3rd party development of Epic/Scarlet modules?

[Shawn Nelson]

Will you guys be opening up the Scarlet/Epic module pipeline to enable third parties to develop modules beyond the scope of what you will be doing?

I could foresee...
-A metadata module. It would interact with recording and have additional buttons to facilitate immediate adjustment of metadata on the fly.

-downres module. It would pipe out SD NTSC or PAL.

-wireless module. better than bolting something out the side of the ports

-digital audio module

 

[Thomas Dobbie]

Very good idea Shawn,it will be interesting to see how this develops,it wouldn't surprise me if this became an industry standard,both still and cine. It's time everything was shaken up a bit.
Tom.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I think the ultimate plan for the RED SDK is to also offer camera control abilities. But I don't know if they will ever go as far as to letting people monkey around with code that runs inside the camera / brain. Would be interesting and cool if they did, but may open up way too many liability issues.

 

[Shawn Nelson]

I think the ultimate plan for the RED SDK is to also offer camera control abilities. But I don't know if they will ever go as far as to letting people monkey around with code that runs inside the camera / brain. Would be interesting and cool if they did, but may open up way too many liability issues.

You're misunderstanding me Jeff, they could allow people to add on while still protecting things. Also Red would have to certify it, to make sure it didnt.


So those "issues" become irrelevent.

 

[FMG battery]

it's a good idea but this move for the thread is too funny.. :mail1:

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

You're misunderstanding me Jeff, they could allow people to add on while still protecting things. Also Red would have to certify it, to make sure it didnt.

I suppose that's true... They could provide some sort of "protected area" within the camera's software environment for user code. ...Software certification program... Possible, I guess. :matrix:

 

[PatrickW]

I suppose that's true... They could provide some sort of "protected area" within the camera's software environment for user code. ...Software certification program... Possible, I guess. :matrix:

I'd rather open source, or at minimum the lack of cert system, because its always circumventable and people want it. Its would be best to have two firmwares, one user changeable and one RED. That way the users can tweak things to fix them before RED patches it, and they can send the patches to RED to verify and standardize and deploy.

I understand the need for a RED certified software package, but give the users the open framework to tweak and improve the cameras in a digital playground for the enthusiast as an added option, it can only benefit the community.