Clint Johnson

Yes, some of them were saying that it was Sony, Canon et al who paid people to break into Red. I find it as offensive to accuse them of this, as accusing Jim of doing it himself. The irony seems to be lost on some people. I stated more than once that their involvement didn't make a lot of sense and in all probability it was a bunch of amateurs doing it on spec with the hope of selling to one of them. I even suggested that Jim get in touch with the other camera companies because I would expect that they were more likely to pass the information on to him than they were to exploit it.

Hi Christopher, I?m guessing that you were vegansoy? There were at least two bannings as a result of this rather uncivil (on both sides) thread. I think that the main problem is that there are a few people at DVXuser who are personal friends of Jim as well as a lot more people who it would appear have conversed online enough with the man to consider him an acquaintance... and when you came in and started attacked the character of the man a good number of those people jumped to a rather over zealous defense. I think that your posts were rude, confrontational and unconstructive but they didn?t deserve the overblown and caustic response you got from some people... or an outright banning. Some of the people on DVXuser are rather... umm... fond of an unseen product and some of them will be burned getting into one without a good understanding of just what a cinema oriented camera entails. That said, there is a fair bit of constructive criticism on the site and when it is presented in a reasoned manner it is addressed in good form. I have a reservation for a Red One camera as well as the 18-85mm lens but I?m not a fanatical ?Red Head?. My next project probably won?t be ready to go until early next summer and I would be ecstatic to have a camera with the specification that Red is aiming for. If the Red One doesn?t come through, and I realize that there is a very real possibility of that, I will simply rent another camera or look to purchasing something like a Sony F350 instead (with no illusions that it gets close to film). And I agree with Matthew that if David had been banned from DVXuser I?d question Jarred?s sanity. David Mullen is a measure voice of reason and experience that any forum on cinematography would be much the better for. Posted by vegansoy Another possibility worth considering and one that I'm amazed hasn't been mentioned yet, is that this is a hoax created by Red itself to stir up attention on many websites and increase chatter about the company. It could also provide a cover for technological set-backs they could be experiencing and would keep investors from losing faith in the product or tech team because delays could be seen as not their fault. I realize that many people are excited by this concept and want to support it as an innovative underdog, kinda like that Coppola movie, "Tucker", but, honestly, my bullshit detector is screaming louder than a smoke alarm right now. When the smoke clears, Red may be more well known for marketing innovation than for technical innovation. Peace. Posted by Jim Jannard Are you kidding me? Maybe you should come down from Portland and help us clean up the glass. a**ho**. Posted by vegansoy Mr. Jannard, Perhaps you should direct your anger and frustration at yourself for not protecting your assets better. In the future, I recommend that you sit beside your valuables while you're reading and contributing to these forums. That should keep them within sight 24 hours a day. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

I apologize for the name calling in my last few posts. This sort of ad hominem attack drives away any possibility for civil discourse and ensures that the people you are insulting will get justifiably defensive. I?m also pretty sure that is what drove Jim Jannard away from here, not so much the lack of rear end kissing.

Yeah, cause that's what billionaires do, they spend millions ripping people off for a few hundred thousand dollars and then spend millions more on lawyers avoiding jail time. You figure smart business decisions like that are what put Jim Jannard where he is today? Actually, I'm not really expecting a refund, I'm thinking that the odds are better than even that Red will get the camera finished and on the market so that I can put that money towards the purchase price. If it doesn't get to market only an addlepated fool would expect there to be a problem getting the refund.

Actually, business does reward honest and upright behavior. Of course some people build up big companies through nefarious means but for every one of those there are a hundred who get there through hard and smart work done ethically. As for car recalls, most of that is about lawyers with a hard-on for cash settlements, politicians needing a soapbox and activists who have a deep seeded need to save the world and so invent problems to solve. Dishonest and lowdown behavior from these people have resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars lost, thousands of people loosing their jobs, the price of cars forced up so people have to make do with the old car that should be scrapped. How much did the invented problem of unintended acceleration cost? Addled people hammering the accelerator to the floor thinking it was the brakes took some good and safe cars off the road. How about the faking of problems with the side saddled fuel tanks of certain generations of GM pickups? The lawyers and activists trying like hell to get them off the road or recalled despite the fact that they had a lower overall mortality rate than either Ford or Dodge pickups of the same generation. They could care less about people dying, they just wanted the payout or the glory. Every automobile out there is a trade of on safety versus cost versus efficiency versus reliability versus performance... there are no ?safe? cars, only a spectrum and to recall every vehicle that someone imagines has a higher accident rate than they feel it should would be insane. The car companies have to make a judgment call and it is a sliding scale... that they do sometimes take too far. But I still think that they?ve ended up on the side of right far more often than not.

Some people here just don?t seem very bright. It isn?t a cover up to hide something from investors. There are no ?investors? since Jim is paying for it all himself- and even if Red doesn?t make a penny it won?t be a hardship for the man. It isn?t chump change but for him it probably isn?t much more than two or three percent of his personal worth. If Red manages to get Red One to market with the capabilities and pricing that they are targeting then there is no need for theatrics and if they don?t hit their targets... well then no amount of theatrics will sell the product. While you might not be smart enough to figure that out I?m pretty sure that he is. That?s almost as idiotic as thinking that Jim Jannard has set this up to scam ac few million dollars out of people. As for thinking that it was to cover up problems they?ve had in development? He?s said that it won?t delay them more than a day or two, and since he has stated previously that they were weeks ahead of schedule it doesn?t really make sense as a delaying tactic now does it? I suppose you imagined him scheming away in his lair trying to find some way to hide the fact that he is only twelve days ahead of schedule rather than fifteen? I can?t understand the hate on some people have for this endeavor and Jim personally? You act as if he just told you that your baby is really, really ugly and that his kids are way cuter. Jim, through Red, is simply trying to engineer a really good camera at a great price. He has taken the unprecedented step of opening up the design and engineering process with the expressed intent to gather constructive feedback from the community he is targeting. And some of you just can?t help but peeing in the pool and congratulate yourself on how cool you are. I have put my deposit on a Red Camera but I certainly haven?t drank the kool-aid. If he succeeds I?ll happily pay the remainder but if for some reason he can?t pull off the engineering required and falls short of the target... then I will simply thank him for the effort and get my money back. And I?m not worried about getting my money back. Maybe you would jeopardize a multi-billion dollar personal fortune for a couple million dollars- but that is probably one of the reasons he has that kind of money and you don?t? Just because lies, deceit and fraud is the first place that your mind goes doesn?t mean that is how others operate. Faking a robbery would have no upside for Jim or Red and would have several real drawbacks. Jumping to that conclusion shows a mean, petty spirit and an intellect in dire need of remedial courses in logic and reasoning.

No, I wouldn?t be so rude as to call you retarded but could you imagine the outcry that would ensue if someone tried to bring out a digital camera that had the exact same workflow as a film camera? What recording media do we use at Purple? Well it is the PurpleCan and it stores eleven minutes of footage at 24 fps in a rather large hard drive of about 30cm by 3cm that will never get a better data density and uh... you can only use once so you have to buy a whole pile of PurpleCans for your shoot. And you have to load them in the dark because any light will ruin some of the data... but you won?t know that until it gets back from the facility that has to run the PurpleCan through a messy and toxic process before you can look at it. And this mandatory step of processing the PurpleCan will cost extra as well as taking a couple days... but you can pay us more to get a rush overnight service. And once we?ve processed your PurpleCan we?ll have to charge you more to copy the data over to an industry standard hard drive that you will be able to actually edit. Maybe this would make you feel more at home with the Purple One but I?d be moving on to a different camera myself. My last outing with video was a 12 day shoot where we got 90 pages done and the only problem that I had were with the time codes not being laid down properly on a few tapes and two scenes where the colour on A camera and B camera was further apart than I would have liked. I suppose it comes down to what feels natural to you and what you are used to. Some see a romance in the physicality of film where I only see layers of inconvenience. The nice thing about a market economy is that we will both get to keep using the workflow that we find more comfortable.

For years to come there will be people who continue to use film simply because it is film. They don?t see digital as art and there will be no way to change that worldview... just like there are a lot of people who look down their nose at film and refuse to see it as art. If you didn?t create it on gesso prepared birch using pigment you ground yourself ... well then it just isn?t art and you mister cameraman, are a hack manufacturer of mechanical facsimiles. Really Richard, that is how it sounds on the receiving end of your speeches. Next you?ll be saying that the only way you?ll work on it is if you develop the film yourself and cut it on a Moviola. And I can?t fathom thinking that shooting in film has fewer workflow hassles than digital acquisition? With digital I can capture the footage, transfer it from the capture media to the working media, convert it to my preferred editing codec and have it on a timeline in my NLE in a matter of minutes while you sit there with a can of exposed film. I?ve only used S16 once and 8mm a couple times and if I never do again I will be ecstatic. The only reason to use film has been the edge in quality... but we are currently nearing the point where the quality of a digital image will cross the lethargic advancements made with film. Looking at the precedent set by the last ten years, a decade from now film will have made tiny little incremental improvements while digital will have doubled its subjective quality two or three times. Red might not be the camera that passes film by but sometime in the next year or two the quality of digital acquisition will surpass film and we can be quit of the noise, mess and mechanical limitations placed on us by needing to drag a strip of celluloid laced with chemicals past a rotating shutter, sending the film for development and then transfer the film to something that we can actually do something with. Film is ALL hassle with only the image quality to offset that and thankfully we are going to see this one singular advantage fall by the wayside.