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 :)

vote for 3k interchangeable, scarlet-x is not future proof either

Jeff Kilgroe said:
Even though it would be rather obscure... Part of me still wishes that Scarlet was a 4K Super16 camera. Not 2/3", but S16.
Click to expand...

+1

I'd buy this in a heartbeat for any reasonable price point. To me, this was never about price per say (any price I've seen from RED is reasonably reachable) but rather to have a S16 alternative in a S35 dominated market (discounting film there isn't any digital alternative for S16 that's anywhere close to what RED could offer us!).

So yes, pretty please reconsider Jim! This'd be so great for a whole list of things I want to shoot that just doesn't fit the S35 criteria that well. I guess there is always 3k on EPIC but that'll take quite some saving to do...
 
Of choose there is an alternative to s16. It's called the Iconoscop. And it shoots in Raw. Blinded by Red much?
 
I don't think that there will ever be a 2/3" Red camera now. They would have released it if it was technically possible. Simple as that.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Even though it would be rather obscure... Part of me still wishes that Scarlet was a 4K Super16 camera. Not 2/3", but S16.
Click to expand...

I'm incredibly happy with scarlet-x, perfect for me.
But I also would buy a S16 4k scarlet.
There is something to it that I find really sexy, lol.
 
Phil Holland said:
4k has been the past, the present, and the future of where the industry is going. Delivery is key. 4k will make you money if you decide to work with it as well.
Click to expand...

Or take your money...

If you're producing content for:
- immediate IMAX release
- theatrical release several years down the road (when 4K cinema is the norm)
- home entertainment re-release years down the road
- long term television syndication years from now

By all means, I would shoot and master to 4K as well. But for most in video production, acquiring and mastering to 4K is superfluous.

But apparently, that is all RED cares about. Sadly, I learned this just recently. Someone had told me they were making a 3K camera...
 
Daniel Kunz said:
Of choose there is an alternative to s16. It's called the Iconoscop. And it shoots in Raw. Blinded by Red much?
Click to expand...

Have you seen the camera specs and footage of the Ikonoskop? 1080p uncompressed RAW at higher datarates than an Epic shooting 5K. Sensor looks pretty clean, but with pretty poor sensitivity in low light (rated around 200 ASA is what I've heard) and it only goes up to 30 FPS. Around 9-10 stops of dynamic range.

At upward of 10 grand for those specs, it's certainly not a S16 film killer, that's for sure.

And yes, I'd definitely be interested (in fact, thrilled) in the original 2/3 interchangeable Scarlet 3K (though I'd also be down with a 4K S16 camera), even at Scarlet-X prices. No question. In many ways, even if money weren't at all involved in the decision, I'd still prefer one of those to an Epic. (The ability to use much smaller fast prime lenses and the lower power draw would be a massive advantage, as would the resulting lighter weight). Seriously, that camera would probably never leave my side, much to the chagrin of everyone around me.
 
Daniel Kunz said:
Of choose there is an alternative to s16. It's called the Iconoscop. And it shoots in Raw. Blinded by Red much?
Click to expand...

Jason Murphy said:
Have you seen the camera specs and footage of the Ikonoskop? 1080p uncompressed RAW at higher datarates than an Epic shooting 5K. Sensor looks pretty clean, but with pretty poor sensitivity in low light (rated around 200 ASA is what I've heard) and it only goes up to 30 FPS. Around 9-10 stops of dynamic range.

At upward of 10 grand for those specs, it's certainly not a S16 film killer, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Actually, dynamic range (I could be wrong), is at least 11 stops if not more I think... Camera is excellent in low light situations. Best results when using standard primes are setting the dynamic range at 0db. But w/ Zeiss Ultras, it's been tested to put out as much a clean image at 12db. BTW, pretty sure this was just filmed w/ Zeiss standard prime and a Kinoptik 5.7, so no Zeiss Ultra example here. Also DR set at 0db in camera I think. Please observe:
I'm very happy to now have ordered one btw!
 
Gabriel Winebrenner said:
Actually, dynamic range (I could be wrong), is at least 11 stops if not more I think... Camera is excellent in low light situations. Best results when using standard primes are setting the dynamic range at 0db. But w/ Zeiss Ultras, it's been tested to put out as much a clean image at 12db. BTW, pretty sure this was just filmed w/ Zeiss standard prime and a Kinoptik 5.7, so no Zeiss Ultra example here. Also DR set at 0db in camera I think. Please observe:
I'm very happy to now have ordered one btw!
Click to expand...
Beautiful. Do you know how long the waiting list currently is?
 
Jason Murphy said:
Have you seen the camera specs and footage of the Ikonoskop? 1080p uncompressed RAW at higher datarates than an Epic shooting 5K. Sensor looks pretty clean, but with pretty poor sensitivity in low light (rated around 200 ASA is what I've heard) and it only goes up to 30 FPS. Around 9-10 stops of dynamic range.

At upward of 10 grand for those specs, it's certainly not a S16 film killer, that's for sure.
Click to expand...
 
Gabriel Winebrenner said:
I just ordered mine and am expecting to receive it in a month or two max since each A-Cam DII is supposedly built to order.
:sifone:
Click to expand...

Nice. Thank you. I'd better get on the case. There are probably a lot more disappointed Scarlet customers looking for a camera just like this.
 
Gabriel Winebrenner said:
Actually, dynamic range (I could be wrong), is at least 11 stops if not more I think... Camera is excellent in low light situations. Best results when using standard primes are setting the dynamic range at 0db. But w/ Zeiss Ultras, it's been tested to put out as much a clean image at 12db. BTW, pretty sure this was just filmed w/ Zeiss standard prime and a Kinoptik 5.7, so no Zeiss Ultra example here. Also DR set at 0db in camera I think. Please observe:

I'm very happy to now have ordered one btw!
Click to expand...

It's a nice looking test shoot, though it's hard to get a sense of the camera's true dynamic range and low light sensitivity from these shots. Some of the shots in the trailer Peace posted look really nice, but others (like the shots in the tunnel) look pretty harsh and clippy. Overall, though, the look is pretty nice.

Still, storage costs for shooting on this thing would rack up really fast. The 80 GB memory module only holds about 15 minutes worth of footage. Compare that to over an hour of 3K RC 8:1 for the same amount of storage. REDCODE RAW is still the single most important thing that separates RED from its competitors; which is why it's really disheartening to be looking at camera options from other companies. Nobody out there is even remotely close when it comes to shooting motion RAW.
 
Jason Murphy said:
It's a nice looking test shoot, though it's hard to get a sense of the camera's true dynamic range and low light sensitivity from these shots.

Still, storage costs for shooting on this thing would rack up really fast. The 80 GB memory module only holds about 15 minutes worth of footage. Compare that to over an hour of 3K RC 8:1 for the same amount of storage. REDCODE RAW is still the single most important thing that separates RED from its competitors; which is why it's really disheartening to be looking at camera options from other companies. Nobody out there is even remotely close when it comes to shooting motion RAW.
Click to expand...

And yet storage gets cheaper all the time, so uncompressed RAW isn't nearly the obstacle it once was. The CCD Ikonoskop is using seems to have a lovely character. It looks CCD-ish. ;-)
 
Jason Murphy said:
It's a nice looking test shoot, though it's hard to get a sense of the camera's true dynamic range and low light sensitivity from these shots.

Still, storage costs for shooting on this thing would rack up really fast. The 80 GB memory module only holds about 15 minutes worth of footage. Compare that to over an hour of 3K RC 8:1 for the same amount of storage. REDCODE RAW is still the single most important thing that separates RED from its competitors; which is why it's really disheartening to be looking at camera options from other companies. Nobody out there is even remotely close when it comes to shooting motion RAW.
Click to expand...
I don't think uncompressed raw vs. RED's compressed raw system is better or worse. The advantage of the uncompressed raw files is that what you are recording is what you get which is mandatory when you are recording to a camera that delivers a little more than 1920X1080 yet slightly less than 2k, although the files/frames are a lot bigger than Red's compressed format. Red's compression gets you more bang for the buck in terms of length of footage, but they are just different. Honestly, I've pointed out that this cam really looks like Super 16 to me already and Super 16 just has an organic look to it that does not resemble 35mm. In this case, I believe the Red's current cmos sensors are great for 35mm feature films but do not replicate the true look of Super 16 celluloid even when cropped down in 2k. Also, I don't think Ikonoskop is a competitor of RED at all since as far as I know, RED only deals in super high resolution cmos sensors.
 
It's possible they may do it, but I think for the most part it goes against the Red ideology. Unless they create a new strategy and begin to produce prosumer cameras, a 2/3 goes against the "professional cinema tool" benchmark they have set for themselves
 
Gabriel Winebrenner said:
I don't think uncompressed raw vs. RED's compressed raw system is better or worse. The advantage of the uncompressed raw files is that what you are recording is what you get which is mandatory when you are recording to a camera that delivers a little more than 1920X1080 yet slightly less than 2k, although the files/frames are a lot bigger than Red's compressed format. Red's compression gets you more bang for the buck in terms of length of footage, but they are just different. Honestly, I've pointed out that this cam really looks like Super 16 to me already and Super 16 just has an organic look to it that does not resemble 35mm. In this case, I believe the Red's current cmos sensors are great for 35mm feature films but do not replicate the true look of Super 16 celluloid even when cropped down in 2k. Also, I don't think Ikonoskop is a competitor of RED at all since as far as I know, RED only deals in super high resolution cmos sensors.
Click to expand...

It's true that perhaps from a pixel for pixel image quality point of view, REDCODE and uncompressed RAW are going to be pretty much the same. But don't discount the other advantages of lowering the amount of data that a camera has to process and write; for example, this enables higher frame rates, and while storage off-camera is one thing (and that is getting cheaper), longer record times on-camera add a lot of flexibility to the camera.

I'm not trying to bash Ikonoskop here. It's clear the camera can produce some lovely images, and the design of the camera is really beautiful. But REDCODE really does enable a whole lot of options that just aren't there for Ikonoskop in its current form.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top