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 :)

No excuse for 5K@24P on Scarlet

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can someone explain to me why the Scarlet 4k is not true 4k and why it takes 5k to deliver 4k?

thanks.
 
Gunleik Groven said:
This is not about math...

It is about positioning two products...

Epic is NOT primarily a high speed cam...
Click to expand...

Yes Gunleik,

But RED has a reputation of not making it`s products obsolete on purpose, unlike other camera companies. It is something that they seen to be proud on that

so to avoid enabling a possible feature for marketing reasons would go against their reputation.

That said, i`m more curious to know the reason, them eager to have this feature enabled. If someone from RED sain that the main reason is purely a marketing reason, I would happily accept their decision, since we bought the camera without being promised of any different. I just wish they would make an official statement on this, if they did, most people would stop asking for something they would officially know it was not going to be enabled (can`t say everyone though, hence the number of people that still ask for on camera internal ProRes Recording)

That also said, since has been no official word (not that I know of, at least) on this particular subject (a WS mode with higher horizontal resolution). I think it`s perfectly fair for scarlet owners to keep asking for that until they are given a answer, and also completely unfair for EPIC owners to bash them because of that (I`m by no means implying that you do that)
 
The sensor has red green and blue filters to allow it to see color. So of the 4096 pixels ( light sensor cells, if you will ) that make up one line of the image, there is a pattern of the color filters laid out like this GRGBGRGBGRGB.... yes, there are more green than blue.
As you can see, there is some 'sharing' that must go on to fill in the color pixels in all the spots.
This is usually called 'debayering' or 'demosaicing' . So where there was a red sensitive cell, the debayer guesses the best it can on what the shade of green and blue should be at the same exact place.
It's an educated guess, but a guess none the less.
The result after all of this is that the image is a little bit soft to avoid mistakes looking awful ( color mistakes on sharp edges are the main issue here, the guess can be way off, think of a thin red cord against a blue background, it has no idea what to do, but tries a safe guess. )

So to make up for the fuzziness, you add more pixels than you need ( 6K Dragon) , and when you resize it down a bunch, you start to get rid of the sharing fuzziness issue.


That's it in very simple words.
Other engineers are probably laughing at my baby talk explanation, but I hope I get the idea across to, gasp, artists and non technical folks as well.
No disrespect or offence intended ;)



Shanon Fernald said:
Can someone explain to me why the Scarlet 4k is not true 4k and why it takes 5k to deliver 4k?

thanks.
Click to expand...
 
Lee Saxon said:
Scarlet does 10% of Epic's throughput (5K@12fps vs 5K@120fps) at 42% of Epic's cost. I'm sorry to say that it is not a good value.

20% of Epic's throughput (5K@24fps) at 42% of Epic's cost is far from an unreasonable desire.
Click to expand...

Gunleik Groven said:
This is not about math...

It is about positioning two products...
Click to expand...

I don't know if you were responding to my post in particular, but I quoted it because it's relevant.

No, it's not all about math. I don't think anyone expects Scarlet's performance to be precisely 42% of Epic's to match the price difference.

But I also don't think there's a product positioning problem. To me, a 5K 24fps offering does not overlap a 5K 120fps offering. I think there's room for those two cameras.

I'd really hate to think that Scarlet is capable of 5K 24fps and Red is holding it back for marketing reasons. I believe it's simply not possible. I was just saying that the frustration over Scarlet not providing price/performance as high as Epic is valid.
 
Peter Majtan said:
That is clearly not the answer to this at all. While I hope to buy my own Epic brain soon - I would still want my Scarlet to provide this frame-rate / resolution combo to better match with the Epic and to provide better source image for post.
The issue is that this is clearly possible with the given HW - it only requires firmware to be written.
RED - I hope - is clearly not a company that will not "allow" functions capable on a given HW just to separate from other product models...

PS: Never mind those who simply can not afford Epic - right? :reddevil:
Click to expand...

Bryan Moore said:
So you pay 20,000 less and you think you are getting 5k? Bhahahahh
Click to expand...

You are the perfect example of an arrogant person who would not even bother to properly read the posts You comment on...

I ALREADY HAVE 5K IN SCARLET!
But right now it is at FULL SENSOR size @ 12 FPS.
Without ANY HARDWARE BOOST AT ALL - simply using the same exact HW the camera is capable to record the same 5K format with halved vertical resolution (i.e. wide-screen mode) at 24 FPS.
Simple MATH (simplified even further):
16x9x12= 1728
16x4.5x24= 1728
This is a very crude way of explaining the point of this thread.

I hope that You and all the others who keep making similar statements (or are thinking I am asking for HW boost - which I am clearly not) take the 30 seconds out of your busy lives and comprehend this...

Peter
 
sergio arguello said:
Peter, with all due respect. It would be like asking volkswagon for a bentley's performance, same company, why not? cmon, when is is enough , enough? I think if you wait im sure your scarlet will get a tune up one day.
Click to expand...

Sergio - with all due respect I am running out of respect for people who do not even bother to read before bashing...
If You read my post carefully - I am asking volkswagen for a volkswagen's performance, not bentley's...
The HW requirement does not change at all. Just see the simple math formula in my above post...

And if You prefer car analogy - I am asking for a gear-box ratio adjustment to give faster speed knowing fully well I will lose my torque by doing so...

Peter
 
sergio arguello said:
No you just want more than the camera you paid for, and thats my point. If indeed you have a camera, sorry, dont want to assume
Click to expand...

I am seriously ashamed people like You are part of this community... :banghead:

For those of You with IQ of a rocking chair or an attention span of a 2-year old - I will recount the main key points here one last time:

A. Are we asking for the camera to do more then it is capable of doing already? NO!

The camera already is capable of capturing 1-12 fps 5K FF
That is 5120 (h) x 2700 (v) at 12 frames per second
The very same camera is also capable to capture higher frame rates - but at the cost of cropping the full sensor image area to smaller sizes.
This is how the camera achieves:
1-30 fps 4K HD
1-48 fps 3K HD
1-60 fps 1080p HD
1-120 fps 1K

So the point is that WITHIN THE SAME HW BANDWIDTH PROCESSING CAPABILITIES the camera can either capture full sensor at 12 fps - or smaller portion at higher speeds - as long as the total bandwidth does not go over the HW limitation - that being the 5K FF at 12 fps...

So to extremely simplify what we are asking for is this:

The camera can capture 5120 (h) x 2700 (v) x 12 (fps) = 165.888.000 pixels per second
Therefore it can capture 5120 (h) x 1350 (v) x 24 (fps) = 165.888.000 pixels per second

So we get 5K at 24 fps AT THE COST OF LOOSING HALF VERTICAL RESOLUTION.

This is after all how the camera achieves the higher speeds at the respective lower resolutions...

So NO - we are not asking for the camera to do more. (and for Sergio: NO - we are not asking for bentley's performance out of VW Golf...) :banghead:


B. Does this give Scarlet any more spec when compared to Epic? NO!

Even with this SOFTWARE format ratio adjustment the SCARLET specs are not changed at all.
The Scarlet will still be able to capture the FF 5K (full sensor) at ONLY 12 fps.
Epic can do the same at 96 fps.

Scarlet will only be able to capture (vertical) HALF of the sensor at double this rate - 24 fps.
When You finally manage to pull your fingers out of your a** you will realize that the same format (half vertical resolution) will allow the Epic to capture the 5Kws at 192 fps...
I am sure EVERY SINGLE EPIC owner would welcome this SOFTWARE feature...

So the EPIC will remain 8x faster then the Scarlet - no matter what...


If You really can not understand this - You should not be owning and/or using Epic to start with... :banghead:

(RANT OFF)
 
I guess the problem is that a lot of people are buying cameras way too powerful for their needs. Professional (making money with epic) need the better compression, larger image, slowmo capabilities. They don't give a s*** about this thread or the scarlet being 4.5k or even 5k 24fps 2.4 7:1 or 8:1. The ones scared are the same that were upset after the price change, those who own one epic and make money by renting it, and those making nothing with it. Epic is made for powerfull projects, it's not an investment and it's not made to shoot pets test slowmos or trailers of never upcoming movies. Some epic guys in this thread are acting like if, as a scarlet owner, i was going to the red one area and asking for a downgrade of the camera to 3k because it's less expensive than mine. Grow up guys, in this thread we are just interested in our scarlet.
 
Majtan look here,

4096*2160*30 = 265 420 800
5120*2700*19 = 262 656 000
5120*2160*24 = 265 420 800

So we get more than 1350 (v).

I posted a chart earlier post #28

Peter Majtan said:
I am seriously ashamed ....
So to extremely simplify what we are asking for is this:
The camera can capture 5120 (h) x 2700 (v) x 12 (fps) = 165.888.000 pixels per second
Therefore it can capture 5120 (h) x 1350 (v) x 24 (fps) = 165.888.000 pixels per second
So we get 5K at 24 fps AT THE COST OF LOOSING HALF VERTICAL RESOLUTION.
......Epic to start with... :banghead:
(RANT OFF)
Click to expand...
 
Ok... i'll say this again.

My guess is that 90% of the epic users for 99% of their shoots don't give a fuck about the 120fps option, but use it for 5k 24/25.

THAT, to me is what makes the Epic "epic".

That I can record slomo to, is just "nice to have"

From the productions I have been involved with, i think that that is true formore than "me"

So what makes Epic exclusive, is not the high fps. Other cameras do that and are rentable when neccesary, but its "workhorse" specs.

When RED decided to ditch 2/3" 3k scarlet, and build a scarlet with cheaper/lower sepc'ed parts, I would think it was important not to canibalize the Epic, but make a win/win in production logistics.

Enabling 24/25 @ 5k would - if at all possible - kind of make the Epic more of a specialist camera, that was kinda highspeed, but not really. The Scarlet would cover 90% of the Epic scenarios.
Maybe with a bit if higher compression, butwho would care?

Except for RED who needs those low compressed 5k images out there to speek for themselves...

But what do I know or care.
Of course just speculation!

So I will this here.

Despite others not seeing any practical reason for red to do this, i kinda see it.

The one thing I am surprised over, is the lack of love for PAL land...

But again

What do I know?
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Ok... i'll say this again.

My guess is that 90% of the epic users for 99% of their shoots don't give a fuck about the 120fps option, but use it for 5k 24/25.

THAT, to me is what makes the Epic "epic".

That I can record slomo to, is just "nice to have"

From the productions I have been involved with, i think that that is true formore than "me"

So what makes Epic exclusive, is not the high fps. Other cameras do that and are rentable when neccesary, but its "workhorse" specs.

When RED decided to ditch 2/3" 3k scarlet, and build a scarlet with cheaper/lower sepc'ed parts, I would think it was important not to canibalize the Epic, but make a win/win in production logistics.

Enabling 24/25 @ 5k would - if at all possible - kind of make the Epic more of a specialist camera, that was kinda highspeed, but not really. The Scarlet would cover 90% of the Epic scenarios.
Maybe with a bit if higher compression, butwho would care?

Except for RED who needs those low compressed 5k images out there to speek for themselves...

But what do I know or care.
Of course just speculation!

So I will this here.

Despite others not seeing any practical reason for red to do this, i kinda see it.

The one thing I am surprised over, is the lack of love for PAL land...

But again

What do I know?
Click to expand...


+1 from a Scarlet owner.

At this point in time, 5K is Epic territory.

4.5K for Scarlet would be great.
 
No one answered my question, or probably someone did, but this thread is too long to find that out, so I rephrase my question: If Scarlet does 12 fps with HDRX, how many frames per sec does WITHOUT HDRX, Also the website specs says 1-30 frames per sec. ???, does it have to do with burst mode instead of video mode?? someone?
 
When enabling Hdrx frame rate cuts by half. So Scarlet does 12fps without hdrx, 6fps with., in 5K. 30fps without hdrx in 4K. No burst modes.
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Ok... i'll say this again.

My guess is that 90% of the epic users for 99% of their shoots don't give a fuck about the 120fps option, but use it for 5k 24/25.

THAT, to me is what makes the Epic "epic".

That I can record slomo to, is just "nice to have"

From the productions I have been involved with, i think that that is true formore than "me"

So what makes Epic exclusive, is not the high fps. Other cameras do that and are rentable when neccesary, but its "workhorse" specs.

...
Click to expand...

Gunleik,

I think for films and tv, this is probably correct. But for commercials and music videos, slomo is kind of a must have.

That said, I think the rationales for keeping Scarlet under 5K are rational.
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Ok... i'll say this again.

My guess is that 90% of the epic users for 99% of their shoots don't give a fuck about the 120fps option, but use it for 5k 24/25.

THAT, to me is what makes the Epic "epic".

That I can record slomo to, is just "nice to have"

From the productions I have been involved with, i think that that is true formore than "me"

So what makes Epic exclusive, is not the high fps. Other cameras do that and are rentable when neccesary, but its "workhorse" specs.

When RED decided to ditch 2/3" 3k scarlet, and build a scarlet with cheaper/lower sepc'ed parts, I would think it was important not to canibalize the Epic, but make a win/win in production logistics.

Enabling 24/25 @ 5k would - if at all possible - kind of make the Epic more of a specialist camera, that was kinda highspeed, but not really. The Scarlet would cover 90% of the Epic scenarios.
Maybe with a bit if higher compression, butwho would care?

Except for RED who needs those low compressed 5k images out there to speek for themselves...

But what do I know or care.
Of course just speculation!

So I will this here.

Despite others not seeing any practical reason for red to do this, i kinda see it.

The one thing I am surprised over, is the lack of love for PAL land...

But again

What do I know?
Click to expand...



I can't agree on this, I'm sorry. If it's true that 90% of people do not need the high speed, than they should have bought a Scarlet. No one pays all that extra money to be ONLY able to shoot in 5K, and not benefit from the high frame rates in high resolutions offered on Epic. And even if that's true. The high speed in high resolution is what makes the Epic so unique. That's why it costs more. Having high speeds is not simply "nice to have" as you're saying. High speed and slow speed is a story telling tool. It's used all the time in fact in commercials and so many other things. Also, Red did not ditch 2/3 Scarlet to build a cheaper/lower specd Scarlet. It's true that it has lower specs in terms of high speed, but I assure you, it ain't cheaper. That 2/3 Scarlet was meant to sell for less than $3K. The 2/3 is gone since Red figured out that the 2/3 sensor is becoming less popular after the introduction and popularity of DSLRs.
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Ok... i'll say this again.

My guess is that 90% of the epic users for 99% of their shoots don't give a fuck about the 120fps option, but use it for 5k 24/25.
Click to expand...

Gunleik, a friend of mine who owns an Epic is working at a production company as a DP, their primary focus are music videos.

Their "working" framerates on every music video shoot are 5K 100fps and 2K 300fps. They almost don't use 24fps, in part not to miss a great visual moment that they can slow down later. When they need lipsync they are recording it at...wait for it...60fps, speeding up the track 2x while recording.

As Peter has pointed out, it highly depends on what different people are shooting.

In this case slow-mo is a must (just because it looks cool and music video industry is all about looking cool 95% of the time) and one of the most used features of EPIC that clearly separates it from Scarlet for this production company, cause they just can't achieve similar results with it in their field of work.
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Ok... i'll say this again.

My guess is that 90% of the epic users for 99% of their shoots don't give a fuck about the 120fps option, but use it for 5k 24/25.

THAT, to me is what makes the Epic "epic".
Click to expand...

Gunleik, while You might be right about those numbers - You did leave out two most important facts without which Your comparison is pointless...:

Yes, the vast majority of Epic owners shoot 5K at 24/25/30 fps - but at the full sensor size and can do so in HDRx...
If this mode is enabled - Scarlet owners will be only able to shoot 5K at 24P in a wide screen mode (half the vertical resolution) and never with HDRx...

And even those Epic owners who shoot most of the time the 24/25/30 fps do occasionally shoot higher speeds without ever having to worry about it.
The Scarlet owners could not even dream about higher speeds without cropping the sensor to lower resolutions well bellow 5K.

Peter

PS: Every single time I shoot with Epic (which is 1/4 of my work - and I rent the Epic body for this) - I shoot everything in HDRx. The extra 6 stops of dynamic range makes all the difference for me to alone justify the higher cost of Epic. Never mind the higher frame rates at full sensor aperture (which is also nothing to sneeze at)...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top