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 :)

Epic and thievery...

Jon B. said:
Privacy does raise a concern but just the fact that serial #'s are accessible on the camera and a list of stolen cameras out there would be more than our current system of posting random threads.
Click to expand...

The police often works faster and more efficient if you yourself are able to feed them the info they need to go and get your camera back. I have seen examples of this a few times with stolen equipment. No need to go vigilante.
 
Hi!

Usually anyone who founds his camera stolen will mention it to the police. Except he/she is awaiting the Epic-X upgrade with keeping the camera and RED would not be willing to accept the reward if the camera is gone, because RED will not be able to judge if the camera has been sold or stolen.

So its in fact of REDs interest to know if a camera was really stolen, because then and only then a trade-in or price discount on EPIC-X would make sense.

But hey, how many cams have been stolen so far?
I hope not to much...
May be this is more a personal/private thing between the affected owners and RED themselves.

On idea that came to my mind...

What RED could do:

All apps out there need to rely on the SDK.
If RED knows the serial numbers of stolen cameras, they could include the serials into the SDK/updates (encrypted, of course) and thereby prevent using the footage recorded with the cameras, as then their software could do anything of the following (which can be discussed which is best or not):

- send a secret email to RED (from the sender IP one could track who and where...)

- place a watermark in the decoded footage, maybe along with a phone number to call, only on exported footage, so that watching footage with RED Cine etc. would not immediately identify the issue, but those who work in post will find out and take steps to get the thieve identified. That is true for all footage shot after it was mentioned as stolen by the true verified owner.

- ignore processing, making all that was done with the camera useless in first place

We have to remember that the one using the camera may not know its stolen. There must be ways to get the footage recovered with REDs help, once the situation is cleared.

A GPS module helps only on received GPS signal to write the coordinates into the footage. Sending GPS info somewhere in the world requires building in a cell phone. Who pays the messages...?
I don't think that is much viable.

The WiFi idea isn't really bad, and could add up to that SDK idea.

Disabling the camera would not help at all, IMHO. Then it may get destroyed and could not be found. If one has no insurance, for whatever reasons, he might be happy to get his camera back healthy, rather than destroyed from the dust track beside the streets or the like...


Cheers,
Axel
 
Axel Mertes said:
On idea that came to my mind...

What RED could do:

All apps out there need to rely on the SDK.
If RED knows the serial numbers of stolen cameras, they could include the serials into the SDK/updates (encrypted, of course) and thereby prevent using the footage recorded with the cameras,
Click to expand...

Of course this would mean that if my camera was stolen, then I would no longer be able to edit existing footage I had shot with it :-)
 
Antony M said:
Of course this would mean that if my camera was stolen, then I would no longer be able to edit existing footage I had shot with it :-)
Click to expand...

No,

because the footage contains date and time it has been shot.
All footage shot BEFORE it was stolen would work. Thats what I have in mind.

Thanks for pointing this out, so that I could add that to the concept :)



And about the bad crew member:

If a camera is announced as "stolen" to RED, it should be verified by RED themselve that the one is the true owner.

I doubt that a true owner would ever call his camera "stolen" unless he is not willing to work anymore with his camera.

On the other hand, a camera owner my insist on payment or otherwise call the camera stolen to take pressure on the post. But it would not be wise anyway to do so. It requires RED to put the camera on the list, and the post houses to install new updates. The concept I had in mind is surely time delayed, but RED offers so many updates that the frequency is high enough, IMHO. Or the SDK had to check - if online - for an updated list of the cameras.

Misues is always bad. But I see no reason that this concept would not work. And it has the least efforts of all so far. There is no need to add hardware, IMHO.

That addition in the SDK may be relatively small, but its impact would be huge.


Axel
 
I think this is a really good idea. That or the sticky with all the stolen bodies. Over here (Russia) i do get offered stolen equipment from time to time and there are a lot of RED floating around new and old. No one cares over here is it is stolen or not as long as it is cheap. Be good to keep alert.
 
We have had this discussion quite a while ago. I was proposing the "RED Key" solution - a SD card combined with "extra" menus along this line:

RED_Key_BootSequence.jpg


:devil: Peter
 
Erik Nordlund said:
The police often works faster and more efficient if you yourself are able to feed them the info they need to go and get your camera back. I have seen examples of this a few times with stolen equipment. No need to go vigilante.
Click to expand...

What?
 
Peter Majtan said:
We have had this discussion quite a while ago. I was proposing the "RED Key" solution - a SD card combined with "extra" menus along this line
Click to expand...

Honey, have you seen my keys?

:emote_headwall:
 
Still wondering about the original posters question of a stolen RED's poor owner - and how they can maintain their place in line for EPIC.
Insurance can cover the original cost of the camera, but hopefully you don't get to the back of the line for EPIC?
 
Dylan Macleod said:
Still wondering about the original posters question of a stolen RED's poor owner - and how they can maintain their place in line for EPIC.
Insurance can cover the original cost of the camera, but hopefully you don't get to the back of the line for EPIC?
Click to expand...

The question is should you report it to RED or not? Getting the insurance payout and option 2 would be sweet for many.
 
Hi Peter,

Not sure finance companies would be very happy, a repossessed a camera that could easily becomes worthless.
I suspect such a scheme would make it impossible to obtain finance on Red Cameras, probably not a good soloution for many.

Stephen

Peter Majtan said:
We have had this discussion quite a while ago. I was proposing the "RED Key" solution - a SD card combined with "extra" menus along this line:

RED_Key_BootSequence.jpg


:devil: Peter
Click to expand...
 
Codes boot sequenes... why not just make it like a car key if you want to go down that route? My volvo key is just a plastic thing with a wireless chip in it. It seems to be doing a decent job of protecting my car. Stick the key in the camera while on set. Take it out when you are away. Most people's REDs are being stolen from locked sets, locked cars or other places where the camera wouldn't need the key inserted.
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Codes boot sequenes... why not just make it like a car key if you want to go down that route? My volvo key is just a plastic thing with a wireless chip in it. It seems to be doing a decent job of protecting my car. Stick the key in the camera while on set. Take it out when you are away. Most people's REDs are being stolen from locked sets, locked cars or other places where the camera wouldn't need the key inserted.
Click to expand...

Replacing such a key would not be easy - especially if on a location away from "Volvo" dealership... :devil:

:D Peter
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi Peter,

Not sure finance companies would be very happy, a repossessed a camera that could easily becomes worthless.
I suspect such a scheme would make it impossible to obtain finance on Red Cameras, probably not a good soloution for many.

Stephen
Click to expand...

Stephen - I don't really understand Your point. Would not a finance company be the actual owner of the camera until You pay in full? If the camera is repossessed, I am sure there will be no issue for RED to provide the KEY to them (if such a program existed...)...

:hippie: Peter
 
Peter Majtan said:
Stephen - I don't really understand Your point. Would not a finance company be the actual owner of the camera until You pay in full? If the camera is repossessed, I am sure there will be no issue for RED to provide the KEY to them (if such a program existed...)...

:hippie: Peter
Click to expand...

Hi Peter,

The finance company may be the legal owner, however Red will probably be dealing direct with the customer who paid the deposit at least with a credit card. Red offer support direct to the customer, not via the finance company. In most cases Red will have no contact or knowledge of the customer's finance arrangements.

I would have thought every bank & finance company would run a mile, if what you want was put into practice.

Stephen
 
The "key" could be like a USB dongle. Easily replaced from RED. Finance company would own the camera and keys. They could have a key deposit where you get some money back when you return the keys or whatever or they keep it to cover new keys if you don't.

Anyway, I have to say that I don't like any of this. It's a camera. Like any other piece of equipment, it runs the risk of being stolen. Having it tied to a key or other type of protection just inconveniences the owners or end users at some point. Making a device like the camera inaccessible to thieves doesn't keep it from getting stolen. It just makes it more likely they'll chuck it into a dumpster somewhere instead of selling it or pawning it off.

And like any other sort of key or dongle protection, there's most likely a way to get around it. The only way to make it unauthorized-user-proof is to incorporate some necessary hardware component within the key. But then we start generating a market for stolen/hacked keys.

Just give me a camera that turns on, turns off and is capable of making a nice image. I'll worry about protecting it.
 
Jeff - that is the beauty of what I am proposing. Say for someone like You who don't want it - You simply don't activate the function. Unless You have previously activated the function AND the key is plugged in during boot - the camera will start just like any other unprotected camera and You won't see any of the "extra" security menus...

But for all those who want the security function - it is there...
By default the cameras would of course ship "unprotected"...

Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top