Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Can Red make a "simple" 2/3" Fixed Scarlet?

N

Nick D

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I am wondering why doesn't Red just back down the Scarlet fixed specs, and produce a Kick-*ss 2/3" camera with "normal capabilities" like maximum 1080 60p for under 5K? I'd buy it...

Being several years after the original announcements, I would rather have a great simple working 2/3" camera rather than what Scarlet has evolved into as a perpetual "off-the-charts capability" prototype...

Best wishes to Jim & Co. for a successful Epic launch asap, either way...
 
Last edited:
It's not in the company's nature to make a simple capability camera..Red goes all out..no compromises..
am not sure what it costs to put audio capabilities in the
cameras..probably not much. But...if audio was any significant cost. A video MOS
camera might make sense as an option way down the line.
 
Nick D said:
I am wondering why doesn't Red just back down the Scarlet fixed specs, and produce a Kick-*ss 2/3" Camcorder with "normal capabilities" like maximum 1080 60p for under 5K? I'd buy it...

Being several years after the original announcements, I would rather have a great simple working 2/3" camera rather than what Scarlet has evolved into as a perpetual "off-the-charts capability" prototype...

Best wishes to Jim & Co. for a successful Epic launch asap, either way...
Click to expand...

It would have to have RAW for me! And better DNR. And be modular. And... Oh, hell. Let's just stick with the program. :thumbsup:
 
I'd say that the fixed 2/3" Scarlet could be "simple" as long as you get the H264 module-but won't be under $5k. It scales down to 1080p. And apparently they're talking about doing a Pro Res module as well.:sifone:
 
I can't say that I didn't think about the same thing every now and then. But I'm not sure if a RAW camera will ever be simple :) I'd assume not...
 
Is RAW simpler or harder to do than 1080P in-camera? After all, any single-sensor camera has to begin with a RAW image before it can convert it to color, so you'd think it's easier to just record the RAW and save conversion step to post. On the other hand, most single-sensor HD consumer gear converts to 1080P in-camera and ARRI seems to find it easier to get their 1080P output on the Alexa up and running sooner than their ARRIRAW output.
 
Well, RAW needs more Data send through the hardware. I think that is part of the complication.
 
Scarlet is spec'd to have 1080p RGB and full auto, full manual capabilities. And, less than $5K

I think it has everything your asking for with room to grow.
 
Kyle Presley said:
Scarlet is spec'd to have 1080p RGB and full auto, full manual capabilities. And, less than $5K

I think it has everything your asking for with room to grow.
Click to expand...

I'd be pretty shocked and amazed if any model Scarlet were introduced at a price point less than $5k.
 
Would it be stupid for me to suggest a(n) (deep) educational discount for those of us in film school with part-time jobs and mounting debt? Not that we're owed it or anything, and not to suggest that what the Scarlet is being developed to do at its price-point is anything less than amazing, but I think RED would do well to court the next generation's film makers. The educational discount has sure worked well for Apple. I don't want anything crazy, maybe just $500 off the 2/3" fixed Scarlet. Just a thought.
 
Kyle Presley said:
$4750 for a working kit 2/3" fixed model. This is common knowledge. Why would you be shocked?
Click to expand...

I've read those same spec sheets. If the price stays there, I'd be shocked. I expect them to actually be priced MUCH higher on release, regardless of what the old pre-prices say.

That's why I'd be shocked. I fully expect those estimated costs to be wrong, and the actual price to be much higher.
 
Nick D said:
I am wondering why doesn't Red just back down the Scarlet fixed specs, and produce a Kick-*ss 2/3" camera with "normal capabilities" like maximum 1080 60p for under 5K? I'd buy it...

Being several years after the original announcements, I would rather have a great simple working 2/3" camera rather than what Scarlet has evolved into as a perpetual "off-the-charts capability" prototype...

Best wishes to Jim & Co. for a successful Epic launch asap, either way...
Click to expand...

I second this,, only mx sensor, manual controls and redcode raw.. that would beat any other camera on the market.. also no need for built-in lens.. any lens mount would be great and converters from other vendors would do the rest..
for audio, a bult in mic for sync reference,,
and I would never call this camera a compromise.. I've never seen a 1080p RAW camera on the market under $15K..

I'm saying this a lot, while in 2010, with all this tech advance in the world.. giving a non-raw camera to cinematographers is kind of disrespect..
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Is RAW simpler or harder to do than 1080P in-camera? After all, any single-sensor camera has to begin with a RAW image before it can convert it to color, so you'd think it's easier to just record the RAW and save conversion step to post. On the other hand, most single-sensor HD consumer gear converts to 1080P in-camera and ARRI seems to find it easier to get their 1080P output on the Alexa up and running sooner than their ARRIRAW output.
Click to expand...

I think the main reason for ARRI getting their HD output a priority is simply fitting on existing HDCAM workflow and not investing on new workflows and support..
I also think what pushed them to support more on the RAW is RED.. one year ago, I never heard about any ARRI RAW workflow.. now I see lots of logos on their website..
 
I have to say I agree with the original poster and have thought the same thing myself. From the original concept however many years ago the camera has had spec upon spec added on, morphing it into an ultimate drag car. A more profitable way would have been to release a simpler version then another version then another.

This is part of the gift and the curse of RED, take it for what it is. Jim doesn't build the cameras for us - he is an artist building to the vision in his minds eye. The ultimate it can be and the customer is just along for the ride
 
J Davis said:
I have to say I agree with the original poster and have thought the same thing myself. From the original concept however many years ago the camera has had spec upon spec added on, morphing it into an ultimate drag car. A more profitable way would have been to release a simpler version then another version then another.

This is part of the gift and the curse of RED, take it for what it is. Jim doesn't build the cameras for us - he is an artist building to the vision in his minds eye. The ultimate it can be and the customer is just along for the ride
Click to expand...

being sorry for this, but its the truth.. he is making some nice art pieces..
 
I might burst the bubble about all this, but let me remind everyone that the bug is in the Epic software so no amount of fiddling with the Scarlet specs is going to change that. And, IMO, to start to fiddle with the Scarlet isn't going to speed up it's delivery either. Another word for "change" might be "redesign" since I don't think is is just a matter of pulling some of the electronics out or yanking out some of the software code. It also doesn't suggest that making changes would make it any easier to find a new manufacturer. So, I ask, what's the benefit to be gained by changing Scarlet this far down the road?
 
Terry VerHaar said:
I might burst the bubble about all this, but let me remind everyone that the bug is in the Epic software so no amount of fiddling with the Scarlet specs is going to change that. And, IMO, to start to fiddle with the Scarlet isn't going to speed up it's delivery either. Another word for "change" might be "redesign" since I don't think is is just a matter of pulling some of the electronics out or yanking out some of the software code. It also doesn't suggest that making changes would make it any easier to find a new manufacturer. So, I ask, what's the benefit to be gained by changing Scarlet this far down the road?
Click to expand...

I hear you Terry on Red's "if everything went as originally planned" path, but as I read Jim's post, here's what I see which means PRICE INCREASE...

1. COST TO MANUFACTURE... will increase, since it's now likely US labor or manufacturing- and with that I expect at least another 20%-35% price increase conservatively. Plus, with unproven suppliers/manufacturing, long-term Quality becomes a major concern...

2. SALES VOLUME... Any one of the following affects volume: price increases, perceived poor quality/RISK at launch, and new competition product launches eating away at the customer base...

Any price increase above $5K (not considering accessories) places the Fixed Camera out of the price range of many hoping to shoot RAW for the same or for less than a Sony EX-1R or Canon Mark 11/3?, or shooting with a pair for 3D such as myself...

Besides that, with every new delay (justified or not), there is a corresponding loss of sales to the competition every 6 months PLUS a loss of confidence that RED will truly roll out a bug-free mass-production camera, which means originally planned sales volume no longer justifies the originally planned price...

This also brings up a big issue... What will the Scarlet warranty likely be? ... and can the Warranty be extended?
 
I think a stripped down Scarlet would take longer - because they'd have to start all over again... That's not an option, and there's absolutely no point because it would be so much worse than the current plan.

David Mullen ASC said:
Is RAW simpler or harder to do than 1080P in-camera? After all, any single-sensor camera has to begin with a RAW image before it can convert it to color, so you'd think it's easier to just record the RAW and save conversion step to post. On the other hand, most single-sensor HD consumer gear converts to 1080P in-camera and ARRI seems to find it easier to get their 1080P output on the Alexa up and running sooner than their ARRIRAW output.
Click to expand...

RAW recording would be far easier - just pump the image out a fibre optic link to a massive RAID array. It's compressing the RAW data down to a workable file size that's the biggest difficulty. With RGB codecs like MPEG2 and H.264 it's relatively easy because you can buy ICs off the shelf that do it for you, but there's no standard RAW codecs yet so either you have to have enough computer horsepower to do it in software, or you have to have custom designed silicon to do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top