Jump to content

I'm going to say it...


Adamo P Cultraro

Recommended Posts

It would've been valuable in a way to see that post

 

Not really. It was out of line, off topic and I don't think anyone would get anything from reading it. I wish I hadn't read it. The poster I am sure will either go away, chill out or expose himself as an arse as you put it again. I am glad the post is gone, it was embarressing to our community (lest we all be labeled angry, spiteful, ignorant and boarderline rascists)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Premium Member

I guess I'm glad I didn't see it but I can imagine.

 

I'm becoming more convinced that Jan was the resurrection of "Joseph George", for those who remembered him (or his other names) a number of years back. Same pattern: increasing number of fairly innocuous press releases and links about some particular product, increasing to the point where it became unusual, followed by people questioning of his motivation for becoming the self-appointed press agent for a particular camera, which lead to angry and bizarre posts where he made racist comments or unpleasant insults in poor taste, followed immediately by a disappearance of a couple of months. This pattern repeated itself for five years or so until I thought we had seen the last of him.

 

The fact that I kept re-identifying him year after year always made his final post always a nasty personal attack on me, to the point where a lot of people who didn't know the back history thought it came out of left field. Of course, he always vehemently denied that he was the former person who posted in exactly the same pattern. Now of course, maybe Jan wasn't the same "Joseph George", I admit.

 

I always gave him ("Joseph George") the same advice on how he could become a liked and respected member of whatever forum or website it was at the time, but he always went back to the same pattern and was always eventually banned from the forum -- even heavily pro-digital forums.

 

All he would have to do is post under his real name and talk more about himself and what he did for a living and participate as a fellow filmmaker and human being who we could identify with, share experiences and knowledge with -- not do this endless and impersonal promotional work for some particular camera (unpaid work, I don't think he was a company shill, just an over-fixated digital fan.) But after seven years of seeing the same behavoir, I guess I should just admit that some people don't want to change their behavior patterns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
The fact that I kept re-identifying him year after year always made his final post always a nasty personal attack on me, to the point where a lot of people who didn't know the back history thought it came out of left field.

This is exactly what it felt like, so I think you might be on the right track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is exactly what it felt like, so I think you might be on the right track.

 

I did some googling and there is a Jan... in a Berlin company web site. If it's the same person I don't know. He might have doing some viral marketing of his own, but it did go over the top recently. Unfortunately, some products seem to have this effect

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm glad I didn't see it but I can imagine.

I only saw the post after the thread was closed so I didn't get a chance to exercise my diplomatic skills. :lol:

 

It was complete gibberish really. He must have been drunk or on something. I've noticed that sometimes he doesn't sound quite his "usual self."

 

I don't really remember much of it as it was pretty incoherent, but he was saying something about a plot by you "Asians" to take over the film industry, or some such raving.

I didn't even realize you had any oriental ancestry until I did a Google Image search just now, although exactly what that has to do with anything, I'm not sure! (Unless he thinks that RED are going to show Sony a thing or two!)

 

But I was never convinced by his technical word-salad spoutings. He sounds awfully to me like some motormouthed menial in a two-bit rental company, trying to pretend he's a big wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
In sumation, I just want to say I hope we can all cool off, relax, have a smoke if you need, just please can we get back to constructive advice tips and questions on the subject of cinematography? I mean, we all should be courtious towards eachother, after all, we are brothers in lenses.

 

 

You said a mouthful, buddy. It's fun to have a lark reading the RED strands but I joined this forum to gain knowledge and share what little I have.

 

I'd love to try out a RED, but I'm really having a good time with an HDX900 and some digiprimes.

 

Of course, I'm no Spielberg....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
The fact that I kept re-identifying him year after year ....

Wow, I didn't know that.

 

Usually I think that the remedy for the excesses of free speech is more free speech. But this case looks more like some kind of mental illness. David, I'm sorry to learn that you're the target of this. It's scary.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

RED represents a big step forward in digital acquisition. Jannard is a marketing wizard who also seems to deliver. He has been refreshingly transparent in the development of the product - taking input from anyone in the production community that wants to participate in a collaborative way. Others may differ on this, but I've always had the same feeling toward Panavision.

 

He spent a great deal of time on DVXUser because he found a receptive community there - one that has a huge interest in making their way into mainstream production. As I'm sure has been stated, some still believe you can buy your way into production with equipment. That's fodder for argument, to be certain. There are a few in this forum - working professionals - who seem able and willing to cross over for a good dialogue in both places.

 

Industry pros have seen a lot of tech come and go. We've been hearing "film is dead" since the 50s. Promises made, promises broken. Now, the RED naysayers can finally look at technology and choose the tool based on the application, just like every other camera system out there. Just remember, for every person hellbent on seeing RED fail (and there were many in this forum in particular), there was an equally enthusiastic supporter of the platform and the ideal and promise it represents to them.

 

If anything, we should celebrate anytime we're involved in a process that is often times only in the domain of engineers who have no sense for what we truly need in the field!

 

e

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erik, please add credibility to your claim by providing an example of a post here "hellbent on seeing Red fail".

 

 

Because Adamo P Cultraro who started this thread has posted on another forum how cinematography.com is bashing the HVX... actually that thread was shut down over there...

 

And how that you didn't ban him... but you won't let him post for a few weeks...

 

I find it funny that you yourself posted two frame grabs and defended the camera...

 

It seems that certain people want to keep this bogus "Us against them thing going" which I have no idea why... actually I do... but that would start another long thread topic...

 

Of course this will be taken out of context also... because everyone has an agenda... even poor little ole me...

Edited by Gary McClurg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Just remember, for every person hellbent on seeing RED fail (and there were many in this forum in particular),

 

e

Name some names. If it's so obvious that there are people here "hellbent on seeing RED fail" then surely you can name who those people are. Or are you just making things up out of thin air and trying to start another argument? I await the list of the "many" you refer to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
If it's so obvious that there are people here "hellbent on seeing RED fail" then surely you can name who those people are.

Without being so untactful as to incite them by naming them, there are certainly some here whose skepticism seems to have gone beyond healthy to hostile. Mr. J and his company have been accused of various kinds of dishonesty, you can find the posts if you want.

 

I've tried to take an even-handed and objective look at this. Some on both sides think I'm on the other side -- which may be a sort of measure of success in that effort.... ;-)

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I had a fun 10 minutes reading this thread.

 

 

Will the thread about closure be closed? I can't wait to find out in the near future.

 

 

I really don't understand how these things get so personal. I'm starting to find these threads strangely entertaining. Maybe because it's always the same argument over and over again. it's kind of mesmerizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I had a fun 10 minutes reading this thread.

Will the thread about closure be closed? I can't wait to find out in the near future.

 

 

I really don't understand how these things get so personal. I'm starting to find these threads strangely entertaining. Maybe because it's always the same argument over and over again. it's kind of mesmerizing.

 

Some of us have been saying the same thing for a long time..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without being so untactful as to incite them by naming them, there are certainly some here whose skepticism seems to have gone beyond healthy to hostile. Mr. J and his company have been accused of various kinds of dishonesty, you can find the posts if you want.

 

I've tried to take an even-handed and objective look at this. Some on both sides think I'm on the other side -- which may be a sort of measure of success in that effort.... ;-)

-- J.S.

 

Why not name the people whom you are accusing of wanting Red to fail? Isn?t that more credible than just citing your personal opinion about what nameless people are thinking? The latter is no better than insisting that something is so because you say it is.

 

You also said that Jannard has been accused of all types of dishonesty, although you failed to note that he, himself, has been guilty of that and bullying people when they have offered pertinent criticism that ran counter to his agenda. He has done this on several occasions, once to at me during an unsolicited phone call to my company. Hitherto that phone call, my only correspondence with Jannard had only been in Red forums in which I offered what I believed to be non-biased, constructive criticism. He apparently didn?t appreciate my point of view. I have watched him do this to others, in these forums, who have asked him hard questions, so I do not take it personally.

 

There is no rule stating that Jim Jannard is obligated to reveal trade secrets, research methods, or any other information, for that matter, although he should not be surprised or offended when his inconclusive claims are questioned by field experts on this board. Did he not invite these questions by virtue of having presented these claims, on Cinematography.com, in the first place?

 

It has been my belief all along that Jannard would have better served his quest for professional input ? if that was ever his original intention for posting here ? by having his engineers post incognito. The debates would have been more about the information and less about the promotional hype, which I can?t help but feel might have been the actual goal all along.

 

Maybe there is a contingent of cinematographers who are actually afraid that digital media will eventually render film obsolete, although I doubt that most working professional are preoccupied with that fear. As for the engineers on the board, it doesn?t surprise me that they would want to evaluate the claims based on a comprehensive and transparent set of data. That is what they do, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not name the people whom you are accusing of wanting Red to fail? Isn?t that more credible than just citing your personal opinion about what nameless people are thinking? The latter is no better than insisting that something is so because you say it is.

 

You also said that Jannard has been accused of all types of dishonesty, although you failed to note that he, himself, has been guilty of that and bullying people when they have offered pertinent criticism that ran counter to his agenda. He has done this on several occasions, once to at me during an unsolicited phone call to my company. Hitherto that phone call, my only correspondence with Jannard had only been in Red forums in which I offered what I believed to be non-biased, constructive criticism. He apparently didn?t appreciate my point of view. I have watched him do this to others, in these forums, who have asked him hard questions, so I do not take it personally.

 

There is no rule stating that Jim Jannard is obligated to reveal trade secrets, research methods, or any other information, for that matter, although he should not be surprised or offended when his inconclusive claims are questioned by field experts on this board. Did he not invite these questions by virtue of having presented these claims, on Cinematography.com, in the first place?

 

It has been my belief all along that Jannard would have better served his quest for professional input ? if that was ever his original intention for posting here ? by having his engineers post incognito. The debates would have been more about the information and less about the promotional hype, which I can?t help but feel might have been the actual goal all along.

 

Maybe there is a contingent of cinematographers who are actually afraid that digital media will eventually render film obsolete, although I doubt that most working professional are preoccupied with that fear. As for the engineers on the board, it doesn?t surprise me that they would want to evaluate the claims based on a comprehensive and transparent set of data. That is what they do, after all.

 

Ken... please decide which story you are sticking to. It kind of makes you look, well...

 

From Ken Cangi post of March 20:

 

Let me set the record straight for anyone who thinks Mr. Jannard is making threats. He has in no way threatened me. He asked me why I had written what I had in a few posts, and he told me that he was bothered by it. He told me that he loves filmmaking and that he is passionate about this project. On that note, I offered him my apology for the unfriendly words, and I offered to post my apology on this site if that would assuage his concerns. He thanked me for the gesture, and then he offered me an invitation to check out his new camera. He was a perfect gentleman in spite of my inconsiderate posts.

 

That is all of it. There is nothing intriguing about any of this, so my suggestion is that you all let it go. His camera will be available for testing very soon, at which point the mystery will have been put to rest.

 

BTW, Like I said before on our phone converstaion, and you seem to acknowledge on March 20th, I still wish you the best. You are welcome anytime at RED to personally see what we are doing.

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also said that Jannard has been accused of all types of dishonesty, although you failed to note that he, himself, has been guilty of that and bullying people when they have offered pertinent criticism that ran counter to his agenda. He has done this on several occasions, once to at me during an unsolicited phone call to my company. Hitherto that phone call, my only correspondence with Jannard had only been in Red forums in which I offered what I believed to be non-biased, constructive criticism. He apparently didn’t appreciate my point of view. I have watched him do this to others, in these forums, who have asked him hard questions, so I do not take it personally.

 

From Ken's March 19th post:

 

I just received a phone call from Jim Jannard. He was very frustrated about having been implicated with the Red hype that has been so prevalent on this site for the past few weeks. He stated, emphatically, that he has no professional association with Chris Kenny and the others, nor is he personally acquainted with them.

 

He asked me why I would make the comments that I did, and I explained to him that I had done so for two reasons. I wanted him to know that, if it had in fact been him behind it, his tactics were not gaining him any respect among many on the site. On the other hand, if he had nothing to do with it, then hopefully the radical fanboys would get the message and give it a rest. In retrospect, even if the latter were the case, as it seems to have been, I realize that it still was none of my business and that I could just as easily have ignored that particular thread. In that regard, I want to apologize to Chris Kenny. He has as much right to his opinions and interests as does any one of us.

 

I asked Jim why he would care at all about what I had to say, and his response seemed sincere. He told me that he did not care what anyone thought about his advertising, but that he resented being called a liar. I can relate to that, and, in light of our conversation, I feel that my posts were not fair to him. Consequently, I want to publicly apologize to Jim.

 

I am guilty of resenting being called a liar. But it appeared to me (and you at the time of your posts) that we had gotten over that issue in an appropriate manner. I did accept your explanation, you seemed to get over my frustration and we ended the call on a very friendly note. I did, in fact, invite you to see the camera. The fact that you keep bringing up the phone call and how it seemingly has changed over time in your mind, puzzles me. If you are not happy with my responses to others here, no problem. Just say so. But please don't use our phone conversation to attempt to lend credibility to your irritation.

 

In another thread, you insinuated that my "I wish you the best" was only said to placate you. I'm not sure why I would do that. If I'm frustrated, I will (sometimes not so elegantly) say so.

 

Jim

Edited by Jim Jannard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Without being so untactful as to incite them by naming them, there are certainly some here whose skepticism seems to have gone beyond healthy to hostile. Mr. J and his company have been accused of various kinds of dishonesty, you can find the posts if you want.

 

-- J.S.

Maybe so, but I've yet to read a post wishing Red to fail, although I'm sure I could have missed it. There are certainly a couple of yahoo's on both sides of the issue (more than a couple I guess). What's funny to me is that they continue to argue and attempt to incite the other side, as if the camera wasn't out yet, and as if there were no proof of anything. It's reminds me of school children arguing about nothing. Personally, I'll decide for myself what I think of the camera when I use it and see what can be done with it, regardless of the exact technical specs. What I'm seeing so far looks OK, although it's hard to make a determination from the tests that are lockoffs off a person staring at the camera. As we see more the results will speak for themselves. Although I'm sure those same people will still be arguing about the same things as long as they can get someone to argue back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken... please decide which story you are sticking to. It kind of makes you look, well...

 

From Ken Cangi post of March 20:

 

Let me set the record straight for anyone who thinks Mr. Jannard is making threats. He has in no way threatened me. He asked me why I had written what I had in a few posts, and he told me that he was bothered by it. He told me that he loves filmmaking and that he is passionate about this project. On that note, I offered him my apology for the unfriendly words, and I offered to post my apology on this site if that would assuage his concerns. He thanked me for the gesture, and then he offered me an invitation to check out his new camera. He was a perfect gentleman in spite of my inconsiderate posts.

 

That is all of it. There is nothing intriguing about any of this, so my suggestion is that you all let it go. His camera will be available for testing very soon, at which point the mystery will have been put to rest.

 

BTW, Like I said before on our phone converstaion, and you seem to acknowledge on March 20th, I still wish you the best. You are welcome anytime at RED to personally see what we are doing.

 

Jim

 

I would think that a guy with your level success would read more carefully. I never said that you personally threatened me or anyone else. I said that you made an unsolicited phone call to my office and told me that I could fu** off. I also said that I initially kept that information personal because of the to final tone of the conversation. The comments of mine that you just posted elaborate on my reason for initially giving you the benefit of the doubt. I would have done the same for most people under those circumstances.

 

Now you seem to be trying to manipulate my words, as it appears you have done with Phil and others, and I am calling you on it. Why are you so defensive, unless you believe that my and other's criticisms are valid? Maybe you aren't used to being called on your behavior, but you should expect it in a forum like this. Not everyone is going to assume the position of sycophant because you are Jim Jannard. If you want the respect of the people who are making their livings in this field, then you should consider extending that same respect to them.

 

What you may not realize is that I was very interested in your camera up to the point at which you told me to fu** off because of my opinions. Since then, I have watched how you handle yourself in here, and I have continually asked myself what dealing with that attitude would be like on the back end, if I purchased one of your systems and had a problem with it. I don't know how you feel, but, for me, two thirds of my decision, when making any serious purchase, is based on professionalism and customer service. There are lots of cameras out there that get the job done - some better than others - but in the end, a reliable and friendly customer service relationship will make or break the product's success. That is why I stayed with Nikon for twenty-eight years, even after Canon began to dominate the market. NPS always had my back when the equipment failed. They never made excuses or blamed me for the problem. They just went out of their way, in the friendliest and most professional manner, to make sure that I was back up and running asap.

 

Look, you don't have to give a damn about anything that I have to say, although I would be willing to bet that I am not the only one with these concerns. Others here have commented about your approach, but maybe you, for some reason, don't feel the need to value their opinions. Not all of us have David Mullen's stature in the industry, although there are many of us are out there making a steady living and spending money on equipment. I am new to the movie industry, although I have had a successful three decades in the commercial photography industry.

 

If it was indeed your intention to use this site as a vehicle for marketing your new product, wouldn't it be in your best interest not to offend your potential customers because you don't agree with or feel comfortable with their criticisms? Instead, you have done things like belittling Mr. Rhodes by calling him a heckler because he has asked you hard questions that you have refused to answer. Phil's approach might be less than savvy, although he seems like an honest guy with valid questions. Watching the Red staff gang up on him and try to paint him as a fool has done nothing toward inspiring me to look at you as a potential equipment supplier. If you really don't respect his opinion, or mine, then the professional thing to do would be to simply ignore us.

 

Feel free to handle your affairs in which ever way suits you. All I am asking is that you please have some consideration for those of us who invest the time and effort to follow these threads for the purpose of learning. If you don't like what someone says about your product, try to answer their concerns in a non-confrontational way or just ignore them. Is that really too much to ask? I am not out to make you or your product look bad. I am just stating my opinions and concerns about things that you put out there in a public forum. Take the info or leave it, That is your prerogative.

Edited by Ken Cangi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you seem to be trying to manipulate my words, as it appears you have done with Phil and others, and I am calling you on it. Why are you so defensive, unless you believe that my and other's criticisms are valid? Maybe you aren't used to being called on your behavior, but you should expect it in a forum like this. Not everyone is going to assume the position of sycophant because you are Jim Jannard. If you want the respect of the people who are making their livings in this field, then you should consider extending that same respect to them.

 

Ken... I didn't try to manipulate your words. I posted exactly what you posted. Your words. Any manipulation is strictly on your part to try to justify the complete disparity of your original posts (which I agree represent what happened several months ago) from your recent posts which say something completely opposite.

 

This is a confrontational board. Just for reference, here is your last (of many) posts that started this whole mess.

 

I have to hand it to Jannard. He is one tenacious marketer , by planting guys like Chris Kenny. Chris has been over here since September of 06. He has posted 167 times - 162 of which were to RED forums. No working cameraman would be that excited about a piece of equipment that hasn't even passed its developmental stages yet. In fact, I don't know a single indie filmmaker who is in a position to fork over an amount of money equal to the budget of many small indie films, let alone have the time to post as relentlessly as Mr. Kenny has in such a short period of time. Even a rich hobbyist wouldn't waste his time posting almost 200 sycophantic Red posts to a site, whose members clearly aren't impressed by the hype.

 

Yes sir. The only logical answer is Red marketing-plants, and they have conveniently been bombarding this site like mosquitoes for the several weeks preceding NAB.

 

You're not fooling me, Jim. You didn't get to be the king of eyewear by accident. I am impressed with your tenacity, although I have to wonder how many sales you actually think you can make from this site.

 

It is quite a show, to say the least.

 

The confrontation was not caused by me. You can now twist your own words around anyway you like. But I'm done with this topic. It is old news.

 

I still wish you the best.

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken... I didn't try to manipulate your words. I posted exactly what you posted. Your words. Any manipulation is strictly on your part to try to justify the complete disparity of your original posts (which I agree represent what happened several months ago) from your recent posts which say something completely opposite.

 

This is a confrontational board. Just for reference, here is your last (of many) posts that started this whole mess.

 

I have to hand it to Jannard. He is one tenacious marketer , by planting guys like Chris Kenny. Chris has been over here since September of 06. He has posted 167 times - 162 of which were to RED forums. No working cameraman would be that excited about a piece of equipment that hasn't even passed its developmental stages yet. In fact, I don't know a single indie filmmaker who is in a position to fork over an amount of money equal to the budget of many small indie films, let alone have the time to post as relentlessly as Mr. Kenny has in such a short period of time. Even a rich hobbyist wouldn't waste his time posting almost 200 sycophantic Red posts to a site, whose members clearly aren't impressed by the hype.

 

Yes sir. The only logical answer is Red marketing-plants, and they have conveniently been bombarding this site like mosquitoes for the several weeks preceding NAB.

 

You're not fooling me, Jim. You didn't get to be the king of eyewear by accident. I am impressed with your tenacity, although I have to wonder how many sales you actually think you can make from this site.

 

It is quite a show, to say the least.

 

The confrontation was not caused by me. You can now twist your own words around anyway you like. But I'm done with this topic. It is old news.

 

I still wish you the best.

 

Jim

 

Sure, Jim. You are confusing opinion for confrontation. That post was my opinion. Your response in calling me to tell me to fu** off was the confrontation. And if what I told you in my last post, about consumer impressions and motivations, is old news to you, then all I can say is: Good luck with that.

 

Cheers,

 

KC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Forum Sponsors

BOKEH RENTALS

Film Gears

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

CINELEASE

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...