Gavin Greenwalt

Filing date was originally April 17 2007. Red announcing compressed RAW on April 20 2006. The only novel things claimed are the 6:1 raw compression on > 2k. But both of those qualifiers show what bullshit the patent is. 2048px wide..obvious/prior art. 2049px... Non obvious, no prior art. Similarly... Everybody and their mother can imagine 5:1 compression but suddenly at 6:1 it's a new concept. ? The preprocessing details will probably survive but the patent covering 4k raw (because cineform already had 2k) will probably die imo.

As someone who was once threatened to be "sued into oblivion" for legally reverse engineering Redcode and publishing the details of the tech I have no love for Jannnard's legal team either. But this seems like bullshit and Jinni Tech woefully ignorant. The patent is on redcode and I clearly remember redcode not being announced initially. There were questions of how good of image you would get if you couldn't afford the fiber optic module and huge raid. Then at NAB and in Gibby's interview they added the secret sauce. At that point they said they were giving Graeme free reign to use whatever tech he thought would be best with zero legacy consideration so they also didn't prescribe a solution to him. Red has an overly broad patent on something that is IMO very obvious "hey what if the computer you record jpeg2000 to was the camera itself and not tethered!" no duh. But it appears to cross its i's and dot its t's.

Feels like a tough sell to me vs the lower end RED market they're clearly gunning for. If you hate RED and are willing to pay a premium you might as well go Arri Mini and be done with it. Scarlet-W 14+ ("16.5+") stops of dynamic range. 5k supersampled to 4k. S35mm Native ISO of 2000 EF Mount or Nikon mount or PL Mount or Leica Mount or Panavision Mount or... ProRes 4:2:2 (1080p though not 4k) 300fps cropped no built in ND. 3.5 lbs $14,500 w/ monitor and battery plate and 120GB memory card.