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 :)

15 Reasons why you shouldn't sell your DSLR for the SCARLET. yet.

This is all still specific though... with SCARLET-X you can choose to shoot a motion stream and extract stills from it. That's the whole idea of the DSMC concept, no? I don't know about you, but being able to do both can be pretty damn useful if your client is willing to accept it!

But of course, if STILLS is your primary application -- why go for a SCARLET-X at all then? Plenty of great stills cameras that go for lower cost...
 
His reasons are all valid for certain people. I'm not interested right now in the "stills" aspect. I have a RED ONE (soon to be Epic-X Stage III) solely to shoot narratives, nothing else.
 
Daniel Kunz said:
Hi Graeme, thanks for the response. That sounds interesting, would love to see those tests.
I'm really happy to add the SCARLET to our arsenal of great tools for what we produce.
I find that the noise reduction found in the ACR of Lightroom does wonders to the high-ISO images of a CANON SLR.
+ it adds the ability to correct lens distortion for each lens.
I'm sure or at least i hope that for the sake of Photographers like myself that you could talk with adobe about the integration of RED Stills for Lightroom!

thanks for your time Graeme, nice to hear directly from the right departement!

I found this test here:
http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/low_light_do_hdslrs_really_rule/
Click to expand...

I guess its also time to look if photoshop is the best tool for the job if you have motion prictures primarily.
Noise reduction and matching Color Correction (of raw or high dynamic images) etc can all be done in Nuke in huge resolutions - its all nondestructive and endlessly faster - except for painting - but small touch up is also reasonably good.
 
Björn Benckert said:
Agree, who wants to shoot weddings anyway....
Click to expand...
Not sure if you are being facetious or not but I would answer your question by saying people who want to make money. Some may find weddings low art form, but personally I think people who shoot weddings and do a really good job of it should be given more credit. There's a ton of pressure with wedding videography. You miss the moment, have a tech failure, etc and it can just about ruin your career or at least your psyche. I have a lot of respect for the good wedding videographers. In fact, I like to shoot one every once and a while just to see how on top of things I am. So back to the money part, unlike many struggling filmmakers, wedding videographers tend to make decent money. Now those struggling filmmakers may argue they'd rather be poor than shoot weddings, and that's fine but the successful wedding videographer could probably be doing both. Just food for thought.
 
@Eric
thanks for your reply. Its specific i know. But i do both. i'd say 70% Motion 30% Stills. the 70% is the reason i will go for the Scarlet.
I know that extracting stills from motion is great. but it's not the same as taking stills. At least not yet.

Unless Red would offer us a "dual" mode HDRx that reduces the shutter time for the second stream to a value chosen by the user but keeps exposure by pushing the ISO.
example:

Stream 1: 24fps ISO 100, F:2.8 1/50
Stream 2. 24fps ISO 800, F:2.8 1/200

that would be awesome. That way hybrid photographers would use the HDRx to have the best of both worlds: buttery motion and crisp stills.
 
fALk Gärtner said:
I guess its also time to look if photoshop is the best tool for the job if you have motion prictures primarily.
Noise reduction and matching Color Correction (of raw or high dynamic images) etc can all be done in Nuke in huge resolutions - its all nondestructive and endlessly faster - except for painting - but small touch up is also reasonably good.
Click to expand...
You clearly haven't used Lightroom, haven't you? It's Photoshop for Photographers. Nondestructive, Fast, Cataloging, Metadata, Tags, Presets, etc. And it works seamlessly with Photoshop aswell. Check it out. Ask a photographer that uses something like Lightroom, Aperture or CaptureOne.
It's the best thing that happened to digital photography since photoshop.
 
Björn Benckert said:
Agree, who wants to shoot weddings anyway....
Click to expand...

Ouch. Are you serious? Even though I don't shoot weddings myself, I have respect for those that do and who thrive to raise the bar of their craft.

Frankly, I found your remark rather snobbish.
 
Gunleik Groven said:
I think Jim killed flash-sync as a concept about a month ago...
Click to expand...

Really, for sure? I have missed that. I think that it is pretty unfortunate. That's one reason I'll never sell my cannons. I'm still waiting on my Epic X, but I think if you really want to be a true revolutionary in the photo world, flash is a must. Maybe it is just me. I can see that magazines and big budget photo shoots can afford big hmi or tungsten units, but it's not only the money they cost to rent but the cumbersome they are to use. If used well, strobes and flash can be very powerful. And I don't think that flash is just a wedding scenario.

I know it must be quite hard to accomplish to do synch flash photography on the Epic/Scarlet, and it is not a priority for Red right now, but I'm sad they discontinued that idea, because I think it would make our Epic/Scarlets, so much better.

At the same time I understand that Red is looking to reach the photo world that needs both. Meaning, the scenarios where the photos are just simple frame grabs. (I even wonder if Red will ever activate the switch photo, video) So it is obvious that red is not interested in the kind of photography where you'd need a flash.

I agree with many of the valid points that Daniel points out (but not all) but it is pretty clear that Epic and Scarlet will still be a proffesional used only in the jobs/situations that video is a must and the quality needs to be the best, with the option of using those frame grabs as prints as well. But for holidays or jobs where you mainly need photography and video quality is not so important, the 7D will still be by my side unfortunately and the Epic will be on the self waiting for the bigger jobs..

So bottom line, apple and oranges, unfortunately we'll still need both cameras depending on the job, and sometimes even need to carry both.
 
Regardless of my own low post count I just thought it was odd to jump on RED's own site with all guns blazing, highlighting Scarlet in such negative light. I could be wrong, maybe I am, I just wouldn't do that myself.

I can see you are angry Daniel, I'll come back and chat with you when you are feeling less heated.

Enjoy your day Daniel.




Daniel Kunz said:
oh my gosh really? do you look into the mirror every moring and proudly think "look at me: senior member of reduser.net. 111 Posts and counting"?

So tell me Kacey Baker, Senior Member of reduser.net with 111 Posts, what did i write that offended your honor, that you had to demote me to an inferior poster? Why don't you contribute with your opinion about The advantages of using Red primarely as a Still camera? Because 2 of your posts seem utterly unnecessary in this thread. Maybe try with some CONTENT instead of some trolling?
Click to expand...
 
Steve Sherrick said:
Not sure if you are being facetious or not but I would answer your question by saying people who want to make money. Some may find weddings low art form, but personally I think people who shoot weddings and do a really good job of it should be given more credit. There's a ton of pressure with wedding videography. You miss the moment, have a tech failure, etc and it can just about ruin your career or at least your psyche. I have a lot of respect for the good wedding videographers. In fact, I like to shoot one every once and a while just to see how on top of things I am. So back to the money part, unlike many struggling filmmakers, wedding videographers tend to make decent money. Now those struggling filmmakers may argue they'd rather be poor than shoot weddings, and that's fine but the successful wedding videographer could probably be doing both. Just food for thought.
Click to expand...

Hi Steve. Thanks for your reply. You are totally right in my opinion. I don't overly enjoy shooting weddings, since after 25 or 30 of them they all seem a little similar. BUT THEY KEEP YOU AT THE TOP OF THE GAME. if you want to be a good observer and learn how to compose your pictures, or if you want to train your eye at getting interesting perspectives or angles, if you want to learn how to interact with people and direct them there is nothing more challenging than a wedding. Since i have shot so many weddings i keep asking myself "haven't you done that picture before" or "how can i improve this shot".
I have only shot 1 Wedding VIDEO, but 25-30 Weddings as photographer. big difference. Everything i learned in photography has helped me in film.

And as for those who think it is a low art form to witness love, family and friendship and to record it to share the moment, the memory and the atmosphere knows little about art.
 
Kacey Baker said:
Regardless of my own low post count I just thought it was odd to jump on RED's own site with all guns blazing, highlighting Scarlet in such negative light. I could be wrong, maybe I am, I just wouldn't do that myself.

I can see you are angry Daniel, I'll come back and chat with you when you are feeling less heated.

Enjoy your day Daniel.
Click to expand...

Hey Kacey, no i'm not angry. just a little shocked about the way that you dismissed the thread to be more suited to dvxuser. it's not that i am eating away your time or your server space.
I didn't jump with all guns blazing. The Scarlet is an amazing Camera for cinema. no doubt about it. i didn't even touch that part. but i was just pointing out a few things to consider for those readers that were unsure about the obsolesence of their DSLR for a stills purpeous.
I am worried about people that always from one extreme to the other without considering what they are leaving behind. There isn't such a thing as a perfect camera for everything, neither is there a perfect monitor or a perfect phone. it's all about what you need to do your job better.

i am sorry for jumping at YOU though. didn't mean to dismiss you in an unloving way. god bless you, have a great day and keep shooting!
 
Daniel Kunz said:
@Eric
thanks for your reply. Its specific i know. But i do both. i'd say 70% Motion 30% Stills. the 70% is the reason i will go for the Scarlet.
I know that extracting stills from motion is great. but it's not the same as taking stills. At least not yet.

Unless Red would offer us a "dual" mode HDRx that reduces the shutter time for the second stream to a value chosen by the user but keeps exposure by pushing the ISO.
example:

Stream 1: 24fps ISO 100, F:2.8 1/50
Stream 2. 24fps ISO 800, F:2.8 1/200

that would be awesome. That way hybrid photographers would use the HDRx to have the best of both worlds: buttery motion and crisp stills.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the thoughtful post Daniel.

Good news for you: you can use HDRx exactly as you described. With HDRx set to +2 you will get an x-track (stream 2) with shutter 2 stops faster than the A-track (stream 1). ISO is metadata with RED, i.e. no gain is applied in camera, ISO affects processing in RED Cine-X. You would need to set ISO for the x-track at 800 in Cine-X. This has been discussed several times since the release of HDRx, but the info is buried in stream-of-collective-consciousness threads. In your example, to keep EVs the same in both tracks you would set Stream 1 at ISO 200 - 2 stops difference in ISO and 2 stops difference in shutter speed. In reality, the sweet spot for ISO is 800, so the ISOs might be something more like 400 and 1600 (which is apparently about the limit for a clean image).

As far as flash sync, if/when it is enabled it will only work for long-duration strobes. This includes most, but not all studio strobes, and eliminates all speedlights. It is not a firmware issue, it has to do with the fact that the sensor uses a rolling shutter that reads the lines at a speed such that a speedlight would not provide light for a long enough time to light the frame evenly. There may be a sweet spot where speedlights could work, but there would definitely be limits to their usefulness. There has been talk of using FP high-speed sync with speedlights, but that's pretty iffy and introduces another set of major limitations.

Agree 100% with what you said above about weddings. Nothing like moving from a ceremony in low light - no flash, to group photos with lights, to a reception with handheld strobe and maybe flash off camera - all in the space of 30 minutes.
 
Last edited:
Daniel Kunz said:
@Eric
thanks for your reply. Its specific i know. But i do both. i'd say 70% Motion 30% Stills. the 70% is the reason i will go for the Scarlet.
I know that extracting stills from motion is great. but it's not the same as taking stills. At least not yet.

Unless Red would offer us a "dual" mode HDRx that reduces the shutter time for the second stream to a value chosen by the user but keeps exposure by pushing the ISO.
example:

Stream 1: 24fps ISO 100, F:2.8 1/50
Stream 2. 24fps ISO 800, F:2.8 1/200

that would be awesome. That way hybrid photographers would use the HDRx to have the best of both worlds: buttery motion and crisp stills.
Click to expand...

Remember ISO is just metadata. You can do exactly this and apply the ISO gain in post.
 
Steve Wake said:
Thanks for the thoughtful post Daniel.

Good news for you: you can use HDRx exactly as you described. With HDRx set to +2 you will get an x-track (stream 2) with shutter 2 stops faster than the A-track (stream 1). ISO is metadata with RED, i.e. no gain is applied in camera, ISO affects processing in RED Cine-X. You would need to set ISO for the x-track at 800 in Cine-X.
Click to expand...

thanks for the helpful response! looking great! I'm very keen on trying this out! although it won't really be possible with the Scarlet yet since the highest quality with HDRx enabled at 25fps is 3K which results in the same DOF characteristics as with a 2/3rds Sensor (not my cup of tea).
 
- HDRx is one of the ways I intend to replace the 5D. Shooting aperture brackets is a PITA to pull back together.
- Epics are surprisingly light. 5D isn't terribly light but I'm actually kind of looking forward to getting back into shape after slacking off from film school when I was able to hold much heavier rigs for hours. ;)

The big potential problems as I seem them are:
- APS-C so limited fish-eye options
- FPN for long exposures.
- Aspect Ratio
- Battery Life

If you're worried about data rates, don't be. A canon RAW file is about 24MB I believe. Just shoot a half second burst of RAW video 4k and it'll work out to be about the same.
 
Really. I glanced through all your points and all I could see was the creation of a set of selected opinions (not so much facts) that supported your pre-determined position that you liked the 5D better for stills. As for accuracy, some of it was surely subjective if not downright questionable - btw, the sensor is a Mysterium-X. The 5D is a good stills camera... so? It pretty much sucks at high quality motion for the broad range of needs a videographer or film maker has. What's the point? Then again, I am not sure the folks who favor stills work over video were going to do what you are suggesting anyway.
 
"this thread belongs dvxuser or cinema5d"
"As for accuracy, some of it was surely subjective if not downright questionable"

What the crap? were does all that dismissing opposition come from?
OF COURSE IT's an opinion. one that i would like to discuss with you guys. I'm soon to be a red owner, trying to get some thoughts and opinions together. You make this forum feel like a communist regime were everybody must agree on everything and praise every word and letter that comes out of RED's mouth. They are people, they make products. they are great at what they do, and they seem to care alot about the community, but you make them to a "thing" that they are not. They are respectful and open-minded. look at what graeme wrote back and take an example.

Yes i love my 5D for stills. who doesn't?

Terry please write back which Points are downright questionable? I am very interested, and i will correct them if you prove them wrong.
If graeme shows me his test about comparing High-ISO then i will correct my post. no worries.

Please guys, please make this forum something welcoming for new members that come here to share their thoughts and opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top