???

[Jannard]

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/9_mattebox.jpg

[Jeff Kilgroe]

1st!

When can I buy one?

[Kenn Michael]

okay, now we're talking!

[Curran Giddens]

Whoa!
I want one of those....

Is that carbon fiber?

[Jeremy Torrie]

Jannard, you're one sick puppy.

[Marcus Lundahl]

It looks great!!

Again...Besides Graeme, your designer deserves a BIG christmas bonus!

Maybe that means buying yourself a nice whiskey!? :)

[R. Gonzales]

Wow that's Sexy :biggrin:

When and How Much? I'm glad I didn't buy that Arri.

Method

[Fredrik Harreschou]

!!! :biggrin:

[Tony Lorentzen]

Sure Jim - I'll take one!

[Sanjin Jukic]

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/9_mattebox.jpg

Thanks Jim.

Absolutely fantastic!!!

[Rick Darge]

Now you're talking..

[Scott Webster]

Are you looking at a LMB-5 type version?

[Brandon Fraley]

Jim, you guys are sick! you know that? I just about hit my head when I passed out after seeing that pic! Pray you don't hear from my attorney!

(a free mattebox could probably settle this out of court)

[jbeale]

Nice looking render. For those of us unfamiliar with real matte boxes, can someone explain all the details of this one? There is a lot of complexity to it, some of which I don't understand. Is there a reason the large ring around the lens opening is knurled? Is that something that screws on?

[Mitch Gross]

Looks like it would work for most primes but the lightweight rod mount would get in the way of large lenses such as the Angenieux HR 25-250, Cooke 18-100, the massive but ever-popular 24-290 and wide angle primes like the Zeiss 12mm. Looks good for most primes though.

[Tony Lorentzen]

Nice looking render. For those of us unfamiliar with real matte boxes, can someone explain all the details of this one? There is a lot of complexity to it, some of which I don't understand. Is there a reason the large ring facing the camera is knurled? Is that something that screws on?

I'm thinking it might be an interchangeable rubber ring (?) - for a close fit to a lot of different lenses.

[Shawn Nelson]

Ah yeah!!! Jim, that is one fine piece of matte :-).

Price & availability?

[Sam Druckerman]

Yes!

Now, how much?

And when?

[Jeff Kilgroe]

What I see in the render...

It's a swing-away design, looks to be fairly compact overall. Looks like it can mount to 15mm and 19mm rods.

The bellows, or rubber doughnut (ring that is knurled) is what fits around the lens.

Two rotating filter stages -- 5x65" x 5.65" or 4" x 5.65" ? ...I doubt it's a 4x4 mattebox.

options to mount flags / barn-doors / side wings / whatever.

[HD Hildebrand]

Done. Just pack that puppy up with #423 when I come to pick it up.

[Vincent S]

I did a double take when the page loaded!!!

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm going to echo Mitch's concern over lens sizes. It looks like if this were mounted on 19mm rods, the 15mm rod section of the mounting arm could potentially be in the way of larger diameter glass. OTOH, there still looks like enough clearance for any lens that will still fit into the bellows section. Without any reference of scale, I'd say it's safe to say it will support lenses up to 120~130mm front diameter. IIRC, the RED 300mm has a 117mm front diameter. A Cooke 18-100 has a 120mm front diameter. For larger glass, like a 250mm Optimo, you'll need a bigger mattebox. ...Just like those people who're buying an ARRI MB-20. It's not going to fit every lens out there either -- it fits up to a 130mm front diameter or something like that.

[Cüneyt Kaya]

slowly i think all of you guys are sick ...and i really like it,

its always the same...

we need this...damn this is a workaround...damn pay premium for what you want...we need this now, better yesterday...this is a bug, chaos, we cant sleep...again workaround...

post by red...
here you got what you want...no even better no topic is needed anymore.

[Rick Darge]

This thread is a diversion to avoid talking about the cold issues and shipping dates....

Mwhahahahaha..

[Casey Green]

!!!

nice design. looking forward to the details.

[Keith Brust]

sweet, sweet candy!

[jbeale]

What I see in the render...
It's a swing-away design, looks to be fairly compact overall. Looks like it can mount to 15mm and 19mm rods.
The bellows, or rubber doughnut (ring that is knurled) is what fits around the lens.
Two rotating filter stages -- 5x65" x 5.65" or 4" x 5.65" ? ...I doubt it's a 4x4 mattebox.
options to mount flags / barn-doors / side wings / whatever.

Thanks Jeff! That explains it. I wonder if it would be better (or possible) to have the 15/19 mm rod mount modular, so those using 19 mm could fit larger lenses without interference, and those on 15 mm rods could save some size & weight. ...oh, true I guess the larger lenses would need a bigger MB anyway.

[Adrian T.]

Who wants my brand new Arri mattebox? :wacko:

[Jeff Kilgroe]

This thread is a diversion to avoid talking about the cold issues and shipping dates....

Yes.

A most clever diversion, indeed.

[Cüneyt Kaya]

Who wants my brand new Arri mattebox? :wacko:

the group order ended today?

but you know arri is arri.

i will wait for this one :)

[Scot Olson]

Please have one ready for my camera. Is a follow focus next?

[Siva Kollipara]

This is not fair to tease us like this, more details please.
There are some people concerned about releasing "development" products.
We don't have such concerns, send us as it is.
We will not tell anyone.

[Matt Uhry]

Looks like it would work for most primes but the lightweight rod mount would get in the way of large lenses such as the Angenieux HR 25-250, Cooke 18-100, the massive but ever-popular 24-290 and wide angle primes like the Zeiss 12mm. Looks good for most primes though.

What Mitch said. Have the arm that attaches from the rods be modular so you can use 15mm studio, 19mm or 15mm lightweight, but don't combine them because it will limit usability on large diameter lenses which cannot co-exist with 15mm lightweight rods. Otherwise it looks nice !!

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[mikeburton]

Okay, twist my arm, I'll take one!

[Kevin Halverson]

You just gotta love the ability to generate a photo realistic rendering and make a whole virtual community's collective jaws drop.

Looks like another great RED accessory; I know that I want one.

[Siva Kollipara]

Hey ,

Is this one of the product that LART guys have seen it secretly?

[mikeburton]

I can say first hand, i was at LART and no, we didn't get the luxury of seeing the Mattebox :(
Looks really frickin cool though. Can't wait to hear the specs!

[Jim Hoffman]

Tease!!!

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Is this one of the product that LART guys have seen it secretly?

Nope. This was not at LART.

[Michael Ragen]

15mm offset mount as well please. Looks awesome.

[Eric MacIver]

Will there be a matching follow focus :)

[Martin Jäger]

me buying!!!

[Ivan G]

Yes it's a mattebox! Does anyone here have specs? No. I'm excited to see that RED built one but why no specs. 3 stage, swing, carbon fiber and most important release date?

[Teague Kennedy]

Yes. Please.

[Brian Reisdorf]

So I'll ask the obvious just to add to the chorus here...Estimated price range and delivery date?

If anything, I love it because most people that have seen #97 remark that it looks like some cannon of doom rather than a camera, and this will do nothing but further that image.

[Clint Childers]

I can just picture Jim smiling at all the remarks!

[Patric Ralston]

Can we have the ability for more filter stages please Sir (preferably interchangeable 2 stage/3 stage/4 stage)?
Many a times i've had to send out a 4 stage filter back on an arri MB16 Matte box for people shooting TV dramas and features.

[BASSAM MSSALATIE]

it is look like something near to Mattebox ?:wacko:

[Russ Campbell]

We want one now! OK maybe not right now, but definitely when we get our RED.

[Damien Molineaux]

looks VERY nice, but aren't we suppose to be able to see through a mattebox ;-)

[Gavin Greenwalt]

This thread is a diversion to avoid talking about the cold issues and shipping dates....

Mwhahahahaha..

If this is the diversion to avoid talking about the cold issue... who delivered that kilo of cocaine and flock of hookers to my doorstep last night?

[Alexander Nikishin]

I

WANT

ONE!

Beautiful.

[Evin Grant]

Is this CVB's contribution? or a Red original? Either way it's very sexy.

[Rick Darge]

Photoshopped! Fake!

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/9_mattebox.jpg

[M.Halsell]

Nice, very nice.

[Corrado Silveri]

Oh, yes.

Thanks also to Curt (CVB) if there's some relation with this beautiful thing.

[Tim Lüdin]

Damn this looks realy sexy.
Why did you wait so long to show us. I just went for the Arri MB-20 group buy yesterday. If spent 5K on the mattebox.
So if we all knew the price and and the shipping time (I know everything is about to change:tongue: ) I could probably stop my Arri order. But we need some infos quick. I would love to spend my money on RED stuff but as we said it many days bofore, we need the infos. I can wait some other months till delivery. We all can handle the waiting game now :whistling:

Would be nice to hear about the details very soon.

Thanks
Tim

[laguun]

excellent!

yes.
how much?
when?
5*5 / 6*6?

exquisite design, if i might say.
our crosziels look pretty dated suddenly.

[IAN SUN]

Alright Jim, give us a RED price on that sweet looking thingamajig and I'll order 2!

[hastudios]

No Arri! Be happy!

[Jason Sturgis]

I am so glad that I didn't pull the trigger on that Arri buy.

[Justin Kirchhoff]

Holy shit.

[Jay A. Kelley]

Looks fantastic.. But WHEN.. And HOW MUCH... I love the fact that there's a nice photo... But I am shooting in 5 weeks..

Jay

[Brandon Fraley]

I love the fact that there's a nice photo...

uh, photo?

[albert rudnicki]

It looks very "Alien" to me.

[Larry McKee]

I love the round filter holder grips on top. Much easier hold onto than the small knobs/levers/stakes we are used to.

[Eric MacIver]

If anything, I love it because most people that have seen #97 remark that it looks like some cannon of doom rather than a camera, and this will do nothing but further that image.

Yes, Mr. Cruise, that IS what you look into for your closeup.

[David Wyatt]

Woah...that's effin' sweet! Who needs an MB20?? If Doctor Octopus built a mattebox it would look something like this!!

Dave.

[Tony Lorentzen]

RED is going to be the bad boy of NAB 2008. Everyone else is going to hate them for taking their business. If priced right - this piece of equipment just might put the Redrock mattebox out of business even before it's born. Time to market, Jim!

[MikeCurtis]

Jim - love that you're doing it, but that appears to be a two stage...correct?

GOTSTA have 3 stages! Pola & ND setup.

Also, random note misplaced- Red Alert & Redcine should have reel info in the QTs they make...as should the camera. Otherwise, fubars the conform workflow later...

[Scott Webster]

Jim - love that you're doing it, but that appears to be a two stage...correct?

GOTSTA have 3 stages! Pola & ND setup.


Or make sure there is a retaining ring set for a round pola in the donut.

[Craig Bowman]

The devil's in the details, which we have none at the moment.

[dudeman]

I am with Evin and Elcurado, this has to be Curt's work... if so then the target price according to Curt was somewhere between $1500 to $2000.

[Shawn Nelson]

I am with Evin and Elcurado, this has to be Curt's work... if so then the target price according to Curt was somewhere between $1500 to $2000.

No, it was $1000 to $1500

[jbeale]

GOTSTA have 3 stages! Pola & ND setup.

Seems like a tradeoff. Using three filters is always inferior optically if you can do it with two, due to flares/ghosting from surface reflections. If you have a strong enough ND you should not need or want to stack NDs. For any given filter size, having 3 stages limits the widest angle before vignetting, relative to a 2-stage MB of the same size.

[dudeman]

No, it was $1000 to $15000

That's a tad high Shawn.:wink:

Actually, Curt said from $1350 to $1500, I added the extra $500 for pad. As a matter of fact, I always add some pad because no matter what... it always costs a little more. At least that is what 15 years of buying Sony, Panny and Arri gear has shown me. It is best not to be too optimistic and plan for a little higher prices. But that is just me. YMMV Shawn.

[Daniel Reichenbach]

Damn this looks realy sexy.
Why did you wait so long to show us. I just went for the Arri MB-20 group buy yesterday. If spent 5K on the mattebox.
So if we all knew the price and and the shipping time (I know everything is about to change:tongue: ) I could probably stop my Arri order. But we need some infos quick. I would love to spend my money on RED stuff but as we said it many days bofore, we need the infos. I can wait some other months till delivery. We all can handle the waiting game now :whistling:

Would be nice to hear about the details very soon.

Thanks
Tim

Didn't I tell you to wait until Jim or Curt or both come up with a incredible matte? :bye2:

It is soooooooo geillllllllllll, hehehehe

[Daniel Reichenbach]

Jim - love that you're doing it, but that appears to be a two stage...correct?

GOTSTA have 3 stages! Pola & ND setup.



Would never put three glass in front of a 40'000$ lens, two are enough or I'll find another solution

[Shawn Nelson]

That's a tad high Shawn.:wink:

Actually, Curt said from $1350 to $1500, I added the extra $500 for pad. As a matter of fact, I always add some pad because no matter what... it always costs a little more. At least that is what 15 years of buying Sony, Panny and Arri gear has shown me. It is best not to be too optimistic and plan for a little higher prices. But that is just me. YMMV Shawn.

But that was with the pad. Originally Curt was going to be $750, then it slid to "below $1500". Hopefully getting the cool Red styling didn't raise the price 33% or more.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Would never put three glass in front of a 40'000$ lens, two are enough or I'll find another solution

I agree. I don't like stacking NDs at all. But I also think that the ability to have a third stage or a space for a round pola would be a good idea.

[dudeman]

No matter what, it won't be $4,500. We all win. RED/Curt get volume sales and we get the great price break.

[John DeBoer]

mmmm...pola, 85, sfx1/2

Seems like 3 filters are used all the time...

[Justin Kirchhoff]

Anything below $2000 and I'm buying. That, along with everything else, is worth the price. Just look at the mother fu**er. I'd buy it even if I didn't have the camera.

[robbo]

Just look at the mother fu**er. I'd buy it even if I didn't have the camera.

rotflmao

[Jay A. Kelley]

You know guys, I am seeing a lot of people post on here saying that the RED Mattebox makes the ARRI a bad choice...

Hmmm.. Do you think this is a responsible thing to say?

Price is a great reason to love something, and I have no doubt that Curt will make a great item.

But....

We are doing with this Mattebox, what we do with so many RED items, we're guessing.

Those of us that pulled the trigger on ARRI needed to things:

1. A high quality mattebox
2. A high quality mattebox, that exists. TODAY.. And will ship in the next 4 weeks.

Now I could be wrong, but at this time, RED has not been able to committ to #2. 95% of the people who went into the ARRI group buy need their equipment very soon.

So let's not say anyone made a bad decision by buying ARRI.. I think we're safe saying ARRI is pretty good in the quality dept :)

If you have the time to wait for the RED mattebox, then by all means do so. But if you don't or you want that name brand, then BUY ARRI.

Remember, every photo of RED you have seen up now has had an ARRI mattebox on it.. So I don't think I'm the only one who likes them.

This is not a zero sum equation. For one person to buy a RED mattebox (When it comes out) does not make the person who went with ARRI wrong.

Jay

[Rick Darge]

This thread is pretty hilarious

[dudeman]

This thread is pretty hilarious

Agreed. The group dynamic is hysterical.

[Michael Schrengohst]

And the guys at RedRock are puking

[planet e]

thank you, RED. if any single piece of equipment ever needed revolutionized, it was the over-priced, under-delivering mattebox. looks terrific.

[Dave Weber]

oooo ... oooo ...... me too! Hook me up with 2 ..... Please! :whistling:

[Curran Giddens]

That's a tad high Shawn.:wink:

Actually, Curt said from $1350 to $1500, I added the extra $500 for pad. As a matter of fact, I always add some pad because no matter what... it always costs a little more. But that is just me. YMMV Shawn.

I think you guys are both wrong about the price. AFIK, the only price I've ever seen listed was $1200-$1500.

http://viewfactor.net/forum/index.php?topic=18.msg67#msg67

EDIT: Oops. Nevermind. I found a price listed at $1k here.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=46844&postcount=372

[mezmo]

At the moment this looks like a CAD render, not a matt box at all.
Any ETA for a working prototype sitting on a camera body with
weight and filter tray specs?
No info equals no matt box IMHO.
Go on, show me I'm wrong, I dare ya.
Mezmo

[Ivan G]

I double dare ya :gun:

[David Collard]

Wow. Yet another great development. I didn't want to give my money to Arri, particularly at their price points. I'd rather create my own cardboard mattebox with taped filters!

Now I know where I'm buying my mattebox. ChristmasKa has come early.

[Dan Blanchett]

Christmas has come early.

More like Easter! But I'd settle for Valentine's Day.

[Shawn Nelson]

And the guys at RedRock are puking

Unlikely. RedRock is $500. Red would have to release theirs at $1,000 or below to really compete. I'm expecting this RedMatte at $1500

[Gavin Greenwalt]

One dollar One dollar!... oh wait this isn't the price is right.

[dudeman]

One dollar One dollar!... oh wait this isn't the price is right.

LMAO... Lesson learned. NEVER pad the "Showcase Showdown".:)

Shawn, I hope your right about the price, then maybe I can afford some of this great whiskey you speak of so fondly. :biggrin:

[Steve Freebairn]

This is great news it does look pretty awesome. I was thinking that maybe with the rest of the Red mentality of modularity that the matte box could accommodate 1, 2, or 3 filters.

[Mark Allen]

I'm already assuming matte box and follow focus are on the way. I want to see the red head and tripod... and even more so - the RED dolly. :)

[Rick Darge]

100 POSTS and STILL NO WORD FROM RED.. JUST AN IMAGE AND SPECULATION ..

[Joe Vinson]

thank you, RED. if any single piece of equipment ever needed revolutionized, it was the over-priced, under-delivering mattebox. looks terrific.

Speaking of... you got any CAD renderings of a RED Tripod to show us, Jim?

[Shawn Nelson]

I'm already assuming matte box and follow focus are on the way. I want to see the red head and tripod... and even more so - the RED dolly. :)

I don't think Red will tackel follow focus for a while.

I would gladly welcome a Red Dolly. There isn't much in between (in terms of quality track-based dollies) from a doorway until you then hit a Fisher.

[C.H.Haskell]

Sold :)

[Casey Green]

At the moment this looks like a CAD render, not a matt box at all.
Any ETA for a working prototype sitting on a camera body with
weight and filter tray specs?
No info equals no matt box IMHO.
Go on, show me I'm wrong, I dare ya.
Mezmo

True, but remember this time last year. There were a few CAD renderings of another RED product released...

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/971_1197436589.jpg

[Shawn Nelson]

True, but remember this time last year. There were a few CAD renderings of another RED product released...

I don't think Mezmo meant it was a fake, but rather that it wasn't coming any time soon.

I don't think the matte box exists in tangible form yet. I think this post is Jim's way of getting design feedback. They learned their lesson from tooling up on the Production Pack without getting enough feedback and ended up eating it in sunk costs.

[sander kamp]

Uhm.... I think it's ugly.

[Casey Green]

I don't think Mezmo meant it was a fake, but rather that it wasn't coming any time soon.

I don't think the matte box exists in tangible form yet. I think this post is Jim's way of getting design feedback. They learned their lesson from tooling up on the Production Pack without getting enough feedback and ended up eating it in sunk costs.

I agree Shawn. All I was saying is a lot can happen in a short amount of time. And somehow, I don't think a MatteBox takes as long as a 4K Camera to get on the market. :wink:

[Mark L. Pederson]

Dear Santa -

If it's possible, I would like to buy the SN #6 and #7 Red matte boxes to go with the soon to be "reincarnated" Elvis and Mr. Bond.

That would make me very, very happy.

Please tell all the elves I appreciate their hard work and dedication.

[Rich Schaefer]

Very Sexy, I Like I Like.

Two notes/ideas because you listen so well.

1. I think the upper 15mm mount MIGHT NOT will interfere with many zoom lenses like my 25-250 HR. If the sliding rods on the side of your matte box are sucked-up tight, then the mount will be in front of the lens! I have been using the Chroziel (It covers the HR) and the whole thing rides in front of the lens. In fact I use their 19mm to 15mm mini rod adapter. It works well. So just make sure it can do that.

2. I had a thought it would be brilliant for the lens ring to be varriable!!!! I hate the matte box vs. lens dimater hell game. How many bellows do I need to buy??? Here is my idea: Make one that is adjustable and works like a lens appiture with a set screw?... I love it.

My 2 cents
Rich

[Zack Birlew]

Well........ eh...... umm..........*looks over at Redrockmicro site for the RR Mattebox, looks at it and back at RED render, sighs shaking head, walks down the long dirt road into the night*.......*embarrasingly, pants fall down mid-walk*............... *continues walking*

Moral of the story? Dumbstruck! :ohmy:

Can't wait to hear more, Jim!

[Poi Boy]

C'mon Jim. this is getting to be like shooting fish in a barrel..off course I'll take one !
Aloha
-A

[C.H.Haskell]

JIM...please, if your listening...when can we place a reservation for this puppy and what is your target release? :)

[Michael Stanmore]

I think Jim might be asleep...

But I'm sure there'll be more info in a few days or so.

EDIT: Not that I meant to say that Jim sleeps for days... Just that this was an appetite whetter... and we don't really NEED to plead for info, we'll get it as soon as it's ready to give us...

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Uhm.... I think it's ugly.

I'm with Sander. I like my film gear to look like it was pounded out by a blacksmith in Siberia. That looks just a bit too super soaker for my tastes. But hey, the question is how it performs, that's what really matters (except to Keifer Sutherland)

[Pierce Cook]

Very exciting. Looking forward to where this is headed.

[Brandon Fraley]

I like my film gear to look like it was pounded out by a blacksmith in Siberia. That looks just a bit too super soaker for my tastes

..I'll take the super soaker ;)

[Mark B.]

Your giving one of these free to each of the res holders as a surprise Christmas gift, right Jim?

[I Bloom]

(Insert random gushing comment)

;)

[Jochen Schmidt-Hambrock]

So, what´s next? Filters?

Naw, what does Jim know about filter glasses?

[David Limpus]

I'm already assuming matte box and follow focus are on the way. I want to see the red head and tripod... and even more so - the RED dolly. :)

one red dolly
http://www.red.com/store/product_detail/103:umm:

[david farland]

Anything below $2000 and I'm buying....

Justin,
I'm hoping Red's mb is much less that $2,000!

I can do a deal with Arri for a MB-20 for about $2,500.

Dave,

[Justin Kirchhoff]

Justin,
I'm hoping Red's mb is much less that $2,000!

I can do a deal with Arri for a MB-20 for about $2,500.

Dave,

Well some of us have to be realistic.

[david farland]

Justin,
I'm saying if the basic Red mb is at $2K.....for $500 more I can get an Arri MB20!

David

[Álex Montoya]

I guess the RED matte box will be between 1000 and 1500 $.

[david farland]

At the moment all there it is is a beauty contest....and a difference $500-1000 on the basic setup isn't much to me.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/48_1197461880.jpg

There is SO much more to consider when buying a Matte box.

Arri has over half a dozen matte boxes and over 50 rings/adapters for the MB20 alone.
I expect (hope) Red is compatible with these.

Also the price of flags, trays, filter rings/adapters can nearly double the cost of the basic matte box.

Cheers,

Dave,

[Justin Kirchhoff]

If RED is making the mattebox, and it ends up being $500 less, to some of us that could mean buying filters, etc.

I'd rather save the $500 then go with an MB20 so I could use that money on other RED accessories. Of course, many people will think differently, but that's how I would work it.

[david farland]

Sounds like you don't need an Arri!

[HD Hildebrand]

Sounds to me like all this speculation has just raised the price.

[Paul Leeming]

looks VERY nice, but aren't we suppose to be able to see through a mattebox ;-)
Good spot, but I think you're looking at an optical reflection of the back of the doughnut in the matte box, via an ND filter placed in one of the filter stages. Nonetheless, kudos for the humourous point that made me look closer! :)

Cheers,

Paul

[Hrvoje Simic]

Mmm...biotech.
Count me in.

ETA?




p.s. - Giger influence ?

[ericyoung]

Jim - love that you're doing it, but that appears to be a two stage...correct?

GOTSTA have 3 stages! Pola & ND setup.

Also, random note misplaced- Red Alert & Redcine should have reel info in the QTs they make...as should the camera. Otherwise, fubars the conform workflow later...

You should be able to add or subtract stages. Only want one? Push and rotate, and the stages detach. Want four? Add three.

Of course this is probably too expensive and difficult to do in reality. :matrix:

[david farland]

Sounds to me like all this speculation has just raised the price.

From how much??....for what??

[Manuel Wenger]

Looks sweet, and i love the design, would also vote for three stages with fitersize 5,6x5,6 and make sure Cooke 18-100 and Angenieux 25-250 HR will fit .

[HD Hildebrand]

From how much??....for what??

As Curron Giddons already mentioned:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpos...&postcount=372

[Noah Kadner]

Love it- would really love an EVF too. :)

-Noah

[CJ Roy]

Looks great. When can I buy?

[Jaime Vallés]

Very nice. There's that Oakley aesthetic at work again!

Thanks for posting this. Any word on price?

[Vincent S]

So could this mean that Red filters are not to far behind? I mean connect the dots Oakley----Red. I could see it now,, the Red HIJINX ND filters!!

[Rob Lohman]

Also, random note misplaced- Red Alert & Redcine should have reel info in the QTs they make...as should the camera. Otherwise, fubars the conform workflow later...

I think you're a bit out of the loop there Mike ;) Camera has reel info in the generated QuickTimes, as does RED ALERT! for a couple of weeks now. Redcine doesn't have it yet though, but it's coming.

[Brian Broz]

Please let us know what filter size these trays will accept?!
Schneider is having a price increase Jan 1st and it would be great to get orders in before then.
I assume (and am hoping) 5x5 will cover the 18-50 and 50-150 but it may be 5.6x5.6 ?
I know the rear opening of these lenses is 114mm.

[redicule]

You know guys, I am seeing a lot of people post on here saying that the RED Mattebox makes the ARRI a bad choice...

Hmmm.. Do you think this is a responsible thing to say?

Price is a great reason to love something, and I have no doubt that Curt will make a great item.

But....

We are doing with this Mattebox, what we do with so many RED items, we're guessing.

Those of us that pulled the trigger on ARRI needed to things:

1. A high quality mattebox
2. A high quality mattebox, that exists. TODAY.. And will ship in the next 4 weeks.

Now I could be wrong, but at this time, RED has not been able to committ to #2. 95% of the people who went into the ARRI group buy need their equipment very soon.

So let's not say anyone made a bad decision by buying ARRI.. I think we're safe saying ARRI is pretty good in the quality dept :)

If you have the time to wait for the RED mattebox, then by all means do so. But if you don't or you want that name brand, then BUY ARRI.

Remember, every photo of RED you have seen up now has had an ARRI mattebox on it.. So I don't think I'm the only one who likes them.

This is not a zero sum equation. For one person to buy a RED mattebox (When it comes out) does not make the person who went with ARRI wrong.

Jay

I don't know how much any of the gear talked about costs Red or Arri, and of course it is possible that dollar for dollar the Red matte box will be better value than the equivalent Arri matte box.

But regardless of cost, Arri make very very good matte boxes. (never seen an MB20)

[Gian Joon]

Let RED come with specifications & pricing for Matte Box. It will make sense to compare it with other brands only after that. From what we have seen from RED so far, we can be sure it will be excellent value for our bucks.

Let us wait till RED makes more details public.

[david farland]

As Curron Giddons already mentioned:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpos...&postcount=372

OHH...THAT bit of speculation!

[Mark Allen]

one red dolly
http://www.red.com/store/product_detail/103:umm:

Ironically, yes, when I picked up my camera, it was mounted on this dolly and I made my first RED shot on this dolly - smooth too!

You know, one interesting thing about 4k is that if you shoot with a little extra room, you could hand hold and then stableize the footage in post and get a pretty smooth move.

That said, my ideal dolly would be a light weight device where the weight comes from the operator's body. An adjustable ped arm. Basically - I'm most interested in having a roling tripod with a ped arm to get my shots quickly. I am finding on a lot of shoots lately I'm in locations that are just too small to bring a big dolly into them yet I'm really stick of adjusting the sticks. So a tiny size would be ideal. People have suggested a few options which get mounted to the operator basicaly - but that won't work, I like setting a shot and locking it off. I think there is room for a totally unseen design for this kind of thing. If it does exist. link please.

(I should clarify that i'm aware of broadcast style pedistal tripods and I've though about those, but what I'm thinking would have a much lower height range than anything i've ever seen in a broadcast style pedistal... and be a lot cheaper ideally.)

[HD Hildebrand]

OHH...THAT bit of speculation!

Ha-ha - well that seems to be what this whole thread has turned into? May as well toss in a bit of speculation from the "gift horse's" mouth ;)

444 - not a bad camera number David. Almost as good as 423!

[Cüneyt Kaya]

Ironically, yes, when I picked up my camera, it was mounted on this dolly and I made my first RED shot on this dolly - smooth too!

You know, one interesting thing about 4k is that if you shoot with a little extra room, you could hand hold and then stableize the footage in post and get a pretty smooth move.

That said, my ideal dolly would be a light weight device where the weight comes from the operator's body. An adjustable ped arm. Basically - I'm most interested in having a roling tripod with a ped arm to get my shots quickly. I am finding on a lot of shoots lately I'm in locations that are just too small to bring a big dolly into them yet I'm really stick of adjusting the sticks. So a tiny size would be ideal. People have suggested a few options which get mounted to the operator basicaly - but that won't work, I like setting a shot and locking it off. I think there is room for a totally unseen design for this kind of thing. If it does exist. link please.

(I should clarify that i'm aware of broadcast style pedistal tripods and I've though about those, but what I'm thinking would have a much lower height range than anything i've ever seen in a broadcast style pedistal... and be a lot cheaper ideally.)

not what you want, but maybe a combo of this and something else,
dont know...

http://www.porta-jib.com/spider_dolly.htm

[Craig Meadows]

I can't believe you all fell for this! This is the front intake for the 6-71 blower on one of Jim's alcohol burning dragsters. Nothing this cool looking goes on the front of a lens - Sheez!! :)

[Simon Valderrama]

i usually use this one ...

http://www.abc-products.de/english/wigo_kits_e.htm

stil have to stabilize in post some shakes that eventually happen in track junctions, anyway it's light to carry around and very fast to setup!

[Dalibor Fencl]

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/9_mattebox.jpg

Cool design.

But the vertical pair of rods doesn't seem to be compatible with Panavision system.
It would be pity. Compatibility saves money and makes wider market pool.

[vincelucero]

That is the stuff of dreams. Can't wait for the RED follow focus, camera vest, stedicam, madmax camera bike, etc., etc.

[Sven Seynaeve]

Very nice indeed.
The red team can easy follow what we'd like to pay for it. If you all had speculated and done this before the cam was released, maby the red one would have ended up at a much higher price tag. I'm hoping pricing will be close to redrocks mattebox. And I'd like to give both a try for my upcoming reds.

[MikeHedge]

looks neat... can we add a third stage as Mike Curtis says?

[Mark L. Pederson]

looks neat... can add a third stage as Mike Curtis says?

rotating circular Pola + two stage all good with me!

[Jason Sturgis]

Looks great and looking forward to some figures on $ and when it might be available.

[Ash Bolland]

Rad!!

[Blue]

Ok, now I must pipe up, and I hate feeling forced into it. But...
There seems to be a lot of reference as to how 'sexy', yes...sexy, the Red mattebox is. Seriously! What does it matter how it looks as long as it's sturdy and works well? Is it absolutely essential to whack off over the cosmetic design of what is simply, *surprise*, a practical item. What's happening in the world? It's a mattebox for CS and hopfully a reasonably priced one. God help us.

[Ash Bolland]

Ok, now I must pipe up, and I hate feeling forced into it. But...
There seems to be a lot of reference as to how 'sexy', yes...sexy, the Red mattebox is. Seriously! What does it matter how it looks as long as it's sturdy and works well? Is it absolutely essential to whack off over the cosmetic design of what is simply, *surprise*, a practical item. What's happening in the world? It's a mattebox for CS and hopfully a reasonably priced one. God help us.

Wow - So Negitive!

I think its great people get excited about a mattbox! We are are bunch of geeks that love cine gear! - Is this not the purpose of this forum? +___+

We are all here at the end of the day to make 'moving' films/tv - and we are visual people - creative people are we not?

So if this ' pratical item' makes jaming more visually pleasing and gets people to shoot harder - its a good dont you think?

-
U

[Blue]

Wow - So Negitive!

I think its great people get excited about a mattbox! We are are bunch of geeks that love cine gear! - Is this not the purpose of this forum? +___+

We are all here at the end of the day to make 'moving' films/tv - and we are visual people - creative people are we not?

So if this ' pratical item' makes jaming more visually pleasing and gets people to shoot harder - its a good dont you think?

-
U

Not negative at all, just bewildered. Sexiness is the last prioiry on my list of cine-gear requirements. Practical and affordable are first and foremost. Girls are sexy, matteboxes are practical. There is zero ambiguity here surely.

[Blue]

...Speaking of affordable, James, any thing to reveal? I sense a fair bit of backed-up anticipation on this thread, not least my own. Cheers mate.
BTW, do you think you might ever sell your 1200mm Canon. (I refer of course to the lens).

[Ash Bolland]

Not negative at all, just bewildered. Sexiness is the last prioiry on my list of cine-gear requirements. Practical and affordable are first and foremost. Girls are sexy, matteboxes are practical. There is zero ambiguity here surely.


Well ok , I disagree its negitive - So u only go to films if they are Practical and affordable?
:wink:

Well designed is sexy. Practical and affordable - yes is important - but well designed is first. Life is to short to be practical first and formost - surely.

[PaulClements]

Since we're talking about aesthetics I personally prefer the look of an MB20. It seems to me that this design would have fitted perfectly with the original concepts for the red one, with the curved angles of the silver arms and gun. I imagine that throughout it's design stages this will probably evolve to match the current camera a bit more, after all it's only sensible that products from the same manufacturer should have the same aesthetic. That aside, if Red's mattebox betters or equals anything on the market then I couldn't frankly care less about looks. What's important to me is functionality, cost and availability so I look forward to these details being announced.

Paul

EDIT: Just thought I ought to add, I think the Mattebox looks very good, I'm not saying it doesn't - Only my preference is all :)

[soundoc]

WOW! I don't go to the forum for a couple of days and I missed a huge announcement Now that is what I'm talkin' about. Jim you rrrrrrock.

now all that's missing is the 4K monitor.

[Dominic Cochran]

Ok, now I must pipe up, and I hate feeling forced into it. But...
There seems to be a lot of reference as to how 'sexy', yes...sexy, the Red mattebox is. Seriously! What does it matter how it looks as long as it's sturdy and works well? Is it absolutely essential to whack off over the cosmetic design of what is simply, *surprise*, a practical item. What's happening in the world? It's a mattebox for CS and hopfully a reasonably priced one. God help us.

We're all very lucky that Architects, Car Designers, and Clothing Designers don't share your sentiments on design. What a drab world we would live in.

Not that I particularly like the design of this mattebox, but I can see it growing on me.

[sander kamp]

Speaking about the design: the two things I have the most problems with are the hinge that looks like some kind of pump (8 screws??) and the silly red accents. Seriously, get rid of the red accents.

[vincelucero]

red black and white have always been my favorite power color combo. if you know anything about Oakley, you realize they make military grade products with full functionality and "make sexy time" looks. i think its art, finding the balance of aesthetic and functionality.

[chuck colburn]

If you need one now, here's this....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ARRI-5-Stage-6X6-S-A-Matte-Box-Pkg-MINT-Condition_W0QQitemZ330196245637QQihZ014QQcategoryZ 4691QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[vincelucero]

rotating circular Pola + two stage all good with me!

me too!

[vincelucero]

If you need one now, here's this....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ARRI-5-Stage-6X6-S-A-Matte-Box-Pkg-MINT-Condition_W0QQitemZ330196245637QQihZ014QQcategoryZ 4691QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Thank God for post efx. I hope I never have to put 5 stages of glass in front of my red. :sick:

[david farland]

Yes, eye candy is nice which was what the render was, but marketing eye-candy thou it captures your attention only goes so far and there's a whole bunch of more practical elements that need answering.
Total cost of a complete MB? what acccessories and how adaptable is it for different rods, lenses, filters? how robust and road tested is it? Stuff that doesn't induce wet dreams but defines professionalism.
Cheers,

[John V]

Who ever said sexy is bad?

[A. Bastaki]

now we know why our cameras are being late... :p

[Mark B.]

Who ever said sexy is bad?

I'm just hoping they'll keep the structure sound and the weight down. Set sexy aside if it'll make for better performance.

[Blue]

Well ok , I disagree its negitive - So u only go to films if they are Practical and affordable?
:wink:

Well designed is sexy. Practical and affordable - yes is important - but well designed is first. Life is to short to be practical first and formost - surely.

I'll take that as a wind-up.

[Blue]

We're all very lucky that Architects, Car Designers, and Clothing Designers don't share your sentiments on design. What a drab world we would live in.

Its not the design I have a problem with. It's the description. Sexy? WTF?

[Blue]

Who ever said sexy is bad?

Not me, as long as it's used in context.

[Blue]

I'm just hoping they'll keep the structure sound and the weight down. Set sexy aside if it'll make for better performance.

Right on dude.

[Obin Olson]

yes yes yes yes yes!!!

[Blue]

5 yes's but only 4 points - unless you includes Lowkus's post but I already covered that in mine. So, however awkward it may seem obin, you have some explaining to do!

[Antoine Fabi]

Depends on the price, the weight, and availability.

Looks good.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Its not the design I have a problem with. It's the description. Sexy? WTF?

It's called techno-porn. A phenomenon amongst geeks. Some geeks and nerds become aroused when exposed to imagery of technical gadgets they find interesting. It's all the more erotic for them when they see it, but can't actually obtain it.

[vincelucero]

I must admit... I was a bit aroused and I'm sure it won't be the last time with this company.

When RED #138 gets here she's sleeping with me the first night. Hope the wife is cool with a threesome. :bleh:

[Chris Burket]

It looks like a really nice matte box. It appears the box itself is to be made out of carbon fiber? I would seriously consider the same type of plastic that arri and panavision use. I have seen their boxes take some extreme impacts without breaking. For some reason I would think that carbon might be a little more likely to crack.

And it also appears that the eyebrow and siders are seperate pieces like the new MB14 eyebrow setup. I do like the new MB14 brows more than the old ones that flip down, but the panavision eyebrow with flip down sides can't be beat. It so easy to use, folds up very small, never gets in the way etc... I would try to move more toward their design and see if you can even improve it. Having the three seperate pieces can be a pain sometimes, although sometimes (rarely though) its useful.

[Steve Murray]

PLEASE Make 2 versions:

(A) 6x6

(B) 4X4.565


Both with 3 stages -- At least one which rotates and also a 138mm round in the doughnut ring so one can put 4 filters total -- if they need to.

Both with 15mm and 19mm size rod mounts.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That will cover the guys with big zoom lenses and also those of us who already have a full set of 4x4.565 filters.

This looks awesome. Thanks and happy holidays.


_

[Chris Burket]

Good Suggestions. It might also be good to make the 6x6 box convertible between 2 stage and 4 stage. Both should have the 138mm option.

Also you could consider using a similar filter tray to Panavision's ARF. It tilts the filters to help prevent reflections and if you remove the wedge, you can get 3 filters easily into a small matte box. Their 4x5 swing away is an amazing box.

[CVB]

Also you could consider using a similar filter tray to Panavision's ARF. It tilts the filters to help prevent reflections and if you remove the wedge, you can get 3 filters easily into a small matte box. I think thats patented. http://www.google.com/patents?id=7DEmAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=panavision,+filter

[david farland]

I think thats patented.....

Here's the vertical adj on the Arri MB-20. The knob bottom right is horizontal adj. The MB20 doesn't have ability to mechanically adj matte box tilt either.
If it did you'd probably do something like placing cams on the M4 locking screws or have an adjustment knob as marked in diagram below.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/48_1197694536.jpg


I understand you started your design on the Arri MB20.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/48_1197461880.jpg

Trouble is you've integrated the swing-arm with the 19mm rod adapter. The 2 options I see are 1. unintegrate the 19mm adapter from the horizontal rod bracket or 2. place a horizontal cam like an uneven washer at the base of the swing arm column assembly so it can swing on a varying angle. The rubber bellows adapter or gimbal ring for large lenses will (hopefully) accommodate misalignment of the matte box and lens.

Sorta,
Dave,

[Chris Burket]

Those photos bring up another interesting concern I've dealt with. It's important to consider how far back you can push the box against the rod mounts. As you can see with the Arri box, you can push it all the way back against the rod mount. Sometimes you need the edge of the 138 ring really far back on a zoom to prevent vignette problems.

[Ziad Oakes]

thats awesome.. keep making it happen..

[Michael Brennan]

An important measurement to watch is matt box clearance when the camera is placed on a flat surface in hand held mode with 15mm bars.

Small Eyebrows built into the inside of mattbox as well as ability to instlal regular eyebrows on the outside.


Push button locking instead of a rotating knobs (but don't ask me how to do it)

A stage that can take a special filter draw that has two filters.

Mattbox that can expand and contract to accomidate wide lenses.

An eccentric type pivot (?) so mattbox can swing away without having to first wind it out to clear lens. (is this available on any mattbox?)



Mike Brennan

[vincelucero]

An important measurement to watch is matt box clearance when the camera is placed on a flat surface in hand held mode with 15mm bars.

Small Eyebrows built into the inside of mattbox as well as ability to instlal regular eyebrows on the outside.


Push button locking instead of a rotating knobs (but don't ask me how to do it)

A stage that can take a special filter draw that has two filters.

Mattbox that can expand and contract to accomidate wide lenses.

An eccentric type pivot (?) so mattbox can swing away without having to first wind it out to clear lens. (is this available on any mattbox?)



Mike Brennan

Great suggestions. Give me more speed I say...

[SF Geek]

Has anyone asked about how you'll be able to slide the matte box past the front of the dovetail plate with 15mm rods? From the render it looks like the 19mm holes will bump against the front.

[Jannard]

We posted this for suggestions... :-)

Jim

[Matt Uhry]

Has anyone asked about how you'll be able to slide the matte box past the front of the dovetail plate with 15mm rods? From the render it looks like the 19mm holes will bump against the front.

The Combo 15mm light weight and 19mm studio support bracket will have problems in that it will hang below the base in lightweight mode. It's a serious design problem. Make interchangeable arms. 15mm lightweight, 19 and or 15mm studio.

Also much of the film world uses 15mm studio rods, I know it's retro and and agree that 19mm is better, but that's how it is.

Looks nice otherwise, would consider retiring the ol' MB-12 and buying it if it's well made... Standard trays ???

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Jannard]

Standard trays...

Jim

[James T Mather]

A couple of questions -

1. is the circular rotator at the back for circular polas etc?

2. Can the system accept modular stages to turn it from a 2 stage into a four stage (sell the modular 2 stage as an additional accessory - it could simply slot in) - 9 times out of ten you need colour+ND+Grads for exterior work - so minimum 3 filters.

3. can the stages spin to put the edge of a nd grad along the roof of a building etc. Thats pretty useful.

Thanks a million

[david farland]

Another thought is would it get rid of glare hitting the sensor by tilting the pola filter, by having it floating in a spherical socket. Maybe even do this to the main filter assembly.
Cheers,

[Shawn Nelson]

So can we please get an ETA on this? I have an older sub-standard matte and I'd really like to plan out when I can buy this one!

[Adam Jeal]

So can we please get an ETA on this? I have an older sub-standard matte and I'd really like to plan out when I can buy this one!


I'll second that! - I'm also concerned about the mattebox being carbon fibre because of cracking and splintering etc.. No Carbon fibre Please!!!
adam

[Alexander Nikishin]

I'll second that! - I'm also concerned about the mattebox being carbon fibre because of cracking and splintering etc.. No Carbon fibre Please!!!
adam

Carbon fibre pleaseeee!

It allows for great weight reduction and handles heat very well, not to mention it's very pleasing on the eyes.

Moral of the story, treat your gear well and it will treat you well, no splintering and cracking needed.

[Finner]

No carbon fibre for me please. I want durable equipment as film work is a battlefield and carbon fibre does not hold up. Also the weight savings from plastic is little to none.

[Evin Grant]

What about a Red clip on mattebox, something in the same vein as the LMB-5 but affordable.
http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/cinemasupplies_1977_8820480

[Greg M]

No carbon fibre for me please. I want durable equipment as film work is a battlefield and carbon fibre does not hold up. Also the weight savings from plastic is little to none.


For hand-held this could save several pounds.

[chuck colburn]

For hand-held this could save several pounds.

Not a problem for Finner. He shoots 3D with two BL4s handheld, one on each shoulder. And that's with 1,000 ft. mags.

[Finner]

For hand held or steadycam though a swing away is not the best choice anyway. You are much better to go with a clip on at that point. For many this mattbox will become their bread and butter studio MB that lives on the camera. MB's take more abuse then any other camera part and IMO durability is much more important then a few pounds. I would be very highly suprised though if the CFshade weighed 2 pounds less then a plastic shade. I would be happy to have you prove me wrong though Greg as this is just my guess (I pull a lot of shit right out of my ass you know!).

[Adam Jeal]

No carbon fibre for me please. I want durable equipment as film work is a battlefield and carbon fibre does not hold up. Also the weight savings from plastic is little to none.

Amen to that! - I want something that will last me for years. Also, CF looks baaaaad. Matte grey powder coat is the way to go. This is a tool, not a fashion statement but i'm sure that the final design will find a perfect balance between price, form and function - this is RED (and Curt) we are talking about, after all :) ..

adam

[Gavin Greenwalt]

It allows for great weight reduction and handles heat very well, not to mention it's very pleasing on the eyes.


I would just post a question mark but my post would be too short... so "?"

[Greg M]

For hand held or steadycam though a swing away is not the best choice anyway. You are much better to go with a clip on at that point. For many this mattbox will become their bread and butter studio MB that lives on the camera. MB's take more abuse then any other camera part and IMO durability is much more important then a few pounds. I would be very highly suprised though if the CFshade weighed 2 pounds less then a plastic shade. I would be happy to have you prove me wrong though Greg as this is just my guess (I pull a lot of shit right out of my ass you know!).

I use a clip on lmb4 and 5, I was referring to the top rails. cf would be nice addition to the kit....sure cant hurt.

btw- I was talking about cf rods, not the mb. maybe I was confused, too late to go back and read again.

[Greg M]

"you'll be hearing a lot about me over the next couple of decades." The JohnathanLB

dam it...how did I miss this one. can you point me to the post?

[Finner]

You will love this one Greg!

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6121&highlight=No+RED+tape%21

[ladru]

All these whishes for specs sound very familiar.
-Carbon fiber reinforced hood.
-2 fully Rotatable, and one tiltable filter. total Up to 5 filters. One 138mm round filter in the back.
-The basic unit can be used as clip-on, with optional brackets also on 15mm and 19mm rails, swing away.
-Large diameter lenses, up to 144mm.
-Internal "eyebrows" in the hood.
-Build to last.

Demo animation:
http://www.vocas.com/links/prdemo-link.htm

http://www.vocas.com/image/IMG_2202.jpg

[Evin Grant]

Sorry to burst your bubble Bas, but my guess is this product gets it's genes from Germany
(Arri MB-20).

[Bruce Allen]

Bas, I saw your matte box at Cinegear. I thought it was absolutely excellent. However, it seemed very expensive ($4000 for matte box plus swing-away module?).

If yours were priced in the $1000-$2000 range, you'd be selling a ton right now. Additionally, Red might possibly not have been motivated to compete with you because you would already be filling that gigantic gap in the market where a decently-priced, high-quality matte box should be?

Put yourself in our shoes - if the Red matte box can do 90% of what yours does (minus your super-cool front filter tilt, which is patented?) for 50% of the cost of yours, wouldn't you be excited too?

If I am wrong about pricing, please, please correct me!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[ladru]

Hi Bruce, our mattebox is in the same price range as Chrosziel, and about 20% lower than Arri for a comparable mattebox.
We never had the intention to be the cheapest.
Our main goal is to give the camera man all the possibilities he needs to take advantage of all his creative ideas.
But than again, that is why there are Porches and VW's..

Edit: THe Vocas MB-450 is 20% lower in price than a comparable Arri mattebox.

[Axel Mertes]

Hi Bruce, our mattebox is in the same price range as Arri and Chrosziel.
We never had the intention to be the cheapest.
Our main goal is to give the camera man all the possibilities he needs to take advantage of all creative ideas.
But than again, that is why there are Porches and VW's..

Out of curiosity:

Did you know that Porsche is close to getting full control over VW?
Beside their common history, the "smaller" Porsche owns about a third from the "giant" VW by this time...

Competition is always a good thing. Bad it, if there is not competition or prices have been fixed by someone. To overcome fixed prices, you need a new competitor, and one that is willing to stay away from such politics.

Clearly a new competitor means loss to established companies. There is just one question: Would one compete or just stay and die. Future always tells the story.

Cheers,
Axel

[Clint Johnson]

Hi Bruce, our mattebox is in the same price range as Arri and Chrosziel.
We never had the intention to be the cheapest.
Our main goal is to give the camera man all the possibilities he needs to take advantage of all creative ideas.
But than again, that is why there are Porches and VW's..

Our concern is we have a mattebox market with an over representation of Porsches and Hyundais and no middle ground VWs... and when that VW comes to market it is going to take some of the Porsche market share.

And you ain't gonna pick up chicks 'cause of the mattebox in front of your camera.

And I tease a little here, I know that a small market and a quality product lead to a higher price point... but I think that market is set to expand and some economy of scale is going to come into play here. You can take advantage of that or get bit on the ass by it.

[Ken Willinger]

When I saw the Vocas mattebox at NAB I loved it. I have a couple older Vocas models I use for EFP (clip on). But I also felt the cost was a bit out of the ballpark for the new one. I agree with Bruce that you could corner the market with your mattebox if you came in at a more competitive pricepoint.

[Häakon]

Part of the RED revolution is that they have developed a way to sell Porsches for VW prices. The era of the $300,000 camera and $4,000 mattebox is coming to an end.

[steve palazzese]

:bye2: Amen

[Elizabeth Lowrey]

Part of the RED revolution is that they have developed a way to sell Porsches for VW prices. The era of the $300,000 camera and $4,000 mattebox is coming to an end.

!!!!!!!!!

[albert rudnicki]

YAHHHH!!!!

oops

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I'm going to laugh if RED's matte box ends up being $4000. ;)

[Matthew Rogers]

Hi Bruce, our mattebox is in the same price range as Arri and Chrosziel.
We never had the intention to be the cheapest.
Our main goal is to give the camera man all the possibilities he needs to take advantage of all creative ideas.
But than again, that is why there are Porches and VW's..

Not to be mean, but from the pricing that I've seen, your MB is basically the same price as the Arri. Why should I buy your system when I can get a proven and well know MB for the same price?

It's too bad because I really was considering the Vocas MB until I saw the price tag:(

Matthew

[John V]

Most matteboxes have some form of patent on them hence you cannot have all the wizz bang things in one mattebox.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Saw the Vocas at NAB, very impressed. Saw the price tag, walked away.

[Jarred Land]

Part of the RED revolution is that they have developed a way to sell Porsches for VW prices. The era of the $300,000 camera and $4,000 mattebox is coming to an end.

well said....

[albert rudnicki]

Vocas!
Listen and learn; it's free :)

[Mike Prevette]

Vocas product is awesome. The price is fair compared to other things on the market. Remember the demand for these things is at an all time high, and that drives down prices. Just two years ago the demand of high end cinema gear was half what it is today. Just ask guys selling sets of PL primes.

[SF Geek]

As awesome as Vocas could be, I'd still take an Arri for the same price.

[Jay A. Kelley]

This thread cracks me up.. I love everyone talking "around" what they really mean cause it might make them look bad.

"Hey! Since you are not selling a high quality mattebox at a cheap price we can afford, you MUST be running your business badly. And since it's not cheap enough for us, you are going out of business cause expensive items deserve too!"

Think a moment... How many of you actually believe these companies are making these things and simply marking them up through the roof for "fun"? That does not serve them, or you. If they make it too expensive, you won't buy and they go out of business. If they make it too cheap, they do not cover costs and go out of business.

Like it or not, matteboxes are expensive with a LOT of parts, and they have to last a long time. Last I checked CAvision made the mattebox you all want. Big, tough, and $1,500.00. Sure it has design flaws, sure they won't send a loner for review, sure they charge a restocking fee, even when it's THEIR mattebox that does not work correctly.. But HEY!!! Its $1,500.00 GOTTA LOVE THAT!

Pay attention my friends, RED's revolution is NOT it's price point, I don't know how many times we need to go through this... It's the camera and the company that is the revolution. The price is nice, but to many people, $20,000 will still be far beyond "cheap".. And I am glad it is.

I respect and encourage quality hardware and excellent customer service. I expect the company to charge what's nessesary. If they go to far in either direction, the marketplace will take care of it, but I am not arrogant enough to tell anyone that their price, and therefore business model, is flawed just because I cannot afford it.

We shall see what the RED mattebox has to offer once it's built.. Until then, let's just see what we see.

Jay

[Anthony Gratl]

Pay attention my friends, RED's revolution is NOT it's price point, I don't know how many times we need to go through this... It's the camera and the company that is the revolution. The price is nice, but to many people, $20,000 will still be far beyond "cheap".. And I am glad it is.
Jay

Jay, from your own posts, where you were debating which ENG camera to get while waiting for the red, you were mentioning price as a main factor. You're telling me that if Red was double the price you'd buy it? If that's the case, you should buy #126 and get shooting.
And "I don't know how many times we have to go through this"? What is this, Jay A. Kelley School for the Informed? It's not kind to be snide dude.

The camera is a revolution MAINLY because of it's price point. It's not the first 4K camera. What makes it so great compared to Dalsa, Genesis, D20, and F23, other than compact size and weight, and compression rates for data? What's the first thing that people say. Is it, "wow incredible images from the Red Camera", or do they say, "wow incredible images from this camera for less than 30K!" That's what pulled you in the door isn't it? Or do you spend as much time online discussing Dalsa, Genesis, D20 and the F23 on their respective forums?
And frankly, if you think the machining of those arri parts for your new MB costs thousands of dollars, and the markup that Arri and Chrosziel apply are reasonable, I can tell you as the son of a master machinist and mechanical engineer who learned his craft in Germany, your dreaming, and it ain't in red 4k. Those prices are totally through the roof.
So those comments are right on the money. And yours aren't.

EDIT: and as far as the $1500 mattebox goes, design flaws are a totally different kettle of fish. Noone buys stuff that doesn't fit, regardless of the price.

[John V]

Agreed...they get the prices because people are willing to pay it right now. Part of the reason the industry does not want RED to succeed is it will drive down the margins.

[Alexis Hanawalt]

How many of you actually believe these companies are making these things and simply marking them up through the roof for "fun"? That does not serve them, or you. If they make it too expensive, you won't buy and they go out of business. If they make it too cheap, they do not cover costs and go out of business.

Is this just being contrarian? Nobody likes high prices, no matter what the justification - and it only really makes history when prices get slashed. Ford was selling more cars than ever when it abruptly dropped the price of the Model-T from $900 to $300. The rest was... history.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

They aren't through the roof if you only sell 400 of them a year.

It's just that high end cinema gear hasn't had a market to sell in volume to. Jim is creating a volume market for cinema gear much like what exists for still cameras.

If the RED and plethora of 35mm adapters (remember those things that were all the rage right when RED announced they existed) hadn't come along there wouldn't be the massive spike in matte box, support, steadicam and 4k cameras.

The act of putting 8,000 top of the line cameras out into the world needing PL lenses and support gear has created the demand necessary to sell at a lower rate.

Jim's creating his own customer base from thin air. Everybody is going to see an increase in sales volume. And everybody's prices are going to drop to some extent (except for used gear). But Jim has the advantage of knowing exactly when and in what quantity the market is going to grow by because he's the OPEC of cinema gear demand at this point.

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

It's funny: some other high-end companies sell gear über expensive because they don't sell a lot, but they don't sell a lot, because they sell über expensive (and okay, there aren't as much people shooting 35mm in their spare time, compared to the still photography market, agreed, but still).

Jim sells cheap because he knows how to do it cheap (I've heard about Oakley's famous way of machining things and such), but also because he knows there will be lots of sales if the price is pretty low.
So he sells a lot, because his price is low.

Nice circle, but for the consumer (or professional buyer), if quality of the second is roughly the same as the first, the second is much better for the buyer.

[david farland]

Those prices are totally through the roof.
.
Those prices may be thru the roof for you!
Maybe you're a part of the good enough crowd. Nothing wrong there. Just don't slam people that want more. They're (Arri kit) beautifully made for professionals who know why they buy it. Beautiful item with no hype, no bugs, works so smooth, won't fail and will last forever.

Cheers,

[Martin Drew]

Pay attention my friends, RED's revolution is NOT it's price point, I don't know how many times we need to go through this... It's the camera and the company that is the revolution. The price is nice, but to many people, $20,000 will still be far beyond "cheap".. And I am glad it is.

I think you may have to go through this a lot of times Jay, because I reckon you are wrong. The MOST revolutionary aspect IS the price point, Reds pricing is redefining the market.

M

[Jay A. Kelley]

I think you may have to go through this a lot of times Jay, because I reckon you are wrong. The MOST revolutionary aspect IS the price point, Reds pricing is redefining the market.

M

Hey Martin,

I really don't think so. The reason is that I have seen many items that come in at a lower price point, BUT they are poorly done by a 2nd rate company. So nothing happens.

RED's prices are cool, but what closes the deal is the product and the company behind it.

Perhaps it would be better if I/we said there was no one aspect that makes this camera revolutionary, rather their successful use of all the elements we've brought up combined.

As for me and my price posts.. Guys, I am not rich.. I cannot afford some things that are sold, this is frustrating, and maddening, but I don't blame the company for it.. I simply pick something cheaper, or go out and make more money.

I think the real issue here may not be that people cannot afford things, but they question if the item is worth the price!

Perhaps many of you simply think the Vocas is not worth $4000.

Jay

[Jay A. Kelley]

Jay, from your own posts, where you were debating which ENG camera to get while waiting for the red, you were mentioning price as a main factor. You're telling me that if Red was double the price you'd buy it? If that's the case, you should buy #126 and get shooting.
And "I don't know how many times we have to go through this"? What is this, Jay A. Kelley School for the Informed? It's not kind to be snide dude.

The camera is a revolution MAINLY because of it's price point. It's not the first 4K camera. What makes it so great compared to Dalsa, Genesis, D20, and F23, other than compact size and weight, and compression rates for data? What's the first thing that people say. Is it, "wow incredible images from the Red Camera", or do they say, "wow incredible images from this camera for less than 30K!" That's what pulled you in the door isn't it? Or do you spend as much time online discussing Dalsa, Genesis, D20 and the F23 on their respective forums?
And frankly, if you think the machining of those arri parts for your new MB costs thousands of dollars, and the markup that Arri and Chrosziel apply are reasonable, I can tell you as the son of a master machinist and mechanical engineer who learned his craft in Germany, your dreaming, and it ain't in red 4k. Those prices are totally through the roof.
So those comments are right on the money. And yours aren't.

EDIT: and as far as the $1500 mattebox goes, design flaws are a totally different kettle of fish. Noone buys stuff that doesn't fit, regardless of the price.


You're right about the snide part... Oops sorry, must have been late and not checking my stuff.

I do not know how to build a mattebox.. And perhaps you are right, perhaps ARRI is a bunch of crooks marking their stuff up through the roof because we simply do not have any other choice.

But....

You cannot proof that. You are guessing. Therefore I choose, (At this time) to believe that perhaps the reason for the cost is due more to the cost of running the company accordding to their model, and providing the customer service they do.

If I am stupid for this, so be it. But I think you and others may be telling yourselves it is cheaper to make this stuff because you want it to be.

The creation of the product may be cheap, but the company that supports it costs a lot of money. And when it comes to owning a company, I DO know what I am talking about.

As for the revolutionary part, I commented on that in the above post. I am coming to understand that it is a number of elements that make the camers revolutionary, not just one. I think the most DISRUPTIVE aspect of RED is it's price, but only as compared to higher end cameras. As for Revolutionary, that's the product and the company.

Had RED been $30,000. I still would have bought one.

Of course, by the time I am done putting it all together, it will be that and more. I think, from a marketing standpoint, being able to say the "Body" is $17,500 was genius.

Jay

[planet e]

Therefore I choose, (At this time) to believe that perhaps the reason for the cost is due more to the cost of running the company accordding to their model, and providing the customer service they do.

If I am stupid for this, so be it. But I think you and others may be telling yourselves it is cheaper to make this stuff because you want it to be.



just go back and re-read Gavin's post, he pretty much nailed it. there's no need to rely on speculation, we know that enough REDs have been ordered to create an entire new market base and a new source of demand that will increase supply and drive down prices and that the RED team has sole access to this information and is designing new products based on a reasonable ROI for the price point.

or did Gavin just say that? (squawk, planet e wants a cracker, squawk....)

[Martin Drew]

I really don't think so. The reason is that I have seen many items that come in at a lower price point, BUT they are poorly done by a 2nd rate company. So nothing happens.

RED's prices are cool, but what closes the deal is the product and the company behind it.

Perhaps it would be better if I/we said there was no one aspect that makes this camera revolutionary, rather their successful use of all the elements we've brought up combined.

Thats just it. We aren't talking about something coming in at a lower price point, poorly done by a 2nd rate company. We are talking about an equivalent product that competes directly at 10% of the cost.

I suppose you could argue it the other way around, that it is a much better product than has previously been offered at a given price, but that is fundamentally the same argument.

M

[GrafxLvr]

<i>Remember, every photo of RED you have seen up now has had an ARRI mattebox on it...</i>

In that case... here's a couple pix with a Chrosziel Mattebox on a RED

http://www.greenteainteractive.com/RED/RED-840-01.jpg

http://www.greenteainteractive.com/RED/RED-840-02.jpg

http://www.greenteainteractive.com/RED/RED-840-03.jpg

[Jaime Vallés]

Nice pics, Grafx! Just curious, what lens is that on the bottom two photos? It looks like a still photo lens. How is it mounted onto the RED? How does it perform? Also, what rod system are you using? 15mm?

Thanks in advance!

[GrafxLvr]

<i>...what lens is that on the bottom two photos? It looks like a still photo lens. How is it mounted onto the RED? How does it perform? Also, what rod system are you using? 15mm?</i>

It's a ZEISS 35mm Distagon T1.2 Super Speed Prime Lens (PL Mount). The rods are the standard RED 19mm rods. The pix shows a 19mm to 15mm rod adapter--the mattebox is attached to this adapter.

[Brook Willard]

Looks like a Zeiss Super Speed... mounted backwards! :wink:

[Brook Willard]

Hey Jim, any chance of a render from the opposite side of the mattebox [say, 180˚ from where this one was taken]? I'm working up a little list of what I'd recommend for changes, but I can't discern as much of the design as I wish I could.

[Mike Prevette]

3,000 of something is not much when your talking about driving down the cost of manufacturing lots of small intricate parts. If RED had sold 50,000 cameras then maybe, but so far it has sold less than 3,000.

[Mike Prevette]

Looks like a Zeiss Super Speed... mounted backwards! :wink:

Oh it looks like it's mounted right. I'm more concerned that the follow focus is attached to the Iris gear on the 300. :tongue:

[Nick Gardner]

Dear Jim,

I have a suggestion. Build a proto-type. Send it out on a real feature, then a commercial, then a music video. Get it to 3 different 600 ACs. See what they think. Make changes accordingly. Nothing makes you think of things to make better, faster, smarter than getting yelled at, wanting to know what the fuck's taking so long :)
Seriously, talk to any good AC and they have gripes about every piece of gear there is. "yeah it's a good follow focus, but the stupid ......." Even eypiece leveling rods get cursed at if they don't have the right after market holes tapped. I know more than one AC with machine tools to fix the situation.

Hell, send my AC one he'll beat the hell out of it, fix it and send it back.

Cheers
Nick

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Nick makes a good point. Top ACs would be excellent testers for just about anything that relates to camera operations. Sometime during the prototype stage of camera or accessory development just offer an "A" list AC his or her day rate and invite them over to HQ, have them sign an NDA, and let 'em at it.