Whooww! Epic rocks... one technical suggestion

[Sebastian Cramer]

What a great moment seeing Jim and Jarred presenting the Epic on IBC. Epic will change the way films are made and I can‘t wait to get it into my hands.

When I saw it, my only thought was, how easily can the camera been mounted on a steadycam in low mode or a 3D rig, hanging from the top? Here is a thought I just had and maybe someone else out there thinks this would be helpful, too.
Of course Red is very welcome to use these ideas, because my only intend here is to make my life easier and not because of any financial thoughts.

Here is what I think:

1) There will be a lot of situations in which one wants the camera hanging from the top in minimized configuration (lowmode steadycam and of course 3D). Two threads at the end corners of the camera module would help a lot.

2) Registration pins on both the top and bottom would make an end to the voodoo, when aligning cameras on a 3D rig. Steal inlets would be the best, but a simple bore is better than nothing.


Please feel free to add any thought to this. Thanks.

Best,
Sebastian Cramer, www.scramer.com

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

What if you just mount the camera upside down and turn on an "upside down" mode in the menu that flips everything, monitoring, displays, recording, etc..? Not saying that it will do that, but I seem to recall that being discussed in the past.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

I can't imagine the RED team not having taken consideration of multiple applications, and I strongly believe that the vast range of accessories will provide for just about any situation you might think of.

 

[Sebastian Cramer]

What if you just mount the camera upside down and turn on an "upside down" mode in the menu that flips everything, monitoring, displays, recording, etc..? Not saying that it will do that, but I seem to recall that being discussed in the past.

Would not work if your dealing with rolling shutter issues on a 3D rig...

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Hi Sebastian

As always your ideas are well thought and very constructive!

Perhaps there are the rear mounting points on another module that we are not seeing. I appreciate that would not allow for the smallest possible usable body. However I feel for both steady-cam and 3d we will need basic video out beyond EVF/Red Monitor (I may be wrong).

As for the possibility that Red offers the ability to change the way they camera reads out the chip... that would be a even better solution to the 3d rolling shutter problems. Inverting the camera only solves the major problem of top staying top in the read out. The left-right inversion it creates isn't ideal to my current thinking (i do need to test this so I may be misunderstanding the full consequences)

Any way I'm like you excited and keen to trade in..

kind regards

Michael L

 

[Sebastian Cramer]

Hi Michael,
great to hear from you.

Yes, there will be mounting holes on additional modules, but I would be very happy to be able to swap them, even if the camera is mounted from the top. Maybe I'm asking too much here and it can't be done anymore, but it just would be cool, to have it like this.

Best,
Sebastian

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Hey Sebastian

Your right and it would be great to see your ideas integrated.. I just suppose I'm hopeing Epic is days away and maybe the modification is not possible. If it's still not 100% finished then I hope they take your suggestion on board.

good luck

Michael L

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Those side mount points look pretty strong I wonder if you couldn't just put a U bracket on and create your own top mount points a half inch above the body. Like the red top handle but with a cheese plate of sorts.

 

[Sebastian Cramer]

Those side mount points look pretty strong I wonder if you couldn't just put a U bracket on and create your own top mount points a half inch above the body. Like the red top handle but with a cheese plate of sorts.

True, a lot of things can be done...

All I'm saying is, that a registered mounting of the camera body and therefor of the sensor plane and the optical mount can be valuable for various applications.

Sebastian

 

[Brook Willard]

I suspect that RED will match the holes/spacing on the new cameras to those on the RED ONE rather than modifying them. A lot of people are upgrading from the RED ONE and will not want to have to buy new accessories to mount on their camera. While I personally agree with you and would prefer that they use a pre-existing layout like that, there are enough RED-Arri or RED-Panavision adapters out there already that the market will survive.

 

[Philipp Chudalla]

I also think, Sebastians idea is right, holes for registration pins and additional threads for top-mounting or mounting other accessories are a simple solution for the problems many users will have. Threads should be steel, because the aluminum threads on the red one body get worn out quickly.

 

[firstcamera]

Hi all.
I do a lot of car-commercial stuff, I really can´t wait to mount some Epics to a Formula-1 race car for example.

But to be honest, I was never really happy with the Red One not having a hole for the register pin that is so useful on the Arri bridge plates. Having two registration pins, one in the front and one in the back for exact positioning makes much sense to me. And I see a lot of situations in my daily work, where it would be great if the same is possible for a top mount with the smallest possible configuration.

Cheers,

Emanuel M. Schwermer, bvk
Operator - 1st AC - DIT
Munich - Germany
www.firstcamera.de

 

[Sebastian Cramer]

I suspect that RED will match the holes/spacing on the new cameras to those on the RED ONE rather than modifying them. A lot of people are upgrading from the RED ONE and will not want to have to buy new accessories to mount on their camera. While I personally agree with you and would prefer that they use a pre-existing layout like that, there are enough RED-Arri or RED-Panavision adapters out there already that the market will survive.

Brook, I'm not quite sure if I understand what you're saying. This is really not so much about accessories or adapters...

Here's what I would like to be able to do: shoot a motion control pass, take the camera off, put it on again, and shoot second matching pass.
Other useful applications: steadycam, 3D rigs, visual effect work and much more.

Sebastian

 

[Manuel Wenger]

I like the idea from Sebastian,

i think there would be good use of the additional mounting possibilites on the brain. I like the idea to just mount the brain and add or remove modules as required. i do a lot of steadicam and car rig work, and this would come in really handy.

best regards
Manuel

 

[Brook Willard]

Brook, I'm not quite sure if I understand what you're saying. This is really not so much about accessories or adapters...

Here's what I would like to be able to do: shoot a motion control pass, take the camera off, put it on again, and shoot second matching pass.
Other useful applications: steadycam, 3D rigs, visual effect work and much more.

Sebastian

Allow me to clarify.

RED has already established their favorite hole size and spacing. This hole spacing is new and specific to RED.

There is an existing market of parts that adapt "RED" to the various standards in our industry.

As far as I can tell, you are suggesting that they adopt the pre-existing standards in our market.

I am suggesting that since RED has already created their own standard, they are not likely to abandon it with their second camera. While I certainly wish that they would do exactly as you're suggesting, I understand that it will not be a major issue since there is already a market of accessories to adapt RED to the various standards already out there.

I would be happy to be proven wrong.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Would not work if your dealing with rolling shutter issues on a 3D rig...

And why do you say that?

As for the top mounting / low mounting of the camera, I don't worry about it. We have been shown a multitude of configuration renders showing top handles, top rods, etc.. Plenty of ways to mount the camera it seems. Just like the current RED One... I mount it hanging from the top. I mount it on its side for portrait shooting. If I have to, I make my own cheese plates, adapters or whatnot, but I rarely have to do so. Actually, the only adapter of any type I've made in the past 6 months, is a right-angle piece of 1/2" aluminum that can take my tripod quick plate on the bottom and an ET Arri dovetail plate on the vertical portion. It supsends the R1 body centered over the tripod head. But my point is, we have seen renders of top mounts and other things for the Scarlet / Epic already. I don't foresee this being a problem.

 

[Michael Hastings]

I think maybe you guys are missing what sebastian is saying, and it is really two things.

1) registration - this works just like the old registration marks on three color printing separations - the registration marks let you VERY accurately position or reposition the camera. And those registration holes should NOT be threaded because then you lose accuracy. It would be drilled and then reamed (a very simple machining process) so they are very accurate - say .50 or .375 or 8mm as Arri does. Then you use the matching ground pins on your mount to get extremely accurate and repeatable positioning - within .001 of an inch should be doable with that type of registration hole and that kind of accuracy can greatly simplify things when you get into 3D; motion control; time lapse in situations where you need to remove and replace the camera; etc.

2) The threaded holes at the rear: Although you can do a fairly solid handle or mount with just the one line of holes at the front, but it would be much more solid and secure with a couple threaded holes at the back as well.

All of these things should be fairly easy to add to the design, even very late in the game - particularly the registration holes which are the most important since even though you could add them later is A LOT EASIER and most accurate if done at the same time as the rest of the holes.

BTW from the renders it looks like there are two registration holes on the bottom front of the brain below the mount.

 

[Sebastian Cramer]

Micheal, this is exactly what I'm saying.

Jeff, I guess you have seen the ET 3D rig. They even had to mount BOTH cameras from the top, to match with their design and rolling shutter issues. Maybe the guys from ET have an opion here, if registration can be useful, or the ones who are getting their rigs, like Keslow or Off Hollywood. Mark, can you imagine pin registered mounting would be cool for 3D?

Brook, I agree with you that Red was always a pioneer in creating new standarts. But I'm NOT talking about changing anything here, I'm talking about adding. Put the registration holes in for those who need them in this industry, and use what ever existing equipment is out there. ET-Base from R1, with 2x 3/8"... fine, top handles... fine, holes don't hurt and they are not in the way...

Best,
Sebastian

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Jeff, I guess you have seen the ET 3D rig. They even had to mount BOTH cameras from the top, to match with their design and rolling shutter issues. Maybe the guys from ET have an opion here, if registration can be useful, or the ones who are getting their rigs, like Keslow or Off Hollywood. Mark, can you imagine pin registered mounting would be cool for 3D?

I guess I'm still not understanding what the rolling shutter has to do with whether the camera is top mounted or not. As for pin registration, to me it does seem it can be useful for some applications. But for 3D, I think the usefulness will be somewhat limited and it will give a false sense of accuracy. All lens mounts, lenses, sensors and sensor alignments, etc.. are subject to slight variations. Even if your pins are accurate to within 0.001mm, which is highly unlikely for a mechanical registration pin, that still doesn't account for other variations, which increases the margin of error.

How will registration pins account for the self-repositioning sensor block and auto-collimation system? In a 3D rig or other rig where critical image alignment is key, it's best to mount the camera off standardized mount points, and it's true, additional registration pins may prove useful here. But the rig will still need a form of micro-adjustment to get line and pixel accuracy.

Brook, I agree with you that Red was always a pioneer in creating new standarts. But I'm NOT talking about changing anything here, I'm talking about adding. Put the registration holes in for those who need them in this industry, and use what ever existing equipment is out there. ET-Base from R1, with 2x 3/8"... fine, top handles... fine, holes don't hurt and they are not in the way...

....We don't know what the internals of the brain look like at this time. No guarantees those registration holes won't be in the way.

 

[Michael Hastings]

I guess I'm still not understanding what the rolling shutter has to do with whether the camera is top mounted or not. As for pin registration, to me it does seem it can be useful for some applications. But for 3D, I think the usefulness will be somewhat limited and it will give a false sense of accuracy. All lens mounts, lenses, sensors and sensor alignments, etc.. are subject to slight variations. Even if your pins are accurate to within 0.001mm, which is highly unlikely for a mechanical registration pin, that still doesn't account for other variations, which increases the margin of error.

How will registration pins account for the self-repositioning sensor block and auto-collimation system? In a 3D rig or other rig where critical image alignment is key, it's best to mount the camera off standardized mount points, and it's true, additional registration pins may prove useful here. But the rig will still need a form of micro-adjustment to get line and pixel accuracy.



....We don't know what the internals of the brain look like at this time. No guarantees those registration holes won't be in the way.

I'm moving away from my area of expertise here - but I think the issue with mounting cameras is you have to mount them such that the rolling shutter wobble goes in the same direction.

As far as self reposition/auto collimation - these may pose additional problems but things have to be easier to setup/resetup the closer you are to a repeatable position. Sebastian is a very capable designer/machinist and I have a fair amount of experience too (I have a 7000 lb. Haas VF1 CNC machining center in my garage!) and we both know that this is very easy to do if done at the time of manufacture and shouldn't pose any big difficulties even if added just days or hours before final lockdown for manufacturing. In addition, even if you don't use the registration holes, the two threaded holes at the back of the brain should make handles and other mounts much more stable and stronger.

BTW Did I read somewhere that the Epic brains will be machined not cast?