REDCine Cost?

[Chris Gearhart]

This is a fun night. The little people inside my calculator must be wondering why I keep adding 17500 to a bunch of other numbers.

As I was adding, something occured to me. With the new clarifications on what comes with the body and what is an accessory, I was wondering where RedCine fits into the mix.

[Paul Hazlett]

You gret the license for that
included in the base price

[Alexander Nikishin]

Freeeee!

[dewman]

I thought the same thing Lakeview...but posted it as the Redcode software...my bad...but it's not listed as u stated with the body...clarification?

[Stuart English]

REDCINE is a no cost accessory. One copy shipped per camera.

[dewman]

right on stuart...thought this...appreciate the time to respond!...

[Anders Holck]

Any news on the exact license for Redcine and the quicktime codecs?
I for one would like the software on all my machines (2 x Editbays, 3x laptops etc)

[Chris Gearhart]

Right. Adding zero . . .

(Thanks Stewart!)

[Michael Schrengohst]

When will the license be explained. As a reservation holder it will be great to get first crack at all of this.....and I won't mind for awhile to be the gatekeeper of the RED footage...but eventualy that producer will ask....
Can I get the original 4K footage so I can go to post house X to grade???
And post house X won't have a clue.....

[Joe Carney]

Not meaning to sound ungrateful, but will there be an option to output to OpenEXR format? For those using Fusion or Nuke that would be great.

[Rob Lohman]

Zeke: yes

[MikeCurtis]

Stuart - can you clarify - it is a zero cost option - but is that a single seat, or an open # of seats? Can we run it on as many machines as we have? Can we give it to clients so they can process footage at their shop? What are the limits on this option?

-mike

[Jannard]

Yes to output to OpenEXR from REDCINE (and just about anything else you can name)... :-)

[Michael Schrengohst]

When will the license be explained. As a reservation holder it will be great to get first crack at all of this.....and I won't mind for awhile to be the gatekeeper of the RED footage...but eventualy that producer will ask....
Can I get the original 4K footage so I can go to post house X to grade???
And post house X won't have a clue.....

I just asked sort of the same question....

[Jannard]

REDCINE will be released in beta format with no seat restrictions for the user...

Jim

[MikeCurtis]

Thanks for the quick response - so does that mean it is givable to client so they can convert footage as well? Or do you folks intend to enforce a "this is YOUR license, not to be shared" policy? Sorry to pester, but this has significant workflow (and even business model) ramifications. You say in beta it'll be no seat restrictions - have you decided on a policy for the final release yet, or is that still TBD?

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm sure this is meaningless to most everyone else, but....

I'd like to see a licensing model where 3~5 seats of REDCINE are included with each camera purchase, but they're limited to use by the owner of that camera and their assigns. So it won't be acceptable to just give it to clients or others.. But at least there will be the capacity to have it available on a few different systems within a workplace. For my personal needs, I'd like to have REDCINE accessible on both a Mac and a Windows PC as well as on a Macbook Pro in case I need to do something when out shooting. I wouldn't want it freely available to clients. I want them to have to go through me for getting the footage processed into their desired format.

I may even go for a model where each seat costs, but for camera owners it's a significantly lower price than for non-owners.

Of course, a lot of this is speculative until we get to see the workflow and the software and we know what we're dealing with. :)

[Garrett M. Smith]

I would hope the license would at least be flexible enough to put on a laptop for set purposes and a desktop for home base. The ability to put more seats on several desktops at home base would be awesome.

For the clients, I would hope it would cost enough to discourage some them from using it on a whim, but not too much to discourage those who would really benefit and/or use it all the time. Big reasons being A) most will not know really what to do with the program anyway, B) most will not want to deal with the labor/processing aspect, C) they will call you back up when something doesn't work the way they want expecting you to fix it b/c it's your fault, etc., and D) processing for the clients may provide an alternate, additional source of income.

Anyway, can't wait to see Redcine in action.

Garrett

[Joe Carney]

Now I'm really stoked!!!
I'm currently testing out eyeon Fusion5.1 learning edition. OpenExr is one of their preferred formats.

Joe C.

[Larry McKee]

As a freelance shooter, I need to be able to give the footage/data to my client and let them edit away. So, no restriction, no limit on seats would be very helpful.

[Chris Gearhart]

It's a knotty issue. Wouldn't want to be the one to make that call at Red.

Personally, I would want to have a fair bit of flexibility in house (the various workstations, some of which are off site), but it is not an issue to me at this point as far as clients go.

I dunno--I took Jim's post more like, Redcine will have no seat restrictions--you will be getting a beta at first, though.

I guess NAB will tell.

[Steven Parker]

It is a knotty issue... I want to protect my looks (which it seems RedCine will help me do as I may become Keeper of the Footage) but also I could do without a major upgrade of computer power ($$$ + time + maintenance, etc and may or may not be billable to the client)...

In the end, options are everything so I'll be upgrading... but I hope there's the option of allowing clients the use of RedCine, or a downloadable version for them...

[krobar]

Just thinking "out-loud" here. But, perhaps a solution similar to Flip4Mac's model may work. A free read-only codec for clients to use, but only the camera owners would be able to use the advanced features of REDCINE, like transcoding and advanced raw manipulation. The client would just get a de-bayered "best light" type image, and would have to do any transcoding or image manipulation in their software package without the ability to re-encode to raw.

Of course, I have no idea how difficult something like this would be to implement, or even if it's feasible, just a thought.

-Kurt

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I agree... The codec should be free for viewing, but you need a REDCINE license to get the authoring codec / encoder components. Personally, the only reason I'd want restrictions is so I can have a bit more control over the footage I shoot and I can bill people for processing and conversion. I know, I'm a greedy bastard. But all things considered, I would rather see a completely open license with a fair number of seats per license than see a model where we have to pay per seat or pay per CPU node or whatever. That model is going to die in the software biz. Companies like SoftImage, etc.. Who have always had very restrictive licensing are relaxing a little bit every year. Some of it is to be more price competitive... I also think piracy has some to do with it to. I'm a believer that a fair and honest pricing and license model with minimal copy protection will pay more dividends and cause less grief than an elaborate licensing and protection scheme. This is why Luxology chose a serial # registration model with very open installation restrictions. They felt they would lose less money to piracy than they would to paying licenses and product fees to FlexLM or Rainbow, which are still rather simple to crack when people want to do it. It seems to be working for them, sales are great and the community support is great. I think that REDCINE has such a niche market on its own, it makes sense to be very casual in its licensing and installation requirements.

[Gregory Karydis]

Thanks for the quick response - so does that mean it is givable to client so they can convert footage as well? Or do you folks intend to enforce a "this is YOUR license, not to be shared" policy? Sorry to pester, but this has significant workflow (and even business model) ramifications. You say in beta it'll be no seat restrictions - have you decided on a policy for the final release yet, or is that still TBD?I'd like to know about this as well.

[Barend Onneweer]

What I understand is that Redcode RAW is a Quicktime codec. If the codec is distributed for free (which I'm assuming), anyone could read the files as long as they use QT compatible systems and software and have the codec installed.

Redcine looks like a valuable workflow tool, but it's not essential to the post path. You can just deliver Redcode RAW files to the client, and supply them with the codec.

[Michael Morlan]

It's really interesting. Some of the same crowd raving about finally having a top-of-the-line camera at an accessible price-point are clamoring to limit or severely price the companion conversion software so they can corner the market on post-conversion. (I have no problem with that but let us recognize this dichotomy.)

With the democratization of information, software, and now the RED One, you have two opportunities to create value-add for clients:

1. Own a really expensive tool that everyone would rather rent than buy, and;
2. Do something arguably better than anyone else can.

The RED One and RedCine do not fit category 1. Hence, your opportunity lies not with binding up a resource in demand, but in demonstrating that your service (be it acquisition or post grading) can offer both top-line expertise and cost-efficient deliverables.

High-end clients will recognize the value in hiring an expert or service and will pay for it.

Mid-level clients will always weigh the value of hire/rental against in-house.

Low-end clients will always try to do it themselves by whatever means necessary.

Recognize your markets, exploit the gap between them and discover how to offer something of value to each.

M