LEGACY BAGGAGE

LEGACY BAGGAGE

I've been researching this notion of Legacy Baggage and how it often unfortunately impairs the development of new technologies. 2 aspects of video production in particular are victims of this, namely - 2/3" sensors and 29.97/23.98 time code.

The size, 2/3", standard for broadcast camera sensors, lenses, etc. comes from the fact that prior to CCD technology, video cameras used a CRT pick up tube much like the one in your television. This pick up tube was 2/3" in diameter so the video lenses of the day were designed to work with this standard size. Due to the efforts of Sony, Ikegami, and others, eventually pick up tubes were phased out in favor of new CCD sensors. Given this opportunity to introduce a new broadcast video standard, the size of these new chips could have been anything but due to the existing equipment legacy, 2/3" was chosen so that all those thousands of video lenses out there could continue to work. It's the exact same situation with time code. Time code was originally a solid 30 fps. With the advent of color television back in the 1950's, the frame rate was slowed by 0.01% to become 29.97 which could accommodate analog color sync. Years later when 24 fps video production became a reality, the frame rate of 23.98 was introduced so that the new technology could fit into existing workflows. Now here we are again in the process of adopting a new 100% digital TV standard, where there are no analog related sync issues. HDTV broadcasts could quite easily utilize a solid frame rate and we would be done with 59.94/29.97/23.98 forever but instead, it was deemed easier and safer to make the new accommodate the old. Legacy Baggage.

Within reason, newer companies like RED and Vision Research have minimal existing equipment legacies to deal with so are therefore free to design with much less limitation. Take this new RED Digital Stills in Motion Camera idea. Unlike Canon, RED doesn't already have a pro video product line that would be rendered instantly obsolete with the introduction of this one product. (They do however have a certain 4k digital cinema camera that could be jeopardized, that is if they don't continue to support and develop it in its own right.) 

No legacy baggage = technological innovation

These are just some quick thoughts. It plays in with my earlier post on stills/video convergence. Just wondering where all this technology is leading us.. I'd love to hear what other people have to say about it.

C O N V E R G E N C E

C O N V E R G E N C E

I recently worked on another simultaneous video and stills shoot. Seems like there's been more and more of this lately. It was a branded content piece for Vice Magazine's online video network, VBS.tv. What was so cool about this job was that the 2 digital workflows in place - one for the two HVX200 video cameras and the other for the two Canon 1Ds Mark II still cameras were REMARKABLY similar. We had a laptop station set up for video and a separate one working for stills with a tech handling each. We lit the shots for video and when the director would call for stills, the Mark II would fly in and he would just use a tethered flash when he needed a little extra kick. In working closely with the stills tech, we were able to create a very similar palette and digital "grain structure" for both media. In the end, the images were remarkably well matched though the stills were obviously of vastly superior quality. This really got me thinking about where this business is going and the possibilities that new technology, like the upcoming RED Digital Stills and Motion Camera, will afford. Shoots like this could become the norm for commercial applications in the coming years. You kill 2 birds with one stone and in the end, it's all just digital imaging. So much of the theory and practice applies to both media. If this trend takes off, it will be interesting to see what happens when videographers are forced to become photographers and photographers become videographers.

Director of Brick speaks his mind. Incites blog wrath.

Director of Brick speaks his mind. Incites blog wrath.

This is too much. I love these polite and oh so convoluted back and forth blog wars. What's good is that real issues are addressed in specific contexts. For a camera like RED, a camera whose continued development depends on feedback from its user base, this is utterly essential. Then why is the RED community so up in arms? Who dare criticize the messiah of motion picture cameras?

I've let my thoughts on RED be well known on this blog. Having used it many times for many different applications I can say that it's an amazing camera in its price range. Is it the right tool for every job? No and to my knowledge it never claimed to be. The legions of its rabid fan base however have their own opinions which is why they're so quick to come to its defense. Johnson's article however is by no means an attack on the camera. It merely addresses the reality of how the technology works and what the real repercussions of the way it handles its data are. I think the old adage, "you don't get something for nothing", applies handily here.

Now read it cause it's great:

Part 1: Rian Johnson writes "RED FACTS". The original version of this paper, the version that solicited the first response, has been over written by this current draft.

Part 2: Chris Kenny responds on his blog in several posts.

Part 3: More from Kenny/Indie4k

Part 4: Johnson's Rebuttal

and Finally Part 5: Kenny's rebuttal to Johnson's rebuttal.