Ambush test...

[David Battistella]

i think that was exactly jim's point--can they hold off testing until the features are fully enabled? i'm assuming that includes affiliated software, like REDCINE.

still, what is there to ambush?

You wouldn't expect "the competition" to hold off, would you? Do you think they care that the camera is not fully enabled, or that the software is not ready? Playing devils advocate I am sure they are saying, "this is the camera, right? I can rent this for a day, right? It does power up and take pictures, right". Do you think they care about the "ya, buts". I doubt it. This is one risk RED took by releasing a partially enabled camera.

It's like trying to explain a rough cut to someone who doesn't get it. They don't care what it is going to be. They care what it is.

If you want a great laugh, have a listen to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MNg3sSZ9F8


David

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

But by Jim''s own admittance the red will never be finished. Therefore I can't see any justifiable argument that could be made that the camera isn't fair game for testing yet.

If a movie was released in theaters but would get an updated cut every week. The first week's review is perfectly valid.

 

[Stephen Williams]

You wouldn't expect "the competition" to hold off, would you? Do you think they care that the camera is not fully enabled, or that the software is not ready? Playing devils advocate I am sure they are saying, "this is the camera, right? I can rent this for a day, right? It does power up and take pictures, right". Do you think they care about the "ya, buts". I doubt it. This is one risk RED took by releasing a partially enabled camera.

David

Hi David,

Are talking about production cameras or pre-production cameras here?

Stephen

 

[Jim Arthurs]

Well, actually that's not quite correct. There is also at least Scratch one can use to process r3d files, and there are a few people out there capable of using a Scratch system. Other applications, although myabe only beta versions, may also be capable of processing r3d files.
Cheers,
Damien

...Do you think the "ambush test" folks, as Jim calls them, will go out of their way to track down the latest build of RED ALERT or get a RED friendly Scratch artist with the beta that supports RED files to do these conversions? I'll bet they'll use that first RED ALERT release, run it at default and call it a day, burning in the extra sharpening and generally not representing the image as well as they could.

My greater point is this... With film, you look-see-measure to determine the various factors you're interested in. A print or telecine isn't necessary to tell latitude, grain structure, or resolution.

With the other tape cameras, you make a series of choices BEFORE you pull the trigger... after that, it's a done deal. Maybe the Digital Tech made the right choices at the time, maybe not, but it's burned in.

With REDCODE RAW you can't begin to evaluate any aspect of the image quality until you've done processing, and the quality of the processing appears to be an evolving target at this point in the development cycle.

Since the Bayer conversion and processing are equally important to the final resolution and look of the camera, no definative testing could be done until the RED Team is happy with their conversion quality. And even then, when processing speed increases, advances in better Bayer conversion would make re-visiting the tests a necessity down the road.

The good news is that you can always revisit the Bayer conversion to tweak the output. The bad news is that you can always revisit the Bayer conversion to tweak the output...

 

[David Battistella]

Hi David,

Are talking about production cameras or pre-production cameras here?

Stephen

Stephen,

The camera's are "out there" and can be rented. If 1-50 are pre-production camera's then I guess I am talking about those camera's. It's a tough spot for RED to be in right now because obviously you would want to have a fully enabled camera, or at least one of your people present at the test.

Unfortunately because the camera is available but not fully enabled, it's not going to stop people from testing it. Look at how much has been posted right here on these forums.

All RED can control is what they do with their camera and their customers, some people (maybe those who are either threatened or curious) will get their hands on the camera and put it through the ringer. This happens with almost every new camera release.

It's just too bad they do not choose to involve RED but that says something about them. My first question to whoever is doing the testing is: "why wouldn't you, at the very least out of professional courtesy, ask member of the RED project to participate?

I think this is what Jim is asking too.

David

 

[Jannard]

I have a problem when someone does tests with an agenda and uses our camera with a known and published firmware issue in a "secret test". Some may discount the results, but others will not know the circumstances around the tests. I don't think the plan was to put a footnote saying, "oh, BTW, the RED camera had known firmware issues so discount these tests accordingly".

There is a big difference between continuing to improve the camera and known problems.

Jim

 

[Stephen Williams]

...Do you think the "ambush test" folks, as Jim calls them, will go out of their way to track down the latest build of RED ALERT or get a RED friendly Scratch artist with the beta that supports RED files to do these conversions? I'll bet they'll use that first RED ALERT release, run it at default and call it a day, burning in the extra sharpening and generally not representing the image as well as they could.

Hi Jim,

For the test to have any credibility amongst working pros, the test has to be done to the best ability of the people carrying out the test. If it's just a marketing ploy it will backfire.

If I am testing a camera for a job next week, I can only evaluate what is available & working today. As more features are enabled then Red will have more advantages, if I need 60 fps & sound tomorrow than a Varicam may well fit the bill. As Geoff Boyle would say Horses for courses.

Stephen

 

[David Battistella]

But by Jim''s own admittance the red will never be finished. Therefore I can't see any justifiable argument that could be made that the camera isn't fair game for testing yet.

If a movie was released in theaters but would get an updated cut every week. The first week's review is perfectly valid.

Gavin,

My interpretation of Jim's remarks was that the RED project is fluid and that the camera and code can constantly be upgraded and improved. The design of the PROJECT is as modular as the camera.

I took his remarks to mean that they were working toward a very stable platform for the first "Fully Enabled Release", and they would continue to improve the product line. I did not get the sense that the RED project is the "neverendum".

Presumably, they will continue to make camera's and improve the software with monthly or quarterly or yearly updates.

That said, some people are not going to cut you any slack. The camera is released so they will test it. Some might perceive this to be the best time to strike because they see a partially enabled camera as a chink in the armour.

David

 

[David Battistella]

I have a problem when someone does tests with an agenda and uses our camera with a known and published firmware issue in a "secret test". Some may discount the results, but others will not know the circumstances around the tests. I don't think the plan was to put a footnote saying, "oh, BTW, the RED camera had known firmware issues so discount these tests accordingly".

There is a big difference between continuing to improve the camera and known problems.

Jim

Jim,

I can understand the frustration, but I think that many will understand that there is a lack of professional courtesy on the part of the testers. It's a big industry and it's a very small one at the same time and people know when manufacturers are sandbagging.

That's why so many people have responded to RED's fresh approach which is a professional, courteous and civilized way of doing things.

David

 

[Jim Arthurs]

Hi Jim,

For the test to have any credibility amongst working pros, the test has to be done to the best ability of the people carrying out the test. If it's just a marketing ploy it will backfire.

Stephen

Hi Stephen, I would agree... however the title of the thread is "Ambush Test", implying that the condition of fairness you suggest may not happen. I'm just working within the conditions suggested here.

Besides, this is relatively new territory here in the world of cameras... where an existing camera could literally be "made better" with a quick upgrade seconds before the test, along with the same happening to the evaluation of the footage after it is shoot. Some testers, if even well intentioned, might not be aware of the latest greatest firmware and applet burn, certainly if they're not in communication with the RED Team.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Hi Stephen, I would agree... however the title of the thread is "Ambush Test", implying that the condition of fairness you suggest may not happen. I'm just working within the conditions suggested here.

Besides, this is relatively new territory here in the world of cameras... where an existing camera could literally be "made better" with a quick upgrade seconds before the test, along with the same happening to the evaluation of the footage after it is shoot. Some testers, if even well intentioned, might not be aware of the latest greatest firmware and applet burn, certainly if they're not in communication with the RED Team.

Hi Jim,

Bear in mind many Sony cameras perform rather badly 'out of the box', and negative film benefits from slight overexposure.

As a born skeptic, I take all information I receive with a pinch of salt until I can verify it with my own eyes. I always test, evaluate the results, then test again using the knowledge gained from the first tests. Only then do I understand what needs to be tweaked & retested.

Stephen

 

[David Battistella]

Hi Stephen, I would agree... however the title of the thread is "Ambush Test", implying that the condition of fairness you suggest may not happen. I'm just working within the conditions suggested here.

Besides, this is relatively new territory here in the world of cameras... where an existing camera could literally be "made better" with a quick upgrade seconds before the test, along with the same happening to the evaluation of the footage after it is shoot. Some testers, if even well intentioned, might not be aware of the latest greatest firmware and applet burn, certainly if they're not in communication with the RED Team.

Jim,

The other important note here is that RED is redefining things a bit. You do not really download firmware and upgrade the picture quality of shot footage with any other motion picture camera.

The same way film benefits from digital technology years after it was exposed (improvements to film scanning technology), RED footage can and will benefit from new releases of the RED codec.

I'm not sure everyone has fully wrapped their head around this yet as we have become accustomed to putting things on tape and (with the exception of a few DV codec improvements) it never ever being anything more or better.

 

[mezmo]

Hi Guys,
My guess is that Kodak will do the usual thing of producing
a split screen 2.35:1 35mm print,Red one side,film the other.
Red will have to go thru a film-out process and probably get
eaten here because Kodak film taken thru the total photochemical post
path looks stunning. This old trick works really well up against
digital and you get to see film in all it's intended glory.
They invite in studio exec's and producers, DP's. Lots of free
beer and food (that's why I go) and some pretty girls to hand out
free promo stuff, sunglasses (that's right Jim) T shirts and office
stuff, pens, phone books, and even DOF calculators.
Red could do this as well, I'm sure the freeby stuff would be a lot
better quality, my Kodak sunglasses lasted for one day on a shoot.
I digress, My point is that most DP's like me go to these things for
the free booze and to see old friends.
DP's tend to make their own minds up on the choice of camera for
a job and then test the camera for that job.
For me the reason for using Red would have nothing to do with film.
Mezmo

 

[Graeme Nattress]

What amazes me, is that Kodak have some superb digital sensor technology and have not done anything in digital cinema with it.....

I attended a SMPTE event in Toronto back in 2001 I think where it was HDCAM v Film, and a lot of education about HDCAM. Very interesting. Even back then HDCAM was very good in comparison to Film.

Graeme

 

[chuck colburn]

Mezmo

Tests are good. As Stephen said.

 

[Seung Han]

If they find issues with RED and publish via print or internet early enough at this initial stage it will be out there for people who just don't like Red to refer back to in their arguments or it will plant the first 'official' seeds of doubt for non-techie people who first start researching Red, like producers and directors especially in foreign non English speaking countries.

The reason I say this is because I see how much information in English gets distorted before it becomes available in Korean in Korea. I see it all the time in a wide range of topics, I have already seen it with misinformation on the Red in a Korean video magazine.

Things get twisted and stuck in people's heads early enough then its hard to dislodge that first impression no matter how ill conceived it was...

If I spent as much time as the Red Team did on this camera and knew so many people in the industry were skeptical to the point of antagonism, I would be fairly concerned about bias testing.

 

[duckgrossberg]

Is anyone really trying to bash the red?

Is anyone really trying to bash the red?

I am confused. I am reading through all of these posts and I am noticing there is no solid evidence that anyone is trying to make RED look bad!?! Does any one have any first hand knowledge that this is actually happening and if you do please site your source.

 

[justshootalready]

We have a tip there there is an ambush test going on this weekend. We have been told that someone from Kodak is doing a side by side test where the results "have been pre-determined".
Jim

The only person that would know of a test like this is the person shooting it. I would be suprised if a company like kodak would risk cheating the results. There are too many skillled individuals that can see with their own eyes and have no problem calling it like it is.

 

[Jannard]

The details have been posted on CML.

Jim

 

[Jannard]

The only person that would know of a test like this is the person shooting it.

And the people he talks to... hypothetically speaking.

Jim