@RatLabs, I've been here for a long time, I actually did NAB coverage for Vitality last year. I've had this call name since the beginning of the internet, nothing to do with Red Cameras. Own 2 Gh2's and shot a lot with them...

@Vitality

When Red introduced it's camera the competitors(Sony) were listing an inferior camera(f900) for close to $100,000.00. Red's price point was close to 35k fully rigged out. Total misinformation on this thread about Sony or Canon being affordable alternatives.

@re9d

I removed some sugar.

Also, try to keep it out of pure flame and trolling. It is topic about specific thing, not about how Red is good or bad.

@010101

Some, please. We don't need pro Red or anti Red flame here. It is so old and not interesting.

@010101 I don't know Jarred personally, nor can I speak for him. I work as a Cinematographer or Camera Assistant on professional sets in Los Angeles, CA.

Well the Invention is patented by Jarred.

Back in the day, Panavision and Jarred were the two front runners of the large sensor cameras and Red One(well now the Epic), not the Panavision Genesis, is what I see on set everyday. If you go to Panavision HW, they have a large amount of two cameras, Epic & Alexa... for a reason.

The Epic is an amazing camera and is constantly being improved... there are patches, but the camera is very reliable and I haven't had a problem with it that wasn't caused by human error.

How great would it be if Panasonic said, "we'll rehouse the GH2 to give you guys a full frame sensor and HD-SDI out for maybe an extra $1000..." that's basically what the Red company does with upgrades. Sony makes you buy a whole new camera system on top of the fact that when there were asked to make a camera for George Lucas, they dropped the ball. They basically copied what American companies were doing, specifically, Red & Panavision.

Problem is you don't know what you're talking about, don't have any professional experience working with any of these cameras. I could spend an hour explaining why the Red didn't make something similar to the BM, but it's probably over your head...

@Vitaliy Thanks so much for the correction, you're a god man.... keep up the good work!

I'm a little confused. Read through the patents and couldn't really find anything in the description of the innovations of their compression that wasn't known about compression before the filing of the patents, and wavelet compression and its application for video goes way back before RED in may different variants. The claim from RED seems borderline fraudulent? But I'm a layman in this sense, therefor the confusion.

@re9d, " Yada yada yada ...Problem is you don't know what you're talking about, don't have any professional experience working with any of these cameras. I could spend an hour explaining why the Red didn't make something similar to the BM, but it's probably over your head... yada yada yada"

Oh I see you brought your BAZUKA ( intended ) and your mouth to go with it - but this is not one of your JJ's knife fights. Talk BIG is what redusers live with. How about you show off some that said professional result from your work with the beta epic here. Especially the ones that would be over my head.

As interesting the red's technology was for a while, it is all history now. The natural progress of technology is growing so fast around them, you won't be able to recognize them from the rest soon. As matter of fact 8K technology is just around corner and that is when red having major troubles producing " working " units of 4K in considerable quantities . This noise that JJ is making these days against SONY and others will be the laughing matter for some times to come.

Even your little mind should get this point. Technology get's outdated - and the people that affix themselves to that specific technology will share that fate. That said, " the work " done with technology may survive if it is worthy.

Do we care what camera Kurosawa used to shoot " Seven Samuri " !? I don't think Stan Kubrick ever walked around arguing about his favourite camera but everybody knows " 2001 Space Odyssey " and Kubrick.

Only insignificant people attempt to get recognition by attaching themselves to a supposedly popular brand.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev, To make it clear I don't hate red. I just don't like some of the fanfare they gathered - that's all. But you are right man. I'll try to stay on the road.

'RED may have found something deeper in the way Sony is compressing RAW'

Sony have done the dodgy before, it was something along the lines of Sony stealing/pirating it's copy protection methods used on it's CDs for the purpose of preventing people pirating them.. several years ago though.

Still waiting for that Red full-frame 617 medium format camera that does video lol!

@010101

We do care about some related details, such as Kurosawa's usage of telephoto lenses heavily stopped down.

@eyenorth submit a prior art claim them to the U.S. patent office

Anyway, if I was spending that much on a camera, I would simply not be shooting digital to begin with.

This discussion seems a little odd to me.

If RED was awarded patents, then the only question regarding them and Sony should be whether Sony violated those patents. I have no expertise or experience with the patents in question and I have no reason to hold this situation against either Sony or RED.

Some of you do not feel the patents should have been granted. That's an issue to take up with legislators and the patent office, not RED. RED is a business and it seems highly illogical for any business to fail to take advantage of patents they've been awarded. Similarly, if Sony does not feel they have violated these patents, it would be highly illogical for them to have avoided doing something just because it was "similar" to RED.

Both companies have made cameras that have been used for extremely high-quality cinematography and have contributed to better digital technology (I'm going to avoid arguing about film) being put in the hands of cameramen than they previously had access to. There is no doubt that both the Sony F65 and the RED Epic technologically superior cameras to F900 and are available at a lower price. I do not see any reason for us to "jump on" either company here.

The only people who have reason to feel passionately about a "victory" in this case are Sony, RED and their respective teams. The content of the lawsuit should make it evidently clear whether their respective claims have merit. Until then, there really doesn't seem to be much reason for consumers unaffiliated with either company to get upset about this particular story. Honestly, I think that the demise of either company would be a loss for the consumer - I'm surprised to see some people arguing otherwise.

Whatever happens in the lawsuit (and I hope that the law is accurately interpreted, whomsoever benefits), I hope that both companies emerge from the encounter in good enough shape to continue making products. Competition tends to benefit the consumer.

@re9d You said we don't have any professional experience and we don't know what we are talking about, so I thought it would be reasonable to ask to see some examples of video that you yourself created. Only by looking at footy can we really tell what is real and what is imagined.

@thepalalias it does not matter whether anyone was awarded the patents, what matters is when the patent is tested whether they can show prior art. Patents are awarded all the time, sometimes randomly, and they only dig into them if they are contested. By the time the case works its way through the courts and appeals, the technology will be obsolete. Sony has a long history of questionable behaviour (remember the rootkit?) but they probably have a case on this one. Anyway, most of these patents are bogus and the electronics business needs to come up with a better solution than litigation.

If Sony's claim wins, RED is dead.

Regarding this topic's name, the old rule says: "attack is the best defence"