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 :)

Why no 120fps at 2k?

R

Roger Valdes

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
200
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Scarlet can do 30 fps at 4k, so why can't it do 120fps at 2k?
4k = 4 times the data of 2k... 120fps should technically be possible
 
Last edited:
I'm hoping it will change, 120fps looks great but the resolution is so low at the moment. 120fps at 2K would make a great camera an amazing camera. Hope it is possible and implemented...
 
Brigham Edgar said:
It won't in my opinion...there has to be a big enough difference to EPIC and I think it's deliberate. As they have said themselves, need more buy EPIC.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a possibility. I don't know about anyone else though, but having 120fps at 2K would not discourage me at all from wanting an Epic. There is an enormous value difference between 120fps/2k and 150fps/4K - and surely everyone would still aspire to get the highest performance they could afford. I think a firmware unlock adding a little extra fps would take the Scarlet to a whole new level of usability, without stepping on Epic's toes.
If it's possible, I'd welcome it with open arms. Ha!
 
Well i hope they will, because 60 fps is not enough...And even if scarlet was able to shoot 120fps in 2K or at least 1080p, there will still be a huge difference between the scarlet and the epic...I mean the epic shoots 300 fps in 2K!!! In 2013 dslrs will have 120 fps, and i can t understand why RED, who let s be honest, have the best cameras in the market, (used for holywood productions and high end Fashion photography) can t make that happen... I m sure that if scarlet (who was supposed to be a 3k for 3k camera back then with 120 fps ) had 120 fps 2K, and was priced at around 12K,(up and running) it would be a huge hit... Epic owners could still use scarlet as a B cam.. Today another brand announced a new camera with 120 fps included.. So at the same price i would prefer going for red, that said, only if scarlet was able to shoot 120 fps HD.. i m sure a lot of people,like me, hesitate to buy a scarlet because you re stuck with 60 fps... ( 120 fps 1K is useless... )
 
Apart from the fact that the original RED ONE was capable of 2K 120fps. and the its quite clear that the RED ONE processoe is not as fast as the Scarlet's. The recording data rates shows that clearly. Also its good to take note what the competition is doing.
 
I think it's able to handle it honestly. I think it falls back to a pricing gap between the Epic and Scarlet. The Scarlet has "failed" Epic boards, it atleast can handle HDRx mode which shows it could probably handle higher frame rates even at 2K. Maybe this will come with an announcement today? I feel it would be wise of RED. Granted we don't know the price on the cameras released or announced today, what they can do with no crop at all resolutions is impressive, external recorder or not. I feel that we should see 120fps 2K before to long...

Although i do wonder how RED has yet not ran out of "failed" boards with the numbers of Scarlets out there...unless they kept building them knowing they worked for Scarlet, and just kept producing them. I don't mean this as negative. I'm just saying I think it's available and doable. I think RED wants to protect the Epic, which I totally get.
 
Last edited:
R1 was/is "only" 12-bit and had programmable FPGAs...

I don't think 120fps at 2k is possible on Scarlet without major tweaking, something that isn't inherently possible with "hardwired" ASICs (especially Epic rejected ASICs)...
 
Last edited:
Mike P. said:
R1 was/is "only" 12-bit and had programmable FPGAs...

I don't think 120fps at 2k is possible on Scarlet without major tweaking, something that isn't inherently possible with "hardwired" ASICs (especially Epic rejected ASICs)...
Click to expand...
Compress it, where there is a will......
 
Mestizo Devon said:
Compress it, where there is a will......
Click to expand...

Yeah, except the problem is compressing it requires more power. Uncompressed is easier to pass through the system, however you then run into a throughput/bandwidth bottleneck problem (or at least that's the way I understand it.) Between a rock and a hard place.

From my understanding the only way to do it would be to line skip (which would be fine since they've got a 4k/gobs of resolution to begin with, it'd probably look as good as 2k windowed, and it'd be full sensor FOV), however that requires hardware dedicated to doing that process which the Scarlet/Epic do NOT have... Or at least I don't think they do... Plus line skipping messes with DR and light sensitivity.

So, yes, where there's a will, there's a way, but even if they started working on it today, it wouldn't come before Dragon, which would make it somewhat moot (and probably a waste of effort/time).
 
HMMMM

changing the redcode compression ratios requires more power? Power thats not already in the camera?
 
Mestizo Devon said:
HMMMM

changing the redcode compression ratios requires more power? Power thats not already in the camera?
Click to expand...

You'll notice that some compression ratios aren't available for certain settings. Yes, it takes power to compress - sometimes more power than Scarlet has available.
 
I would love 120fps but don't expect it. From just a throughput standpoint it looks like Scarlet should at least be able to write 2k 120fps @ 8:1 to the cards (but I don't know anything really).

Honestly the sensor crop is the biggest issue for me. That in and of itself is reason to go EPIC - bigger sensor at 5k and no crop up to 120fps at 4k.

Terry VerHaar said:
If I am not mistaken, Scarlet can only do 24 fps at 4K, 30 fps at 4KHD.
Click to expand...

It can to 30p @ full 4k.
 
Oh, you mean with one of the current compression ratio options? It's the same problem. The cameras current compression ratios are limited because they're riding a balance between compression processing requirements and the cameras other throughput/bandwidth limitations. Or at least that's my interpretation of it.

Mestizo Devon said:
You can compress 5k@18:1 correct?
Click to expand...

Yes, but at what frame rate? Don't confuse resolution processing with compression processing. *I think* the limitation isn't at what res, but at what frame rate. The camera's compression processing might have to look at the entire sensor regardless of the window being recorded (which would also be another reason why it couldn't handle it, and is likely the case, given the look around being pumped out of the cameras outputs.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top