Viewfinder design

[Finner]

Gibby you can really sumarize things nicely, TJ is right about the extension though. The traditional extension model works well and is simple. Video glasses have already been done in the late 80's early 90's and they fell flat as they seem like a great idea but they just don't practically work well at all.

1. Often the Dp has a major voice in deciding the format and camera. Usually he/she is hired before the camera is rented. Reel and reputation of the Dp are way more important than what camera to the producer and agency.

2. When people are spending a lot of money they want a person they know about and a workflow they believe is proven and trustworthy. 35m film is considered by most producers to be completely trustworthy. The Dp. whose work they know is often the person they want.

3. Although in lower budget jobs owning the camera is a plus, since you can throw it into the mix for less than a rental house would charge. In a higher budget situation the tendency is to go to the rental house first because it's proven and secondly because if something breaks they will run another one over to the set. You may be able to fit yourself into some more medium budget jobs with the camera because the camera has a lot of buzz and you come on the job with your camera in the same way a film camera asst. works. You are there to solve problems for a more non digital/technical Dp.

4. It is a mistake to underrate the knowledge of those people who want to archive on 35mm film. When you know the throw of every light, can recite the dof tables for any lens and stop, can go into any grip truck and name every part and discuss it's use, can make any move off any support, can light and pre light quickly and beautifully etc etc. then you will take their place.

TJ there are clearly accesories that need to be added to the camera and I am sure they will appear in good time. As for established vetern camera DP's and Op's if they choose their camera based on outward appearence and are unwilling to make changes, well unless they are some of the biggest names in the biz they better save the $$ they make in the next few years because they are probably near the end of their career. Be it RED or another company a digital cinema wave of change is comming and people unwilling to change will undoubtedly get swept away.

 

[tj williams]

Good change is good, bad change is bad...

Good change is good, bad change is bad...

Totally agree with Gibby. Evolve or die applies. I feel evolution is a matter of keeping what is good and useful as we evolve. Which is why we have legs like other animals and not wheels on our hips. Cause legs work better than wheels. As technology changes we all change our ways of working with it. But I'd say it is a mistake to move toward a way of working which is less productive, simply because it's newer.

I still stand by what I said in Post 47 Para. 4. There is a lot more to this work than knowing a bunch about computer work flow. The proof of this is the number of folk currently working on sets as some form of Digital Asst. They are working there because the Dp. is not comfortable managing digital workflow, and because the production believes he/she has more important things to do ie Light The Set Block Set the moves... As for me I'm studying digital tech, which seems to be mostly a matter of the devil in the details.

I've used a lot of different ways to aim the camera. So far I haven't seen one that lets us see focus, and frame out unwanted small objects as well as an optical system. I'm waiting for NAB to be able to change that opinion in the RED booth.

Evolution and Revolution.

Gibby: In your opinion is the RED a revolutionary camera or an evolutionary camera? I ask this since it relies on proven chip technology and proven hard disk technology, uses RAW that is similiar to the nearest competitor, and has a work flow similiar to other digital cine. cameras.

And back once again to viewfinders, which is what this thread used to be about...

Gibby: Do you believe that rigidly mounting the viewfinder on any spot on the camera, will facilitate operating as well as a viewfinder that stays in front of your eye and is properly orientated to your eye during camera movement?
(pivoting long eyepiece with a rod.)

Gibby: have you operated with an optical viewfinder, headset, remote monitor, green screen monitor etc. etc. did you like it? What did you like best?

ps: Finner, Hey dude, your post wasn't there when I started?? I know you're modern because the Mitchell doesn't rack-over... Actually these threads have given me several good ideas already. I hope the RED folk have all the measurements at NAB because in the crush it will be difficult for me to fit my calipers onto the body.

The top Dp.s are already using digital cameras. My point: Why should anyone have to overcome a look of the tool bias? Why should a Dp be confronted with a non standard matte box mount, an not standard way of seeing the image, a non standard form factor to hand hold, certainly Dps. won't choose just on "looks" that would be pretty shallow. I think every Dp/Operator chooses tools that "look" like they will be easy to use. A case in point: I can reach onto the lens of most shoulder mounted cameras in the dark with my eyes closed and adjust them. Try to do that on a Z1 Camera??? People who work just don't want a hammer with two handles. The upsurge in work for digital asst. demonstrates how many Dp's who are not Digital savvy. are using the digital tools out there already. It looks to me like all the folks who work at the top of this game are very smart and will quickly learn what they need to know. Totally agree that those who don't change will be over. I think that will be more of a matter of style of images than specific camera or work flow.

 

[Finner]

Cause legs work better than wheels.

My buddy Dave is in a wheelchair and I give 9 to 1 odds that he can kick your ass.

Any one want in on this bet???

 

[Ace]

My buddy Dave is in a wheelchair and I give 9 to 1 odds that he can kick your ass.

Any one want in on this bet???

Now now.. Lets play nice!

 

[tj williams]

Finner: no he won't kick my ass because I will run away up stairs....

Anyway he didn't evolve wheels. I've had some friends who race (chairs) you gotta admire the upper body development. some amazing athletes I shot a race a few years ago, when one guy went off the road down a steep bank at over 30mph and still wanted to race but the chair was busted.

 

[Finner]

Shit stairs, well I think you may have him there. He's really strong but not to bright so I can't see him comming up with a solution.

 

[tj williams]

Elevators?

ps whats in the glass?

 

[Finner]

Elevators?

Like I said he's not that smart.

ps whats in the glass?

You'll have to watch "the big lebowski" to find out.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Think outside the frame...
Ace/Jeff you "must" see this:

http://www.fastcompany.com/video/general/perceptivepixel.html?bcpid=271543545&bctid=422563006

Yep... Already seen it, but thanks for the link anyway. I love watching that video! Han and his team are still working with the university and haven't become fully independent yet... Still getting much of their business model/plans in order. As soon as they are able and willing to look for investment capital, I'll be ready to dive right in -- their interface products are going to be huge!

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Applied Visual: Interesting perspective. I love the story about the 35mm archiving that is a hoot!!! No the scary part is that among my peers I'm considered to be technologically savvy??? If you've seen some of my other posts then.......

I suppose it is an interesting perspective. I know it's different than many who frequent here. But I don't think I'm too far off from a lot of the DV crowd who's finding niches for their work or ways to wiggle themselves into the industry using "cheap" camera systems with 35mm adpaters, etc.. There's quite a few of those guys already with RED reservations.

1. Often the Dp has a major voice in deciding the format and camera. Usually he/she is hired before the camera is rented. Reel and reputation of the Dp are way more important than what camera to the producer and agency.

Of course. ...And just as many of us keep saying, the camrea is just a tool. Just as with any other industry, your reel or resume or whatever credentials speak volumes. Most clients/customers/contractors/etc.. don't care which software, power tools, etc.. you use to get the job done.

3. Although in lower budget jobs owning the camera is a plus, since you can throw it into the mix for less than a rental house would charge. In a higher budget situation the tendency is to go to the rental house first because it's proven and secondly because if something breaks they will run another one over to the set.

Yep. Owning the camera should give me quite a bit more options and freedom. We shall see... I don't know if I'm going to provide services as a DP with camera attached just yet. For now I'm going to keep on doing what I'm already doing... RED will let me explore some of my more creative ambitions and in the immediate future, that's me shooting a few of the short films I've written and I'll most likely be serving as producer, director/DP, editor, etc.. I will probably shoot for stock on occasion too, maybe more often if I find the time to do it and the 4K stock footage proves desireable.

4. It is a mistake to underrate the knowledge of those people who want to archive on 35mm film. When you know the throw of every light, can recite the dof tables for any lens and stop, can go into any grip truck and name every part and discuss it's use, can make any move off any support, can light and pre light quickly and beautifully etc etc. then you will take their place.

I definitely agree with you there... I wasn't underestimating anyone based on such a comment. I just wanted to use it as an example of where some film-oriented people are coming from and what some are still thinking. Even a lot of broadcast or DV shooters are having trouble adjusting to tapeless workflow concepts like the P2 format with the HVX200 and other Panasonic offerings. Not so much here or on DVXUSER forums, but I've run across a few on DVINFO and some of the cinematography forums that are completely overwhelmed by or even out of touch with the digital progression of filmmaking beyond DV or 16mm and 35mm film. There are several people with strong 35mm backgrounds that I'd love to just pick their brains. Especially some of the guys posting here on REDUSER... I'm sure I could learn mountains of valuable info if I could be on-set to shadow Gibby or Finner or some of the others here.

 

[tj williams]

Elcurado: I'm having a workflow problem!!!! when I click the link a screen comes up but I can't get any video to play.... Is there some player I don't have downloaded?

 

[Joel Kaye]

Links are generally contained in text. TJ, clearly you have never operated the standard internet before.

[I kid, I kid...]

WAY OFF TOPIC - skip this message.

Hey Jarrod - I didn't catch this link either (and I've probably as much design/surfing experience as most people on this board). The links are invisible in IE7 and almost no one's going to float their cursor over a paragraph of text to figure out if a link is there. It's WAY more likely to assume the poster messed up IMHO.

Looking at the page HTML you could just change this:

a:link, body_alink
{
color: #FFFFFF;
text-decoration: none;
}

to this:

a:link, body_alink
{
color: #FFFFFF;
}

That body_alink isn't doing anything though - not sure why it's even there.

Setting up multiple link styles would be done with classes like this:

a:link {color: #FFFFFF;}
a.menu:link {color: WHITE; text-decoration: none; }

Then something like this should work:

<span class="menu">
<a href="http://www.reduser.net">REDUser Home</a>
</span>

Since the "user message text area" doesn't seem to be able to add a span or class tag embedded in user's posted links you'd probably have to leave the default a:link with an underline and use classes to remove them from the other parts of the template - like the menu etc.

I'd imagine anyone over at the vBulletin forums could sort it out in 60 seconds... but right now it is nonstandard enough to be annoying for experienced surfers who expect to see links highlighted somehow.

 

[tj williams]

It's good to see that my difficulties are shared by others....but it is true that I run a camera much better than a computer....

Jarred It would be nice to make this a little easier to use?

 

[Emmanuel Cambier]

I missed the link as well.
emmanuel

 

[tj williams]

If the viewfinder was only mounted far enough forward w would be able to see the link!!!

 

[Stokestack]

It doesnt have to extend, just move it.

it doesn't have to be in any particular place on the camera. Think outside the frame.

Well, yes it does. If my head is against the left side of the camera because it's on my shoulder, that's where the viewfinder damn well better be. Nobody should have to bolt some third-party armature contraption on when all he needs is the viewfinder moved 65mm to the left.

You can't predict which of the user's eyes is dominant, so having a viewfinder that only works with one (out of the box, with no add-ons) is a bad idea.

 

[tj williams]

You can't predict which of the user's eyes is dominant,

This is a great point for RED team as they finish the design of the VF mount.
The way Arri or Aaton eyepiece flips over is excellent.