Jump to content


Photo

to the mod(s)


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 jan von krogh

jan von krogh
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts
  • Producer

Posted 20 July 2007 - 06:21 PM

i fail to understand why posting photos is now considered advertisement.

if so, please educate me about the guidelines - i personally was waiting eagerly for real shots of the camera this particular forum is all about.
  • 0

#2 Werner Klipsch

Werner Klipsch
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 86 posts
  • Other

Posted 20 July 2007 - 08:18 PM

i fail to understand why posting photos is now considered advertisement.

if so, please educate me about the guidelines - i personally was waiting eagerly for real shots of the camera this particular forum is all about.


I think the problem is that the only photos available are the ones that RED and co have decreed release-able! We are never going to see a bad picture coming from them!

We are supposed to be discussing the camera for the purpose of personal evaluation. This can only happen when cameras are in production for testing in private without strings attached. For an example, a while back we had a unauthorized picture through the RED viewfinder, which Jannard was not happy about. But that was much more interesting that most of the stuff RED released!

As for your pictures, the place for those is on RED's own website.
  • 0

#3 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 21 July 2007 - 02:19 AM

We are supposed to be discussing the camera for the purpose of personal evaluation. This can only happen when cameras are in production for testing in private without strings attached. For an example, a while back we had a unauthorized picture through the RED viewfinder, which Jannard was not happy about. But that was much more interesting that most of the stuff RED released!

As for your pictures, the place for those is on RED's own website.


Hi Werner,

I think you have answered Jan's question.

This running costs of this site are paid for by Ad's, and sustaining members. The photo's in question were 'options' available for purchasing.

Stephen
  • 0

#4 jan von krogh

jan von krogh
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts
  • Producer

Posted 22 July 2007 - 09:23 PM

so, bottomline:

shots not authorized by the manufacturer and in discussion are ok, shots by the manufacturer not ok.
titlepages of wellknow magazines not ok.

i can´t help myself, but i think these paradigms are not too unbiased.
  • 0

#5 Werner Klipsch

Werner Klipsch
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 86 posts
  • Other

Posted 23 July 2007 - 05:58 AM

shots not authorized by the manufacturer and in discussion are ok,

Of course. What kind of discussion forum do you think this should be?

shots by the manufacturer not ok.
titlepages of wellknow magazines not ok.


Only when it seems reasonable that people on this forum might not know about them. If there is some radical -RED development and nobody here is talking about it, a brief link to the page or whatever should be OK, and then we can discuss it .

Jannard doesn't advertise here; he isn't even a sustaining member! He has his own damned site where he can advertise all he likes for free! You can't really blame the management for denying him free advertising here :lol:

Nobody stops Jannard from posting here, you'll notice.

Edited by Werner Klipsch, 23 July 2007 - 06:00 AM.

  • 0

#6 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 23 July 2007 - 06:08 AM

Jannard doesn't advertise here; he isn't even a sustaining member! He has his own damned site where he can advertise all he likes for free! You can't really blame the management for denying him free advertising here :lol:

Personally I feel that way particularly about the quotes that got posted here. The people who tested the camera are more than welcome to post about their experiences in detail, but please spare us quotes from folks like Cranky Maxwell Taylor, which really are just disguised advertising without any information content.
  • 0

#7 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19769 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 23 July 2007 - 07:43 AM

I didn't mind Jannard posting his own tests here, even though it was just a repeat of his posts elsewhere. Imagine if Sony or Kodak engineers posted tests here too? Despite the fact that it is a form of self-promotion, it's still a technical test being posted, it's still information of a sort, and the source is identified, not hidden so it can be taken with a grain of salt.

But if it bugs enough forum members, so be it -- that's the nature of a forum, there has to be some group consensus about its nature.

As for personal tests of the RED or any other camera, lens, or film stock, I don't think anyone here would mind at all.

My only comment about the RED being shot at high ASA ratings is that noise is less distracting in a still shot than in a moving image, so keep that in mind when deciding just how much underexposure is acceptable, image-quality-wise.
  • 0

#8 Hal Smith

Hal Smith
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2280 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • OKC area

Posted 23 July 2007 - 08:03 AM

I didn't mind Jannard posting his own tests here, even though it was just a repeat of his posts elsewhere. Imagine if Sony or Kodak engineers posted tests here too?


My vote would be for posting anything technical of value. He was very quick to let everyone know that he had run into a production glitch and I think that speaks volumes of his ethical intent with respect to using forums to publish information about RED.
  • 0

#9 Gary McClurg

Gary McClurg
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 304 posts
  • Producer

Posted 23 July 2007 - 09:06 AM

My only comment about the RED being shot at high ASA ratings is that noise is less distracting in a still shot than in a moving image, so keep that in mind when deciding just how much underexposure is acceptable, image-quality-wise.


Could just be a web legend... but I thought that you were included in a test of the camera with some of the people who were on the waiting list for a camera... maybe just a story someone posted...
  • 0

#10 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 July 2007 - 09:30 AM

Could just be a web legend... but I thought that you were included in a test of the camera with some of the people who were on the waiting list for a camera... maybe just a story someone posted...


From memory, I believe one of the guys on DVInfo offered to let David test the RED he'd ordered.

Showing tests is fine, of course people are going to have their own opinion on what is acceptable on their productions.

It's more a matter of defining the rather grey dividing line between useful technical discussion/debate and viral marketing.
  • 0

#11 Gary McClurg

Gary McClurg
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 304 posts
  • Producer

Posted 23 July 2007 - 09:46 AM

It's more a matter of defining the rather grey dividing line between useful technical discussion/debate and viral marketing.


I think your right about someone saying David could test his...

I think the camera is still a year a way...

All the people who are shooting with the camera will have the money to fix problems... so once all the bugs are out... then who knows...

Myself I'm not a dp... I'm a producer so I wouldn't risk renting or purchasing the camera until then... I can't afford to have down time on a set...

Someone told me just pad my budget so that I can fix things... at that point I might as well pad the budget some more... and shoot 35mm to begin with... and not worry about problems...

Edited by Gary McClurg, 23 July 2007 - 09:47 AM.

  • 0

#12 M. Andrew Benz

M. Andrew Benz
  • Guests

Posted 23 July 2007 - 10:42 PM

From memory, I believe one of the guys on DVInfo offered to let David test the RED he'd ordered.


Hi Brian,

That was me and the offer still stands whenever the camera is released. David seems to be a great guy (not just a great DP) and he has been very gracious with his knowledge. I just want to pay him back a little for all his incredible input/knowledge/time... But I have to be honest, it would be prudent on my part to let someone who is a lot smarter and knowledgeable to run my camera/lenses through whatever tests they would like... I do look forward to meeting David at the LART when it happens.

This is my first post here so please be gentle...

Cheers

Andrew
  • 0

#13 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 July 2007 - 11:14 PM

Hi Brian,

That was me and the offer still stands whenever the camera is released. David seems to be a great guy (not just a great DP) and he has been very gracious with his knowledge. I just want to pay him back a little for all his incredible input/knowledge/time... But I have to be honest, it would be prudent on my part to let someone who is a lot smarter and knowledgeable to run my camera/lenses through whatever tests they would like... I do look forward to meeting David at the LART when it happens.

This is my first post here so please be gentle...

Cheers

Andrew

I think you graciously meant to say "smarter than I," meaning that you feel that David is a smart guy.
  • 0

#14 M. Andrew Benz

M. Andrew Benz
  • Guests

Posted 23 July 2007 - 11:49 PM

I think you graciously meant to say "smarter than I," meaning that you feel that David is a smart guy.

Heheh, thank you Mitch you are absolutely correct. It was in my train of thought, it just didn't leave the station.

Mitch, I look forward to purchasing and renting gear from you guys. You are also a great resource. Thank You.

Cheers,

Andrew
  • 0

#15 Emanuel A Guedes

Emanuel A Guedes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 528 posts
  • Producer

Posted 24 July 2007 - 05:58 AM

Heheh, thank you Mitch you are absolutely correct. It was in my train of thought, it just didn't leave the station.

Mitch, I look forward to purchasing and renting gear from you guys. You are also a great resource. Thank You.

Cheers,

Andrew

Indeed!

I'm also glad to see you... everywhere Andrew!

Be welcome my friend! ;-)
Emanuel

(...)

This is my first post here so please be gentle...

Cheers

Andrew


  • 0

#16 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 24 July 2007 - 06:59 AM

As for personal tests of the RED or any other camera, lens, or film stock, I don't think anyone here would mind at all.


Indeed not. Heck, I'd actually suggest that he grab a member of here to run his own tests.

Might I suggest Santo? 8)
  • 0

#17 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11944 posts
  • Other

Posted 24 July 2007 - 08:50 AM

In response to the thread starter, I would suggest that the moderators avoid discussion of moderating decisions.

It leads to pointless argument.

This is, as they say, not a democracy.

Phil
  • 0

#18 jan von krogh

jan von krogh
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts
  • Producer

Posted 24 July 2007 - 10:40 PM

I think the camera is still a year a way...


i suppose you don´t realize the cameras are shooting the moment we speak.

2 times so far delayed delivery mass-production schedule has slipped from may to august.
  • 0

#19 jan von krogh

jan von krogh
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts
  • Producer

Posted 24 July 2007 - 10:50 PM

I didn't mind Jannard posting his own tests here, even though it was just a repeat of his posts elsewhere.


Hello David,

i posted links to the shots of the red camera in its delivery packages as well as a link to a well know publication from new zealand, which decided to put peter jackson and his tests with red prototypes on its frontpage.

the thread was locked down within short time before anyone could comment.

i started this thread in order to understand if we do have a policy and guidelines or personal judgement as base on these forums.

i would like to add that i am amused.
accusing one of the owners of hdcam cameras and gear posting on this board of advertising red is, in itself, an obvious oxymoron.
  • 0

#20 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 25 July 2007 - 05:30 AM

I think posting the links as "news" was the problem. If you had written a post that said something like "Up until now the only pictures of the RED camera were CAD illustrations but if you go to their website you can find actual photos" than I don't think anyone would complain. When you start a new thread based on linking to those images it feels like an ad. If you just point out that these things exist as an answer to the comments that they had not in the past than that is useful information. Perhaps a fine line, but it is a distinct one I think.
  • 0


CineLab

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine