Mike Brennan

Yes I've gathered there are some interesting technical aspects of the patent that, I summise, when taken in context with comments made by JJ, supposedly could have far reaching effects on the developments of other cameras. I can't recall another occasion in the past 25 years where a patent about core elements of an electronic camera that is in production, is being said by the manufacturer to have such a wide reaching effect on the industry. Having just paid the lawyers and had a technical innovation patent accepted here in Oz, I am loathed to try and disect the patent description because I know the devil is in a type of detail which is just beyond my iQ :) But I'm all ears if anyone else wants to have a go. Mike Brennan

Now that they are being assembled in the USA perhaps we can get a better idea of the number of cameras RED has sold? Knowing the number of cameras sold is a great help to accessory manufacturers and the industry as a whole. That the number is probably over 2000(?) is good news for owner operators in respect to ongoing availability of spares ect. It is interesting that when it suites them Sony release sales figures for cameras but keep any plans for ongoing developments and improvements of existing cameras confidential, whereas Red is the opposite, they have not given any evidence for the number of cameras sold and are keen to let the public in on most aspects of camera development with a daily, blow by blow descriptions. Both Sony and RED share a philosophy of laying out their longer term ambitions in public, Sony's track record is good at delivering what they predicted 5 or 10 years earlier, with RED everything is apt to change although so far in general, any changes to the plan have been for the good. Mike Brennan

The surprising development is that manufacturers of single chip cmos cameras do not demand the use of cc filters? But once a photo site is saturated thats it and it makes sense, in theory, to at least roughly balance the optical path to match the sensor to avoid massive amounts of gain in one or two channels being added within camera or in post to rebalance the image. Tests by end users tend to not explore this aspect, perhaps because it is a convenient truth not to have to use cc filters on location:) Mike Brennan

Anyone care to decipher the red raw patent? important? irrelevant? The subject thread although started by JJ has been pulled at Red User and stifled on cml, so please no Red bashing just informed comment! My link Mike Brennan

Very good question! Could there be other film camera related reasons for 24mm x 36mm coverage? Rebirth of vistavision? Mike Brennan

For some large screen applications I think we could do with more pixels. If you look at a RED grab 1:1 on a 24 inch 1920x1080 display it is softer than a HD grab at 1:1. I like the idea of getting teased at what is around the corner but REDs history is one of a series of corners and diversions before reaching the destination so actually planning on future concepts is as risky as banking on errr banks:o Sony may bring out a product that is higher quality but I seriously doubt it will be cheaper unless it comes from the consumer division. The Sony consumer division caught Sony broadcast on the hope when they made semi pro DV cameras so it has happened before. John S is correct, look at the computer model not pro broadcast cameras. The notion that development is so fast that the RED products will never be fully developed and bug free is worrying for craft cameramen and DPs who want to maintain standards. Mike Brennan

Do camera manufacturers need to test and meet DO-160 EMC test standards? Mike Brennan

An even more interesting development is when a new camera is used on a second project as the A camera by a DP or director. Mike Brennan

The other option is the Sony HDC1500 camera head recoridng onto Stwo or SRW1 which will give the Viper a run for its money and make the f900R look like your old aunts instamatic. The 1500 is 14 bit AD has similar mother boards to f23 has hyper gamma and 444 output (as options) and soon will have user gamma curves and it is on its third upgrade to reduce noise and a optical block that reduces chtomatic abberation colour fringing that both Viper and f900 suffer from. Mike Brennan

The same. The f900R A/D and image processing is more sophisticated so it is a better picture comming out of the f900R HDSDI than the 750:) Beware that there are a few varients of the HDW750 A HDC 1500 camera head (no recorder) is even better than the f900R. Mike Brennan

Here here to Keiths post! Fuji tried a "ND filter" (my description) on neigbouring pixels last year in still cameras and a DPreview exhaust test indicated it wasn't a success. Obviously those shooting docs will have a different wish list than those shooting drama. But both genres would like as much control of depth of field as possible. By stipulating a 65mm sensor one is limiting control of depth of field on one direction whereas 2/3 inch limits it in the other. Ultimate control of depth of field (in theory) is most likely to come from a camera with an interchangeable or adjustable sensor, say from 2/3 inch to 65mm. the challange is to do this and still keep a common texture resolution noise signature ect of the image. Here is a relevant question. What percentage of 35mm dramas regularly shoot T1.5? im not saying that T1.5 on 35mm doesn't have a place it does! I believe that a 1 1/3 inch sensor with T 1.5 lenses is more practical and would satisy both day to day narrow depth of field requirements (lets say equivelant in 35mm shooting T2.8) but also offer greater scope in achieving deeper depth of field required for docs. For many applications 2/3 has too much and 35mm too little, what about 1 1/3? The brave, so called, revolutionary world of new digital cinema cameras is still being tied to the legacy of a sensor size based on achieving acceptable film grain. I'd love to see a digtial cinema camera design that starts from scratch that is not dependant on integration with existing film lenses. RED 3ks format is interesting in its size is around 1 1/3 (?) it just needs more res and a set of dedicated lenses :) Mike Brennan

Im interested, from both business and camera science perspectives, that none of the RED upgrades since nov 2007 involve any additional hardware. Some improvements are waking up hardware that has been dormant for a year, which is not unusual in electronic pro cameras, but the apparent reduction in noise with build 16 is usually achieved with hardware tweakes not software. I hope someone directly compares build 15 to build 16 by shooting same test subject before and after the upgrade. In respect to Phils apt description of rancid outputs, Sony misleadingly calls farty flickering noisy fizzy pictures a "monitoring output". Having had finished today with another HD remote head aerial gimbal with yet another type of spaggetti/rain/corduory/hum bar noise signature I believe their is enough examples for a glossy illustrated book of electronic noise:) If only we could figure a way of evaluating the background garbage on a Phil Rhodes rancid scale of one to ten:) May I say that using RED in a wescam this week there was no gimbal or aircraft induced noise although the 720p monitoring image via slip rings was very organic :) Mike Brennan

Yes they will record psf to tape, I was hoping that the decks would recieve a P input and psf it in the deck. Sony have replied to my question and they say that true P can be recorded at 1080 50p and 60p on SRW1 using dual link. So if I understand this correctly true p needs dual link. Jim? Mike Brennan

To be clear, in theory Sony decks should take a P input from RED (thats what all the Sony cameras output) Mike Brennan

Thanks Mitch, I wonder if the RED output will support SMPTE 372M standard... Mike Brennan