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 :)

2 Feature Requests

J

John Schick

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Orange County, California
I've been trying out the latest Scarlet beta firmware (3.3.12), and I was thinking about a couple of feature requests:


1. More control for mapping buttons. From what I can tell, there's no way to map the rocker button on the side handle to change the FLUT value in increments (1, 2, 3, etc.) without having to create a separate preset for each individual FLUT value and then mapping the button to change between 10 different presets).

It would be nice to have a dedicated menu option for changing a parameter (FLUT, ISO, Aperture, Shutter Speed, etc.) based on an incremental value (-3, -2, -1, 1, 2, 3).



2. Possible separation between Resolution and Aspect Ratio. What if there was an advanced menu option where you could select your Aspect Ratio (2.4:1, 2:1, 1.9:1, 1.78:1, 1.33:1, etc.) separately from Resolution. The the regular Resolution "scroll bar" is cleaned up to just (5k, 4k, 3k, 2k, 1k - and eventually 6k). Depending on your selected resolution & aspect ratio, the camera will crop the sensor and adjust your max frame rate.

Under the advanced options, you could also add a checkbox for Anamorphic mode - which will de-squeeze the image on the monitor. Maybe you could also choose the amount of de-squeeze (2x, 1.3x).



SAMPLE ILLUSTRATIONS:

Regular Resolution Menu:
attachment.php


Advanced Resolution Menu:
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • menu1.jpg
    menu1.jpg
    16.4 KB · Views: 0
  • menu2.jpg
    menu2.jpg
    31.6 KB · Views: 0
I second this. I would like to be able to shoot 2.35:1 without having the wasted look around. Sometimes its nice to have it to reframe, but other times its just a waste of information and would rather gain some space on a card/higher frame rate and shoot cropped than not.
 
I like this idea.

I believe that Red will likely update the recording formats once Dragon comes out.

I think we'll see these formats for 6K, 5K, 4K, 3K, and likely 2K across the board:
-Full (full sensor or approximately 1.94:1 - can be designated as simply "6K, 5K, etc..")
-2:1 (2:1, might not be necessary, but nice to have for all formats)
-HD (16x9 broadcast standard)
-WS (2.40:1)

In terms of anamorphic support I'd like to see 1.33x, 1.5x, 1.75x, and 2x to support all the potential anamorphic glass at those above resolutions.

Having these formats across the board makes heaps of sense. I'm surprised it's currently not implemented this way actually.


I don't know if there's a real reason moving forward to have 1K as a format with the physical size of the Dragon sensor and where things are going. Maybe for medical imaging or something. If it does exist it should also adhere to the same aspect ratio "formats".

In the future when and if Red makes the 3:2, 645, and 617 sensors that those will be added later for their unique properties. Interestingly I think Dragon could scale up nicely to a 3:2 36mmx24mm sensor and still pull off decent frame rates at 7K-ish+. I wonder if we'll see Dragon S version maybe. However for motion picture production and the proposed specs of Dragon the 6K makes a ton of sense.
 
Phil Holland said:
I don't know if there's a real reason moving forward to have 1K as a format with the physical size of the Dragon sensor and where things are going. Maybe for medical imaging or something. If it does exist it should also adhere to the same aspect ratio "formats".
Click to expand...

I like the idea that as we ask for things, they also remove stuff to avoid firmware bloat and impossible testing. Also with the Dragon sensor coming out, and with the Scarlet being FPS limited, i just don't see a reason for hdrx on the scarlet (I find i can never compromise FPS by turning on hdrx for anything except messing around).
 
PatrickFaith said:
lmao ... hehe ... your awesome Phil ;) I should have known there isn't a feature on the Scarlet your not using!
Click to expand...

Well to be perfectly honest, minus some initial tests, I don't shoot 2K or 1K on it. 3K is as low as I go really.
 
Asking for removal of 1k or HDRx is rather silly, frankly. I don't know why people ask for features to be removed.

Also, the menu suggestion makes sense when dealing with all those different formats...
 
Niko Pueringer said:
Asking for removal of 1k or HDRx is rather silly, frankly. I don't know why people ask for features to be removed.

Also, the menu suggestion makes sense when dealing with all those different formats...
Click to expand...

Silly and don't know why ? I well stated testing and firmware size increase. This also effects power and battery performance optimization.
 
PatrickFaith said:
I like the idea that as we ask for things, they also remove stuff to avoid firmware bloat and impossible testing. Also with the Dragon sensor coming out, and with the Scarlet being FPS limited, i just don't see a reason for hdrx on the scarlet (I find i can never compromise FPS by turning on hdrx for anything except messing around).
Click to expand...

HDRx is still legitimate for stills though.

I never use it for motion, but I actually used it tonight for a photo I was shooting.
 
Phil Holland said:
Well to be perfectly honest, minus some initial tests, I don't shoot 2K or 1K on it. 3K is as low as I go really.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I generally shoot 3k, 48fps for any slomo I need. Occasionally 2k @ 60fps.
 
to be honest HDRx is a big feature if U know hot to deal with it... I'm using at this moment 3KHD maybe more then 4K with anamorphic lenses and the HDRx is a wonderful feature to increase the overall stops to work with...
 
I would actually prefer it wide open kind of like flame deals with project frame sizes.

in oter words.

A menu where you set your width x hight in pixels and your aspect ratio.

then depending on how many pixels you actually record your highest possible framerate and lowest compression will change. The "standard formats" should only be available trough presets, I find it super help full to be able to choose more freely than that.

To take it one step further... if we could sellect what pixels out of the FF we wanted to record then that would be even more usefull.. kind of be able to shoot a plate of the top left corner of the frame in 500 fps or such. or just shoot a middle stripp full 6k width but only 800 pixels high or such.. kind off be able to shoot the race track with a high speed pass only for the horses in the middle that we could post into the rest of the frame that was shot FF 24p or such.

In other words make it a open as possible. I would like to shoot FF anamorphic x2 and see that on screen if possible... and do the crop in post, just one example.
 
Absolutely agree with Bjorn.

Further, it would be fabulous if RCX would allow you to crop an R3D in post (not trim IN/OUT, which obviously exists now). So one could shoot full frame for coverage, but streamline processing and archival later.
 
There are many times while doing talking head Green Screen shoots that I only need about 1/2 of the screen. These are the types of situations where shooting 4:3 would save me a whole lot of data. That would be a great choice to have. I could probably save a TB on my system right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top