View Full Version : Would you prefer Metric or Imperial markings ?
Seth Larney
09-08-2007, 06:02 AM
Hey all,
Would you prefer Metric or Imperial markings on your Red lenses ?
I think everyone would probably prefer both, so I've limited the choices to one or the other as I think that info is more useful.
Sorry Red team if this is too late to change and we're opening a can of worms..
Cheers,
Seth.
Jens Jakob Thorsen
09-08-2007, 09:31 AM
Hey all,
Would you prefer Metric or Imperial markings on your Red lenses ?
I think everyone would probably prefer both, so I've limited the choices to one or the other as I think that info is more useful.
Sorry Red team if this is too late to change and we're opening a can of worms..
Cheers,
Seth.
I really hope we can order metric.
JJ
DP
Stephen Williams
09-08-2007, 11:33 AM
Both would be good IMO.
Stephen
Seth Larney
09-08-2007, 07:31 PM
Both would be good IMO.
Stephen
I'd agree ..
Emmanuel Cambier
09-08-2007, 07:45 PM
both would be kick ass for sure.
Rodrigo Lizana
09-08-2007, 07:54 PM
Interchangeable, like the Master Primes.
Nils Ruinet
10-13-2007, 06:00 PM
Having both metric and imperial markings is the way to go !
A lot of people around the world use the metric system...
Pleaaase, add the metric markings !
Damien Molineaux
10-14-2007, 01:59 AM
...
A lot of people around the world use the metric system...
Pleaaase, add the metric markings !
I always find this kind of comment funny. Is the glass half full or half empty, or in this case, is the glass 5% empty or 95% full. Who actually uses imperial, and for how long ? I am in no way an advocate of a unique world culture, but I believe the imperial system will go the way of the Dodo. Both the USA and the UK have already started adopting the metric systems. The only countries using the imperial system are : England, USA, Myanmar, Burma and Liberia.
This info comes from here : http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/internat.htm
And according to this article, one should differentiate the UK and the US imperial systems : http://www.france-property-and-information.com/imperial-system-and-history.htm
In any case, both would obviously be the way to go, if I HAD to choose, well I'm born and raised in Europe, that answers that.
Cheers,
Damien
Sanjin Jukic
10-14-2007, 02:40 AM
Both is better.
Craig W. Bickerstaff
10-14-2007, 03:00 AM
I don't think it really matters, You've got both on your tape measures already so the only real advantage this could have a real advantage beyond being a very small bonus.
Stephen Williams
10-14-2007, 03:51 AM
I don't think it really matters, You've got both on your tape measures already so the only real advantage this could have a real advantage beyond being a very small bonus.
Hi Craig,
Tape measures in Europe are metric, in the UK they have both scales. Many focus pullers can only judge distance in either feet or meters so it is an issue.
Stephen
dalemccready
10-14-2007, 03:51 AM
A large number of people, even in metric countires use feet for focus as it's a nice small, but not too small measurement.
Frank Mirbach
10-14-2007, 04:09 AM
I´m for the metric system !
Nils Ruinet
10-14-2007, 05:28 AM
I always find this kind of comment funny. Is the glass half full or half empty, or in this case, is the glass 5% empty or 95% full. Who actually uses imperial, and for how long ? I am in no way an advocate of a unique world culture, but I believe the imperial system will go the way of the Dodo. Both the USA and the UK have already started adopting the metric systems. The only countries using the imperial system are : England, USA, Myanmar, Burma and Liberia.
This info comes from here : http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/internat.htm
And according to this article, one should differentiate the UK and the US imperial systems : http://www.france-property-and-information.com/imperial-system-and-history.htm
In any case, both would obviously be the way to go, if I HAD to choose, well I'm born and raised in Europe, that answers that.
Cheers,
Damien
Ok, you're right, I should've said :
"Most of the people around the world use the metric system..."
:wink:
Brent J. Craig
10-14-2007, 08:00 AM
People who say you could just buy a metric tape measure have obviously never pulled focus.
Although I am a Canadian and we have been 100% metric since the 70's, focus pulling is still done entirely in FEET and inches.
As someone said, it is a perfect sized increment. Decimetres and centimetres are just too confusing.
High-end focus pulling is a very intuitive, Zen type of thing. A person trained in feet could never learn to use metres.
If Red wants to continue on its world-class path, they have absolutely no choice but to offer lenses marked in feet and metres but never both on the same lens.
Adrian T.
11-17-2007, 05:06 AM
Any news about metric markings on RED lenses?
Metric obvoiusly. What's imperial? Sounds chinese to me.
People who say you could just buy a metric tape measure have obviously never pulled focus.
Although I am a Canadian and we have been 100% metric since the 70's, focus pulling is still done entirely in FEET and inches.
As someone said, it is a perfect sized increment. Decimetres and centimetres are just too confusing.
High-end focus pulling is a very intuitive, Zen type of thing. A person trained in feet could never learn to use metres.
If Red wants to continue on its world-class path, they have absolutely no choice but to offer lenses marked in feet and metres but never both on the same lens.
:poster_stupid:
And Phosphorescent markings too please.
Clint Johnson
11-17-2007, 11:28 AM
Metric obvoiusly. What's imperial? Sounds chinese to me.
Not Chinese at all, it is based on the body morphology of the ruler of the kingdom... so the US focus pullers might have to get the shoe size of George Bush II to properly represent the "foot".
A foot is no more or less confusing than a cubit, dhanus or a meter- it is simply that what you use most often becomes easier to estimate and judge. Measuring out 1.75 meters isn't any more difficult than measuring out 5 feet, 8 7/8 inches. Okay, you'd just go to 5 feet nine inches at that point but you get the idea, they are just numbers to represent distances and what you use is what becomes intuitive - the International Standard just has the advantage of exceptionally easy conversion and consistency with the majority of the world.
If you learned to pull focus using a self made unit based on the length of your shin, it would be the "perfect sized increment" and far less confusing than a foot or meter.
Until you used one or the other unit long enough to stop mentally converting 1.75 meters or 5' 9" to 3 3/4 shinnies.
Just human nature.
I'd certainly agree with you about SI units for calculations.
Having pulled focus in both metres and feet for about the same amount of time I still favor feet and inches. A foot is somehow a more usable size. A foot is a more accurate approximation than a metre, an inch is more accurate than a decimetre and a centimetre is too hard to judge.
chuck colburn
11-17-2007, 12:28 PM
Myanmar and Burma are the same country. No matter what the name it has been run by mudering thieving bastards for the last two hundred years.
cheers,
Jeremy Hughes
11-17-2007, 01:58 PM
Who shoots with a 386/1024" (rough estimate) focal length lens? We use 35mm. But both would be the best of course.
Brent J. Craig
11-17-2007, 02:30 PM
I'm hoping the original poster will add 'shinnies' to the poll options! :-)
As a professional focus-puller with 15 years experience here is the number one reason why lenses should be marked off in FEET:
You are shooting a nice closeup of a big-shot actor. They walk to the camera and stop with their foot half over the large orange T-mark you have lovingly placed for them to hit. Do you yank out your tape measure? Do you you tell the director you missed the shot because the actor messed up? Or do you guess how far off they are and compensate for them?
On a lens marked in FEET with the actor's foot halfway over the mark, he is half a foot too close. Both literally and figuratively. Set the lens six inches closer and you are good to go.
When actors start wearing metre sticks on their feet, maybe I will consider metric lens markings.
Fredrik Callinggard
11-17-2007, 02:47 PM
CrewPix
If you've been brought up with metrics you feel the same as you do for feet. I know that Canada has the metric system but your on feet in the business (I think). Coming originally from Sweden which has metrics I see it differently. I understand feet but do prefer metric and my RED will be used in Scandinavia and therefor would be better off with metric. It's all well that you feel that feet is justified but don't forget that 90% of the world is only familiar with the metric system and that is in the business as well.
Fredrik Callinggard
11-17-2007, 02:48 PM
Maybe 90% was a little exaggerated.
Maybe 90% was a little exaggerated.
Probably when you are talking about Focus Pullers if you think how much stuff is shot in the US.
It may be that only a few place still use feet, but those places make RED cameras and Cooke lenses :P
Dominic Cochran
11-17-2007, 03:48 PM
I'm hoping the original poster will add 'shinnies' to the poll options! :-)
As a professional focus-puller with 15 years experience here is the number one reason why lenses should be marked off in FEET:
You are shooting a nice closeup of a big-shot actor. They walk to the camera and stop with their foot half over the large orange T-mark you have lovingly placed for them to hit. Do you yank out your tape measure? Do you you tell the director you missed the shot because the actor messed up? Or do you guess how far off they are and compensate for them?
On a lens marked in FEET with the actor's foot halfway over the mark, he is half a foot too close. Both literally and figuratively. Set the lens six inches closer and you are good to go.
When actors start wearing metre sticks on their feet, maybe I will consider metric lens markings.
Plus it was really cool for us when they adjusted the SAG contracts to require all actors to wear 12 inch shoes, no matter how long their feet are. Makes things much easier!
Adrian T.
11-17-2007, 04:21 PM
It may be that only a few place still use feet, but those places make RED cameras and Cooke lenses :P
Cooke lenses are British! Please consult the following map before forcing the imperial system upon the rest of the world. :angry03:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Metric_system.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Metric_system.png)
When you grow up in a country which uses the metric system it's really difficult to work with feet and inches. Mainly because we cannot think in a duodecimal number system. We never learned that.
Fredrik Callinggard
11-17-2007, 04:26 PM
I'm not going to bother about commenting that bs
Probably when you are talking about Focus Pullers if you think how much stuff is shot in the US.
It may be that only a few place still use feet, but those places make RED cameras and Cooke lenses :P
Fredrik Callinggard
11-17-2007, 04:28 PM
and the preferred lens by RED users seem to be the Zeiss super speeds - which definitely aren't US made.
Clint Johnson
11-17-2007, 07:06 PM
Plus it was really cool for us when they adjusted the SAG contracts to require all actors to wear 12 inch shoes, no matter how long their feet are. Makes things much easier!
Yes, you put a petite actress such as Kristen Kreuk into the high heels she usually wears to close up that 25cm height difference with Tom Welling and I bet there isn't much more than 5 inches from heel to toe (or about 12cm... or about a 1/4 shinnie).
Cooke lenses are British! Please consult the following map before forcing the imperial system upon the rest of the world. :angry03:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Metric_system.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Metric_system.png)
When you grow up in a country which uses the metric system it's really difficult to work with feet and inches. Mainly because we cannot think in a duodecimal number system. We never learned that.
I know Cookes are British. I was referring to the comment: “The only countries using the imperial system are : England, USA, Myanmar, Burma and Liberia.”
By the way, your map is wrong. The UK uses miles per hour and focusing is done in feet and inches.
I'm not going to bother about commenting that bs
Come on, it was a light hearted retort to all the people making jokes about the imperial system.
and the preferred lens by RED users seem to be the Zeiss super speeds - which definitely aren't US made.
I was referring to Cooke because they make/design the RED lenses which is what I thought this thread was about.
Stephen Williams
11-18-2007, 07:33 AM
I was referring to Cooke because they make/design the RED lenses which is what I thought this thread was about.
Hi,
I think you will find that Sigma makes & designs the lens that ends up being rehoused in the UK as a Red 18-50.
Stephen
I stand corrected. I was under the impression that there was some connection between Red lenses and Cooke.
Dominic Cochran
11-18-2007, 02:25 PM
Hi,
I think you will find that Sigma makes & designs the lens that ends up being rehoused in the UK as a Red 18-50.
Stephen
Where can I find this information?
Already tried a forum search. Thanks!
Fredrik Callinggard
11-18-2007, 04:06 PM
Well if it's rehoused in the UK chances are it's in Cooke's Leicester factory.
Brent J. Craig
11-18-2007, 05:27 PM
The markings and form-factor are very Cooke-like to me, but they sure as heck aren't using Cooke glass.
At 6.5K for a cine zoom they are definitely re-housed stills lenses.
Dominic Cochran
11-18-2007, 09:56 PM
The markings and form-factor are very Cooke-like to me, but they sure as heck aren't using Cooke glass.
At 6.5K for a cine zoom they are definitely re-housed stills lenses.
I'm not surprised by this, I'm just trying to find out exactly WHICH still lenses they're re-housing. And I still haven't been able to verify that said re-housing is indeed happening in the UK by Cooke. Does anyone have detailed info on the Red glass? Anyone from Red care to chime in?
Stephen, you seem fairly sure about the Sigma glass being rehoused in the UK thing. Where did you read this?
Thanks all!
Well the poll is unanimous. So is it settled?
Adrian T.
11-19-2007, 08:02 AM
Well the poll is unanimous. So is it settled?
I really hope so. Any word from RED?
I wouldn't say "unanimous"
It's about 3:1 in favor of metric in a poll representing a small fraction of camera owners, who would all (most likely) have chosen the third option of being able to choose.
Charles Angus
11-19-2007, 11:36 PM
I'd certainly agree with you about SI units for calculations.
Having pulled focus in both metres and feet for about the same amount of time I still favor feet and inches. A foot is somehow a more usable size. A foot is a more accurate approximation than a metre, an inch is more accurate than a decimetre and a centimetre is too hard to judge.
As a Canadian I am "fluent" in both systems. Not everyone here is; many people older than me only understand Imperial, and many people younger than me only understand Metric.
I'm 6'2" and a foot is the size of my foot, which is pretty sweet.
A yard very close to my comfortable stride, (but then so is a metre, but a bit farther off).
An inch is the size of the last joint of my thumb.
Does that matter? For me it does, for differently sized people, I guess not.
At the end of the day, everyone I know pulls in Imperial. Why? Because that's what they want to do. Go figure. People are set in their ways, and alienating people is silly.
Zakaree Sandberg
11-20-2007, 09:05 AM
Cooke lenses are British! Please consult the following map before forcing the imperial system upon the rest of the world. :angry03:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Metric_system.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Metric_system.png)
since when did Alaska become a country?
Alexis Vanier
12-13-2007, 05:58 PM
It's quite interesting. Living in Canada I was taught the metric system in school, but in no business have I seen it used. It's all Imperial except for volumes (ml/oz) and great distances (km/miles) (mostly car related stuff actually). Cooking is done in Fahrenheit, but the weather in Celsius. Engineering, carpenting, focus pulling, and every day life is all imperial. I'd go to school be thought about centimeters and my father would pick me up from school and ask me to open the car window by an inch.
Has anyone ever tried going to Home Depot and ask for a 5,06cm x 10,16cm (2x4)?
In the end it's really about what you feel the most comfortable with.
For me it's feet and inches. I think centimeters (aprox. 1/3") are too small a unit when pulling focus. Nevertheless, I have my weird units. I picture someone I know laying on the ground as my 6 feet reference and "stack" him.
But I also work with people from France and Switzerland and when they tell me about a 60m mag (200 ft), I can't help but to go : "Whua?".
Lenses really need to be available in both scales. Interchangeable would be nice.
Axel Mertes
01-02-2008, 11:24 AM
As being from germany: Metric, no question.
Why not have both?
All my Canons have both... Its not THAT hard to calculate from one to the other (well, don't hire that ex-NASA guy that slammed that one robot in the dust years ago by mixing it all up 3-2-bang-ouch).
Axel
Adrian T.
01-02-2008, 11:35 AM
Final word by RED:
I can answer this issue right now for you, we will unfortunately not be selling any lenses with metric scales.
What a major bummer!
Someone with contacts to a sticker printing company?
Axel Mertes
01-02-2008, 11:42 AM
I guess this is something I start to work on this week. No metrics at all is not acceptable.
The precision of a sticker is not the big issue, as the precision is anyway never perfect, but through viewing through the lense. But its important as a close reference, after all.
Making the sticker should not be the big problem.
My question is just: Why has RED decided to not deliver metric scaling? Convince the rest of the world that the better measurment system is indeed the worse?
Can it be a patent issue? I can't really believe this idea, but what else would prevent this (except having tons of lenses ready to go, ah, yep...).
It is as least something we wonder about, since it has been discussed long time ago, and I think I remember Jim to note they will have both.
Anyway, the sticker solution sounds like a possible way down the road. Not perfect, but acceptable (what else can we?)
Axel
Eirik Tyrihjel
01-02-2008, 11:48 AM
I will definetly have to make stickers, the benefit is that my markings will be costum made to my lenses, and hence more precise. I know just the place (in Norway) that prints on anything adhesive - I will make sure they print my stickers on the thoughest material they have. (On mine I can also put in imperial, in a littles smaller size, should anyone ever want them)
Brent J. Craig
01-02-2008, 11:50 AM
The precision of a sticker is not the big issue, as the precision is anyway never perfect, but through viewing through the lense. But its important as a close reference, after all.
Every motion picture lens I prep for a job must have all the distance markings line up exactly with the witness marks on the lens or they are rejected. Proper cine lenses (Cooke and Zeiss) are extremely precise. If the difference between the distance mark and the witness mark is off by even the width of the witness mark I would ask the lens tech to repair the lens. Shooting 35mm film or 4K is pretty unforgiving.
This announcement makes me wonder if Red has realized that you can't compete with real cine glass and is slowly moving away from supplying lenses.
Adrian T.
01-02-2008, 11:50 AM
I guess this is something I start to work on this week. No metrics at all is not acceptable.
The precision of a sticker is not the big issue, as the precision is anyway never perfect, but through viewing through the lense. But its important as a close reference, after all.
Making the sticker should not be the big problem.
My question is just: Why has RED decided to not deliver metric scaling? Convince the rest of the world that the better measurment system is indeed the worse?
Can it be a patent issue? I can't really believe this idea, but what else would prevent this (except having tons of lenses ready to go, ah, yep...).
It is as least something we wonder about, since it has been discussed long time ago, and I think I remember Jim to note they will have both.
Anyway, the sticker solution sounds like a possible way down the road. Not perfect, but acceptable (what else can we?)
Axel
And we could even add witness marks. So we'd even have the better solution than the "imperialists" (sorry about using this word here :wink:).