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 :)

More news...

Steve Gibby said:
If RED does end up offering an OVF model Epic, I hope it is a separate model camera body from the model designed to be used with the EVF. IMO the vast majority of Epic users will opt to use the camera with an EVF - and none of us EVF users will want to help pay for the added R&D expense, and put up with the added bulk (and weight) of a camera case also designed for an OVF - when we don't ever intend to use the camera with an OVF. IMO a separate, dedicated OVF model Epic camera would probably be the best way to go.

There are a vast number of professional RED One users - and in the future professional Epic and Scarlet users - who don't care to work in traditional cine style workflows, eye focus their cameras, like electronic focusing and exposure aids (1:1, false color, edge highlight), and have no interest in using an OVF.

Perhaps a good solution would be to deliver the planned EVF Epic models on schedule - take advanced orders for the OVF option modified Epics to gage market demand - then, and only then, if there is sufficient market demand to justify the time and expense of actually making the OVF model, go ahead and make it.

There was a lot of initial noise about wanting the uncompressed recording option for RED one - but when it came down to actually paying for the increased expense, and decreased mobility, of going that route, and those who said they wanted it were faced with the greatly increased expense for their choice, nobody ordered it and the option was wisely dropped by RED. I'm not saying that would be the case with the proposed OVF option, but I am saying that taking advanced orders, where people have to put their money where their mouthes (and forum posts) are, would define the volume of the actual purchasers - and weed out all the young cinematography hopefuls who somehow feel they will be seen as being a "true cinematographer" by saying they want to step back to "old school" technology - even though ironically it will be used on a "new school" camera system.

I would never gauge market demand for RED products solely by the forum feedback here on RED User. I love RED User, but IMO RED User is over-weighted with cine-style posters and hopeful newbies - and thus has never been a true market picture for RED One - and is an even less accurate market picture for the much more scalable and flexible Epic and Scarlet cameras - especially the DSMC models, which will be used (depending on lens and accessories added) in the cine, hybrid EFP/cine, EFP, and still photo industries.

I would also never gauge true sales market for RED products by the attitudes of a few traditionalist DP's in the cine-style portion of the motion media industry. Their opinions and desires are fine, and accurate for their workflows and peer groups - but don't even begin to reflect the needs and attitudes of a vast numbers of professionals in the wide array of other motion media (and stills) industries. If Epic and Scarlet are to be flexible and modular convergence cameras used in the cine, hybrid EFP/cine, EFP, and digital stills industries, then the overall market preferences must be gauged by RED - not just a narrow slice of high-profile cine style camera users.

RED is a business, my longtime friend Jim Jannard is obviously a very wise and successful businessman, and I'm quite certain he'll continue to make the good business decisions he always has. In fact, I'm quite sure he already thoroughly understands everything I posted above. I merely posted it as food for thought for forum users here.

My 0.02 cents...
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with Gibby on this... Development shouldn't affect those who don't want the OVF.

But if RED can justify the R&D and support costs, and possibly make a seperate module or even alternate Epic brain and charge accordingly, then I would encourage it... HOWEVER, this all would be well after the current announced EPIC and Scarlet models have been shipping and fully developed and supported, which would most likely be about 2 years out.
 
We are talking as a RedUsers, but RED is thinking for the whole industry. And i'm sure that the OVF module will bring RED close to complete all range of productions, or more exactly to the all range of user-experience requests. And I think it's as clever as encourage option... As RED usually do.
 
Stupid question: I've seen comment a couple of times that the OVF might be a "likely rental" option for many.... are folks referring to renting JUST the OVF, or the entire camera with OVF already installed?

I ask becuase it would appear that an OVF module would require being mounted up front in place of the current lens mount (or in between it and body?) .

Given the discussion of the complexity/sensitivty/need for maintenance, how practical is it likely to be to be able to rent this as just a module?

It would seem to be different than other cameras for which the OVF mechanics are already integral to the camera body...

-sc
 
FF & MB

Is there any plan for a Red follow focus and matte box?
The rendering of an impressive mattebox in the Epic/Scarlet presentation looks promising.
Should we wait?
 
I heard mountains of concerns every time Red announced that it was going to release a new item.
But then almost all the time, all those whinging disappeared with no problems.
 
I would like to expand on Gibby's points and preface it with this:

It seems to me Epic is two levels of product advancement

1) We all know that the REDONE has some limitations that hinder it from full fledged acceptance in the mainstream of production on high end motion pictures and television. These are primarily related to the high power draw, slow boot up times, some battery mount issues and just the overall bugginess of a rapidly developing platform over the past year and a half. This is not meant as a knock on RED, it is simply an acknowledgement that all of the updates and other things that have been continual pleasant surprises for us early adopters can be concerns for those who need a more mature platform.

So the first level of Epic is that it will be a much more solid platform - its firmware starts out at the highest level of REDONE development. Simply moving that to ASICs is a major step because it solidifies things and drastically reduces power consumption and therefore heat plus gives near instant boot up. Combine that with the tighter integration of the battery modules and i/o modules and probably 98% of the resistance goes away.

Moving to sensors with a higher dynamic range and more sensitivity plus 5K native that can provide true 4K debayered, plus many higher frame rates is the second level. Having an optical VF would be an attraction for some, but with improved reliability AND increased resolution/DR/sensitivity, I think virtually all of the REAL resistance points are gone. Adding an Optical VF would be icing on the cake, but I doubt if the lack of one would be a deal breaker for any but a very, very small minority. So I think it is MUCH more important for RED to focus on getting epic to market as quickly as possible and spend whatever effort might go into an OVF instead on getting it thoroughly tested and debugged and fully accessorized. I think it is fine to commit to developing an OVF, but any use of resources to that end would probably be better spent AFTER Epic is shipping in the base form that most people have anticipated.

Once it has been introduced with the EVF, RED can determine the level of interest in an OVF, solicit ideas of how it could/should be implemented, and take their time in deciding whether an add-on module for any Epic, or a separate body style, makes the most sense. If a separate body style makes the most sense I'm sure that for that particular case, given the anticipated much higher price, they could also probably come up with a reasonable trade-in/early adopter program that fits within their business model. But even if that were not possible, the likely customers can probably also afford the new price plus whatever financial hit they would take reselling their first EPIC.

I fully understand why many pros have held off buying into the RED program until something a bit more mature like Epic is introduced, but I really don't see many of them holding back due to a lack of optical viewfinder. I think once epic is released you will see a whole slew of new customers that were holding back and those numbers - added on to the existing backlog of REDONE upgraders will keep RED totally busy for many months giving them plenty of time to shift some development resources to that final piece of the puzzle, the OVF.
 
Reading through American Cinematographer vol 90 #9 in the ASC digital camera tests article, one of the things that is mentioned as one of the improvements digital camera manufacturers still need to make ,is an optical viewfinder. I think RED wants to comply with the ASC's recommendations on this so it is being made an option.

Depending upon cost the OVF may also be a benefit for some still shooters most of whom still use optical finders. I believe this is RED's weakest point for still photography unless you are in a controlled studio environment. There is an earlier comment that it will be very expensive so I'm not really sure how much impact this will end up making to the still field as a whole. I suspect the type of work will dictate RED's success on this front.

Bill
 
I'm amazed at how much debate this one possibility ( OVF ) has thrown up among us all. It's interesting that anyone who might consider an OVF as something they would value is judged to be, old school cine style. And that younger shooters see it as a generational thing. Personally the more tools the better, if RED decide to make one and i can afford it, i would love it. If not, that's cool, the RED evf is superb, and any improvements on that are a boon. I really doubt that development of the EPIC would be slowed down because of this. I think RED have already shown us and the market place what a shrewd and progressive company they are, forward thinking ain't the phrase that does them justice.
 
As a guy who rents cameras to high-end commercial productions, I would say that any option that makes my packages value-added is a good thing. And as a guy who often looks through the finder, I would welcome the ability to once again have the "best seat in the house" as David Mullen put it. So an OVF option from Red is a pretty exciting prospect.
However, the Red EVF is already quite good, and obviously we all expect the bomb to be better. As Steve Gibby said, constantly improving EVF's will be the way forward for the masses. Witness that even ARRI's two lower-cost DCC options are EVF-based.
It really is great that Red is considering this though, and I will be interested to see what comes of it.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Aaron McAdam said:
I doubt he has to worry about what he labels his stuff.
1458226.jpg
Click to expand...

Super! I like it, what's neded for it? CPL or just PPL if you fly just yourself and friends?
 
Steven Caesare said:
Stupid question: I've seen comment a couple of times that the OVF might be a "likely rental" option for many.... are folks referring to renting JUST the OVF, or the entire camera with OVF already installed?

-sc
Click to expand...

I think there will be a need to semi-permanently mate the OVF to the Brain in order to maintain the critical tolerances.
 
One thing I've learned from the development and launch of the Red One is that there's an ingrained pre-disposition to be overly critical of the solutions that Red provides in making the camera. We've all heard the arguements and criticisms, they are legion, and they have all ultilmately been addressed in the upcoming Epic and Scarlet models, save this one.

Having said that, if Red does proceed with an OVF program, it has to be a first-class solution, better than Arri's solution, because the minority of camera owners that buy it will trumpet any flaws or perceived shortcomings that they may feel it has.

I just feel its a no-win situation for Red. If they proceed with an OVF program, not only will it be expensive, they will ultimately lose money on it anyway. If its not absolutely perfect, people will complain loudly that it sucks and even if it exceeds expectations, it won't garner the praise it deserves. In my opinion its a reactive posture to take.

Either commit to making it an integral part of the program or take deposits on it with a minimum number of commited purchasers before proceeding.

Maybe its time for a poll?
 
If its not absolutely perfect, people will complain loudly that it sucks
Click to expand...

Well, you cited Arri, but then if Arri produce a bad viewfinder, people would complain about Arri in the same way. So I don't see this as a special problem for Red.

and even if it exceeds expectations, it won't garner the praise it deserves.
Click to expand...

Why?
 
EVF

EVF

The current RED EVF was awesome two years ago. In the time since the RED ONE's release, its technological edge has diminished.
Click to expand...

Which alternative EVF's would those be?
 
Tim Hole said:
This one....
telescope-connecting-london-and-new-york-01.jpg


Its the working prototype but they couldn't take it to IBC unfortunately.
Click to expand...


I thought that was the new Cooke 5/i T/1.4 18-200 that someone dropped, you can even see the lens support bracket and black and gold colourings. You should wait until they illuminate the dial... :001_tongue:

Gary
 
Stuart English said:
Which alternative EVF's would those be?
Click to expand...

I don't know the particular models, but the EVFs I've used on the F35, F23 and Phantom were quite nice. They were cheap feeling, plastic and lacked a lot of great features, yes. But they made a great image, were very lightweight and were an appropriate shape for handheld work.

It looks like you guys have corrected a lot of the downsides with the new EVF, but I haven't had a chance to give it the real Brook-is-too-obsessed once-over.
 
The viewfinder we use of te Phantom is the Sony VFC35W (viewfinder color 3.5" wide). It has a large LCD screen with a removable eyecup assembly and the LCD is on a nice hinge mount so that it can be used on its own. There are lots of controls on it including two hidden underneath that access a complete menu system of additional controls. Very nice. Native resolution of 1280x720.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top