Cancel that thought...

[Elsie N]

RED desperately needs a wiki. There should be a page for each type of workstream (i.e. tv realty, tv episode, heavy fx, low budget feature/adobe, high budget feature/adobe/davinci, a work stream for each major product that tv/movie people use, also work streams by different DI approaches). These workstream pages shouldn't be debates on what is best, but just explains how to do it ... what works and is tested. There should be pages on EXACT setups, like different power and battery configs, lighting for digital, lighting for 4k skin. there should be "theory" pages, on things like spatial frequency. There should be pages on black shading, installing updates to redmotes, where it's EASY to find and specific to windows or mac (and avoiding the debate which is best). All that stuff is randomly in reduser, but the search in reduser does not work, and the google search often requires you to know the answer before you do the search. Also the concept of "testing" each setup might be for features and/or camera "techie's", but most people just want to copy something that works and focus on production.

That should be a RED knowledge base or Whitepaper section and should be written by RED personnel (when they have the time.) '-)

The forum is broken down into sections already for discussions. Personally, I've found the way the discussions evolve on Reduser have led me to answers to questions I didn't even know to ask.

[Wayne Morellini]

I have suggested this before, and easy ways to do it, including summaries from users for the wiki with a gate keeper moderators who approves them, excellent Patrick. Look up my posts in recent months you will find a summary there.

Elsie, you will find a lot more answers you didn't know a lot quicker with a wiki, and a lot more time for interesting discussions due to less repeat chatter, and the moderators will have less overall work. I'd love to be a moderator, but all that work you have to do (really, slow at it, and have important things on my plate, like trying to find a team to build a revolutionary camera).

[Wayne Morellini]

Elsie, we use real names around here. I would like to remain anonymous myself, cool, but not allowed, and I notice two people (both engineers) with hidden names. I wish to remain anonymous myself for the same reason the engineers do, professional reputation, so you can kick back and relax (like I still do) but without reputation destroying knocks from morons I ussually get.

So, one question. What is the N?

[Elsie N]

...

Elsie, you will find a lot more answers you didn't know a lot quicker with a wiki, and a lot more time for interesting discussions due to less repeat chatter, and the moderators will have less overall work. I'd love to be a moderator, but all that work you have to do (really, slow at it, and have important things on my plate, like trying to find a team to build a revolutionary camera).

Wayne, I think you and I are perfect examples of the problem RED is facing in making Reduser the best place for information for all concerned. If I may take liberties in analyzing you vis a vis Reduser, I think you like order and direct-to-the-point information. You are what I would call knowledge-centric and someone who has a knowledge goal that he actively seeks. A person like myself prefers a more personality driven forum that allows knowledge to find me... serendipity-like. That is, I don't know what I need to know sometimes, and the only way to know that is for someone to make that information available so that I can recognize I need to know that. But I think Reduser satisfies both our needs through the thread system. We don't have to read every thread and can easily tell if they have in them what we need or want in the way of information. Even in a thread, I find it easy to scan page after page of a long thread to glean a nugget. The really short posts are nice and the really long ones are probably more about the writer than the information, so those are easy to skip. (sorry about the lack of whitespace in this post. The computer I'm on isn't allowed to make paragraphs... probably some sort of javascript issue, which I'm blocking at present.)

[Wayne Morellini]

Ha, ha, mine are really long because they are full of information (rather than it). Information finding me, sounds like habit of a wait. It is simply, nearly unworkable to search information out (the search function is a bit of a sight). A hint about the wiki and information finding us, my father reads encyclopedias.

Your description of me is fairly accurate, but in a way that seeks better things. Thank you for the compliment Elsie.

[Elsie N]

Ha, ha, mine are really long because they are full of information (rather than it). Information finding me, sounds like habit of a wait. It is simply, nearly unworkable to search information out (the search function is a bit of a sight). A hint about the wiki and information finding us, my father reads encyclopedias.

Your description of me is fairly accurate, but in a way that seeks better things. Thank you for the compliment Elsie.

Your father sounds like an interesting man.

EDIT: Oh, and you too, Wayne. '-)

[Gunleik Groven]

There was a wiki...

Issue is that people read them as bibles, while there is in fact many ways to get "there", also depending on productiontype.

But I think it would be a good thing to have a thread/discussion outlining workflows. It would need to be pretty strictly moderated. SOmehow my threads haven't become too filled with spam, so I could possibly give it a go.

There was in fact some attempts on "wiki"s early on. But they were in many ways not very valuable IMHO. And then it is bad if they end up as stickies just leading to confusion.

Another issue is that the toolset is a moving target, so I guess for something like this to work, one must be very clear on perspective, productiontypes, toolsets and goal before starting to outline anything too intensively.

But it is an interesting ball to play...

[Dan Finlayson]

I am a fairly young shooter. The first film I shot was s16. The second was on a Red One.

I've learned about digital and film in parallel, having neither as a basis before switching to the other. I consider this very fortunate timing between when I was born and when all this new technology became available.

I prefer film. I like my meter more than a histogram.

Reading through this thread has been frustrating. I'm seeing a lot of people citing camera stats, facts, and figures, and throwing aesthetics out the window to "defend" the red. Why aren't they "defending" film with stats? It sees more colors. In larger gauge formats, it is higher resolution. It's capable of insanely high frame rates. The dynamic range is pretty similar to the Red and Alexa. Obsolescence obsolete? Where will your hard drives been in 80 years? What happens when we go 6k? Not that 35mm film resolves 6k, but I'd rather watch a 6k film scan than an up-res of 4k digital footage.

But at the end of the day, its not the numbers that inform me on my preference of film. I simply like the aesthetics of the final image and the onset workflow. Sometimes, I'll opt for s16 over 35mm.

Who's gonna call me an idiot first?

[David Adamic]

God love us all...

Jim

Except the heathens shooting 1k. ;)

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Who's gonna call me an idiot first?

I'm not going to call you an idiot but I do think you're off on a few points: the F65 already shoots a wider gamut supposedly than film. Highspeed film needs tons of light and is considerably larger than an epic or even alexa. Comparing Waveforms/Histograms to meters is a non-sensensical comparison. They're two very different tools and one does not exclude the use of the other. That being said I don't really miss that sinking feeling in my stomach waiting for the film to come back to see if it exposed how I intended. And then trying to look at the negative to see if that was a timing issue when it was scanned or the way it was actually shot.

I think though it's a safe bet that in 12 months with Dragon this will all be a moot point since you will probably see RED's color gammut expand pretty dramatically again, hopefully with less cross talk and even more dynamic range. You can always retarget one image to another with a good enough sensor (http://www.filmconvert.com/).