Epic render...

[Matt Uhry]

I agree with what you are saying "Brieferg" ... Cameras of the past were ungainly rude and generally sucky, and the Epic's design as recently shown would have probably been a wet dream to cameramen from the 1900's to the end of the 1990's.

Shooting with a certain camera you get to know it really well, you use it 12 hours a day, in a rough conditions, under stress. It's the center of your production, if something about it is annoying, it's annoying many times a day. If it works well, you just forget about it and deal with some other aspect of your job. You adapt a bit to it's needs - and adapt it a lot to your needs. I guess this is obvious to anyone working in the camera dept.

Flash forward to 2008.

Maybe it's unfair and uncool to hold Red, in the design of their 2nd camera to such high standards, I actually believe the design team likes a bit of a challenge and wanted to continue to walk in giant steps.

In many respects the Red One is a giant step forward, the design of the body and AKS, at the risk of being blunt are mediocre. I hoping the Epic will offer a chance to leap forward in this respect in addition to 5k and more FPS and whatever tricks Jim and Co. have up their sleeve.

It's a digital camera... there are so few limitations that designers have to work under - unlike the mechanical constraints of any film camera that has come before, it's design and utility should far exceed the best current offerings from Arri or Aaton.

The design should anticipate the things we will use with it - a heavy lens, the EVF, an onboard monitor, an onboard battery. The body alone is not good for much without these things.

In reading the Ergonomics thread, and this one, there is a significant desire for the camera to have the possibility of a lower optical axis, and thereby also a lower CG when in certain modes, especially hand-held. I don't understand why there is resistance to this concept that some users have stated...

I'm running out of steam with this, and would love to hear what anybody else would like to add.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

 

[Casey Green]

purring, meowing....

nope too loud on set.

 

[Adam C Lubkin]

In reading the Ergonomics thread, and this one, there is a significant desire for the camera to have the possibility of a lower optical axis, and thereby also a lower CG when in certain modes, especially hand-held. I don't understand why there is resistance to this concept that some users have stated...
Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

At NAB, one of the key Red personnel revealed to me how Jim kept driving the Red team to make the Epic as small as possible. At this point, if you look at the PL mount as the limiting factor, it's about as narrow and short (in height) as it could practically be. To get the size down to what it is, it's likely that they had to pull off a series of engineering magic tricks. So it's understandable that some of our requests, especially if they come off as demands, might not get the response we desire. From our perspective (speaking for myself and several Red owners I've spoken with), we see in Epic a camera with eye-popping specs, in a tiny package, that improves on Red One in every way. But we also see some things that could be done that would make it even closer to perfect, which we’ve tried to communicate on this forum. Perhaps the resistance comes because we don't always find the most diplomatic way to express ourselves, or show enough appreciation for the work the Red team has done. I hope they can appreciate that our occasional lack of restraint is a product of the passion we feel for their creations. And if we keep coming back to the issue of ergonomics, it's because we expect to spend countless hours over many years with this camera and feel that it has the potential have a form-factor that we won't wish to change or replace because it will be close to optimal in every way.

 

[Adam C Lubkin]

Battery/Drive attachment: I would buy a version that could snap onto the back via bracket or dovetail and would be self contained. Please allow me to describe my concept:

I remove the control panel from the rear and put it somewhere I prefer which opens up the bracket/mount on the back. Make the mount point strong enough to attach substantial accessories to, yes it will be overkill for the control panel and add a couple ounces of weight, BUT, now I can hang several pounds on the back without adding rear iris rods and the attachment hardware for them.

This provides a convenient place to attach a housing for the battery and drive that offers protection from shock, elements, field abuse, etc. The casing should be lightweight - aluminum, magnesium, whatever - but should be rugged enough to grab onto.

Perhaps this mount I imagine would be some kind of dovetail style bit that would also have contact pins behind a sliding cover that would allow me to snap on this power/drive solution without cables...

That would be really cool.

 

[Nathan Garofalos]

I think EPIC will have controls similar to this picture of the D-21, right after the shoulder cut out and like the controls pictured in the render on the back of EPIC. There will be two sets, maybe not all the functions on the side of the cam as in the back, but more advanced controls than what is on the side of the REDONE right now. Either way, I really like the new render, it looks great. Thanks Jim.

 

[Brian Ferguson]

Flash forward to 2008.

It's a digital camera... there are so few limitations that designers have to work under - unlike the mechanical constraints of any film camera that has come before, it's design and utility should far exceed the best current offerings from Arri or Aaton.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

Matt,

I think this was my point, in maybe indirect way. The RED is constantly compared to ARRI motion picture cameras. How does it compare to any other digital camera that you would shoot a feature with? Digital cameras have different design requirements. When comparing to any other digital camera I think it is far above the competition. Again how does it compare to Panavision? Dalsa? Of course you can't buy those cameras.

It seems like people want specifically a hand held camera.

I see the comment "high center of gravity". I own a RED One, I am looking at it now, and I can't see how the lens can be any lower and still use PL mounts and ARRI type accessories. And there is no mass above the lens to speak of unless it is added with accessories. I don't understand this comment.

As far as a "Cat on your shoulder", is the type of shoot where you use an Aaton the same type of project that you would throw up a 24-290 Optimo? I think the advantage of the RED ONE was it's modularity and ability to move into different modes. I always considered the Aaton as a hand held camera not a production camera.

I know we are talking about the Epic but evrything I have heard is what people want that they don't have on the current model.

Anyway I understand the discussion, but I don't hear these comments in my day to day dealings with RED owners and users. I only hear it here.

 

[Jannard]

We really are listening here. But the constraints of the board stacks are the limiting factor. The smaller we can make Epic, the more options there are to every application. That is no our primary goal. Just so you know we aren't screwing around... we have heat issues at the small body end and ergo issues at the large body end. And we are also trying to make it Arri system compatible.

This is not an easy task. I think the board stack issue is the one that "critics" can't quite wrap their heads around.

Jim

 

[Florian Stadler]

hire Steven pizzo and his team. I went down to his shop today to try out his handheld rig and it evaporates the limitations of the somewhat clumsy red one ergonomically. Having shot an entire film exclusively handheld on a moviecam compact which is ergonomically pretty good, I was wishing element technicas rig was around when I was doing it. At least my back was.

 

[Gregor Hagey]

resistance to cut out

resistance to cut out

In reading the Ergonomics thread, and this one, there is a significant desire for the camera to have the possibility of a lower optical axis, and thereby also a lower CG when in certain modes, especially hand-held. I don't understand why there is resistance to this concept that some users have stated...

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

The resistance is because it will make the camera very front heavy and unergonomic and force you to keep the batteries extended far out from the back of the camera. Time and again I have had more problems with the back end of the camera hitting walls or door frames during a shot. This is also a problem with a lot of HD cameras (especially with large Anton Bauer batteries on the back). The beauty of the Red One's modular design is that I can remove the cradle with the hard drive and batteries by using CF cards and the belt clip. This not only takes a fare bit of weight off my shoulders, but shrinks the length on the camera and allows much greater freedom when shooting hand held. I only use the cheeseplate with a foam pad so I can easily put the camera where it balances best on my shoulder. A cut out would thwart this. I've only had issues with the Red feeling top heavy when I've left the dual batteries and hard drive on the top rods orientated in the up position. If you have to leave the cradle on just move it down to the lower rods and it easily solves this for hand held. I'm not too sure why film cameras are being held up as the gold standard for hand held as this is not my experience at all. The best hand held shooters I know all work in docs with video cameras.

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

The design should anticipate the things we will use with it - a heavy lens, the EVF, an onboard monitor, an onboard battery. The body alone is not good for much without these things.

In reading the Ergonomics thread, and this one, there is a significant desire for the camera to have the possibility of a lower optical axis, and thereby also a lower CG when in certain modes, especially hand-held. I don't understand why there is resistance to this concept that some users have stated...

I'm running out of steam with this, and would love to hear what anybody else would like to add.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

Matt I think that everybody agrees with you, also RED, but I don't think they're that far away from it either. The lens is almost in shoulder level as it is now, it at least looks so to me, from looking at the pic. I also think we need to consider that there needs to be a computer inside and fans and.....

I believe that if the connectors goes on the side with the BNC another battle is won. Hopefully we can cut a thad more in the shoulder cut out and especially not let it curve so fast.

I'm a firm believer that the cut out is nicely where it is, simply because the Epic is a small camera. I could be wrong but it seems to me as if the lens will end up pretty much where it would be on AATON or A235.

I truly think that an interesting complement for the ergonomics would be to keep the cut out going with the cage for drive and batteries. Making it as if it's the magazine. Although the batteries and drive need to be more or less behind shoulder. I've said before that making a construction that makes it possible to slide in and out a pad in that curve - making it possible to build a handheld shoulder plate (like ET's) that can slide in with it's shoulder pad. Basically the cutout shoulder pad Epic has now is removable and we can slide in the handheld system with handles. In the back of the curved bow that the handheld slides into is the batteries and drive. This way the lens and batteries balances themselves out.

The last thing I think that might make the camera look less ergo is that the rest of the body design throws you guys off a little. If it didn't have as much of a square look on the top and maybe it should be smooth, meaning that it should loose that rib cage structure all together. It's to army for my taste and a there was someone saying something constructive somewhere in this thread - we need places to stick our velcro on as well.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

We really are listening here. But the constraints of the board stacks are the limiting factor. ... I think the board stack issue is the one that "critics" can't quite wrap their heads around.

Jim

Jim, we understand the board stack issues and their limiting factor :whistling:

http://flickr.com/photos/84221353@N00/136883027

 

[Joel Kaye]

We really are listening here. But the constraints of the board stacks are the limiting factor.

Consider making the XLR's plug in vertically so the cable and plug hangs straight down. I made a little breakout box that hangs from the top rail and having those big XLR plugs hang straight down is really nice. That's how they usually come out of field mixers. Drop the weight of the EVF if at all possible.

Overall I'm liking the EPIC design personally...

 

[Jannard]

Consider making the XLR's plug in vertically so the cable and plug hangs straight down. I made a little breakout box that hangs from the top rail and having those big XLR plugs hang straight down is really nice. That's how they usually come out of field mixers. Drop the weight of the EVF if at all possible.

Overall I'm liking the EPIC design personally...

We have a new idea...

Jim

 

[Gregor Hagey]

hire Steven pizzo and his team. I went down to his shop today to try out his handheld rig and it evaporates the limitations of the somewhat clumsy red one ergonomically. Having shot an entire film exclusively handheld on a moviecam compact which is ergonomically pretty good, I was wishing element technicas rig was around when I was doing it. At least my back was.

I shot a feature 100% hand held with the Red this past spring and it was as comfortable as any film camera out there. The secret is in how you configure the Red. I love being able to refine my approach to the camera with every job. That's the beauty of having a modular camera. I don't like having one 'correct' set up for studio mode or hand held mode. The nature of working in film is that every job requires a custom approach, which to me means a modular camera.

 

[Joel Kaye]

We have a new idea...

Can't wait to see it. I was always a big fan a breakout cable that moves every plug off camera that did not need to be on camera. Perhaps power, monitors and one XlR for an on camera mic are on camera. But hey, I get the feeling you guys are really getting the hang of this so I'm sure you've got good thoughts. Wireless?

 

[Casey Green]

We really are listening here. But the constraints of the board stacks are the limiting factor. The smaller we can make Epic, the more options there are to every application. That is no our primary goal. Just so you know we aren't screwing around... we have heat issues at the small body end and ergo issues at the large body end. And we are also trying to make it Arri system compatible.

This is not an easy task. I think the board stack issue is the one that "critics" can't quite wrap their heads around.

Jim

I hope this post is understood, so I am quoting it.

This is not an easy thing RED is attempting.

 

[Casey Green]

Jim, we understand the board stack issues and their limiting factor :whistling:

http://flickr.com/photos/84221353@N00/136883027

The search for Animal Chin continues.

 

[Jeff Coatney]

We really are listening here. But the constraints of the board stacks are the limiting factor. The smaller we can make Epic, the more options there are to every application. That is no our primary goal. Just so you know we aren't screwing around... we have heat issues at the small body end and ergo issues at the large body end. And we are also trying to make it Arri system compatible.

This is not an easy task. I think the board stack issue is the one that "critics" can't quite wrap their heads around.

Jim

Can you post a diagram, without labeling any critical components, or even just a "massing" envelope that would explain what you mean? If there is a reverse-engineering effort underway, the cat's probably out of the bag by now. Maybe someone here could provide ideas for cooling, etc.? It could help if we had some idea of what the stack looks like, even if it's not a board-by-board explanation.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

We have a new idea...

Now, that's unusual :tongue:

 

[I Bloom]

One issue that I have been consistently facing with my Red One is the position of the power cable makes it difficult to lay the camera on the ground and tilt it up. I do this often and I'm sad to see that the drive port now appears to be in a similar position on Epic.

However, having also used the camera in underwater housings, I see the great advantage to having the port face backwards, and I was impressed by how well you could strip down RED One when it was built into Aquavideo's housing.

Since the power cable is the one thing that must always be connected, I suggest considering having two alternative ports. One in the back and one on the side.

I agree with your drawings Evin but I believe that should have been for RED ONE.

I vote for keeping the cut out where it is and then making a "cradle" for battery and drives that continues the cut out - just like a magazine.

Then the pad ( or multiple pads available) should be modular, mountable in multiple locations, and/or slidable.

My hope is that the camera when completely stripped with just battery, CF, EVF and prime lense is still balanced and handholdable. I hate having a cradle sticking out the back, and I've whacked it on many a wall, or tried fitting into a tight space and been denied. I want a compact unit that brings the lense and center of gravity very close to my shoulder blade without any complicated shoulder pad apparatus. I want the battery and drive to mount directly on the camera with little to no profile.

Warm regards,

IBloom