantastic Industry that we are in, but nonetheless is a hard one, and very competitive and judgmental to the work of others and the equipment used in each set.

Especially the equipment part, it happens all the time, in truth people should really start concentrating more on what they are doing and how they are doing it, instead of what they are doing it with, and this also goes for Accessories, not just Film vs. RED, but what accessories one chooses for its RED camera seems to make him suddenly more or less based on what MB or FF ETC He/She has on the RED, this to me is absolutely BS!!

so Any ways Casey, just wanted to say: GREAT POST!!


ciao

click Banner to visit Official Site​

 

[I Bloom]

"My sources say yes" - Magic 8-Ball

You have to be wrong Clayton. That means that this bird can't fly without syncing off a clap??

IBloom

 

[Fergus Meiklejohn]

As the specs are currently described I think Clayton is right. There's no clapper mic built into the brain is there..?

 

[CJ Roy]

The cinema module sounds like a great idea. I'd be really interested in that.

Here's some of my configurations I've dug up. Can't seem to find the ones that resemble Brook's originals, but more often than not, my camera ends up looking close to it. Depends on the shoot.

Anything we can do to help the mess of the add ons, I'd love.

Thanks.

-CJ

 

[Clayton Harper]

You have to be wrong Clayton. That means that this bird can't fly without syncing off a clap??

IBloom

In the new EFP world we're not allowed to use timecode slates. :biggrin:

Seriously though, I doubt there's a timecode port hiding under that lip and thus we get back to the same problem again: some of these designs and configurations fall apart when you think about what you need to use them in a cinema production environment.

The funniest part of this to me is being told that cinema-style is a small part of the audience and then looking at the marketing of the product which touts all these large scale cinema productions.

I realize I need to end my cry baby session with some constructive criticism.

I would love to see the modules start to be usage specific in their design. Instead of a bunch of legos, I would really like to see a stripped down run and gun module, a middle ground EFP/ENG module (with audio pots/meters), and a big-boy studio box for when size and weight aren't such a big deal.

In reality, the different styles of shooting haven't changed much since the lightweight cameras of the 60s/70s came into play freeing filmmakers from the giant studio camera set-ups. The only fundamental change was integrated sound in the camera with video. Everything else is just shades of image quality. (Mullen, please feel free to school me hard here)

I think they discussion should change from ENG vs. Cinema vs. whatever to something along the lines of "How much crap are you carrying around". I vote for Small, Medium, and Large modules. :biggrin:

I love you all, thanks for reading.

 

[I Bloom]

Custom modules might work. Mark's snake idea is also a big part of the puzzle.

My idea is custom slots on general modules. So instead of velcroing and AJA downconverter to your camera on a steadi rig, you pull the HD-SDI port and pop in the SD port, just like an Express-card slot. Essentially adding a second dimension to the modularity of the system.

Put a slot on the brain for timecode. :shifty:

 

[Brook Willard]

It'd also be nice if there was a way to cable modules together over a longer distance... a few feet. It'd let us treat the body like an optical block for specialty shots without losing the functionality of the additional modules.

 

[Stephen Strangways]

As I see it, connectors sticking out of a camera body at 90 degree right angles are a terrible design decision.

When I shot film, it was with an Aaton XTR or Arri 16SR3. Those have video connectors on the side of the body that face straight back or at a 45 degree angle (or less), so cables run along side the body. Perfect. The 416 pictures posted a little back in this thread also shows that.

This design makes it less likely to snag a cable or connector, they follow the shape of the body rather than poking out of it. Empty connectors coming out at 90 degree angles might look cleaner and smoother, but as soon as you add cables, it's much less elegant.

I work a lot with the HVX200 now, and find things like the headphone connector sticking out the side at a 90 degree angle to be a huge pain. I have all sorts of right-angle adapters to solve problems. Why? Well, I often end up with a Y-splitter in the headphone jack, with one side of that getting a L-R mono separator, then one or both sides of that getting jacks into transmitters. It would extend several inches from the body, and be a real danger of getting broken off.

Panasonic's newer HPX170 moves almost all of those side connectors to the very back, and facing out the back so everything lines up perfectly with the body. The breakout boxes I've seen for the RED all do the same thing... obviously, people are buying them because they want standard BNC connectors, and they want them aligned with the camera body!

Please RED, reconsider the I/O module design, or at least make another one with angled or straight back connectors. Otherwise, a lot of people will be looking to another company to provide them with yet another breakout box.

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

Ergomics Firts!

Ergomics Firts!

I went through this thread and saw this picture again. While this is a nice looking render I don't want my next Red camera to be set up for hand-held work in this way. Why? This configuration is super front heavy. I really thought that Red knows that designs like the Arri 235 are the benchmark - ergonomically. At least I got the impression that Jim Jannard sees it like this. Hopefully, Red publishes such a configuration just for fun. The RedOne is in many ways a great camera - but it's bulky and heavy. My formost wish for the next generation of Red cameras: Make it the most ergonomical camera on the planet. Please.

Hans

 

[David Mullen ASC]

If you're used to handholding a 35mm movie camera, the RED ONE seems pretty small & light...

It's a basic, almost unsolvable, design problem: cine lenses are bigger than ever, and as cameras get smaller and smaller, they get front heavy because you've basically reduced the system to a lens attached to a sensor & processor, and the data recorder & battery past those modules aren't going to compensate enough to throw the weight much to the rear.

We're in that awkward size phase that some of the bigger prosumer cameras suffer from, in that they aren't small or light enough to be handycams held by the wrist, and they aren't big enough to sit on the shoulder naturally. So you find artificial ways of throwing recorders, batteries, accessories and whatnot off of the back to counteract the weight in front, so it becomes a shoulder-mount camera.

 

[Mark Pugh]

I went through this thread and saw this picture again. While this is a nice looking render I don't want my next Red camera to be set up for hand-held work in this way. Why? This configuration is super front heavy. I really thought that Red knows that designs like the Arri 235 are the benchmark - ergonomically. At least I got the impression that Jim Jannard sees it like this. Hopefully, Red publishes such a configuration just for fun. The RedOne is in many ways a great camera - but it's bulky and heavy. My formost wish for the next generation of Red cameras: Make it the most ergonomical camera on the planet. Please.

Hans

I've been posting here and there about how dubious this setup looks... you're the only other one, as far as I know. Most people seem to think it looks really cool, which seems to be the basic idea.

 

[Jannard]

What you don't see from this render is that the back portion can be slid (on rails) as far back as you want/need for balance. You also need to understand that the heaviest thing up front is the lens. I have held this particular rig on my shoulder with a RED prime lens and it balances perfectly (with battery and drive moved back slightly). Maybe you should withhold judgment until you actually try it? Just a thought.

Jim

 

[Jared Caldwell]

Maybe you should withhold judgment until you actually try it? Just a thought.

Jim

LOL! You mean I can't judge the balance of the camera by looking at renders? :blink:

What has the world come to?

 

[CJ Roy]

I have held this particular rig on my shoulder with a RED prime lens and it balances perfectly (with battery and drive moved back slightly).

It seems the older batteries & drives would have to be back even further once you add in a mattebox, follow focus, filters, etc. And of course, depending on which kind of lens is mounted.

In the current specs, is there a way the modules can be separated, to spread the weight over the shoulder?

Thanks.

-CJ

 

[I Bloom]

It seems the older batteries & drives would have to be back even further once you add in a mattebox, follow focus, filters, etc. And of course, depending on which kind of lens is mounted.

In the current specs, is there a way the modules can be separated, to spread the weight over the shoulder?

Thanks.

-CJ

Mark Pederson proposed a "snake" which I'd imagine to be a longer protected ribbon cable that would connect two modules. Kind of like this guy but stronger:

I don't think it's actually needed for handheld though. The setup I linked to looks like it will be great and very compact just two batteries on the back maybe.

IBloom

 

[ericyoung]

Custom modules might work. Mark's snake idea is also a big part of the puzzle.

My idea is custom slots on general modules. So instead of velcroing and AJA downconverter to your camera on a steadi rig, you pull the HD-SDI port and pop in the SD port, just like an Express-card slot. Essentially adding a second dimension to the modularity of the system.

Put a slot on the brain for timecode. :shifty:

There's pros and cons to this approach - the overall form factor of the camera becomes more fixed, but probably has to be large to accommodate all the potential add-in modules. But it would involve less disassembly to reconfigure differently.

 

[Todd M.]

It seems the older batteries & drives would have to be back even further once you add in a mattebox, follow focus, filters, etc. And of course, depending on which kind of lens is mounted.

In the current specs, is there a way the modules can be separated, to spread the weight over the shoulder?

Thanks.

-CJ

Jim has already stated that modules can be "off camera". So, yes. (I'll try and find the post)

...here it is.

 

[CJ Roy]

What's interesting about that, and Mark's snake cable approach, is that there could be a third party body design that allowed you to put the various modules where you saw fit. Kind of like a skeleton that would let you put the organs where you needed them. Could be one rigid, aluminum body that ran the snake internally.

I have no idea how feasible something like that would be, or if Red would allow it, but it could be designed to be shaped like more comfortable film cameras.

Just thinking out loud here.

-CJ

EDIT: Just finally saw Mark's snake thread. There's a similar idea in there. Sorry Mark, didn't mean to rip your idea off.

 

[P Andersson]

RED Snake - good idea - but it would have to be a different name i think - too weird associations

 

[Jared Caldwell]

RED Snake - good idea - but it would have to be a different name i think - too weird associations

That is funny! I can't wait to see these "hidden bombs" that have been referenced in the past. I am sure connectivity is one of them.