Arri LDS Metadata on Red – PLEASE

[Mark Pedersen]

Jim, if at all possible, can you PLEASE make the Red compatible with metadata from Arri/Ziess LDS lenses (Ultra Primes and Master Primes) as well as the Cooke /i metadata?

For those not aware of the situation, two issues are involved: the position of the contacts on the PL mount, and the incorporation of the LDS metadata into Red software.

CONTACTS
The position of the 4 contacts on the Red PL mount are in the 12:00 position (which works with Cooke lenses) instead of the 3:00 position on Arri lenses. This was first brought up in Greg Milneck’s post in November:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=5714

You can mount the Arri lens to align to the contacts, but the scales are then in the 12:00 position.

Arricam bodies have the contacts in two positions on the PL mount—12:00 and 3:00. This allows the scales to be read in either low mode or normal “AC” mode. It also allows you to mount an Arri LDS, Cooke /i S4 lens, or LDS Optimo, and use the metadata from any of the lenses.

It would be great if Red could do the same. That would give everyone the flexibility to use any intelligent lens set and get the benefits that these modern lenses offer for both production and effects/motion control work.

I understand that a lot of work went into making the current PL mount rock solid, but couldn’t you simply provide a second set of 4 holes at the 3:00 position on the PL mount, install contacts and the necessary wiring?

Looking at the current mount, it seems quite doable.

If that approach proves cost prohibitive for some reason, can the current PL mount be simply rotated 90 degrees so the contacts are in the 3:00 position? In that case, it seems all that would be needed is a longer wiring harness to the contacts. That would allow users or a local lens shop to rotate the PL mount. Doable? If not, can we order a camera with the PL mount oriented with data contacts in the 3:00 position?

Of course that approach would force users to chose one type of intelligent lens system over the other—not great for anyone in the rental market, or users who may want different lenses for different projects, or only have access to certain lenses at any one given time from local rental houses.

SOFTWARE
On the software side of things, it’s my understanding that the Arri LDS system and Cooke /I data systems ARE compatible.

You can use a Cooke /i data lens on an Arri body and capture the metadata, just like an Arri/Ziess or Angenieux LDS lens.

In discussions last week with two Arri representatives as well as the Cooke dealer in the US (ZGC) both camps have stated that the two systems are fully compatible from software perspective. In fact, Arri told me they invented the system, shared it with Cooke and Angenieux, that it is not proprietary, and in fact, have given the protocols to Red. Is that true?

If so, that doesn’t square with Jarred’s responses on Greg’s LDS thread in December:

“the connections are both the same, its just different data.”

“LDS is (currently) a closed proprietary system, where the /i system is an open standard so other companies can adopt it like (like Red), which is how we put it on our zooms and on our camera. It’s the same signals and the same contacts, just different info moving back and forth.”

We have no problem working with Arri, or no problem working to get LDS integrated, but its not that simple.. its one thing to get lenses to talk to to an Arri body because Arri still controls the data... its another thing for Arri to give us the keys to the protocol to implement into our camera. And the ball isnt just in Arri's court , we need to allocate the resources for development and integration.”

“The first protocol we will support is the /i system.”

So what’s the current status? Did Arri recently provide the LDS software protocol “keys” to Red? If so, that would lead me to believe that Red DOES intend to make LDS compatibility a reality—which would be awesome.

I totally understand that Red is advertised as an /i system, but I hope Red will provide a solution for the contacts and integrate the Arri data into the Red software stack so Red users have more flexibility in how they use their cameras.

The analogies to the computer industry certainly seem to apply here. Let’s keep Red the innovative hardware/software “open system” that opens opportunities for everyone, levels the playing field and benefits a loyal and passionate community of users. Opening up Red’s lens mount and software to embrace both Cooke i/ and Arri LDS would be a big step in that direction.

You’ve done an awesome job getting this kick-ass camera to market, and I can’t wait to get mine. I just want to be able to take full advantage of it, and hope you’ll make this capability available.

Thanks for your thoughtful consideration,

Mark

 

[Jarred Land]

LDS protocol is not an open system and does not send exactly the same data as the I/system as I think you are saying you were told.... but the good news is we heard your requests and there has been discussion.... We've always liked ARRI.

No promises, and /i will come first, but we are listening.

 

[Greg M]

Thanks Jarred.

 

[Mark Pedersen]

Jarred,

Thanks for clarifying, listening and seriously considering this. With 4K acquisition and a flexible workflow, Red One is a natural for effects work. Arri/Zeiss offer the widest range of modern glass. The combination will make Red a very tough camera to beat in the professional marketplace.

I also think that as more users discover the full capabilities of Red, and the limitations of still lenses, they'll be shopping for cine glass and will want options.

Thanks again for your support and listening to your customer base!

Mark

 

[Mark Pedersen]

Jarred,

BTW, based on past action after Red has said they're "listening" to its customers, I'm taking "listening" to mean, we'll implement it, we just can't say when.

Assuming you do, are you leaning toward providing two sets of contacts on the PL mount? And would LDS follow shortly after /i?

M

 

[Jarred Land]

no to second set of contacts... we only have mechanical and electrical design for one set of contacts. the RED lenses use the Cooke orientation for the contacts, and we are not going to change that. (sorry)... if we were to implement LDS, you would need to rotate your ARRI lenses.

we listen... but we arn't going to change our mount so it stops working with our own lenses. I hope you can understand that.

 

[jbeale]

My take is, they've got too much stuff still to implement, test, troubleshoot, and make &@**-fool-resistant (if not '-proof') before making any public statements about the stuff that they haven't already said they'll do...

-oh, Jarred already replied. -hm, I wonder if that means the Red lenses have something mechanical which would prevent them from working if there were two sets of contacts? Do Red lenses not work on an Arricam body, or is there some copyright or patent problem that prevents Red from using exactly the Arricam mount configuration? Otherwise, it seems that either Red or a third party could easily enough (in theory) make such a solution work, either by designing in two sets of contact pads wired in parallel, or maybe making one contact set modular and removable so it could be repositioned 90 degrees.

-edit 2: ...or it's basically a business decision. Fair enough.

 

[Jarred Land]

thanks Jbeale.. and I hope everyone can at least get us credit for giving you guys what you ask for most of the time..

we cant do everything, specially if its to accommodate a competitors product that would assassinate something in our own product line.

 

[Brook Willard]

Jarred, would there be anything preventing us from removing the mount, rotating it 90 degrees and lengthening the contact harness to match up with the LDS lenses? Obviously this would be after the software side of the equation was sorted out.

Or...

If one were to take two of the contact/harness parts and wire them in parallel... drill 4 more holes at the 3:00 position in the lens mount... and install both sets of contacts simultaneously... would it work? Or would one set of contacts send confusing data [from contacting the lens flange] while the other sends accurate data [from contacting the contacts] and bugger the whole operation? That is, assuming there was even enough current in the wires to "power" both sets of contacts in the first place.

 

[Jarred Land]

Jarred, would there be anything preventing us from removing the mount, rotating it 90 degrees and lengthening the contact harness to match up with the LDS lenses? Obviously this would be after the software side of the equation was sorted out.

just your warranty

seriously though.. there is a way or a method to make anything work.. it just depends on how brave you are, and if your credit card can handle it if something goes wrong.

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

If one were to take two of the contact/harness parts and wire them in parallel... drill 4 more holes at the 3:00 position in the lens mount... and install both sets of contacts simultaneously... would it work? Or would one set of contacts send confusing data [from contacting the lens flange] while the other sends accurate data [from contacting the contacts] and bugger the whole operation? That is, assuming there was even enough current in the wires to "power" both sets of contacts in the first place.

just your warranty

seriously though.. there is a way or a method to make anything work.. it just depends on how brave you are, and if your credit card can handle it if something goes wrong.

Maybe there could be a way of either having you guys at RED (I know you have a lot to do, so you might not have time for this) or having ARRI doing this. It would be of extra charge of course. It would cost us to "pimp" our cameras with the luxury of having both mounts.

Who knows maybe you guys at RED could even start earning a buck or two over there :greedy:

No seriously, I can see you guys maybe try to implement it in the software for us, but if we want to do a hardware change then there could be an extra charge?

Another way is to talk to ARRI about changing the position or changing the LDS mount on their lenses. Their already doing that so why not in this case?


Fred

 

[Evin Grant]

Rotating the mount on the lenses shouldn't be much of a big deal. And most rental houses would do it for you if you requested it, heck, they'd still work fine on their Arricams.

 

[Mark Pedersen]

Maybe there could be a way of either having you guys at RED (I know you have a lot to do, so you might not have time for this) or having ARRI doing this. It would be of extra charge of course. It would cost us to "pimp" our cameras with the luxury of having both mounts.

Who knows maybe you guys at RED could even start earning a buck or two over there :greedy:

No seriously, I can see you guys maybe try to implement it in the software for us, but if we want to do a hardware change then there could be an extra charge?

Another way is to talk to ARRI about changing the position or changing the LDS mount on their lenses. Their already doing that so why not in this case?

Fred

I already explored this with Arri, and they said it wasn't possible.

 

[Mark Pedersen]

thanks Jbeale.. and I hope everyone can at least get us credit for giving you guys what you ask for most of the time..

we cant do everything, specially if its to accommodate a competitors product that would assassinate something in our own product line.

Jarred,

Please forgive the long post, but I feel I need to respond to this.

First let me say that of course we give you credit for trying to give us guys (your customers) what we want most of the time. The Red team has been awesome about listening and incorporating changes that makes the camera better. And that's the whole point isn't it? Red has obviously chosen to create the Red User forum as a tool to get real time feedback/input from your customer base as a way to help fast track the R&D of this camera and workflow and then refine it. That was a forward-thinking and "revolutionary" business strategy and that helped make Red the camera that it is today in such a short timeframe.

Red could have, like all the traditional camera companies have in the past (and still do): invest the money and time to do all the R&D and market research internally, build a camera to your specs and then release it to the market and hope for the best. But you didn’t, and we applaud you for it.

So isn’t it safe to say that “we” (your customers) are an essential part of the process of making this camera what it is today? Aren’t we all happily part of the Red community? And isn’t that why a company exists in the first place? To serve a market and customer need? So please recognize that you have a loyal community out there, with an active interest in providing constructive feedback and suggestions, and let’s move on.

Today, nearly a year after I placed my order, the camera is still evolving and I have to wait a couple of more months to take delivery. And while that’s frustrating at times, it’s also at the core of what this camera is all about. I’m happy to take delivery on a camera that will be better when I get it, and continue to evolve after I do. I’m stoked that you’re committed to ongoing evolution. Keep it coming. I love what you’re doing for the industry.

And that’s the spirit behind my original post. In the process of building this camera, you got feedback from users and in your own field testing, realized there were issues with the PL mount. You went to work and not only fixed it, but made a kick ass PL mount. Awesome. But it’s not finished. It doesn’t yet have contacts for the /i system. That capability is not yet enabled in software. OK. We understand it’s coming down the road. That’s cool. So isn’t this the perfect time to consider making the mount flexible enough to accommodate other customer’s needs?

One of the unique aspects of the Red One (and one of your stated design goals) is that it “renders obsolescence obsolete.” In other words, Red One is a modular design intended to deliver as much flexibility and functionality as possible.

The flexibility to use different lenses has been one of the most attractive features for your customers from day one. You can use the PL mount with professional cine lenses. Traditional video guys can use B4 to PL adaptor mounts, etc… You can use still lenses. In fact, there have been a zillion threads about still lenses. Obviously, a lot of users want to use them. So Red is making a fixed Nikon mount for still lenses. As well as a B4 Adaptor. Then there’s Birger’s mount for Canon lenses.

All of these options give people the flexibility to use lenses other than Red’s. So does the standard PL mount for that matter.

So why the sudden paranoia about building capabilities into your PL mount that you fear would “accommodate a competitor’s product that would assassinate something in our own product line.”

How does adding support for Arri/Zeiss data lenses take away anything that your product offers? What product would be “assassinated?” Your lenses? I don’t think so.

If Red builds a PL mount that enables /i technology in Cooke or Red lenses AND supports metadata from Arri lenses as well, haven’t you made the camera that much more capable and appealing to a broader set of customers? Doesn’t that translate into more camera and accessory sales? Isn’t that in keeping with your design and market philosophy?

Red’s lenses are targeted at a specific price point and market segment. They are perfect for some people. But not everyone.
$20K for a five prime set versus $15K for a single lens? Clearly, different products aimed at different buyers. Enabling LDS isn’t going to trigger a rush to Arri lenses or cannibalize Red lens sales. Theoretically, it could impact Cooke sales, but I don’t think so. If people like Cooke lenses, they’ll buy Cooke. If they like Red and appreciate their value, they’ll buy Red. But not supporting Arri lens data capability in the interest of creating a defensive perimeter around Red or Cooke glass sales isn’t in the best interests of your customers. Hopefully, that’s not Red’s strategy.

For the record, I don’t own Arri LDS lenses. I have Red lenses on order. But that doesn’t mean I may not want to rent Arri LDS lenses for projects that require or benefit from that capability. Or that lots of companies doing FX work might want the same, but don’t want to use Red or Cooke glass—for whatever reason.

So, bottom line, if you can help this community by providing at least the ability to rotate the PL mount to align to Arri LDS lens contacts at 3:00 so the AC can read the scales, and enable the metadata to be recorded just like /i technology, we’d be very grateful. And we’d all have yet another reason to cheer the Red team on and spread the word that Red is the open camera platform of choice for anyone wanting to shoot 4K digital cinema.

So thanks for all the hard work, and the commitment you make every day to making this the best camera on the planet. We appreciate it.

Mark

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

I have to say If only all of us would post threads as well spoken as Mark's and the RED forum would be a better place:wink:

Nicely put Mark.

 

[Greg M]

we cant do everything, specially if its to accommodate a competitors product that would assassinate something in our own product line.

Mark,
Great summary, I never noticed this comment until now.
I have to agree 100%, how could you possibly think supporting one of the most popular lens manufacturers in the world would assassinate your own product line? This is backwards thinking Jarred.
Adding support for Arri only helps your product line!!
I am beginning to think this why we dont have full Anton Bauer support yet.

Red should not only support, but embrace these vendors who are in many ways industry standards, and not be short sighted into thinking they are going to assassinate your product lines. Many of your customers (myself included) have invested many thousands of dollars in these great products and expected from day one that you would support them as ALL of your competitors do.

Actually Jarred, you can do everything, and it will only make you better. As a kid my grandfather always told me that the word "cant" wasn't acceptable, that I could do anything I wanted to do. That advise has always stuck with me, and I believe that this simple thought is the reason Jim created Red.

Dont get me wrong, I do appreciate everything you have done, and dont expect a free ride. I wouldnt expect that this should be a free option. I think we just need choices, and the ability to use various lenses is very important.

 

[Mark Pedersen]

just your warranty

seriously though.. there is a way or a method to make anything work.. it just depends on how brave you are, and if your credit card can handle it if something goes wrong.

Jarred,

So I think we're asking if Red can do this for us. Obviously, no one wants to be stuck in a situation where Red takes no action, and the only option for us is to try to hot wire it ourselves and void our warranty.

If you can make a Nikon mount that requires removal of the PL mount (and that doesn't void the warranty), how hard is it for Red to make an LDS version of the PL mount and allow users substitute it for the stock version?

Like you said, there is a way to make anything work, and this doesn't sound too tough, so can Red make this option available to those who want it (and are willing to pay a premium if necessary?) We understand that it would take engineering time. So maybe you charge $500 for the "Arri" LDS PL mount. After all, if we can get a Nikon mount for $500, or an Arri base plate from ET at $600...$500 seems reasonable for longer wires or whatever it would take.

Or could we simply order a camera with that configuration from the factory?

Thoughts?

M

 

[Steve Freebairn]

The rental houses we've talked to are interested in the Red being able to work with the Arri LDS system.

Jarred,

So I think we're asking if Red can do this for us. Obviously, no one wants to be stuck in a situation where Red takes no action, and the only option for us is to try to hot wire it ourselves and void our warranty.

If you can make a Nikon mount that requires removal of the PL mount (and that doesn't void the warranty), how hard is it for Red to make an LDS version of the PL mount and allow users substitute it for the stock version?

Like you said, there is a way to make anything work, and this doesn't sound too tough, so can Red make this option available to those who want it (and are willing to pay a premium if necessary?) We understand that it would take engineering time. So maybe you charge $500 for the "Arri" LDS PL mount. After all, if we can get a Nikon mount for $500, or an Arri base plate from ET at $600...$500 seems reasonable for longer wires or whatever it would take.

Or could we simply order a camera with that configuration from the factory?

Thoughts?

M

 

[Emmanuel Cambier]

I believe Lens Data is going to be more frequently needed from Master Primes or Ultra Primes than from Red lenses.
I'm buying Red lenses, but I can imagine that on a heavy FX shoot, they have the budget to shoot with ARRI glass.

Emmanuel

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Mark,
Great summary, I never noticed this comment until now.
I have to agree 100%, how could you possibly think supporting one of the most popular lens manufacturers in the world would assassinate your own product line? This is backwards thinking Jarred.
Adding support for Arri only helps your product line!!
I am beginning to think this why we dont have full Anton Bauer support yet.

Red should not only support, but embrace these vendors who are in many ways industry standards, and not be short sighted into thinking they are going to assassinate your product lines. Many of your customers (myself included) have invested many thousands of dollars in these great products and expected from day one that you would support them as ALL of your competitors do.

Actually Jarred, you can do everything, and it will only make you better. As a kid my grandfather always told me that the word "cant" wasn't acceptable, that I could do anything I wanted to do. That advise has always stuck with me, and I believe that this simple thought is the reason Jim created Red.

Dont get me wrong, I do appreciate everything you have done, and dont expect a free ride. I wouldnt expect that this should be a free option. I think we just need choices, and the ability to use various lenses is very important.

I could not agree more!

Granted I'm having some serious financial issues (having lost about half Mil. in real estate value) but it is going to change wryly fast, as I'm working towards the making of not one but nine multimillion dollar features, I intend to put on my REDs the best glass this industry has to offer, not only that as my projects cal for super speed lenses I will have ARRI's MASTER PRIMES and it wil be imperative that RED works with LDS.

As far as gong with Anton Bauers for me it is not a choice as I will be traveling world wide in numerous locations and the Lithium restrictions do not allow me to get the RED Bricks even do I love those batteries, super light and with great charge/durability ratio.

So at the end of the day RED cameras is what I have chosen, as I do believe it is the absolute best complete camera package in the industry at this time and likely will be for years to come.

Nonetheless I also never say never, and never say "Can't" or I would already be dead!( literally). So I truly hope that RED attitude changes fast in this matters and works towards the absolute integration with as many industry standards as possible, and most definately not excluding such a big player like ARRI.

Leaving to its costumers the right choices to choose which products and from which manufacturer better fits their budgets and projects needs.


Choices it is and always will be, what business and costumer service is all about.

Love the camera and the team, just hope they "DON'T" let as down on this one.

Ciao,

KETCH ROSSI
www.KETCHFRAME.com