Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Scarlet 2/3": Do you want a 4K Scarlet?

Scarlet 2/3": Do you want a 4K Scarlet?

  • Aye

    Votes: 71 39.0%

  • Nay

    Votes: 111 61.0%
  • Total voters
    182
K

Ken Chan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Points
0
4K Scarlet 2/3" fixed.

What do you reckon? Is it a good idea?
 
Ken Chan said:
4K Scarlet 2/3" fixed.

What do you reckon? Is it a good idea?
Click to expand...
Well, yeah, another body, i guess this idea has everyone who always preferred Scarlet S35.... I think it depends on one question: how big will be the gap between EPIC-S and Scarlet 2/3"? Without knowing this, i can't vote.

If there is enough room, yes, why not fill it with another model. But i wouldn't ask for a 2/3"-model with 4k-resolution (this needs a new sensor-design with smaller pixels than we will have on the 3k-model). I'd prefer the 4/3"-route, based on the current sensor-design.
 
Since alot of the scarlet owners are going to be downressing to 2k or 1080p for either a 2K theatre, or 1080p web or blu-ray. 3k is enough.

If you're actually going to use it for films/high res productions, spend the extra on the EPIC-S or rent an X
 
it's not a matter of what you want. you can't just "enable" it. there's a lot of development that must take place. i would love to have 4k, but that doesn't change any facts.
 
Yes very good idea, but not for the moment. They have to build another fixed lens for the S35 sensor. Perhaps, everything can change, an upgrade in the future but not for the moment. @RED they tell us that 4K is the future, but for the moment ...

Jannard said:
You should shoot whatever you can afford to shoot. The problem I have is the conscious decision to shoot 1080P when budget is not an issue...

The message is out there that "1080P is good enough". I'm just trying to make sure that everyone knows that concept is not accurate.

Jim
Click to expand...
 
I think there is a point where adding more pixels (resolution) begins to impact the other image characteristics to such an extent that it is undesirable. I have a feeling that is probably around 3K for the 2/3" sensor size.

I voted "Nay" simply because I don't know enough to say "Aye". Does anyone have some nice grabs from a 4K 2/3" camera? How would a Scarlet with significantly smaller pixels perform? That's the problem for me - I have no idea what it would normally look like, and then I have no idea what RED could do with it.
 
Brian Petrie said:
The Alexa isn't 4K and no one seems to mind.
Click to expand...

Other companies like Sony, Canon, Panasonic,... didn't care 2 or 3 years ago when RED was working on the RED One. And now they start looking at RED as if there is something going on. Shouldn't we (other companies) do something like they (RED) are... Something like Full HD but with a smaller sensor, less frame rates, more buttons, not modular, very expensive so only real big companies can but the few cameras we can make...
:biggrin:
I think they care but to late, 2 years to late. Canon has just made the XF105-305 with a real FullHD sensor. The previous was only 1440, not 1920...
Jim know this and he is moving forward and not looking back. I think they are also working on there new sensor but he's not telling us yet... oeps the other companies may read this...:emote_happyhappy:
 
I don't think you would gain much on a 2/3" sized sensor going to 4k over 3k with currently available lenses. There aren't many if any that could resolve 4k on that small a sensor. Even if the lens is sharp enough, diffraction will limit optical resolution below what 3k can resolve at f4 and above.
In short it is not worth the extra cost for such a small sensor, and the extra processing power would put it into a price range comparable to the low end S35 version anyway.
A true super 16mm format sensor at QHD resolution (3840x162) would be possible and practical with the same pixel size as Scarlet 2/3" though. That might be a nice step up.
 
4K is not true 4K, because the sensor is based on a Bayer pattern. You would need a 5K sensor (like the Epics) to have real 4K. It will be quite a challenge to put 5K resolution inside a 2/3" sized sensor, but I guess that technology will get there eventually. I'd be glad to have my 5K 2/3" Scarlet in say 2015 or 2020. :001_smile: (If I'm still alive, that is...)

But why would you need that? The 2/3" models are perfect now. With the HDR upgrade and all... I don't see anything lacking. Even if you have to uprez your 3K movie for 4K delivery, I bet it will still look pretty good.

Short answer: No...
 
not 4K

not 4K

The Alexa isn't 4K and no one seems to mind.
Click to expand...

However, Alexa is an Arri. And some number of people are going to shoot that because it makes them feel comfortable. We'll just have to see if that comfort factor sustains them long term... it's certainly pretty underwhelming if projected on a big screen.

The situation on Scarlet is somewhat different. For a 2/3" sensor, 3K RAW seems to us to be the right pixel density to aim at in order to match up to the lens characteristics and offer the best balance of recorded resolution and dynamic range.
 
Happy with what it is and with the potential quality of lens, noise floor and projected specs. Push those boundaries and you will suffer something. I trust RED in creating, like Stuart said, the best balance. Its not a marketing spec and its already beyond what is available on the market, in its bracket - and several on top of that. Don't be greedy now!
 
Stuart English said:
...The situation on Scarlet is somewhat different. For a 2/3" sensor, 3K RAW seems to us to be the right pixel density to aim at in order to match up to the lens characteristics and offer the best balance of recorded resolution and dynamic range.
Click to expand...

Curious...how does it come off intercut w/epic footage...?
 
Stuart English said:
However, Alexa is an Arri. And some number of people are going to shoot that because it makes them feel comfortable. We'll just have to see if that comfort factor sustains them long term... it's certainly pretty underwhelming if projected on a big screen.

The situation on Scarlet is somewhat different. For a 2/3" sensor, 3K RAW seems to us to be the right pixel density to aim at in order to match up to the lens characteristics and offer the best balance of recorded resolution and dynamic range.
Click to expand...

Agree...Just wanted to point out that just because it is not 4K people should just not automatically count it out.
 
Last edited:
I don't want 4K but I'd like a BIGGER or a FASTER sensor with the same resolution.

4K resolution is also more complicated to manage on the storage side. ;)
 
Nay.
If you want to go for the BIG screen, then EPIC 5K is your thing. But for the moment 3K is good is you go for 1080P or 2K. And they will build new models and new versions will be available within the next years. Perhaps a (now I'm dreaming) Scarlet Fixed Xzoom FF 4.5K so you can deliver 4K...
 
Stuart, I wonder how 3K would look if uprezed to 4K in order to match 4K R1 material in the movie because I would need to mix Scarlet Fixed footage with R1 footage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top