Viewfinder design

[tj williams]

First on the look of the viewfinder shown on the renderings. Wonderful cosmetics looks like Alien machine-gun like the whole camera a science fiction fans wet dream.

I'm concerned that the viewfinder shown on the renderings from two perspectives.

1. It seems a little far back for hand holding kinda like an Arri3 viewfinder. Which wont let the operator balance on the shoulder without moving the batt/mag way back and creating quite a long camera configuration.

2. No way is shown to mount it much higher and further back either by an extended viewing tube or a Cinewidgets style mount. For multicam event and wheels work this also seem essential.

[Jannard]

You can mount the EVF anywhere you want...

Jim

[Jarred Land]

yes.. you can mount it anywhere you want as Jim said, and position it at any angle you want.. that is the advantages of a non-optical viewfinder... you can put it anywhere..

[tj williams]

Jannard/Jarred

Thanks for the quick response.

Seems to indicate you have taken the Cinewidgets route rather than the extension tube or two viewfinders.(short and long like Arri) So is the viewfinder on the same kind of arm as the Lcd.? I own this same arm so there is a reason I ask this. Put the prototype on a tripod with the LCD adjusted to allow you to watch the scene while the camera is level. Now tilt the camera as far up as your tripod allows now make a slow controlled tilt to the floor. Did you notice your squatting stretching to keep the viewfinder in view. Now imaging that you are in a bright lit reflective outdoor environment and your head is against the viewfinder, now you have to make the same tilt. unless the viewfinder stays level this will be the devils own time. So This is a question about how the viewfinder is mounted and how it is constrained to move during operation, how difficult it will be to move the viewfinder from hand held to dolly positions, not a question about whether an electronic viewfinder can be placed anywhere.

[Brook Willard]

There has been much discussion about eyepiece levelers and how they interface with an EVF. The great thing about EVFs is that you don't need that long eyepiece extension like you do on an optical viewfinder.

This thread (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=129&highlight=eyepiece+leveler) will be a good place to look.

[Jarred Land]

you absolutely dont get it... (sorry man)

I assume you are referring to an eyepiece leveler on a conventional film camera, so your eyepiece stays level, attached to a leveling rod on your head. So you can tilt up and down and your eyepiece stays the same.

Now.. take both of our points from above. You can mount the EVF anywhere. That means you can mount it right to that leveling rod on the head, not attached to the camera at all, so when you tilt the camera it doesn't move. your problem solved.

[Tony Lorentzen]

That's great news for the realization of my newest contraption:

http://p2genie.dfmc.dk/redbeerhat.jpg

That will give a completely new dimension to modern filmmaking :-D

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Honestly, who's going to buy that... And put root beer in the can holders?

Other than that, it's perfect

[Jarred Land]

ha ha the funny thing is.. that someone is gonna come out with something that looks a bit like that for the stedicam guys..

[chuck colburn]

Is that for 3-D?

[Brook Willard]

Is that for 3-D?

Nah, I believe that's just for awesome.

[Andrew Benz]

tlorenzo, thank you for the levity.

[tj williams]

Tlorenzo: First off love the helmet that is laugh out loud funny!!! funny!!! Thanks for taking the sting out of a harsh comment. actually before I'd work with a viewfinder rigidly attached to the camera body, I'd try out your idea, but with real beer.

Jarred: Your suggestion of mounting the vf to the rod attachment point shows that you have never seen how the rod is mounted to a fluid or wheels head. This would be a wimpy impossible way to mount anything without attaching at the other end. Now it is true that I could go to the rental house on every job and insist they weld or bolt a sturdy rod to their geared or fluid head. This however seems unlikely to endear me. Even if I did this I would have to attach the vf to the camera for most hand held work, so I would now have an extra step in moving the camera from one modality to another. Anywhere the vf is mounted to the camera it will not face the eye when tilting or panning across ranges greater than easy head movement. If you mount below the head it won't pan if you mount on the head it must be below the part which tilts. There is nothing like this on the market. yet every rental house and many operators already own rod sets and heads modified for them.

Brooke, To retain the geometry of the eyepiece levelor you will need some bracket to extend its length so the eyepiece can rotate nodally and the rear of it be far enough back. The further off the center of rotation of the front of the eyepiece from the mounting point the greater the swing in angle of the VF during tilting.

Please read this paragraph carefully before you respond: what I'm asking about is not whether you can position the vf anywhere on the body. I'm asking how the viewfinder moves with the camera use and what is involved in moving it to different positions on the body where hopefully it can move appropriately with the cameras movement. in both hand held and dolly tripod mounting.

For much of cinema use the RED will just replace the Arri/Pana body. It will need to relate to pieces which already exist and are widely used and accepted. These pieces are already in rental houses. I doubt that there will be a RED wheels head, with a monitor mount rod on it? Probably many operators and rental houses have rods, matte boxes, etc. which they will want to use with their new camera body just like they use the same ones on Arri or Aaton.

Jarred clearly you have never operated a standard cinema camera. Let me explain how this works. It's true that the long tube is merely an optical extender. Sony etc have put some similiar extenders onto their cinematized HD cameras, which are still only looking at a screen. This is not just a matter of style. or optical limitations.

What do the long tube and the rod do for the operator?

First this configuration allows the front of the tube to pivot up down near the nodal point of the camera and the rod mounted to the rear of the tube and the head keeps the rear of the tube at the same level. while the front of the vf does not move much during tilt preserving vf orientation. This means that the operator is always throughout a tilt able to look straight into the eyepiece without scrunching down or stretching up. Even more than looking at an lcd, where off axis dims the image, looking into an eyepiece whether electronic or optical involves looking with the head against the eyepiece and looking through an optical path so that it is more necessary to be able to comfortably align your head with an eyepiece than an lcd on the side of the camera.

Secondly the long tube or a correctly mounted short vf which is further back and whose front is extended by some bracket to near the nodal point of the camera prevents the operator from having to lean forward from the dolly seat and therefore makes it easier to maintain position and facilitates his moving around the camera in a pan.

Therefore I started this thread in hopes of finding out how RED plans to mount the viewfinder for hand held. Which requires adjusting for various eye distances from the side of the camera and quickly tilting the viewfinder with one hand when hand held shots move from the shoulder to holding under the arm. it is necessary to simply twist the eyepiece up and that it stay in that position. yet move with the eye.

The renderings show the monitor mounted too far back for balanced hand held and too far forward for proper dolly work. None of the renderings show the vf in a vertical position for looking down from above. None of the renderings show the mount anywhere idea you promote. None of the renderings give any indication about vf tilting capability.

I'm also interested from the assisting standpoint to find out what will be involved in moving the monitor for different uses.

Jarred actually in the development of Steadicam GB tried out a fibre-optic eyepiece. He said it was truly horrible to work with, the disorientation between the hands camera position and head position was positively sickening. Several other ops have tried the various game specs. and quickly rejected them.

[Jarred Land]

Tj.. first off I suggest you be a little less abrasive if you want to stick around here.

2nd.. you still dont get the point. Your were complaining (whining) about when you tilt up and down to drastic degrees you dont want to have to bend down or stand on your tippy toes. (boo hoo). I offered you a solution to your specific problem and you still went on a side rant.... your question has nothing to do with me shooting with a camera (I've shot 2 features with a 35mm cinema camera since you asked)

about your comment of a level mount not in the market that pans and doesnt tilt.. you sure havn't looked very long or very far.....

I think you may just be one of those guys that like to complain about things rather than find a solution. I ask you to simply open your mind a little...

[Brook Willard]

Just to highlight a link I've already posted that fully addresses all issues discussed so far, I recommend that you give this a once-over (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=129&highlight=Brook+Willard). There is a diagram - albeit imperfect - that describes an eyepiece leveling solution that should be right up your alley.

[SF Geek]

Hey TJ,
You did kind of step over the line with that one, and here I thought that I was the complainer. I think you just need to have faith in that the RED team can successfully create an EVF extender that is compatible with existing leveling rods. I mean come on, if you believe they can create a breakthrough 4k digital cinema camera, what makes you think they can't tackle that? i just hope that it is included in the price of the EVF!

[Brook Willard]

And even if they don't make it, a support company will.

[Jarred Land]

And even if they don't make it, a support company will.

absolutely...

[Don Woods]

I'm so lost.. I'm with Jarred and Brook I don't really see the big deal. There is a number of good solutions to this problem. Nothing that a little thinking would not fix.

[Rodrigo Lizana]

As I see it, you don´t need an optic extender VF. A simple round tube that "looks" like an extender (we don´t want to put ugly acc. on the beauty) will do. This tube should carry all the cables for the short VF and rotate smoothly.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Could be the best viewfinder ever. For example Sony HD viewfinder has 800 lines. The best head mount display has 800x600 resolution. Possible fast switching between one or two eyes in the viewfinder. It is extremely mobile and mounted on head as glasses. Headphones are built in. Brand new and optically advanced way of camera viewfinder for cinema and broadcast.
Just have a look at the red viewfinder on the picture below.

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/extras/viewfinder_1.jpg

Brand new and optically advanced way of camera viewfinder for cinema and broadcast.

[tj williams]

Rodrigo
Brilliant, Thats a great solution: stylish, light, simple, and functional. Most of the brackets to move the short viewfinder to the rear position are so ugly!
It might be nice if the cables were inside the pivoting mount so that as it was removed, or attached the connector inside would just unplug. or plug in?

SF Geek, you're right, that was over the top. I got pissed when Jarred's answer not only didn't address my question but presumed to say "I didn't get it." My suggestions about what camera-people want comes from doing this for over 25 years. This is the RED TEAM's first Cine camera. Think of some of the design aspects of, Arri. and Panavision cameras that cause operators difficulty. Have you ever tried to hand hold an ArriIII?

The RED TEAM seems to want user input to get it right. This, in my opinion, as huge evidence of exceptional merit on their part. I think its wonderful that they opened this site in part to solicit user opinion about a variety of configuration and feature issues. I made several suggestions at last years NAB to folks from RED, that seemed to be very well received. They seem to me to be genuinely interested in users concerns. I hope in my postings here that I have, by asking questions or bringing up issues, helped in a small way to make this a better camera. My especial thanks to a camera manufacturer who listens to us users. I think many of us will recognize threads in this forum as playing a part in the final configuration of RED 1.

Jarred I apologize for going off and calling you inexperienced. If you read my post without the insults to you, which I shouldn't have included, you will find that there is some pretty good information about standard ways of mounting viewfinders and why some operators prefer them. In shooting two features you must appreciate the ease of use the leveling rod provides the operator. I'd think that you would agree with me that keeping the operators eye and the viewfinder aligned is a good thing.

Your statement that a rigidly mounted viewfinder mounted to the portion of the head below the tilt would provide good viewfinder orientation on the dolly, is true. Perhaps there will be a RED head? I wish you would explain in detail how you would mount the RED viewfinder to existing heads? Clearly I have no idea how that would be done, maybe the RED team or some future accessory builder will benefit from your idea.

JARRED Quote: "Your were complaining (whining) about when you tilt up and down to drastic degrees you dont want to have to bend down or stand on your tippy toes. (boo hoo)."

Jarred, My point was that when forced to extend in these ways we don't make as clean a shot move as we otherwise would.

My hope here it that the RED TEAM in their final design of the VF:

1. When used in long VF or rear mounted mode: Mounted with the VF front pivot lower than shown in the renderings, closer to the camera nodal point. Provide a way to extend the viewfinder back (aka Rodrigo) which would look very cool, provide interface with the standard leveling rods.

1. When used in the hand held mode: pivot mount allowed to slide forward and backward for various operator head positions. In the hand held renderings the viewfinder appears to be so far back that the persons head would be seriously straining back to use it? The viewfinder pivot should have enough friction to hold itself in place, yet be pivotable by moving the eye against the cup.

Brooke: where is the link you posted I haven't been able to find it?

[tj williams]

Third man very nice, looking carefully at the angle of the 16/9 mask I'm concerned you may need a chiropractic visit!

[Jim Arthurs]

As I see it, you don´t need an optic extender VF. A simple round tube that "looks" like an extender (we don´t want to put ugly acc. on the beauty) will do. This tube should carry all the cables for the short VF and rotate smoothly.

Like minds on this, I had similar thoughts back in Dec... start here and read down for more feedback...

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=804867&postcount=65

My opinion on the need for some sort of extention "tube" hasn't changed. I do "get" that the viewfinder can be moved around.

My feeling is that if you are going to have all sorts of conventional tools (like PL Mount lenses, standard matt boxes, follow focus, rails, etc.) then following the industry standard levelling model as an accessory OPTION is perfectly valid.

There will be plenty of operators completely outside their comfort zone as it stands using the RED, this would be one more way to make the transition easier.

[Gregory Leno]

TJ,

Here is the link Brook was referring to...

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=129&highlight=Brook+Willard

It was there. You just needed to put your cursor over his sentence.

~G

[tj williams]

Thanks Gregory, never thought to click his paragraph?

Charles and Jannard are of course right that an ideal mount would be between the pan and tilt on a head. There are a couple of problems with this. Most manufacturers heads are made pretty thin so welding or deep strong bolts will be a problem. It is even a little tricky installing the tiny rod mount that supports the adjustable rod end of an extended viewfinder. Perhaps some second party vendor will come up with a special head? For most of our uses however we will probably need to fit in with the systems that are in place.

Brooke on the other thread referred above. Nice job on the pictures comparing the rod mount and pivot point to the Arri SR camera. IF you think about the way the support rod system works with the SR you will notice that as you tilt up the eyepiece comes back at ya...and the eye end changes angle, They had to mount it like that because of optical considerations.

Because of course the RED VF is electronic they should not be constrained by optical considerations. If you use a standard wheels or fluid head (not a Ronford type) the center of the pivot from the side will actually be below the camera. BAsically centered on the fluid head. To make a studio style viewfinder that minimizes eye end movement, the RED needs to attach the front of the viewfinder pivot low and centered on the camera. EVen below the camera would be better. but might have clearance problems on some setups. This pivot point will vary by head so it will be good if it is adjustable.

[Jarred Land]

TJ.. go check out an O'connor 2060 head.. they have eye leveler attachment that does not tilt up or down with the head but does rotate with the camera when you pan.

There are a dozen other heads out there that do the same, but you kinda confused me when you said nobody made them.. so today i double checked on the 2060 we have to make sure i wasnt going nuts. And you dont need to weld anything onto it.. its rated to hold 80 lbs. It could easily hold a magic arm and a gaffer/super clamp with the viewfinder, and a few babies.

[Brook Willard]

Thanks Gregory, never thought to click his paragraph?
Links are generally contained in text. TJ, clearly you have never operated the standard internet before.

[I kid, I kid...]

And adjustability on the theoretical rig I described is a given. I created that image to serve as a description of how "standard" eyepiece support systems work to those that aren't familiar. The beauty of the EVF is that you can go so much further...

[Sanjin Jukic]

Third man very nice, looking carefully at the angle of the 16/9 mask I'm concerned you may need a chiropractic visit!

Not bad joke TJ but there are no reason for skepticism about 16:9 frame in the head mount displays like a digital cine camera viewfinder. And I am sure you did not even give a try out with head mount display glasses. Reinventing the viewfinder could be very important for digital acquisition and will finally make difference from the old fashion film shooting.

[Martin Drew]

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

[I kid, I kid...]



That is a weakness with the otherwise fabulous design of the dvxuser site (sorry Jarred), there is no default formatting for links. I normally try to remember to colour any links I stick in just to maker it clearer that it is a link. It would be nice if links were automatically coloured or (dare I say it) underscored!! Hover formatting would be great too. Just makes it a lot more obvious when a link exisits without you actually having to spell out the URL in text.

M

[Stephen Gentle]

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

[I kid, I kid...]

The reason is probably because this forum theme doesn't underline links. I find this really annoying.

[tj williams]

StephenBrooke ehehehheeheheeohhaao thats good!
I'm so old that as a child I went outside and played! I have friends who don't even have computers!

[tj williams]

HI Jarred

I think what you are referring to is the mounting hardware for the leveling rod. I believe this is solid enough to mount the rear of a pivoting extended viewfinder but not solid enough to simply mount a rod which supports the entire viewfinder weight. Thus the need for positioning of the pivot end to minimize viewfinder movement and angle change.

[tj williams]

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.sankom-pro.ru/images/oconnor2060-24p.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.sankom-pro.ru/oconnor.html&h=326&w=350&sz=15&hl=en&start=13&tbnid=-V_YY_dDTmqbNM:&tbnh=112&tbnw=120&prev=/images%3Fq%3Doconnor%2B2060%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10 %26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26channel%3Ds%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DG

Jarred: sorry about the double post, I quick posted by mistake and couldn't get it back... the above comment about my computer knowledge is well placed, not to mention a funny paraphrase.

If you want to mount the viewfinder you paid 2 or 3K for to that tiny rod coming from the head, with no second attachment point thats your decision. I would prefer that the viewfinder was also mounted to the camera by a strong pivot at the opposite end of the viewfinder which would not allow the viewfinder to fall away from the camera onto somthing hard.

[Emmanuel Cambier]

One thing is clear to me:
Someone is yet to come up with "the idea".
Maybe Red have something in store for NAB, maybe they don't.
We may have to wait and see (which I hate as much as anybody).

Emmanuel

[Finner]

As much as it pains me to say this I have to say that I feel TJ is spot on with his point.

There I said it, I got it out I AGREE WITH TJ!!

Kidding aside an extension eye-piece is the same for most every camera because it functionally works well. If it is a pivioting rod or tube extension system I don't really care but I do think it should be very similar to a traditional model because it works well.

All this said I don't think red should spend any time on this right now as I am sure they have their hands very very full right now. An extension eye-piece will definately be a high demand item but as the demand goes up I am sure a product will be produced by red or an outside company. The camera can be used without an extension and compromises have to be made when a new product is introduced. I am not that afraid of not having an extension as I am confident one will be available very shortly or if needed right away a rod system would be easy to fabricate.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I love the idea of a head mount option for the EVF for situations where tracking the camera move with your head is awkward. Since the sister company to Red Digital is Oakley it would be great if they could manufacture a solid HMD rig.

I am imagining a unit with temples and a strap - kinda like ski goggles with some exo-framing that the EVF can be snapped into with maybe a velcro strap for safety. Include a strain relief clip for the cable and try not to block the off eye any more than absolutely necessary. I'd like a 6 foot spiral cable for near work and a longer straight cable for jibs.

Oh yeah, and it should share the same "look" as the camera and have that Oakley style :red_bandana:

[tj williams]

Finner I feel your pain!!!

[Ace]

I love the idea of a head mount option for the EVF for situations where tracking the camera move with your head is awkward.


Hookup a Wiimote Motion sensor, rig a RED to one of Curt's (Is it Curts?) Viewfactor Moco heads, and you got yourself a pretty neat way of maneuvering a camera!

[Zakaree Sandberg]

I love the idea of a head mount option for the EVF for situations where tracking the camera move with your head is awkward. Since the sister company to Red Digital is Oakley it would be great if they could manufacture a solid HMD rig.

I am imagining a unit with temples and a strap - kinda like ski goggles with some exo-framing that the EVF can be snapped into with maybe a velcro strap for safety. Include a strain relief clip for the cable and try not to block the off eye any more than absolutely necessary. I'd like a 6 foot spiral cable for near work and a longer straight cable for jibs.

Oh yeah, and it should share the same "look" as the camera and have that Oakley style :red_bandana:

i heard red will be offering a surgical process cheap.. around 2300 bucks.. they will implant the "redeye" which is a chip wired to your optic nerve to produce a uncompressed raw data flow directly into your brain.. no more need for viewfinder.

[tj williams]

WHoops

[tj williams]

HI Finner: Why does every solution on this board have a computer related style. ie: head set, full immersion, wiimote motion sensor, monitor mounted to your hat, surgical implant...(that was funny) etc etc. Having shot both electronic and optical VF no question which is better..... This feels like most folk here would drive their car with a mouse if they could....

After the initial adopter stage where techno-philes are much more interested I suspect the next wave of buyers will be more conventional in their approach to the work. I think it will go this way because as the RED moves into the mainstream more folks with longer developed methods will be interested. Right now pre-NAB 2007 most of those folks are still clinging to their Panasonics and Sony's hoping to work them out to the end of the payments.
RE post 24 Jim Arthur: really understands this look at his description.

VF Head Mounted: I am an older Steadicam op. mostly my son does the big camera jobs now and I just take it easy on little moves for spots etc. When game headsets first came out. The large mfgs. who got into it, drove out a local company owned by a friend of mine, which made a very nice headset. (it was too expensive to compete) I tried out their prototype as a Steadicam VF. In the Don-juan position it had some slight advantage as a second monitor. Especially because this one could be made quite transparent. So you could see oncoming furniture etc. It's hard to get high enough rez. in these (maybe that has improved) but the basic problem is trying to interpret an image facing in one direction to hand and arm movement which are facing in another. Kind of like driving backward looking in the mirror (not over your shoulder) To test this simply back your car as fast as it will go down neighborhood streets, while driving looking in the mirror. When the dust settles we will more in agreement.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

After the initial adopter stage where techno-philes are much more interested I suspect the next wave of buyers will be more conventional in their approach to the work. I think it will go this way because as the RED moves into the mainstream more folks with longer developed methods will be interested. Right now pre-NAB 2007 most of those folks are still clinging to their Panasonics and Sony's hoping to work them out to the end of the payments.

I'm not so sure that we'll see as much shift back to traditional as you may think. This new generation of digital cameras is attracting a new breed of filmmaker into the mix. There are lots of newcomers to the industry with strong IT or data-centric backgrounds, who have little knowledge of traditional methods, film workflows, etc.. I fit into that category myself. I have zero experience shooting 35mm motion pictures. I do have some limited experience with 16mm. I know 35mm still photography fairly well and I have been shooting video with 35mm still glass duct-taped to my HVX200. I feel I have a creative eye and think I can do well with RED... It's overkill for what I actually do for clients, but I need to upgrade my HVX to something better and RED fits right in line with my budget and takes me more in the direction I would like to go with my own personal projects - creative filmmaking.

I'm not alone... There's a lot of us here who can't wait to get our hands on RED because it's not attached to traditional workflows. The data rates, storage requirements, backup/archival issues don't concern me so much. I already have multiple options under consideration and a good bit of infrastructure already in place to handle it. In fact, if RED shipped my camera tomorrow, I would be ready to handle the data aspects of it -- I would just need another box of VXA2 tapes and I'd add another RAID node to the SAN.

I don't see RED attracting too many tecno-phobes until the workflow is point and click easy all the way from log and capture to archival of the final product. Over on DVINFO.NET there was a great discussion about a week ago that demonstrates how some of the more traditional types are approaching RED. We're seeing backup/archival suggestions in the form of printing your RED footage to FILM to archive your original footage. Mind-blowing, really. They're talking about archiving by converting to an analog medium at a significant cost rather than storing the native, unaltered data, at what equates to pennies per GB once the workflow is established. But I think the more tech-savvy users/adopters of RED are going to outnumber the traditionalists with conventional workflows for some time, possibly even the next few years and we'll see more traditionalists adopting new workflows than technophiles going the other way.

[Jared VanLeuven]

i heard red will be offering a surgical process cheap.. around 2300 bucks.. they will implant the "redeye" ...

Ouch. :whistling:

[Jeff Kilgroe]

i heard red will be offering a surgical process cheap.. around 2300 bucks.. they will implant the "redeye" ...

I know that I won't be too anxious to upgrade every year!

[tj williams]

We will need to buy Visine RED!

[tj williams]

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

I'm sure the RED will help you move up to better work. There is nothing hard work and talent can't do. Getting into the work you hope to do may take years even in a top market. I hope you understand that from my perspective you are exactly the technophile I was talking about. Hey when my computer acts crazy I call my son who comes over and helps me fix it. I do know somthing about how the production process works however.

Consider:

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

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

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

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

[Cail Young]

35m film is considered by most producers to be completely trustworthy.

I'm not taking issue with the statement, but I always find it curious that the industry is so reliant on a format that is uncompromising on error - if it's mishandled in the slightest between exposure and development, your 'completely trustworthy' film is useless.

This is why I joined the RED revolution, and will be doing my best to make producers see the light. If the camera delivers, it can offer a near-identical workflow for DPs (minus any chemical effects they may be after) at a significant cost (and risk) savings to producers.

[Steve Gibby]

Stereotype: all motion media veterans over 45 years old are techno-challenged, narrow-minded, set in their ways, and practice a mantra of “I’ve always done it this way and I’m not changing”.

Reality: A significant number of motion media veterans over 45 years old are very techno-savvy, are open minded, evolve with the industry (in fact are instrumental in changing the industry), and practice a mantra of “What can I learn next to enhance my equipment and workflow”.

I’m almost 59 years, a 30 year veteran producer, director, cinematographer, videographer, photographer, and writer, and I represent the reality listed above, not the stereotype. I have a significant number of associates in my age/experience bracket who, like myself, stay completely on top of evolving technology, are open minded, evolve with the industry, and can’t wait to learn new methods of professional equipment and workflow. There is undoubtedly an “A” list” of top-level professionals who have reserved RED One cameras, and will now infuse them into their productions. The guys I know in my age/experience bracket who fit the stereotype listed above are all about to die, retire, or be out-competed on the job – and a lot of them are in denial of that fact. I grew up professionally in “old school” workflows and technology. I respect all that and learned from all that – but never got to the professional point where I felt I had all the answers, and refused to learn more and evolve with the industry.

Postscript: In the motion media industry of this century we either evolve or by our lack of evolution we program ourselves for professional extinction. The industry of the present and future is one of increased technology – and that trend won’t change or be reversed. RED One won’t immediately revolutionize the professional motion media industry workflow – because of the human nature impulse to resist change, resistance to having to re-learn workflows, ego, pride, legacy investments, and a number of other reasons. But RED One, and other camera systems like it, will inevitably succeed in progressively over time transforming and evolving the motion media industry.

[Zakaree Sandberg]

We will need to buy Visine RED!

red is announcing at the MAED (medical association of eye doctors)
REDSINE should take away any problems with itchiness and irritation but will leave your with a nice RED glow similar to the terminator

[Ken Corben]

I Agree With Gibby.

[Stokestack]

I just have a simple question about the Red viewfinder, but haven't been able to get an answer yet:

In its stock configuration, will it extend out far enough to be usable with the left eye?

[Chris Forbes]

It doesnt have to extend, just move it.

http://www.pictureline.com/images/medium/BO2930_2930.jpg

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

[Martin Drew]

H..... This feels like most folk here would drive their car with a mouse if they could....

Wacom tablet is loads better for that app...

[Ace]

Wacom tablet is loads better for that app...

Yeah totally, with like the airbrush attachment.

[Hrvoje Simic]

Last post from Gibby should definitely be used as a quote in Red's future dossiers, documents or promo material.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Yeah totally, with like the airbrush attachment.

I prefer the duoclick pen w/eraser... For when you make a mistake.

[Ace]

I prefer the duoclick pen w/eraser... For when you make a mistake.

Yeah thats what I use. But I thought that the airbrush you could control the fuel intake for better acceleration and so on.

[Corrado Silveri]

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

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

[Ace]

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

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


Yeah good old Jeff Han. Real head turner that guy is!

[Finner]

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



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

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

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

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

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

[tj williams]

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

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

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

Evolution and Revolution.

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Finner]

Cause legs work better than wheels.


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

Any one want in on this bet???

[Ace]

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

Any one want in on this bet???

Now now.. Lets play nice!

[tj williams]

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

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

[Finner]

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

[tj williams]

Elevators?

ps whats in the glass?

[Finner]

Elevators?


Like I said he's not that smart.



ps whats in the glass?

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

[Jeff Kilgroe]

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

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

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

[Jeff Kilgroe]

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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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

[tj williams]

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

[Joel Kaye]

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

[I kid, I kid...]


WAY OFF TOPIC - skip this message.

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

Looking at the page HTML you could just change this:

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

to this:

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

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

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

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

Then something like this should work:

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

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

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

[tj williams]

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

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

[Emmanuel Cambier]

I missed the link as well.
emmanuel

[tj williams]

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

[Stokestack]

It doesnt have to extend, just move it.

http://www.pictureline.com/images/medium/BO2930_2930.jpg

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

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

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

[tj williams]

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

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