NEW design to chew on...

[Michael Hastings]

Thanks, Ralph

By the way, I will definitely be getting the rails. I just see several situations where a few solid mountholes on the back would be greatly beneficial and usages with and without the rails.

 

[Gbabymogul]

I like the direction they're heading in, but i don't see where one could mount an EVF and LCD plus swing arm without it getting in the way...IMO, the bridge plate with the adjustable handle was better for stripped down use. But, since i'm in the minority here i guess adios to that design...

I recently worked with the Aaton top handle and i found it refreshingly simple. A lemo connector on the back to the LCD placed on the front of the handle with a slim bar mounting bracket (which could be used to add an LED for example) with a 3/8th inch connector to the body, adjustable to rotate the handle.

If i can get away without adding the rails to the top that's what i'll try and do, but so far it doesn't look possible.

I'm not being negative and we all have different needs, though.
:banned:

 

[Häakon]

You can't make a camera the size of the RED ONE and expect to have a place to hardmount everything under the sun to it. That's exactly what all of the mounting points are for - to give you that added flexibility. I'm actually really happy about the return of the "arms" with lots of holes... giving it further thought, I think I would prefer those to the padded grips after all. They're definitely more stable and secure, and shrink the overall footprint of the camera more than the padded ones do.

The team has done an unbelievable job of keeping the camera lightweight and compact (a major concern for many of us), while packing so much functionality into it. The concept from day one is that this would be a modular system. I could just as easily say that I DON'T want a battery mount hardmounted anywhere on the body, becuase I'll be flying it on Steadicam a good deal of the time (where the battery is mounted on the sled, not the body) and that would unecessarily add bulk to the system I don't want or need. The point is, we all have our preferences but at least the way they've done it allows the camera to be stripped down if you need to. You can't do that with a bulky ENG camera. I think Jim stated a long time ago, "it's easier to grow the camera, much harder to shrink it." That has been the goal all along. Besides, there's no real estate on the body to be hardmounting a V-mount plate even if you were able to move the rear LCD somewhere else. The camera isn't that big.

We're getting down to the wire and I think it's awesome that they're still tweaking while they wait for the "engineering delay" to be cleared up, but at this point the major parts of the body seem to be pretty locked down and in place. Let's work with them to fine-tune the system - this is going to be the primary body many of us use for a long time!

 

[Finner]

Yes, and the lens was hardmount attached to the camera at the PL mount - a 3 point attachment which means the rods can't flex unless you pull the mount loose. Look maybe the rods are plenty solid, but that isn't an example that should convince anyone.

Yes it should convince everyone as a PL mount holds very little weight. The key here is the rods are very long and don't miss the point that the lense weighs over 50 (five, zero) pounds. Also there is a 6x6 matte box at the end of the end of the very long rods rods often with filters in them and weighs a lot. Simple point here "Rods are bomber".

But what specifically is so crazy - that I might be able to make a more solid hard mount or that I would consider drilling and tapping into the backplate?

What is crazy is that you would drill into your brand new camera and void the warranty to do something that is completely unnessasary.

virtually every ENG/EFP style broadcast camera has a V-mount or Anton Bauer mount plate screwed - i.e. hardmounted - to the back chassis of the camera and it is very solid.

Virtually every eng/efp camera including varicams and f900's are built like fisher price kids toys in comparison to cine cameras (I am not saying that HD cameras do a bad job but they are built with plastic that wobbles and bends and breaks 10x easier then a film camera.). I am not sure if you were at NAB but I assume not by what you are concerned with. Trust me this camera is built around a structure and cassing that is rock solid and that goes for the way all the accessories attatch as well.

Also, most of the rail attachments use squeeze/friction fittings to hold stuff on which is okay and easy to adjust and also easier to come loose - some situations work better with nice solid screws.

The squeeze friction hold of a properly mounted rod is bomber. I would trust it far over the screw of a plastic body sony or panasonic any day.

I think I understand what you mainly want and that is a shorter camera for underwater housings. I have done quite a few underwater gigs and just finished an underwater music video last month. With 35mm cameras there is no direct mount for the batteries so we just velcro them to the place that helps balance the housing best. This will be an advantage of what you can do with the drive and battery and because everything moves so smooth in water the velcro holds fine.

I went through the form fit and function of the camera mechanics at NAB and it is ROCK solid so don't worry.

 

[Paris Remillard]

>he hee looks like a modern S16 ...NICE.<

Looks like a 4k Bolex. Put a lens turret on there and a leather strap on top and you're set. (The original render, I mean.)

 

[Ace]

Aqua sorry I think I misunderstood you.. I thought you were talking about something else

The battery mounting point does seem to be the weakest link when talking about the ultimate compact configuration. I wonder weather the battery can indeed be mounted beneath the camera for the non rail version of the camera.

Edit: I think Im reading another thread and replying to another! lol.. I think this post belongs in the LCD position thread...

 

[Jannard]

Put the battery on your belt or in your cargo pants pocket for the lightest, most compact camera config...

Jim

 

[Evin Grant]

How bout' a Red battery belt pouch Jim? I assume there is going to be a long (6ft) battery cable, yes? I don't see one in the shop.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Point by point - and all I really want.

Point by point - and all I really want.

Before I get started let me quote from another user:

But I think stability issues with the rails won´t be much of a problem, usually they´re really sturdy, just like finner mentioned.
Quite a lot operators in the U.S. even violently guide the camera with their hands on the mattebox, which is connected to the rods(rails). But I still don´t like that idea of a rails based system for those items. Rails/rods are good for several purposes, be it mbs, ff, grips - but not batteries - just look how far that thing stuck out when Matt Trembley or Brook used the camera in handheld mode.

I fear we´ll see some Red-related knockouts in the future...

So let me say upfront: I already said I will definitely be getting the rails as well, but I think there is some use to other configurations. Besides the points I will get to, I also feel the way kalone does: that the rails with battery and drive are a bit klugey for some situations. I've shot a lot of different things such as shooting in the confined areas of a bus, airplane, or boat; underneath the basket at NBA games; in large crowds; climbing the near vertical steps at Chitzen Itza (try getting in there with a cine-kitted RED without permits and major bribes); etc. where it would be a major hassle to have all that hanging behind you. I don't have the perfect answer, I just know that there are a number of things that would be facilitated by having four threaded screw mount points - I'll call them nubs - on the back just like they have on both sides.

Let me respond to your post point by point - and remember, I appreciate all of your input - so this is just friendly conversation among REDlovers.

Yes, and the lens was hardmount attached to the camera at the PL mount - a 3 point attachment which means the rods can't flex unless you pull the mount loose. Look maybe the rods are plenty solid, but that isn't an example that should convince anyone.

Yes it should convince everyone as a PL mount holds very little weight. The key here is the rods are very long and don't miss the point that the lense weighs over 50 (five, zero) pounds. Also there is a 6x6 matte box at the end of the end of the very long rods rods often with filters in them and weighs a lot. Simple point here "Rods are bomber".

My real point there was you have 3 point attachment which is generally more solid and secure than two points. (see my ebay ad for the twopod I bought that never seemed to work right. :biggrin Second, OK, I'm convinced the rods are strong and solid for everything up to hooking up the trailer hitch for the boat. But one of the things I really like about the RED is that you can strip it down to be very compact (unlike say an F900) without the baseplate, shoulder pad, etc. And I would just like the same kind of screw mount holes on the back as on the sides - I think they would be useful for some things.

But what specifically is so crazy - that I might be able to make a more solid hard mount or that I would consider drilling and tapping into the backplate?

What is crazy is that you would drill into your brand new camera and void the warranty to do something that is completely unnessasary.

That is exactly what I am trying to avoid by requesting simple built up mount holes on the back like on the sides that would add maybe 1/2 an ounce to the weight and another 90 seconds or so on the CNC machine.

virtually every ENG/EFP style broadcast camera has a V-mount or Anton Bauer mount plate screwed - i.e. hardmounted - to the back chassis of the camera and it is very solid.

Virtually every eng/efp camera including varicams and f900's are built like fisher price kids toys in comparison to cine cameras (I am not saying that HD cameras do a bad job but they are built with plastic that wobbles and bends and breaks 10x easier then a film camera.). I am not sure if you were at NAB but I assume not by what you are concerned with. Trust me this camera is built around a structure and cassing that is rock solid and that goes for the way all the accessories attatch as well.

I was at NAB and spent at least two hours on 2 separate days going through it, got my picture taken with Jim, spent an hour (just listening mostly) in the conversation with Jim and Vince Pace about 3D and with the DP from the Peter Jackson film, etc. so I am pretty dialed in on what it is.

Although I think most of the better broadcast cameras have diecast metal chassis, you are right that they are flimsy compared to the solidity of RED, but, in addition to the 4 pin XLR power input, they do also have a way to mount the battery in a very solid and fairly compact way. I think the threaded screw "nubs" might allow some options for the same.

One possibility for shoulder use would be to simply have a flat plate say 3" wide by 10 inches long attached to those nubs with the V Plate mounted at the bottom (maybe bent outward slightly) so the battery was below the level of the camera sticking out only 2 inches from the back of your shoulder blade so my NBA/crowd/plane cam doesn't do the RED knockout everytime I turn. Just one example of something that would be a lot easier to implement with my backplate "REDNUBS" - even if you were using front rails for lens motors, matte box, etc.

Also, most of the rail attachments use squeeze/friction fittings to hold stuff on which is okay and easy to adjust and also easier to come loose - some situations work better with nice solid screws.

The squeeze friction hold of a properly mounted rod is bomber. I would trust it far over the screw of a plastic body sony or panasonic any day.

I would trust it over a screw in plastic too, but I think there are certain things that would be better hard (screw) mounted to the REDNUBS - on the solid body of the RED. If it was a big technical or economic challenge then maybe it wouldn't be worth it, but again we are talking 90 seconds or so of CNC time. If it helps I will pay for the extra CNC time for the first 250 cameras which would get past my #206, and then either RED could absorb the future ones or make a small change to the CNC Program. (PS If necessary to control the cost they could leave the holes untapped and those of us who want it can tap it ourselves.)

I think I understand what you mainly want and that is a shorter camera for underwater housings. I have done quite a few underwater gigs and just finished an underwater music video last month. With 35mm cameras there is no direct mount for the batteries so we just velcro them to the place that helps balance the housing best. This will be an advantage of what you can do with the drive and battery and because everything moves so smooth in water the velcro holds fine..

No, actually length is the easiest thing to deal with it for the housing - side to side/up down is more critical for keeping the volume down. We are more interested in keeping to the base configuration and eliminating the base plate and rails since the mountplate of the housing takes the place of the rails/shoulder pad baseplate.

You're right, Velcro is great stuff. But it would be nice to have the option of not having multiple things mounted in multiple places which makes installation and removal much easier - particularly on a bouncing boat and in situations where you don't have an extra camera for the topside. Not a deal breaker if it wasn't possible to have the little threaded nubs on the RED but since I can't see how the nubs causes other significant problems and they are cheap why not. Let me turn it around - why not eliminate the nubs on the top corners - they aren't absolutely necessary and we could just VELCRO any knick knacks we need up there - or if you want something really solid I have some large stainless steel screw clamps that would mount the rails, handle, or anything else.

I went through the form fit and function of the camera mechanics at NAB and it is ROCK solid so don't worry.

I agree the form, fit, and function are all ROCK solid in the configurations they showed. I just think there might be situations where something could be screwed onto the nubs on the back of the camera and be useful.

The RED is supposed to be modular - presumably to allow multiple configurations and therefore greater utility. But greater utility isn't always achieved by adding stuff in multiple layers i.e. having to have the base plate or the baseplate and rear rails to get something mounted. My suggestion is that a little forethought in adding 4 more small nubs that have almost no downside could add substantial utility for a number of users, and it is even possible that they might be useful for something even if you had the rails. Again, maximize the potential with minimal downside.

New input:

Put the battery on your belt or in your cargo pants pocket for the lightest, most compact camera config...

Jim

Of course putting the battery in your pocket is a solution - but is it the only or best - I thought I gave up that style of shooting when I sold the BVU150. I am not talking only about the battery or even any one specific situation - again, it is the overall utility that I think could be enhanced with minimal cost or downside. REDNUBBERS UNITE! :biggrin:

Who is this Jannard guy anyway? :biggrin: :biggrin:




Evin: That's two biggrins. Please don't ban me.

 

[Ace]

Put the battery on your belt or in your cargo pants pocket for the lightest, most compact camera config...

Jim

Cargo pants, why didnt I think of that. Absoloutely. Wearable components make light hands work. Thats the good thing about this design, You could pretty much treat the setup as a redefinable organism everytime its used to suit the particular situation. Which begs the question.. Next iteration of RED can comprise of the camera as a backpack, and all youd hold by hand is the sensor/lens!

 

[Michael Hastings]

backpack RED.

backpack RED.

Cargo pants, why didnt I think of that. ... Which begs the question.. Next iteration of RED can comprise of the camera as a backpack, and all youd hold by hand is the sensor/lens!

YES!!!


But seriously acehole now nobody will want to read all that cr*p I wrote. :biggrin:

 

[TimothyD]

Ok,

Backpack with a laptop's guts in it and a RAID, two pocket red's mounted to a bike helmet, and two beer holders with the tubes on either side.

Stereophonic 3D drunkvision anyone???

I'll buy that for a dollar...

 

[Ace]

YES!!!


But seriously acehole now nobody will want to read all that cr*p I wrote. :biggrin:

I actually meant that as a serious proposal for the next RED camera not this one.. just to clarify!

 

[Dale Launer]

Handles - another axis would be nice.

Handles - another axis would be nice.

sort of... imagine two sets of these placed front and rear instead of the middle. And they lock down solid.


I'd like to see the handle(s) at a slightly different angle - rather than the up periscope look - imagine the handles pointing forward (like, say, the old Bealieu R16) and outwards a little - like a set of BMX handles but flipped around.

Now this sounds like a joke, but it isn't - image those same handles, now flipped around in proper bicycle fashion, but pointed down and out) mounted in the middle of the camer and holding the camera down like some codpiece/divining rod (that's the joke part) - so you can walk with it around waist level directly in front of - very stable and a nice angle for handheld work (and suprisingly stable hand-held work). What's nice about that angle is that you can follow talent and show the ceiling.

And another possibly, being able to hold the camera overhead, pointing downwards slightly while following talent (or have them follow you). LCD screen mounted appropriately.

The point is - I'd like to see the current design so you can angle the handles in still another axis. Holding the grips up and down, or out in periscope fashion isn't quite as comfortable or useful as iallowing another axis to be used.

Oh, the endless possibilities of a modular design!

I do like the new M16 style handle - it looks more robust than the original.

Also - any chance of being able to put a start/stop button on one of the grips?

Thanks for listening!

Dale

 

[Andrew Benz]

Hi Dale,

Great to see you post here, I have followed your posts on cml and I have always enjoyed your perspective. I hope (and feel) these front handles will be as flexible as you described... if not it will evolve.

Cheers,

Andrew

 

[Jannard]

sort of... imagine two sets of these placed front and rear instead of the middle. And they lock down solid.


I'd like to see the handle(s) at a slightly different angle - rather than the up periscope look - imagine the handles pointing forward (like, say, the old Bealieu R16) and outwards a little - like a set of BMX handles but flipped around.
Dale

Of course you can do that...

I guess we need to post 1000 different configurations so you can see all these pieces will do.

Jim

 

[Clayton Harper]

Jim,

I need to just type the ultimate fanboy message at this point.

Love the entire red team and all reduser members!

Even Chuck Colburn.

 

[Keith Nealy]

Please - no tethers...

Please - no tethers...

Jim,
The problem with battery belts, and drives in pockets or on belts is that you are still tethered to the camera. In order to put the camera down - done very often in certain genres, you lose everything you gained in weight reduction. Been there, done that... not fun, hard on cables.

I recommend good, safe, hard mounting to the camera - possibly in multiple positions to accomodate different styles.

Regarding the rear Battery/Drive position and the potential conflict with the LCD and the joystick/buttons, why not create a mount that drops much lower in the back on a sub-level, thereby lowering the center of gravity because it would fall beneath the shoulder level above a curved shoulder pad and the top would clear the rear view of the LCD and buttons?

Carrying that further, what if the rear LCD panel were on a hinge allowing it to rotate to the left side to accomodate a side view or a rear view depending on style. That may be difficult and put too much stress on the wiring but you guys are geniuses... right?

This is far better than watching paint dry.

Pass me another Primo... I think Jims gonna do another drawing...

Wait for it.... :w00t:

 

[Isa Totah]

I never seen a company like Red, transparant -- constantly listening, adapting and improving at a record pace. And this before the first camera has been released. This approach bodes well for the long term future of Red and its impact on filmmaking in the years to come.

I love the new design -- the slimmer, the better by all means! If possible, I would love to see the cage slim down as well, at least in terms of weight.

 

[Ralph Oshiro]

I guess we need to post 1000 different configurations so you can see all these pieces will do.

Oh boy, Jim! Can't wait to see those!!!