RED certification for 3rd party accessories

[Maik Müller Menendez]

With the 2 (now closed) threads in recon in mind, i just want to say i would really like to see something like a official logo for certified and supported 3rd party accessories or maybe a list to start with. I really want to avoid stuff that voids RED's properties and my warranty, but currently, there is no easy way to sort it out. Sure, i've made already the choice to prefer RED's stuff for obvious reasons, but that might not always be possible.

So, please RED, consider such a certification program for your supported partners.

[Chris Jordan]

Well placed post. I concur, and would love to know what RED does and doesn't support. This way there shouldn't be the "apple" effect, where we wait and wait, with no idea what your stance is. Please don't keep us in the dark on this, so we can s=continue supporting you.

[Patrick Tresch]

More than a RED certification programm it would be cool to know where RED sets the boundaries between desing and robbery.

I'm sure the pattents are here to make this distinction but it must also have some more efficient ways and guidelines to know what on the body of an Epic/Scarlet can be used for 3rd party to develop accesories.

I'm not sure if for exemple the 9 mm spacing between the 1/4 inch holes on a top plate is a RED pattent... Probably getting crazy here but we wheren't prepared as customer to see the WC case coming. Kind of bad surprise about a company that delivered creative work... even if there could be some desing "inspirations"

Patrick

PS: hope this thread will not be deleted as other. I think it's an important discussion to have.

[Maik Müller Menendez]

You said it, thats what the patents are for. I don't think RED has to clarify the boundaries, they're the same as with any other product thats protected by patents. A serious manufacturer should know the difference between copying and designing a product, to begin with. He should also know how to get, read and make own patents and last but not least how to communicate with a company that he wants to support with his products and profit from.

[Marc Wielage]

I agree 100%.

I know that Jannard has long admired Steve Jobs and the way Apple has been run. I'm surprised that Red has not already inaugurated a "Made for Red" certification program for accessories similar to "Made for iPod," where everything is checked out, approved, and the maker pays a small royalty to Red (and I mean a very modest charge).

At least this way, users could buy these products and be assured that they absolutely, positively will work and there is no guesswork or gotchas involved.

I think the problem is, a lot of 3rd-party stuff in the camera business has traditionally been wide open, and you have 200 companies making accessories for Canon, Nikon, and so on without any quality control, beyond user reviews out in the field. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't.

Having said that: I don't see Canon or Sony suing companies that make brackets and batteries. From an objective viewpoint, the accessories business seems to be trivial in comparison to the bigger camera business. And the lens can't be patented, since the PL (positive lock) mount as been public domain by Arri for some time, I think going back to the early 1980s.

[Tim Morten]

I agree 100%.

I know that Jannard has long admired Steve Jobs and the way Apple has been run. I'm surprised that Red has not already inaugurated a "Made for Red" certification program for accessories similar to "Made for iPod," where everything is checked out, approved, and the maker pays a small royalty to Red (and I mean a very modest charge).

At least this way, users could buy these products and be assured that they absolutely, positively will work and there is no guesswork or gotchas involved.

I think the problem is, a lot of 3rd-party stuff in the camera business has traditionally been wide open, and you have 200 companies making accessories for Canon, Nikon, and so on without any quality control, beyond user reviews out in the field. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't.

Having said that: I don't see Canon or Sony suing companies that make brackets and batteries. From an objective viewpoint, the accessories business seems to be trivial in comparison to the bigger camera business. And the lens can't be patented, since the PL (positive lock) mount as been public domain by Arri for some time, I think going back to the early 1980s.

Certification (perhaps for a fee) - Good idea

Royalty - Unless it's using protected Red intellectual property, bad idea... Apple is guilty of greed in this regard, IMO

[Paul Schneider]

While I agree that a certification for third party electronic elements, lens mounts and such is probably a good idea since misuse of these could seriously damage the camera. However folks seem to be going overboard in response to this WC thing. RED, like all other cameras, provide standard mounting points and thread sizes for the mounting of all manner of parts a typical production demands.

It would be silly to restrict "dumb" or inert plates and hardware to only approved units. It's simply not the way real production runs and would surely assure the cameras wouldn't be used as they were intended.