Atom Feed
RSS Feed
Buy Mike Recommended
edit systems & gear
from Silverado Systems
Buy Books, Software, & More
at HD for Indies Amazon Store
Buy New Movies from
HD for Indies Amazon Store
Or, you can also support
HD4NDs by contributing
to the tip jar...
Help Support HD for Indies
RSS Feed
Buy Mike Recommended
edit systems & gear
from Silverado Systems
Buy Books, Software, & More
at HD for Indies Amazon Store
Buy New Movies from
HD for Indies Amazon Store
Or, you can also support
HD4NDs by contributing
to the tip jar...
Help Support HD for Indies
Advertisements
Great HD Links
- HD For Indies Home Page
- HD For Indies FAQ
- HD 24
- Cinematography
- Bare Feats
- 24p Entertainment
- Light Illusion (was Digital Praxis)
- OneRiver Codec Resource
- CamcorderInfo.com
- LumiereHD
- HighDef.org Info
- Understanding RAID
- Video Systems (Reviews)
- DV Film (DV=>Film)
- SonyHDVInfo.com
- Plus 8 Digital (vendor)
- Digital Cinema Society
- Texas High Def (local F900 guy)
- Creative Cow (news & forums)
- Philadelphia FCP User Group
- Los Angeles FCP User Group
- Cinema Tech
- FresHDV
- DV Info's forums
- HVX User
- Pro App Tips
- Bluesky Media - Instruction
- RedUser.net
- fxguide
- little frog in high def
- VideoMaker Learning Section
- Stu Maschwitz's ProLost
Archives
- March 2004
- April 2004
- May 2004
- June 2004
- July 2004
- August 2004
- September 2004
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009
- March 2009
- April 2009
- May 2009
- June 2009
- July 2009
- August 2009
- September 2009
- October 2009
- November 2009
- December 2009
- January 2010
- February 2010
High Definition Video for Independent Filmmakers
A How To Guide for Digital Filmmakers
Welcome all! This is my blog to share my latest research,
thoughts, etc. on utilizing HD for independent filmmaking.
YES, I am available for consulting
Contact me at mike@hdforindies.com
All content copyright 2004-2007 Mike Curtis.
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
New Digital Cinema Camera Coming: RED. 4K. 60p. RAW format. Wow.
Updated Tuesday morning - see bottom
www.red.com is such a simple, innocent sounding little domain, but who are these guys?
I don't know, but they are claiming to have a pretty killer digital cinema camera in the works.
They claim, right there on the front page, in all caps:
WE DECIDED TO SKIP SEVERAL GENERATIONS OF EVOLUTION...
...and boy, do they look like they're going for it!
This is ambitious. This is audacious. This, if they can pull it off, would be the all time mother humdinger of a digital cinema camera, to which one could start asking "Does it do.." and the response would be to cut you off and say "Yeah. It does that."
So why this confidence? Why this arrogance on their part? Because these RED folks are claiming to have a camera that can do it ALL, up to 4K practically.
Some features gleaned from their very sparse website (which is a graphic, so can't even google for the text!):
1.) 4520x2540 pixel resolution. Native.
2.) 60p. Native.
3.) S35 sized image single CMOS sensor (Bayer pattern, presumably?) - 24.5mmx13.5mm, native 16:9 image sensor
4.) captures RAW (sounds just like digital still cameras' the way they put it), 4:4:4 or 4:2:2, however you want it
5.) Uses standard 35mm PL mount film lenses, or their mount and lenses.
6.) Records to their "RED Flash based system, external hard drives, BlueRay (sic), tape or any other capable format."
7.) Shoots pretty much any frame rate you'd want.
Wow, this sounds pretty serious, but I have seen zero press or anything about it.
Hmm.
Delving further, they have some images to compare the image size between their 4.5Kx2.5K max res to 1080p to 720p to lowly, lowsly 480p, but they do NOT claim it is from the camera.
The only real data they have is on the specs page, summarized here:
-4K, true S35mm image sensor that does 4520x2540 @ 60p
-2540p@60p, "Mysterium" CMOS sensor (never heard of that, neither has Google for that matter),
-does 2540p, 1080p, 1080i, 720p, 480p/i, anywhere from 1 to 60 fps in 1 fps increments (hopefully hits the high notes at 23.976, 29.97, and 59.94 as well)
-format - "RAW 4:4:4 through dual fiber channel outputs" (egads, that's gotta be some hellacious throughput!), 4:2:2 out of HD-SDI (good, it has one), or RED codec (no details provided). Select 100, 80, 60, 50, 25, or 19 MBps (this sounds like the kind of data rates bandied about for MPEG-2, but that doesn't mean anything)
-1080i (if you've got 2540p, 1080i is a snap to derive from it), 720p, 480i, etc.
-use standard PL mount lenses or their lenses with their own mounting stuff - "RED Ultra Definition Cinema Lenses", but "other lens mounts available"
Mike's Commentary: WELL. These anonymous folks are talking up a mighty tall game, but I have no idea how serious they are about it. To propose a new camera, with fiber channel outputs (dual, no less!), variable frame rates, their own lenses (THAT is no light undertaking!), and all these other goodies means they are taking a mighty, mighty big bite to chew. The contact page says they will have some kind of presentation at NAB 2006, but presentation does not equal shipping product, nor anything close to that. Jeff Kreines over at Kinetta has similar ambitions, but he's been demoing at NAB two years in a row that I've seen, and has yet to give a ship date, let alone ship that camera *(see note at end).
But just based on the fact that they went out and purchased a short, clear, concise, expensive domain name involving a color implies that SOMEBODY's got some spare change lying around (or if not, their budget choices, whilst reminiscent of dotcom era excess, might be similarly misguided).
In theory this all sounds fantastic, and eerily familiar. Oh yeah, wait! I wrote this a year and a half ago, read it and see what you think about the benefits of RAW (and they're saying RAW in a context that implies similarity to still camera RAW, so I'm assuming that is what they mean).
In that article, I said:
I think, in time, folks are going to want to be able to capture the raw CCD output from their video cameras. Certainly the highest end professionals will want to be able to, and visual effects artists will want to be able to. I think it'll be years before the possibility, and might involve producing cameras with a special "bypass" mode that allows for capture directly from the CCD array straight to a hard drive.
Hmm...that sounds like what these folks are doing if I'm reading this right - but they're saying "RAW 4:4:4 out dual fiber channel outputs" which I can't see being anything else.
This one covers related issues, too.
In the second article (June '04), I wrote:
if you want to shoot digitally in 2K res, 4:4:4 color space, utterly uncompressed, you're talking about a multi hundred thousand dollar digital cinema motion camera, and a storage system costing many tens of thousands of dollars.
...and this may end up being the case. This camera sounds very cool, but the specs are mighty "up there", so I would expect the price to be up there as well. Price always determines success in a market - just because you CAN pay for a ride to the Russian space station doesn't make it a success at $20M a pop. My gut says the price on a rig like this, based on the market for such a beast, is going to end up in the six figure territory. Also, no mention is made of size, weight, form factor, battery powerable, etc., so much remains to be proven.
But the implied workflow sounds like it might really live up to the potential of the whole digital moviemaking thing (if a place can be found for all that raw data).
Of course, I wasn't the first to think along these lines - Jeff Kreines was WELL under way and was already showing prototype hardware when I wrote that, as were others. This might end up being like the Drake digital camera, of which I keep hearing how great it'll be, how on the edge or readiness it is...and time keeps flowing by. Or like the Andromeda project to get 12 bit RGB 4:4:4 out of a DVX100A...which is a glorious hack, but I feel a semi-wasted effort based on the native resolution of the CCDs and the fixed, less-than-stellar lens on that particular camera.
And at the bottom of one of the pages, it has a note to the effect of all specs are preliminary and subject to change without notice...definitely this thing is in the early stages, and this is their wishlist.
Wait and see, wait and see...and I'll keep looking into this thing.
-mike
UPDATE I inadvertently misstated what Jeff Kreines of Kinetta has done and not done - in the timeframe in question, they HAVE shipped product (film scanners and recorders), just not shipped the camera (see more below).
* note at end - Jeff Kreines pointed out that they've shipped film scanners and recorders, but not a camera in that timeframe. They are waiting on components (I think the Altasens imaging sensor last I reported if I recall correctly) from a vendor. So for me to say they haven't shipped product is incorrect - they've shipped non-camera products. But the product in question, the camera, hasn't shipped yet. My read on that situation is that the sensor they had hoped would work wasn't up to snuff and they had to wait for the next generation. In the meantime, I've been in touch with Jeff and engineering has continued, adding more features and dropping the target price point in the meantime. Apologies, Jeff!
-mike again
www.red.com is such a simple, innocent sounding little domain, but who are these guys?
I don't know, but they are claiming to have a pretty killer digital cinema camera in the works.
They claim, right there on the front page, in all caps:
WE DECIDED TO SKIP SEVERAL GENERATIONS OF EVOLUTION...
...and boy, do they look like they're going for it!
This is ambitious. This is audacious. This, if they can pull it off, would be the all time mother humdinger of a digital cinema camera, to which one could start asking "Does it do.." and the response would be to cut you off and say "Yeah. It does that."
So why this confidence? Why this arrogance on their part? Because these RED folks are claiming to have a camera that can do it ALL, up to 4K practically.
Some features gleaned from their very sparse website (which is a graphic, so can't even google for the text!):
1.) 4520x2540 pixel resolution. Native.
2.) 60p. Native.
3.) S35 sized image single CMOS sensor (Bayer pattern, presumably?) - 24.5mmx13.5mm, native 16:9 image sensor
4.) captures RAW (sounds just like digital still cameras' the way they put it), 4:4:4 or 4:2:2, however you want it
5.) Uses standard 35mm PL mount film lenses, or their mount and lenses.
6.) Records to their "RED Flash based system, external hard drives, BlueRay (sic), tape or any other capable format."
7.) Shoots pretty much any frame rate you'd want.
Wow, this sounds pretty serious, but I have seen zero press or anything about it.
Hmm.
Delving further, they have some images to compare the image size between their 4.5Kx2.5K max res to 1080p to 720p to lowly, lowsly 480p, but they do NOT claim it is from the camera.
The only real data they have is on the specs page, summarized here:
-4K, true S35mm image sensor that does 4520x2540 @ 60p
-2540p@60p, "Mysterium" CMOS sensor (never heard of that, neither has Google for that matter),
-does 2540p, 1080p, 1080i, 720p, 480p/i, anywhere from 1 to 60 fps in 1 fps increments (hopefully hits the high notes at 23.976, 29.97, and 59.94 as well)
-format - "RAW 4:4:4 through dual fiber channel outputs" (egads, that's gotta be some hellacious throughput!), 4:2:2 out of HD-SDI (good, it has one), or RED codec (no details provided). Select 100, 80, 60, 50, 25, or 19 MBps (this sounds like the kind of data rates bandied about for MPEG-2, but that doesn't mean anything)
-1080i (if you've got 2540p, 1080i is a snap to derive from it), 720p, 480i, etc.
-use standard PL mount lenses or their lenses with their own mounting stuff - "RED Ultra Definition Cinema Lenses", but "other lens mounts available"
Mike's Commentary: WELL. These anonymous folks are talking up a mighty tall game, but I have no idea how serious they are about it. To propose a new camera, with fiber channel outputs (dual, no less!), variable frame rates, their own lenses (THAT is no light undertaking!), and all these other goodies means they are taking a mighty, mighty big bite to chew. The contact page says they will have some kind of presentation at NAB 2006, but presentation does not equal shipping product, nor anything close to that. Jeff Kreines over at Kinetta has similar ambitions, but he's been demoing at NAB two years in a row that I've seen, and has yet to give a ship date, let alone ship that camera *(see note at end).
But just based on the fact that they went out and purchased a short, clear, concise, expensive domain name involving a color implies that SOMEBODY's got some spare change lying around (or if not, their budget choices, whilst reminiscent of dotcom era excess, might be similarly misguided).
In theory this all sounds fantastic, and eerily familiar. Oh yeah, wait! I wrote this a year and a half ago, read it and see what you think about the benefits of RAW (and they're saying RAW in a context that implies similarity to still camera RAW, so I'm assuming that is what they mean).
In that article, I said:
I think, in time, folks are going to want to be able to capture the raw CCD output from their video cameras. Certainly the highest end professionals will want to be able to, and visual effects artists will want to be able to. I think it'll be years before the possibility, and might involve producing cameras with a special "bypass" mode that allows for capture directly from the CCD array straight to a hard drive.
Hmm...that sounds like what these folks are doing if I'm reading this right - but they're saying "RAW 4:4:4 out dual fiber channel outputs" which I can't see being anything else.
This one covers related issues, too.
In the second article (June '04), I wrote:
if you want to shoot digitally in 2K res, 4:4:4 color space, utterly uncompressed, you're talking about a multi hundred thousand dollar digital cinema motion camera, and a storage system costing many tens of thousands of dollars.
...and this may end up being the case. This camera sounds very cool, but the specs are mighty "up there", so I would expect the price to be up there as well. Price always determines success in a market - just because you CAN pay for a ride to the Russian space station doesn't make it a success at $20M a pop. My gut says the price on a rig like this, based on the market for such a beast, is going to end up in the six figure territory. Also, no mention is made of size, weight, form factor, battery powerable, etc., so much remains to be proven.
But the implied workflow sounds like it might really live up to the potential of the whole digital moviemaking thing (if a place can be found for all that raw data).
Of course, I wasn't the first to think along these lines - Jeff Kreines was WELL under way and was already showing prototype hardware when I wrote that, as were others. This might end up being like the Drake digital camera, of which I keep hearing how great it'll be, how on the edge or readiness it is...and time keeps flowing by. Or like the Andromeda project to get 12 bit RGB 4:4:4 out of a DVX100A...which is a glorious hack, but I feel a semi-wasted effort based on the native resolution of the CCDs and the fixed, less-than-stellar lens on that particular camera.
And at the bottom of one of the pages, it has a note to the effect of all specs are preliminary and subject to change without notice...definitely this thing is in the early stages, and this is their wishlist.
Wait and see, wait and see...and I'll keep looking into this thing.
-mike
UPDATE I inadvertently misstated what Jeff Kreines of Kinetta has done and not done - in the timeframe in question, they HAVE shipped product (film scanners and recorders), just not shipped the camera (see more below).
* note at end - Jeff Kreines pointed out that they've shipped film scanners and recorders, but not a camera in that timeframe. They are waiting on components (I think the Altasens imaging sensor last I reported if I recall correctly) from a vendor. So for me to say they haven't shipped product is incorrect - they've shipped non-camera products. But the product in question, the camera, hasn't shipped yet. My read on that situation is that the sensor they had hoped would work wasn't up to snuff and they had to wait for the next generation. In the meantime, I've been in touch with Jeff and engineering has continued, adding more features and dropping the target price point in the meantime. Apologies, Jeff!
-mike again
Labels: Red
Comments:
That is the biggest bunch of vaporware I've ever seen.
Even if they did have this camera made by 2006 (something I highly doubt will happen... 'cause what chip are they using?) - but if they DO - don't you have a feeling it will cost so much that it will only be bought by rental houses and thus be just like a D20 or Genesis in price?
I agree, they must have some cash behind them 'cuase of the domain name though. The whois on the domain name points to people who have redcode.com email addresses - but redcode.com has no website. All the addresses are located in Washington
Even if they did have this camera made by 2006 (something I highly doubt will happen... 'cause what chip are they using?) - but if they DO - don't you have a feeling it will cost so much that it will only be bought by rental houses and thus be just like a D20 or Genesis in price?
I agree, they must have some cash behind them 'cuase of the domain name though. The whois on the domain name points to people who have redcode.com email addresses - but redcode.com has no website. All the addresses are located in Washington
me again... furthermore... there is only trademark on the word "mysterium" (which is their sensor) and it is for an alchoholic beverage.
Seems like if you were making fancy sensor, you'd trademark the fancy name.
Seems like if you were making fancy sensor, you'd trademark the fancy name.
Mark - you get points for being the fastest poster I've ever seen - I'd barely clicked "Post" when your comment came flying in!
Yeah, it may end up being like those in terms of availability and price, but we'll have to wait and see.
Their ATTITUDE somehow isn't in league with those guys - or maybe that is their garage tech brashness showing?
Good point about Mysterium, too.
Call me crazy, but I think there's more to this one than the USUAL vapory goodness...
Yeah, it may end up being like those in terms of availability and price, but we'll have to wait and see.
Their ATTITUDE somehow isn't in league with those guys - or maybe that is their garage tech brashness showing?
Good point about Mysterium, too.
Call me crazy, but I think there's more to this one than the USUAL vapory goodness...
Open up the sample image in Photoshop and you will see that the EXIF belongs to a Canon EOS 1D MK II.
hdtvblog- NICE bit of detective work there! You guys must hover over your RSS feeds!
Hey, since you obviously track this stuff - what's a good 42 inch HDTV if I REALLY care about rich blacks and true, high resolution?
Any quickie recommends, or is that a long Q&A session? Just curious, email me at mike at hdforindies dot com if you feel like it.
-mike
Hey, since you obviously track this stuff - what's a good 42 inch HDTV if I REALLY care about rich blacks and true, high resolution?
Any quickie recommends, or is that a long Q&A session? Just curious, email me at mike at hdforindies dot com if you feel like it.
-mike
If you check the ownership of the domain here: whois.sc/red.com you'll see that as of 9 October -- less than 2 months ago -- they had a generic image ("Red. The color of life.") for the homepage.
What's more, the domain owner is listed as "Redcode, Inc." with a P.O. box in Washington. But the Washington State Department of Revenue has no record of a business owner "Redcode" in Eastsound or anywhere else in the state. (And they have 1.76 million records.)
Makes me wonder if this was created for a fake resume or something.
What's more, the domain owner is listed as "Redcode, Inc." with a P.O. box in Washington. But the Washington State Department of Revenue has no record of a business owner "Redcode" in Eastsound or anywhere else in the state. (And they have 1.76 million records.)
Makes me wonder if this was created for a fake resume or something.
Wayne Morellini from the Digital Cinema camera projects over at dvinfo.
I don't know who these people are, but a number of commercial projects have been going in the background from our discussions over at dvinfo. There has been big hurdles and people lacking the immense talent, and ego, to handle them swiftly. Maybe Red is one of these groups? We have had one group doing such a camera and spending a lot of time searching for the best fit sensor (any good company is going to do this research). I have been in contact with one group doing a storage array for HDSDi. This camera work has been going on for more than a year enough time to even get a commercial one done.
But as far as the Drake camera (a group with heads screwed on right) came out of our forum discussions, and most of the story of what happened is on the Drake thread in the Alternative Imaging forum (plus a new Soviet camera, in matter of fact a few people have turned up with their own companies hi-speed cameras in the threads, worth a look). As far as we know Drake is not dead, but going through the painful process of commercialising a customised camera solution ("commercialise" and "custom" are two hard things to do in cameras).
Silicon Imaging offer an uncompressed Altasens camera system for around 10K, I think (also involved with us).
Latest drives with more than 50MB/s sustained write rate each, and upto 500GB, and soon more. Once you string a number of the drives together you can have a solution measured in thousands of dollars, not hundreds of thousands.
The problem with people in our group is they call RAW Bayer images, 4:4:4 Raw, which is three times the data-rate of Bayer, and a fair bit more expensive obviously, maybe that is where the confusion is. There is a an even smaller format based on pixel shift that I personally advocate for smaller cameras. You notice that the Red camera has two HDSDi inputs what's that, 400MB/s, 8 mpixels 4:4:4 is around 600MB/s at 24fps 8-bit, in bayer it is around 200MB/s. With pixel shift, much less again.
Recently Dalsa announced a nice hi-tech/ultra-resolution sensor, so I expect 8 MPixel to be coming down in price in face of competition.
The trick to low cost development and fast delivery, is to interface existing systems together so you don't have to do most of the work. If you fully to come up with a better system.
But the future has few friends with deep pockets and deep experience sometimes, and that is what has been holding things back a lot of the time.
Thanks
Wayne.
I don't know who these people are, but a number of commercial projects have been going in the background from our discussions over at dvinfo. There has been big hurdles and people lacking the immense talent, and ego, to handle them swiftly. Maybe Red is one of these groups? We have had one group doing such a camera and spending a lot of time searching for the best fit sensor (any good company is going to do this research). I have been in contact with one group doing a storage array for HDSDi. This camera work has been going on for more than a year enough time to even get a commercial one done.
But as far as the Drake camera (a group with heads screwed on right) came out of our forum discussions, and most of the story of what happened is on the Drake thread in the Alternative Imaging forum (plus a new Soviet camera, in matter of fact a few people have turned up with their own companies hi-speed cameras in the threads, worth a look). As far as we know Drake is not dead, but going through the painful process of commercialising a customised camera solution ("commercialise" and "custom" are two hard things to do in cameras).
Silicon Imaging offer an uncompressed Altasens camera system for around 10K, I think (also involved with us).
Latest drives with more than 50MB/s sustained write rate each, and upto 500GB, and soon more. Once you string a number of the drives together you can have a solution measured in thousands of dollars, not hundreds of thousands.
The problem with people in our group is they call RAW Bayer images, 4:4:4 Raw, which is three times the data-rate of Bayer, and a fair bit more expensive obviously, maybe that is where the confusion is. There is a an even smaller format based on pixel shift that I personally advocate for smaller cameras. You notice that the Red camera has two HDSDi inputs what's that, 400MB/s, 8 mpixels 4:4:4 is around 600MB/s at 24fps 8-bit, in bayer it is around 200MB/s. With pixel shift, much less again.
Recently Dalsa announced a nice hi-tech/ultra-resolution sensor, so I expect 8 MPixel to be coming down in price in face of competition.
The trick to low cost development and fast delivery, is to interface existing systems together so you don't have to do most of the work. If you fully to come up with a better system.
But the future has few friends with deep pockets and deep experience sometimes, and that is what has been holding things back a lot of the time.
Thanks
Wayne.
Read a few more comments:
> Open up the sample image in Photoshop and you will see that the EXIF belongs to a Canon EOS 1D MK II.
With these "guys", it would not surprise me if they used the Canon because it uses a Senor related to the one they want to use, and produces similar picture quality (I doubt the Canon's camera would be able to produce a live feed at that rate, even with over clocking, so I don't imagine their system is a hacked Canon Camera). Still, is it possible the frame was captured/loaded into an editor using the Canon's codec? If it isn't vaporware, it probably answers the question about which sensor at least.
> Open up the sample image in Photoshop and you will see that the EXIF belongs to a Canon EOS 1D MK II.
With these "guys", it would not surprise me if they used the Canon because it uses a Senor related to the one they want to use, and produces similar picture quality (I doubt the Canon's camera would be able to produce a live feed at that rate, even with over clocking, so I don't imagine their system is a hacked Canon Camera). Still, is it possible the frame was captured/loaded into an editor using the Canon's codec? If it isn't vaporware, it probably answers the question about which sensor at least.
Well, you can use this, NOW:
http://www.dalsa.com/dc/origin/origin.asp
Saw this at the HD Film Fest - Stunning....
http://www.dalsa.com/dc/origin/origin.asp
Saw this at the HD Film Fest - Stunning....
Wayne -
excellent analysis/feedback, thanks for contributing! I don't think we've chatted before (that I know of), feel free to drop me a line sometime to chat (please!).
b-scene films - yeah, there's a LOT to be said for "now."
However...the camera is a large beast, control layout is funky, you're required to be tethered to a big honkin' array...BUT...it does take BEAUTIFUL images, and has amazing dynamic range (I saw some snow in daylight footage that made a believer out of me)
-mike
excellent analysis/feedback, thanks for contributing! I don't think we've chatted before (that I know of), feel free to drop me a line sometime to chat (please!).
b-scene films - yeah, there's a LOT to be said for "now."
However...the camera is a large beast, control layout is funky, you're required to be tethered to a big honkin' array...BUT...it does take BEAUTIFUL images, and has amazing dynamic range (I saw some snow in daylight footage that made a believer out of me)
-mike
Some more interesting detective work: The phone number for the admin contact on the website is not in washington, but in california.
When you do a google search on just the phone number, you come up with it as the same admin contact for oakley.com
Oakley.com whois says the admin contact is Oakley inc. with the same admin contact phonenumber, and it gives the oakley headquarters address which is in Foothill Ranch, California (949).
So somehow, website creator, or company, Oakley Sunglasses are connected.
Don't know what it means (if anything) but maybe it sparks someone else to dig further.
As for vapor vs. reality, I really hope it is true: Raising the bar always lowers the price of everything else and may bring the current state-of-the-art within reach of us mortals.
When you do a google search on just the phone number, you come up with it as the same admin contact for oakley.com
Oakley.com whois says the admin contact is Oakley inc. with the same admin contact phonenumber, and it gives the oakley headquarters address which is in Foothill Ranch, California (949).
So somehow, website creator, or company, Oakley Sunglasses are connected.
Don't know what it means (if anything) but maybe it sparks someone else to dig further.
As for vapor vs. reality, I really hope it is true: Raising the bar always lowers the price of everything else and may bring the current state-of-the-art within reach of us mortals.
Oakley? Well, maybe that makes more sense now - it does say Oakley Thump on the fender of the car in the sample frame. They do have money, I would imagine, but what sunglasses and overpriced watches have to do with cameras, I don't know.
-Paul G.
-Paul G.
Amazingly sunglasses and watches and sunglass mp3 players provide a nice link. Means they have optics considerations in place and electronic engineerings in place with skill with memory interfaces. Plus the money. Those overpriced sunglasses just had to be funding something - who would have though digital cinema camera
> Wayne -
> excellent analysis/feedback, thanks for contributing! I don't think we've chatted before (that I know of), feel free to drop me a line sometime to chat (please!).
Hi Mike, you have around five or ten emails from me about the dvinfo cameras and some news contributions.
About lugging stuff around, if you kook at many film camera cinema rigs, they are not small either. Personally, I prefer to see a pro-video like camera with cinema quality image, but many of these cameras decided to go for cheap Cinema quality camera instead.
As far as the Red camera goes, is the business registed anywhere in the US. With some of these startup camera devices the members are spread all other the country (and even world) and Oakley might be just the principle investor/manufacturer that has taken on the device.
> excellent analysis/feedback, thanks for contributing! I don't think we've chatted before (that I know of), feel free to drop me a line sometime to chat (please!).
Hi Mike, you have around five or ten emails from me about the dvinfo cameras and some news contributions.
About lugging stuff around, if you kook at many film camera cinema rigs, they are not small either. Personally, I prefer to see a pro-video like camera with cinema quality image, but many of these cameras decided to go for cheap Cinema quality camera instead.
As far as the Red camera goes, is the business registed anywhere in the US. With some of these startup camera devices the members are spread all other the country (and even world) and Oakley might be just the principle investor/manufacturer that has taken on the device.
About your update Mike,
The availability of the Altasens, is another thing that delayed projects. The problem is that it went way overdue and then was available in limited quantities to some suppliers. The original cheap camera product from Sumix, was delayed due to this (they have gone really quiet for a number of months). As I said before, I think that Silicon Image have it available for their system.
I think the IBIS (and Smalcamera, now both owned by Cypress), latest Micron, and Altasens (supposed to be a cheap smaller sensor floating out there from them too) sensors were the for runners of a new generation of sensor technology, and we should expect more good sensor options to come (on the group we even found a new sensor with around 90% Quantum efficiency, conversion rate of photons to electrons, versus 70% for the Altasens, and usually upto around half of seventy for many hi-res sensors).
The availability of the Altasens, is another thing that delayed projects. The problem is that it went way overdue and then was available in limited quantities to some suppliers. The original cheap camera product from Sumix, was delayed due to this (they have gone really quiet for a number of months). As I said before, I think that Silicon Image have it available for their system.
I think the IBIS (and Smalcamera, now both owned by Cypress), latest Micron, and Altasens (supposed to be a cheap smaller sensor floating out there from them too) sensors were the for runners of a new generation of sensor technology, and we should expect more good sensor options to come (on the group we even found a new sensor with around 90% Quantum efficiency, conversion rate of photons to electrons, versus 70% for the Altasens, and usually upto around half of seventy for many hi-res sensors).
I can't wait for this camera! I can take footage of myself playing the Phantom game console with it, and if it's small enough, I can carry it with me and do some handheld shots while riding on the IT, a device that is going to revolutionize the world (oh wait...it was just a hyped up scooter...)
This camera is not going to happen. Mark my words.
This camera is not going to happen. Mark my words.
The red.com website is made up entirely of images: no searchable text at all. Additionally, the images are not given meaningful names, neither are the pages or titles. There are no meta tags for keywords or descriptions at all.
The makers of the site don't want it to be found.
The makers of the site don't want it to be found.
Believe me, I know another person working on a camera related project he wants to keep secret and not reveal information about, yet he has a website with a web page about it already, go figure that one?
I understand the the red.com website will be updated in a more professional way in two weeks. I was told that the site was indeed done in an hour or so with graphics only. The project began a few years ago and there is definitely a real project that is aimed at providing the camera of the future. The people behind this project are serious and capable, as others have commented earlier in this site.
Two words, price range?
Yes, we are interested.
I would also like to announce my camera project, called "Orange", it is 3D Ultra Ultra HD, has a telephoto mode that can be used to shoot over head shots of people from the moon, and the rockets to get you there ;)
Yes, we are interested.
I would also like to announce my camera project, called "Orange", it is 3D Ultra Ultra HD, has a telephoto mode that can be used to shoot over head shots of people from the moon, and the rockets to get you there ;)
forum, articles... has messages from the founder. And, the RED logo is part of the banner, so they have some connection. Woops, i see this is an old post.. i'll look for a newer one.
I must say, RED is keeping a secret as good or better than Apple. I'm seeing too many symilarities and options for the new Apature software from Apple and all of the Output options available with this cam, plus FCP6 public soon too. Someone else said "Mark my words, this camera isn't going to happen" consider your self marked! I believe this camera to be very true and to put the industry on its ear. The creator of RED has been posting at the DVInfo site, sounds sincere, and true to his word. KUDOS to John and his new creation, may the war of the new camera specs begin! (and goody for us!)
Mysterium was filed on 1/13/2006 under serial 78791220 , 3 months after the beer, with a very similar logo (?) from red.com inc, a Washington Corporation.
Note that the (R) on the red.com site is not justified, as Mysterium application is awaiting assignment to examining attorney, so it should have (TM) until registered. Also address in TM application is Red.com, Inc. P.O. Box 1389 , Eastsound , WA 98245 , but the (858)794-2140 is the number of Janet Kaufman, attorney for applicant (Solana Beach, CA)
Wonder how much was paid for the domain, but from Netcom to Reynolds to the R that is now on redcode.com , there must have been some checks written !
Lookup on archive.org....
CQ
Note that the (R) on the red.com site is not justified, as Mysterium application is awaiting assignment to examining attorney, so it should have (TM) until registered. Also address in TM application is Red.com, Inc. P.O. Box 1389 , Eastsound , WA 98245 , but the (858)794-2140 is the number of Janet Kaufman, attorney for applicant (Solana Beach, CA)
Wonder how much was paid for the domain, but from Netcom to Reynolds to the R that is now on redcode.com , there must have been some checks written !
Lookup on archive.org....
CQ
Kinetta is ridiculous. I ran into that guy at NAB last year, and as usual, he was touting the camera's "sensor-agnostic" design. So I asked him what was holding it up, and he says SENSORS.
Huh. So the great thing about the camera is that you can put any sensor you want in it, but the camera has been held up for years because you can't get this one particular sensor?
What a crock. This camera will be irrelevant long before the first one is sold.
Huh. So the great thing about the camera is that you can put any sensor you want in it, but the camera has been held up for years because you can't get this one particular sensor?
What a crock. This camera will be irrelevant long before the first one is sold.
Good post! Thank for your information!ed hardyed hardy
ed hardy clothinged hardy clothinged hardy jeansed hardy jeansed hardy uked hardy uked hardy bagsed hardy bagsed hardy shirtsed hardy shirtsed hardy swimweared hardy swimweared hardy hoodiesed hardy hoodiesed hardy topsed hardy topsed hardy t shirtsed hardy t shirtsed hardy shoesed hardy shoeschristian audigierchristian audigiered hardy mensed hardy mensed hardy womensed hardy womensed hardy kidsed hardy kidsed hardy accessoriesed hardy accessories
Post a Comment
ed hardy clothinged hardy clothinged hardy jeansed hardy jeansed hardy uked hardy uked hardy bagsed hardy bagsed hardy shirtsed hardy shirtsed hardy swimweared hardy swimweared hardy hoodiesed hardy hoodiesed hardy topsed hardy topsed hardy t shirtsed hardy t shirtsed hardy shoesed hardy shoeschristian audigierchristian audigiered hardy mensed hardy mensed hardy womensed hardy womensed hardy kidsed hardy kidsed hardy accessoriesed hardy accessories
Links to this post:

