Jump to content


Photo

REDuser ethics


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
242 replies to this topic

#1 Jaron Berman

Jaron Berman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 160 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York, NY

Posted 02 March 2008 - 08:46 PM

Well, for once I agree with Phil. The RED marketing system can be a bit scary.

I always post under my real name, as we do here because there should be nothing to hide. My opinions come from my experience and perspective, and should be treated as such.

So here's my story. A couple days ago, I questioned the cells within RED's batteries, guessing that they were chinese cells like all the other batteries at the same price point... and was quickly disputed by a RED team member. An hour later, my account stopped working. Today, as a test, I registered a new name and made a couple of posts. Not only did the account stop working almost immediately, someone changed my picture, profile information and also my posts! Apparently questioning anything related to RED's quality is a sin punishable by identity theft and censorship. If you're curious, I've never been enamored by their attention to detail in the mechanics of their parts. I like the idea of RED and personally hope that the camera succeeds if only because it'll be another great tool. Apparently I'm not religious enough about RED for their taste.

While we may not all agree with all other users here, thanks to the moderators, the discussion remains open and spirited. Information gets exchanged. Thank you for the honesty. Having my posts literally rewritten by moderators is not only completely amoral but terrifying.
  • 0

#2 Daniel Sheehy

Daniel Sheehy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 407 posts
  • Other
  • Brisbane

Posted 02 March 2008 - 11:03 PM

...Having my posts literally rewritten by moderators is not only completely amoral but terrifying.


I personally believe a moderator should never re-write a contribution without signing the re-write themselves and explaining why it was necessary.
  • 0

#3 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2660 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Los Angeles

Posted 03 March 2008 - 03:15 AM

As fas as I know, no moderator here has ever re-written a post. We've deleted and moved plenty, but the idea isn't to alter what someone is saying, it's to get rid of it if it needs to be gotten rid of. It's too bad that happened over there. My first guess would be that someone hacked their system and did it, but I guess an inside job wouldn't be out of the question. I guess you won't be posting there again any time soon!
  • 0

#4 Luke Haywood

Luke Haywood
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Electrician

Posted 03 March 2008 - 04:27 AM

While we may not all agree with all other users here, thanks to the moderators, the discussion remains open and spirited. Information gets exchanged. Thank you for the honesty. Having my posts literally rewritten by moderators is not only completely amoral but terrifying.

If it was done by one of the moderators there, then that's really sad. Pathetic really.

I've had one of my posts "edited" on Reduser. Admittedly I had misunderstood something one one of the "officials" said, but he should have simply quoted my mistake, and explained what I had gotten wrong, not simply deleted the sentence from my post. However I think that might have been the result of youthful inexperience.

With a project like the RED there are still going to be hecklers no matter how successful the product is. Trying to suppress the publication of undesirable information or viewpoints like that, simply gives them ammunition.

If the product never goes anywhere (and please be realistic, the RED still has a long way to go before it's taken seriously by anybody outside its immediate "family"), most people would say "Well, nice try lads, shame things didn't quite go your way" and so on.

But if the company gets a reputation for using "bully boy" tactics to try to cover up their setbacks and then fails, that will simply set them up for ridicule.

Don't get me wrong, I think the RED is still in with a chance, but if word gets round that they are trying to "edit" reality, that will make only their job so much harder.
  • 0

#5 Brian Drysdale

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

Posted 03 March 2008 - 05:34 AM

I've always found Jaron's posts in forums well worth reading and to find that he has been excluded from Reduser disturbing. I remember glancing through this Reduser thread and Jaron's question wasn'y any worse than those regarding who is rehousing the RED lenses. The only difference being the safety concerns over lithium batteries. All that was required was the correction by RED.

Closing Jaron's account is very much Reduser's loss.

The RED has its place and offers excellent bang for the buck, however, there are design flaws, many of which were pointed out during the on line feedback. Some of these could be due to RED keeping the camera module price down to their headline figure. Fortunately, the third party manufacturers are trying to correct these with add ons which should be part of the camera module.
  • 0

#6 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 03 March 2008 - 06:12 AM

I'm not sure there's much I could say here that isn't completely redundant.
  • 0

#7 Stephen Williams

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

Posted 03 March 2008 - 07:41 AM

As fas as I know, no moderator here has ever re-written a post.


Hi Brad,

I don't even have to possibly to edit posts on the Red or any of the HD forums. I have had had posts deleted & edited on REDUSER several times. On one occasion my post was completely rewritten by a moderator however I received a PM apologizing, there was a reasonable explanation on that occasion.

Stephen
  • 0

#8 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 03 March 2008 - 09:35 AM

There is never any reasonable explanation for putting words into somebody else's mouth.
  • 0

#9 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19760 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 03 March 2008 - 12:09 PM

Hi Brad,

I don't even have to possibly to edit posts on the Red or any of the HD forums. I have had had posts deleted & edited on REDUSER several times. On one occasion my post was completely rewritten by a moderator however I received a PM apologizing, there was a reasonable explanation on that occasion.

Stephen


Yes, as a Moderator over on RED User, I can edit anyone's post and have accidentally done it a couple of times when I hit the "EDIT" box when I meant to hit the "QUOTE" box right next to the edit box (hitting the quote box automatically creates a REPLY with the text quoted, however, hitting the EDIT box makes it seem like you did the same thing -- you open up old text, but now you are editing the original post, not replying to it with a new post.) I apologized when I did that because I couldn't figure out how to restore the original post.

I haven't ever edited anyone's post on purpose, however. I have been tempted...
  • 0

#10 Keith Walters

Keith Walters
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2219 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 04 March 2008 - 03:23 PM

I have seen threads on Reduser that point out sometimes quite serious design or QC problems, and they they seem to pass without "The Ministry of Truth" getting into the act.

Well, I suppose we will never know if it does :lol:
  • 0

#11 Chris Nuzzaco

Chris Nuzzaco
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 06 March 2008 - 02:45 PM

Thats interesting... Lately I've seen lots of "less than stellar" posts at Red addressing all kinds of issues like image noise when shooting under tungsten, etc. The original cameras lens mount had issues that were posted prior to and after the new mount. Granted, a lot of "issue" posts are more related to operation and lack of experience working with RAW cameras, but I've seen plenty of posts regarding QC issues like knobs, connectors etc. that haven't been deleted.

I did once get a bit harassed by a Moderator in the Off Topic forum once for posting some of my Andromeda research there, which many found interesting and exciting because it showed just how powerful RAW data is, even from a DVX100 (FYI you can check out the latest improvements at the Reel Stream Forum and here under the DVX forum). Supposedly some people wanted to keep the Off Topic forum "Red Only", but if you have ever been to that forum, you know as well as I do thats its far from that. So I suspect I was being a little targeted, but I was happy to see several members post in my defense.
  • 0

#12 Tom Lowe

Tom Lowe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1211 posts
  • Director
  • somewhere worshipping Terrence Malick

Posted 08 March 2008 - 09:43 AM

Thats interesting... Lately I've seen lots of "less than stellar" posts at Red addressing all kinds of issues like image noise when shooting under tungsten, etc. The original cameras lens mount had issues that were posted prior to and after the new mount. Granted, a lot of "issue" posts are more related to operation and lack of experience working with RAW cameras, but I've seen plenty of posts regarding QC issues like knobs, connectors etc. that haven't been deleted.

I did once get a bit harassed by a Moderator in the Off Topic forum once for posting some of my Andromeda research there, which many found interesting and exciting because it showed just how powerful RAW data is, even from a DVX100 (FYI you can check out the latest improvements at the Reel Stream Forum and here under the DVX forum). Supposedly some people wanted to keep the Off Topic forum "Red Only", but if you have ever been to that forum, you know as well as I do thats its far from that. So I suspect I was being a little targeted, but I was happy to see several members post in my defense.


Chris, I remember what happened to you, and I remember that a few of us stood up for you there.

Any type of "insurgent" movement is always tainted with a bit of paranoia. Just go to the discussion forums for Ralph Nader or Ron Paul's campaigns, and you will see posters and moderators being very protective of their candidate. Small groups that attempt to fly in the face of major parties or major corporations are paranoid (in some cases correctly) about "trolls" coming to their boards and posting negative stuff about their candidate, or in the case of Red, their camera. It's a natural phenomenon. It doesn't help that a very small fraction of people from here and from CML early on posted some really rude and disrespectful personal poop about Jannard, claiming he was a cult leader, and that the Red was probably a "scam," etc. That just adds to the paranoia and group think.

Jarred does believe in fairly heavy moderation in general, but he's built two thriving communities in Reduser and DVXuser, so he must be doing something right.
  • 0

#13 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3066 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 08 March 2008 - 10:23 AM

I don't agree with moderators rewriting posts, but also I really don't understand why anyone would expect impartiality from a forum set up to promote a particular product, and moderated by one of the manufacturer's employees.
  • 0

#14 Luke Haywood

Luke Haywood
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Electrician

Posted 08 March 2008 - 04:00 PM

Jarred does believe in fairly heavy moderation in general, but he's built two thriving communities in Reduser and DVXuser, so he must be doing something right.


If it's not a rude question exactly who IS Jarred Land? Apart from his as you said "built two thriving communities in Reduser and DVXuser", what exactly has he done in the film/TV world? His listings on IMDB are minor to virtually non-existent. OK IMDB doesn't cover the huge number of top dollar people who work exclusively on commercials, but I somehow don't get the impression he's done much of that either.
  • 0

#15 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11939 posts
  • Other

Posted 08 March 2008 - 05:24 PM

That's also assuming you consider the Red forums to be "thriving". Personally I consider them to be a toxic wasteground of sycophantism and disinformation.

P
  • 0

#16 Luke Haywood

Luke Haywood
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Electrician

Posted 08 March 2008 - 06:01 PM

That's also assuming you consider the Red forums to be "thriving". Personally I consider them to be a toxic wasteground of sycophantism and disinformation.

P


What you appear to be saying is: "Get a room, Reduser" :P

Fortunately most of the toxicity is well diluted. If this forum was like Reduser your post would have elicited a large amount of single phrase post "roughage" eg

Right on Phil!

You said a mouthful baby!

Great Post Phil!

I hear ya Phil!

You da man Phil!

:lol:

:P

What Phil said!

I wanna have your baby Phil!

Fantastic post Phil! ;) etc etc etc



To be fair, there have been some good, informative posts on Reduser.

One thing I'd be interested in knowing is what percentage of purchasers actually post on Reduser. I'm sure a large percentage of RED buyers would be professionals with no more time for poseur prat-chat than the trest of us.

Now there's an idea, a forum where the only people allowed to post are those who have actually paid for and received a RED camera!
  • 0

#17 Tom Lowe

Tom Lowe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1211 posts
  • Director
  • somewhere worshipping Terrence Malick

Posted 08 March 2008 - 06:07 PM

If it's not a rude question exactly who IS Jarred Land? Apart from his as you said "built two thriving communities in Reduser and DVXuser", what exactly has he done in the film/TV world? His listings on IMDB are minor to virtually non-existent. OK IMDB doesn't cover the huge number of top dollar people who work exclusively on commercials, but I somehow don't get the impression he's done much of that either.


How exactly is this relevant? Last time I checked, Jarred wasn't claiming he was John Toll. Jarred barely posts about anything. He never weighs in on 99% of the subject matter on the forum. He rarely weighs in on anything at all, nor does he interfere with the general running of the forum. Mostly he's just a host for the rest of us, and sometimes kicks down some first-hand information about the Red when it's relevant. No offense, but your post smacks haterism.

Edited by Tom Lowe, 08 March 2008 - 06:10 PM.

  • 0

#18 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 08 March 2008 - 06:15 PM

Well Obviously a lot of money has been invested in the RED camera and in my opinion it gives the best footage I have seen from a video/ Digital camera Personally I prefer the look of film. But if I wanted to make a film then then the RED may even be my choice for a film script I have written because of the sheer amount of SFX it would need and because the RED has the quality and a look that I wouldnt say competes with film but is a viable alternative. The RED is another tool for film makers and a very good one at that.
  • 0

#19 Jim Jannard

Jim Jannard
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 361 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 08 March 2008 - 06:24 PM

That's also assuming you consider the Red forums to be "thriving". Personally I consider them to be a toxic wasteground of sycophantism and disinformation.

P


Sounds like we are just having too much fun over there...

The idea behind RED was to put a professional tool in the hands of many. To empower the indie shooter and next generation film maker.

Quite frankly, it was a bit of a surprise that real trained professionals, like Peter Jackson, Steven Soderbergh, Taylor and Neveldine, Roberto Schaefer, Dean Devlin and a growing list of talented pros, would embrace and find value in RED as they have.

It is very interesting that this enthusiasm at the highest level is also found at the indie level... but not here. Also interesting to note is that almost half of every post on this site is about RED. As much as Phil and a few others would like to discredit RED as "grotesquely incompetent", that message doesn't seem to be sticking, no matter how hard a few try.

Jim
  • 0

#20 Luke Haywood

Luke Haywood
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Electrician

Posted 08 March 2008 - 06:33 PM

Well Obviously a lot of money has been invested in the RED camera and in my opinion it gives the best footage I have seen from a video/ Digital camera Personally I prefer the look of film. But if I wanted to make a film then then the RED may even be my choice for a film script I have written because of the sheer amount of SFX it would need and because the RED has the quality and a look that I wouldnt say competes with film but is a viable alternative. The RED is another tool for film makers and a very good one at that.

It sounds like you want to voice a contrary opinion, but I can't find anything in your post that particularly disagrees with what has been said do far.

So, what point are you trying to make, that fits into the scope of this thread?
Most people here aren't particularly critical of the camera itself, it is what it is. They are however highly critical of how it was and is being marketed.

By the way, have you got anything other than a script? If not, trust me, the shooting format you use is a very long way down a very long list of obstacles you will have to overcome before you see your project on any sort of screen, large or small.
  • 0


Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Glidecam

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Tai Audio

Glidecam

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post