The lawsuit between RED and Nikon will no longer be going to trial, as it's now been officially dismissed by the California Central District Court yesterday. Meaning that Nikon can continue to use the compressed raw recording features in the Z9.
I'd love to know what our DPs and camera ops think about the situation as a whole. Do you think it's fair for one company to hold a monopolized patent on a tool that is used so widely across all brands?
https://ymcinema.com/2023/04/27/red-vs-nikon-case-dismissed/
3 people like this
I always wondered how this was going to pan out. Interesting that it was dismissed.
2 people like this
RED cameras are overrated anyway! Glad Nikon won!
2 people like this
This is a relief. We can't let greedy companies like RED bully others.
2 people like this
Super interesting, thanks for sharing @Ashley!
2 people like this
Comparing RAW data capture patents and screenplay IP is a bit of stretch. Unless you're a lawyer wanting to cash in on a lawsuit or a company trying to brush others aside for their own gain.
RED does not own RAW and did not invent it. It's been used by the industry before RED even existed. Like they've done before, it's using pressure tactics to try to keep competition at bay.
A screenwriter protecting their script is an entirely different thing.
2 people like this
I think what's complicated about this situation and the reason it's not very comparable to a script, is that almost all cameras now capture RAW data. Even phones, can capture RAW these days. It would be Iike Celtx suddenly filing a lawsuit against FinalDraft for exporting scripts as a PDF. Not the best example, but you get what I mean. RED is attempting to control a technical functionality that exists throughout the industry and beyond it.
3 people like this
Does the outcome of this litigation affect the choice of products that individuals will make for projects? That consideration is a very personal one and should probably not rely solely on outcome of litigation. Histories of litigation are telling in only small ways as it relates to products we use to create pictures. The emphasis put on the consideration of that info is up to each person and how they consider certain companies and their products. I have first hand knowledge of 2 other similar instances and absolutely take that into account when dealing with anything that might relate to those companies. But that is not a sole deciding factor.
I will not have any RED products on my sets. Ever. Personal history dating back to their beginning and added to many times along the way. There are lots of companies out there making products that can be made to work and I choose to use those products instead. Each of us makes decisions based upon myriad bits of information we have gleaned through experience and other ways. That information can be directly related (i.e. what is the actual measurable resolution of the camera system) or secondarily (i.e. was a company doing something I find distasteful). A lot goes into the choices we make for our pictures.
1 person likes this
Andrew Sobkovich, I think that's a good and interesting point. Cases like these do affect larger decision-making for some creators in the sense of what equipment they'll choose to utilize in their productions.
2 people like this
This is such an interesting case and always fee that more choices are better for filmmakers and DPs. Thanks for sharing, Ashley!
1 person likes this
Ashley Renee Smith I suppose that if you have developed the technology and have the patent, then you want to protect your product. My limited understanding is that patents are time limited anyway, so they could wait for that to expire? No/Yes/Maybe?
Andrew Sobkovich I’m intrigued by your answer, Andrew. No Red cameras on your set. Please educate me. Is that because of reliability issues, or quality of image capture, or the mechanics of the camera? I would love to know.
1 person likes this
Geoff Hall I do not use Red cameras. There are other choices, and I opt for those. It is a personal decision with the camera and company forged link by link like Jacob Marley’s chain. For me it started when a director demanded we test the RED One for a commercial even though it was still in Beta release (it was replaced before it ever came out of Beta testing). My crew was getting full rate for the test days, so sure I would test it. I was curious. Well, the 92 second start—up time told me a lot about the people who designed it. We shot color and resolution tests, were going to start into a full exposure test when the camera failed. Wouldn’t turn on. Calls to RED for help elicited an interesting response that was approximately like this:
RED - “can’t turn it on, okay, is it powered?” me - “yes as it was when it worked and power supply still has the correct output and we tried 2 different batteries”
RED - “what is the firmware version?” me-“Where do I find it?”
RED- “in the menu”. me - “I can’t turn the camera on”
RED - “OK, what is the software version?” me - “Where do I find it?”
RED - “in the menu”. me - “I can’t turn the camera on”
RED - “you need to update to the latest software”. me - “I can’t turn the camera on”
Utterly pointless waste of time. with a failed camera and failed support. No, RED was no chosen for the project.
The results of testing that we did get in the can showed that the “4K” camera could not see all of the colours in the REC709 standard. The dark areas were very noisy. The actual resolution recorded in the test was far far below 4K. It was simply not a 4K camera in the way I consider what 4K is. Before RED’s advertising campaign, camera resolution was what the cameras actually saw not the number of photo sites. Actual tested resolution was significantly less than the 4K I got from a 4K film transfer. For me that experience, product that had a terminal failure, poor test results, all with equivalent customer support, pretty much ended my interest in the camera. And made life annoying with “K’s” not actual resolution being discussed. That was just the first interaction with the camera.
On a shoot where the cameras were dictated by the producer (I needed the gig), I had 2 REDs shooting and 2 spare bodies. By lunch on day 1 we had 4 cameras that were overheated. Resorted to shooting with 2 cameras for an hour then swapping out to trying make the day. On the second day we were down to shooting with 1 camera and swapping it out every half hour in a rotation working through all 4 bodies one after the other. By the end of the second day we were way behind schedule. Changed cameras that evening and eventually caught up to the schedule. Producer never talked to me again.
RED brought out an extended latitude camera. At first they didn’t want to admit that there was a secondary much shorter shutter time exposure between the regular frames. At a presentation by RED of the camera I asked about the 2 exposures being at the same time or a different time. I was told “it depends on what you mean by at the same time” by the witty salesman. Obfuscation is the polite term for that answer, in the meeting I didn’t use any polite terms in the response.
Referring to the original post in this thread, I am very aware of some of the details of 2 separate actions (not against me). Both were counter to my ethics.
These are just a few of the incidences that kept piling up. Image quality, build quality and support issues just kept building up. The rare problems from other manufacturers were always fully admitted to and fixed. Almost from the outset it was obvious that there would be no point at which I would choose to use a RED because of a laundry list of issues. I know of projects that were done with RED cameras and everyone was happy. When approached about a project and I am told “we are shooting on a RED”. I decline immediately wishing them a good shoot with whoever made that choice. As I said, this is obviously a personal decision based upon my experiences over an extended period. A decision that I have seen no need to reverse. I’m sure nobody at RED is loosing sleep over this.
Andrew Sobkovich Thanks for your reply. That’s quite a catalogue of disasters. I will steer any DP I work with away from a RED camera. Low budget films can’t afford to drop days because of camera malfunctions. And overheating. Yes, I’d heard of that problem as well as the noise in low-light scenes. With such scenes, what is your weapon of choice? I’m curious and want to learn. Thanks again for taking the time to respond so thoroughly.
Geoff Hall As I said, my reasons are personal, wide-ranging, and built over an extended period. Other people may have different experiences. Respect that. The decision is up to the DP you are working with to deliver the images you want. Trust your choice or change. A simple discussion based upon “why?” should tell you the thought process. Trust your ability to listen and think, and your choices. The only caveat to asking “why” is from an owner/operator as other reasoning may come into play. I only know of the current range of RED cameras through others so cannot speak directly to the image quality. I’ve not seen anything that makes me wish to try again.