Scarlet preview...

[Luc Bouvrette]

It was never a rumor. It was Red's own advertising in the announcement of the original Scarlet 3 NAB's ago.

Thanks for that precision. I wasn't paying attention at that time. It might justify why Ted has been repeating the 6k mantra, to set things straight.

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

Unless there have been MASSIVE changes to the Scarlet since Ted's presentations, I'd personally be very surprised if the price range got anything above 30% Ted's 6k mark. That means 7800.00, not 12k.

I think what many fail to see/come to terms with is, that it is only the price that has changed, not the camera.

The one you mention, the one Ted's been showcasing, the one Jarred used to shoot the internal test with... among other things... is what is coming to our greedy little hands..

 

[sergio arguello]

Thats not bad news Jim....just news and makes perfect sense!!! thank you for always being sensitive enough to feel for your audience, but in this case it just makes tremendous business sense that a camera system that is more, and cost more to make and therefore should
cost more to purchase. IMHO its a great move for the industry. And hopefully Canon and others follows suite.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

I agree with Mike about the term professional. RED has established itself as professional for years now. I think they decided to use the term on their lenses for example because I'm sure there were many who said the 18-50 zoom wasn't "professional" because of some of the issues it had. So, the next versions of lenses had Pro on it to distinguish it from that lens. But really, the 18-50 was professional, it just wasn't up to some people's standards. So, it's a tricky word.

To simplify it, or perhaps make it more debatable, if Jane Smith is a filmmaker who shoots training videos on a $400 camcorder and is really good at what she does and let's say she makes $150K a year doing it, does that qualify her as a professional. In my mind it does because A) She's getting paid to provide a service. B) She's using the tools she has to their full ability. C) She's meeting client expectations or else probably wouldn't be making that kind of money. Professional just means being able to look in the mirror and say "I'm committed to what I am doing with the tools I have access to and will always act in a professional manner towards my clients, or to my crew, or to anyone else I work with". It's easy to get hung up on the terminology, but really all that matters at the end of the day is that you can look in the mirror and call yourself a professional, or commit to trying to become one. As far as equipment goes, it's professional if it helps you accomplish the above mentioned goal. Bring a DVX100 to a shoot that requires a RED One because final distribution is 4K - not professional. Obviously that's a silly example, but it simplifies the point.

In my opinion, Scarlet was always going to be considered professional because the specs on paper placed it into that category. Like every camera, it had its limitations. Epic, without Pro I/O has its limitations. Certainly not going to call it unprofessional. I think at this point, let's let Jim and the folks at RED have their moment in the spotlight, obviously they are pretty excited about what they are about to announce and it seems to behoove us to join in their excitement, let it unfold, and then once the dust settles make practical decisions based on what course they have decided on. Looking forward to it.

 

[FrankApollonio]

JIm... I FUCKING LOVE YOU...

 

[Zeb B]

Now I don't know where in the mill the 3k for 3k rumour started, but it's pretty ludicrous imho. Yet, like all unreasonable rumours . . .

a simple YouTube search turns up lots of these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h4jPTI-qkE

But who cares at this point - much has changed in 3 years

 

[Tim Nitsch]

.....Unless there have been MASSIVE changes to the Scarlet since Ted's presentations, I'd personally be very surprised if the price range got anywhere above 30% Ted's 6k mark. That means 7800.00, not 12k....

I sure hope your right!

 

[Ryan Farnes]

Now I don't know where in the mill the 3k for 3k rumour started, but it's pretty ludicrous imho.

RED started it. Jim keeps bringing it up. I'm not sure why they keep retreating to this line when they've been the ones moving the goal posts all the while. We have been paying attention and we're giving feedback...

$3000 --> $4750 --> [EDIT: $5750 (HDRx)] --> "Around $6000" --> It will be more expensive.

Unless there have been MASSIVE changes to the Scarlet since Ted's presentations, I'd personally be very surprised if the price range got anywhere above 30% Ted's 6k mark. That means 7800.00, not 12k.

Then again, we'll all know on 11/03.

I hope this is the case.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

So it begins... =)

I'm definitely in the price sensitive crowd, so this might make or break. We'll see... exciting times.

I find it somewhat strange that Jim references the 3k3k price. Surely, everyone's reference is Ted's 2/3" 3k Scarlet Fixed with 5" monitor and side handle for 6k. That price never added up, but still... Some of us maybe nurtured the hope that you'd make a break even product to mess up (to put it nicely) the market and gain market share.

But with this, I also think it's time to put smirky remarks about Canon's offerings forever on halt: it should be obvious that you can't get it all for $2.500.

Canon is going to release an alternative to Epic on the 3rd, but costing around $15.000? It won't come close to Epic, but it also not costs as much.

If RED releases Ted's Scarlet on the 3rd, it won't be in competition with Canon's camera. It will stand alone as a very high end 2/3" offering.

If RED REALLY does respond with a bigger sensor Scarlet, it will kind of blow my mind, but I find it so hard to believe thinking about all that has gone into, and been shown of the 2/3", including Jarred's 120 fps internal test. But if, THAT would be a truly disruptive release.

But please, don't go knocking the alternatives, without taking price into account. Price is, after all, the framework that limits, or sets free, all other options.

Andree, I must say that you probably can get 90% or 80% of all you need cheaply, just look at the Panasonic gh2 hack reaching 176mbs h264 intra, probably equivalent to the same rate mpeg2. But I must say, there are differences, one, quality and the last 10-20% costs. Fpga and greatest design evermade, on a short run, costs. Consumer products cost a lot less in large enough part because of large volume runs, that can make shirt volume run costs/many times more. The $70 1080p cameras that maybe able to be hacked to record 4k use high volume runs and are very sophisicated done by longterm high end silicon industry and media industry professionals, in America. If it had been me I would have leveraged their award winning processing knowledge and design elements to drastically reduce cost, and get volume up to reduce the cost of more customised design. But in the end, Red has the superior product and Jim has dared to put in the money time and effort to short cut the development cycle to get there and set himself up for reduced development cost in the future.

Lots of elements of the designs I have been exploring for years are rather advanced compared to the equivalents, including redray, and the reason I rarely am surprise by anything anybody does in my field, such as Apple, is because I have been thinking of more advanced forms for years after I thought about what they are now doing. They see very shortly, and I am glad to say that Red is one of the best I am familiar with for long distance vision, and I have been personally approached to advise on a couple of commercial digital cinema cameras, been approached to work with a few others, and been involved in grass roots home made camera movement that this all stems from, and advocating for improved consumer cameras. With what Jim has done with Red, the design effort has put them in well stead for years to come.

My designs, with medium format technique in pro pocket hanheld is $100, storage will cost a lot extra (real uncompressed raw can reduce internal camera price). The problem, I wanted to illustrate, is that my proferred chip is too datarate limited for 4k, but if you got a more advanced version designed with miminal redesign it could handle 4k even the scarket at a fraction of the cost and power (it is a world leading low energy low cost solution by a leading designer). But Jim is the man, and with the money. The lowcost $70 1080p camera chipset manufacturer faces the same issue, even though thier higher level chipset does scarlet 3k like resolutions, it is at only 30fps h264 inter apparently. This a world away from 120fps and the quality of the redcode codec, that extra costs but not as much as you might think, the trick is volume and that trick is price and market appeal.

With volume your fixed costs and development costs are more distributed and other savings from bulk purchase and manufacturing techniques come into play. This s how comanes like Panasonic can make their gh2 so cheap, or Sony with it's nex 5n mod. But despite what those cameras can be hacked to do, you are getting the last 20% in Red, and that is spent on the expensive extra quality part. If the market had been good, Red could have delivered cheaply as originally planned and maybe in 4k. Now, the way things are going, we should be greatful just to get 4k fixed less than $5k. It is all relative to what you can do, I would undercut by making a consumer camera with built in pro recording feature that you hook a drive and lens up to.

 

[Jeffrey Loewe]

Jim, good decision to get some of the whining over, so it won't clutter up Nov. 3rd threads. I've always been a little uncomfortable with some of the Scarleteers who sound as if their whole deal is dependent on that camera. If you've got a good story and enough technique and gumption to make it happen, it doesn't make a whit of difference what camera you own. I made good films on Hi-8, one of the worst formats ever. Just had to be really careful with contrast and cut around the damn drop-outs. Get a zoom recorder and a G-12 and you can make a film for $600 plus the laptop you already have.

If the difference between $6K and $12K is a stopper, go out and work three jobs until you've earned the difference, and BTW, only then will you be working as hard as Jannard, or as hard as most of us who broke into this challenging, competitive, and creative trade.

James,

I generally agree with what your saying but I think your putting a few into the masses.

It's not that Scarleteers as you call them are saying the Scarlet will make or break there story, it's more that, thay've seen the benefits of RED. Thay've seen it dangled in there price range. And to have it possibly made more expensive will price out people who were patient and saved for 3 years. You should head over to the Scarlet boards, or even SU and you'd be a bit more informed. Most of them have gotten cameras in the mean time to fill in, keep working, and saving.

I think it's commonly forgot around here that everyone has different situations, financial, work and family life. It's easy for some of you to say go get three jobs to be able to afford it. Maybe not so easy for others. Everyone's financial situation is different.

Most of them will be excited and probably save a bit longer.

 

[Michael Dalton]

You obviously haven't heard of the F65. :sneaky2:

I've heard of it's $85,000 price tag. The cinema line up is different.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

If anyone wants a good laugh, shoot an iPhone 4S alongside a Canon 7D. Did this the other day... I'm still laughing at the 7D...

1080p is over. My frickin' iPhone shoots 1080p and resolves just as many lines as a Canon 7D, which is as much as many (and more than some) other DSLRs. Handles skew about as well, but over-compresses. Still shows less moire and chroma aliasing than a 7D...

Any "cinematographer" who chooses a 1080p camera camera at this time needs their head examined. There is no good reason, other than minimally-select artistic purposes, to do so. Tablets and compact notebooks/ultrabooks will all be greater than 1080p this next year. Consumer HDTV's are going quad-HD/4K, so are consumer projectors and desktop displays. It's only a matter of another year or two before 2/3" format "broadcast" cameras hit the quad-HD mark to keep up with the new displays and ATSC format standards.

YouTube supports frickin' 4K... Vimeo is working on it.

...And I have to wonder why I even posted this. This is the same damn argument I made when extolling the virtues of HD back in '99.

Here's a real kicker for all you 1080p evangelists.... 4K is just a stepping stone too. It will one day be replaced with something bigger and better. All the 1080p is "professional" or "good enough" crowd can go sit on the bench with the same jackasses who tried to tell everyone that 30MB hard drives were more than we'd ever need.

 

[David Rasberry]

I think that Red will likely keep a bare bones shooting package for the lowest cost Scarlet under the $10k mark. More than competitive with a range of entry level pro digital production cameras from Sony, Panasonic, Canon, etc. both small and large sensor. It will be unique in the ways that only Red can or will be for now. One either appreciates and wants what Red offers or not.

Based on the last known price targets for the interchangeable version 2/3" and prices for both Red and aftermarket gear, my own planning budget for a reasonable package for camera alone hit about $18k two years ago, with enough accessories like filters, media and batteries to get through my typical one day commercial/industrial shoot. Competitive then and today with other entry level 2/3" cameras price wise.

If we get the 2/3" mini Epic with 120fps @ 3k, HDRx, decent sensitivity, native DR at least as good as the original spec goal of 11-1/2+ stops, and the superb range of creative image possibilities of Redcode Raw in this general price range I will be quite happy.

 

[Sinh Tran]

If anyone wants a good laugh, shoot an iPhone 4S alongside a Canon 7D. Did this the other day... I'm still laughing at the 7D...

1080p is over. My frickin' iPhone shoots 1080p and resolves just as many lines as a Canon 7D, which is as much as many (and more than some) other DSLRs. Handles skew about as well, but over-compresses. Still shows less moire and chroma aliasing than a 7D...

Any "cinematographer" who chooses a 1080p camera camera at this time needs their head examined. There is no good reason, other than minimally-select artistic purposes, to do so. Tablets and compact notebooks/ultrabooks will all be greater than 1080p this next year. Consumer HDTV's are going quad-HD/4K, so are consumer projectors and desktop displays. It's only a matter of another year or two before 2/3" format "broadcast" cameras hit the quad-HD mark to keep up with the new displays and ATSC format standards.

YouTube supports frickin' 4K... Vimeo is working on it.

...And I have to wonder why I even posted this. This is the same damn argument I made when extolling the virtues of HD back in '99.

Here's a real kicker for all you 1080p evangelists.... 4K is just a stepping stone too. It will one day be replaced with something bigger and better. All the 1080p is "professional" or "good enough" crowd can go sit on the bench with the same jackasses who tried to tell everyone that 30MB hard drives were more than we'd ever need.

We need a "LIKE" button on this forum :thumbup1:

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

This from middle of June THIS year.

Do you REALLY think that Scarlet has been re-visioned and redesigned so completely within a couple of months? Especially since RED on several occasions has stated that Scarlet needs to be pretty ready to go on day one?

I agree, it appears most likely it's still the same 2/3-inch 3K camera. But you ignore the possibility of parallel development of an as-yet unannounced 4K APS-C model. Despite its reputation of what amounts to thinking out loud, even at its blabbiest Red has never divulged all of its activity. I'm not saying it's certain, just that anything's possible.

On a side note, Jim's comment "No one will be disappointed if they ignore all previous conceived notions" seemed a little curious. It's like saying, "If you have no expectations, you won't be disappointed."

 

[Steve Sherrick]

The future is the that which we can never attain because it constantly moves forward at a speed at which we can never reach, and at a cost that has no relation to the present.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

If anyone wants a good laugh, shoot an iPhone 4S alongside a Canon 7D. Did this the other day... I'm still laughing at the 7D...

1080p is over. My frickin' iPhone shoots 1080p and resolves just as many lines as a Canon 7D, which is as much as many (and more than some) other DSLRs. Handles skew about as well, but over-compresses. Still shows less moire and chroma aliasing than a 7D..

You know what the funny thing is Jeff, after all these years of waiting, people are probably going to be too tired to persecute you for suggesting that the iPhone with that little lens and sensor, is any good .

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

$3000 --> $4750 --> [EDIT: $5750 (HDRx)] --> "Around $6000" --> It will be more expensive.

$3000 --> $3750 --> $4750 --> [EDIT: $5750 (HDRx)] --> "Around $6000" --> It will be more expensive.

 

[Mike Van Laanen]

Hi Jeff, Love the post , thanks for the smile. I remember seeing a thread here on RedUser talking about the max percievable resolution of the human eye and what that equates to in the 4K - 5k realm. Do you know about where that threshold is? I have one more quick question about the 2/3" broadcast cameras moving to Quad-HD if I may. Can an ENG lens like they use for broadcast cover Quad or better yet 5k? For sports and wildlife that would be a perfect fit.

 

[Ameer Azari]

If anyone wants a good laugh, shoot an iPhone 4S alongside a Canon 7D. Did this the other day... I'm still laughing at the 7D...

1080p is over. My frickin' iPhone shoots 1080p and resolves just as many lines as a Canon 7D, which is as much as many (and more than some) other DSLRs. Handles skew about as well, but over-compresses. Still shows less moire and chroma aliasing than a 7D...

Any "cinematographer" who chooses a 1080p camera camera at this time needs their head examined. There is no good reason, other than minimally-select artistic purposes, to do so. Tablets and compact notebooks/ultrabooks will all be greater than 1080p this next year. Consumer HDTV's are going quad-HD/4K, so are consumer projectors and desktop displays. It's only a matter of another year or two before 2/3" format "broadcast" cameras hit the quad-HD mark to keep up with the new displays and ATSC format standards.

YouTube supports frickin' 4K... Vimeo is working on it.

...And I have to wonder why I even posted this. This is the same damn argument I made when extolling the virtues of HD back in '99.

Here's a real kicker for all you 1080p evangelists.... 4K is just a stepping stone too. It will one day be replaced with something bigger and better. All the 1080p is "professional" or "good enough" crowd can go sit on the bench with the same jackasses who tried to tell everyone that 30MB hard drives were more than we'd ever need.

Thanks for the 7D bashing. It's the only camera I can actually afford that lets me create the images I want to create, so cheers for the derogatory post

Would you like my address? Then you can come and dance around in front of my flat with your Red ONE, Scarlet and EPIC