Re: Camera v1.5.1 available
Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2014 5:15 pm
Moved to the a more appropriate thread sorry.
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15689
gr8pics wrote:I work with software.
Imo, its not about revealing new features, but generally just keep us in the loop.
They should hire a communication manager, informing us about the progress "hello again, as you may know, we are working on an update, but bugtesting of new features have taken a little longer than expected, so bla bla bla bla..."
It takes SO little extra to make a customers satisfied, instead of putting them on the ignore list, like they are doing here.
ANY INFO, IS BETTER THAN NO INFO!
Eugene C. wrote:Moved to the a more appropriate thread sorry.
Theodore Prentice wrote:"The Cinema Camera has zebra stripes now, and according to Blackmagic Design, they are adding histogram and waveform monitoring (at time of shipping, or in a firmware update after shipped units is not known at this time)."
John Brawley wrote:Theodore Prentice wrote:"The Cinema Camera has zebra stripes now, and according to Blackmagic Design, they are adding histogram and waveform monitoring (at time of shipping, or in a firmware update after shipped units is not known at this time)."
I don't believe BMD have ever said they would add those features. You're quoting a review of the camera that says that they will without attribution.
JB
shanepeters@bellsouth.net wrote: I understand the difficulty in doing all this, but the problem I am having is I bought a product advertised to work a specific way. Rec709 in camera lut (still admittedly not color accurate....red/orange issues)
shanepeters@bellsouth.net wrote:and Audio that requires extra gear and a post fix to make usable are the 2 problems that hinder this product and its professional use on a shoot.
shanepeters@bellsouth.net wrote:... and ability to appy an in-camera lut that works without color correction (if you set your limited colorbalance option right.)
shanepeters@bellsouth.net wrote:do you think that would be a good buisness practice or ethic?
Theodore Prentice wrote:Im quoting the man that BMD trusts as a beta tester, and an insider to BMD tech and info.
Are you saying Solario made it up?
Did BMD not read his review?
John Brawley wrote:Theodore Prentice wrote:Im quoting the man that BMD trusts as a beta tester, and an insider to BMD tech and info.
Are you saying Solario made it up?
Did BMD not read his review?
That's not the same as BMD saying it. You're drawing a very long bow to make your argument that it was promised. I don't believe they've ever promised that feature.
jb
Theodore Prentice wrote:
Hogwash JB, if somebody other than golden boy Solario would have said it then I would tend to agree with you.
Not that long of a bow when they (BMD) use that person to disseminate information.
Either way, I doubt that BMD didnt read (or have it read) the review (by Solario, on Creative Cow ..uh yeah)
If thats the case, should we not be trusting Marcos feverish pitches for BMD products in the future?
Theodore Prentice wrote:
Do I want to really have this conversation...why not?
Theodore Prentice wrote:John, are you saying he made it up?
Marco is hearlded as a very reputable "source" of information, is he not?
He was very specific in what he wrote, so it is doubtful that he made that kind of a statment without a valid reason.
Do I want to really have this conversation...why not?
John Brawley wrote:Theodore Prentice wrote:
Do I want to really have this conversation...why not?
Because it's a tedious waste of time.
BMD didn't say it. It's not a promised feature.
JB.
Theodore Prentice wrote:.. get over it and try not to split hairs so much ..
Soeren Mueller wrote:Theodore Prentice wrote:.. get over it and try not to split hairs so much ..
That coming from you is actually hilarious.. keep up the unintentional comedy!
Theodore Prentice wrote:Thanks for contributing Soeren
Really
Soeren Mueller wrote:Theodore Prentice wrote:Thanks for contributing Soeren
Really
You're welcome!
Keep going!
Theodore Prentice wrote:Did you want to add anything about firmware updates..
Soeren Mueller wrote:Theodore Prentice wrote:Did you want to add anything about firmware updates..
and thus nothing to talk about
Theodore Prentice wrote:yet, here you are...
Soeren Mueller wrote:Theodore Prentice wrote:yet, here you are...
...and not talking about a non-existing firmware update
Here's your fish.. happy now?
><((((*>
spacewig wrote:This forum desperately needs a "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" thread...
Tony Rivera wrote:If you want to speak on this firmware update or future ones, keep it on topic and not personal. I'm all for you folks having discussions about relevant topics but the personal shots will not be tolerated. Any more of this happening in this thread will be cause for locking it so let's keep it civil.
John Brawley wrote:shanepeters@bellsouth.net wrote: I understand the difficulty in doing all this, but the problem I am having is I bought a product advertised to work a specific way. Rec709 in camera lut (still admittedly not color accurate....red/orange issues)
To be accurate, they don't call it a REC709 LUT, which is a very specific colour space. They call it "VIDEO"....shanepeters@bellsouth.net wrote:and Audio that requires extra gear and a post fix to make usable are the 2 problems that hinder this product and its professional use on a shoot.
While the issues is well documented and should be addressed, many users have found ways to record acceptable audio in camera.shanepeters@bellsouth.net wrote:... and ability to appy an in-camera lut that works without color correction (if you set your limited colorbalance option right.)
Where / when did they promise that feature ?shanepeters@bellsouth.net wrote:do you think that would be a good buisness practice or ethic?
Obviously they are judged TODAY by how they perform and deliver. You make enough noise by yourself to make sure that everyone has a chance to do that.
jb