Paul C. Buff, Inc. Technical Forum

Sorry to hear that, Paul. Hope he recovers well, and soon. Looks like a few companies have had some bad news lately. Tesla (the electric car company) lost 3 of their people in a plane crash a few days ago...

I am sorry to hear about Dr Morgan and am sending positive vibes his way.

People come first. Waiting a few more weeks is no big deal in comparision.


Kent in SD

Paul, first off I join others in wishing Michael a favorable diagnosis and speedy and full recovery.

Secondly, based on what you had described, even before Michael's incident, i.e. as of this past Monday, the promise to ship any units February clearly was TOTALLY unrealistic. The milestones for Einstein delivery that i see outstanding are:

1) finish Michael's and any other testing work before the final production run, spending 4-5 hours per day 4-5 days per week - not 14 hour days 7 days a week. Because you tend to other matters like the CyberCommander issues and this forum and staffing. And you need your rest, neglecting which simply makes one liable to overlook things in testing. Einstein is a complex product and we do not want it to miss anything like the off/reset switch on the CC.

2) if testing reveals any issues (and if it does not, i'd look again), some time needs to be set aside to work them into the design and unit-test them. Not having adequate time set aside for this simply establishes a psychological prerogative to NOT find any issues in testing.

3) the preproduction you've mentioned for a dozen units with final hardware.

4) test the units internally, once the units are in-house

5) send the units out to one and then the next group of testers. These should include power users of your stuff (who have constructively reported issues in the past rather than love everything but hardly use it), online opinion leaders, and other qualified folks.

6) rank their feedback on the 4 quadrants (risk/cost/time of implementation vs benefit) and implement the low hanging fruit plus any serious issues. Unit testing.

7) depending on the volume of changes and comfort level, another small batch may have to be made and evaluated internally.

8) first significant batch of Rev1.0 hardware can be manufactured and shipped.

How long? I'd say July-August. These steps won't guarantee a flawless v1.0, but feel that skipping steps and cutting execution time could take you to August just the same, only with more users who feel misled and with faultier hardware and deflated workforce. Right when you need them to expeditiously nail any issues that pop up (unlike what's happening with CC).

Just my opinion

Hi Paul,

Sorry to hear about your latest setbacks.

Alex, thanks for your assessment. I was considering a used Profoto system that looks like a great deal and I think you just helped me make up my mind. Well I guess if my place in the waiting list is transferrable, it is up for grabs. Feeling sort of relieved now.

Good luck,
Manny

Best wishes to Dr. Morgan for a quick, and full recovery. It was fortunate that the event occurred where there were capable friends on hand to provide an immediate, and proper response. That's how heroes are born. I'm sure Dr. Morgan is proud of the team.

When Einstein ships, it ships. Waiting for it does not hold me back in any manner. It exists, and it's specifications are such that when it becomes available, I'll buy two units to start, and add more as my budget allows, with the goal of making Einstein the core of my studio lighting kit. The fact is that adopting the Einstein flash in the future does not cause my current PCB flash units to become obsolete. Current PCB units offer an incredible level of control with the CyberSync system, and Einstein simply adds a new level of utility/features to the CyberSync system without taking anything away from the current series of lights.

There is nothing else on the market to compare in the overall sense, so where is the
advantage in bailing out now, and buying into a different brand of studio lighting just to chill the pain of cash burning a hole in my pocket? There is no advantage. It would be a waste of money.

Since CyberSync is shipping now, and delivers incredible lighting control with the current PCB lighting units, it would make far more sense to satisfy seriously pressing current needs for flash units with either new, or used PCB lighting gear until Einstein ships. In the end, all lights will be perfectly compatible with the same CyberSync control system, and none of them will become useless orphans.

Meanwhile, life goes on. I have one of the initial run of 86" PLM units, and have been chomping at the bit for more of them. I'll make due while the new version is working it's way toward production, just like I'll make due while Einstein makes it's way to production.

KEH camera is happy for the delay, as my PCB budget was already set aside, and the additional time has allowed me to buy a few used Mamiya RZ lenses, one used Bronica PS lens, another Canon strobe, misc general accessories, printer ink, and even a variety of premium Ilford photo paper to try out. Delay isn't always a bad thing. Impatience is a bad thing.....

A bit of photo gear advice (for the little that it's worth), is to decide what you want or need in a general sense, then sweat the details until you determine the foundation brand of that gear that best suits your present and future needs in a long term system sense. Then, stick to it. Don't ever give veto power over your careful choices to the weight of cash in your wallet. If you abandon the results of your efforts to determine the best product line to buy in favor of the desire to hold SOMETHING in your hand right now, you will lose.

If you really can't wait for the latest and greatest offering from your chosen system, buy the cheapest currently available unit(s) in the same brand line (new or used), that will hold you over, and still be compatible with the latest unit when it ships. That way, you have full value for your expense. Your system support components, accessories, and even operational drill will be unchanged in the end. If you choose to keep the interim purchases, they remain fully compatible with future purchases. If not, sell them. Then they essentially become cheap rentals that filled a need, and gave you plenty of practice with your system of choice before the new stuff arrived.

Voyager

For what it's worth, it's been claimed on Model Mayhem that if my Chief Engineer's temporary absence causes a short delay in Einstein, that I must be a big fat liar for saying I designed Einstein. How very ignorant.

These armchair engineers apparently have no idea of the number of things I do in a day besides testing and debugging Einsteins . . . and yes, I spend a good percentage of each day doing this. Try measuring the color temperature, flash duration and f-output in 80 steps in two operating modes and compiling lookup tables for each parameter at each 1/10f step. Once you figure out no commercial color meter is accurate and that you have to shoot color targets in RAW, then open and measure in Bridge to find the real color temperature, you will gain insights into things that mere grumblers don't comprehend.

Indeed, I designed every aspect of Einstein (and of all our products) but it take a lot of highly competent technical help and expertise before a design becomes a bulletproof product.

The only part where I really rely on outside expertise is in the actual code programing . . . that is still done in Austin and remains the major source of delays. Same with CyberCommander coding.

Thank you all for your understanding and human compassion, and to pity the ultra ugly vocal minority that thrives on character assassination and self importance and smear.

Mike is doing OK, he is my friend, and I'm not going to stress him unnecessarily at this critical point.

Well said......

At the very worst, i may have to buy a set of AB or white lightening. Thanks for keeping us in the loop.

I still have a hard time understanding people motives for this vicious slander. it's becoming epidemic

Actually Paul, I said that it was inconsistent for you to have been the chief engineer, for Mike to have been irreplaceable in its testing, and (as was being implied by others on MM) that shipping the Einstein was your company's only priority - in which case the full diversion of your time to assuming Mike's role would have been reasonable. I was in no way questioning your role in the development - rather using conversational device to point out a fact (that you designed it) which clearly was not widely known by the community there. If you're offended by that mechanism, you have my apologies, but I never set out to question your role in your products' lifecycles. As to the question at hand, I personally feel that you have too many roles to fill within your company to completely dedicate yourself to such a testing protocol, but as so many others, will respect the decision you make.

Glad to hear Mike continues to recover, as well that the real holdups are external and in Austin.