Dear Jim/RED - Scarlet firmware upgrade

[Les Dittert]

"Entitled" is just the wrong word in this context. After all Scarlet is already way more than RED ever promised.

I just find this discussion fruitless as it combines the sense of entitlement with something technically impossible.
.

Martin, why do you think that it is technically impossible ?

In my educated opinion the restrictions are a pure business decision. Providing the Scarlet at the low price that it is, is a gift. They don't make much money on the Scarlet.
It's better to sell more of the same hardware with Epic enabled. Accounting likes the extra $10K for each sale. They dropped the price to increase volume on it. They can't drop the price much on Scarlet as the Cost of Goods is too close to the selling point.
I accept this business model.

 

[jimhare]

The information we have been given is that if the chip doesn't meet the EPIC test in QA then it automatically becomes a Scarlet. This means the Scarlet is not capable of doing what the Epic does, high frame rates and full resolution.

Does everyone think that the Scarlet is just feature-blocked and the hardware is the same? Red have been pretty transparent about this and never given me any reason to doubt their word.

So in way it's kind of like saying we would now like to fit 2 gallons in a 1 gallon container. At some point what's being asked is not about economics, it's about reality.

Will they find a way to do it anyway?

They have worked miracles so who knows, but to say the price of Red Ones has dropped so we need more features on the Scarlet does not really work in my opinion.

I own both the Epic and Scarlet so I win either way, more capability on my lower-priced camera, or more differentiation to protect my higher-priced camera.

 

[jimhare]

This was a completely different camera with completely different hardware. Only similarity is the name Scarlet.

The actual production Scarlet is a subset of EPIC hardware so this chart doesn't suggest anything about the specs.

I don't think you're completely right on that statment mate. Look at the price and specs for Epic down below. (faster frame rates, less.. lesser price now). Now look at the price and specs for Scarlet. (Frame rates nope, price not so much). That's well over 3 years ago mate, when that kind of technology seemed to be a "bit" more expensive. Oh and by the way, the 2/3" Scarlet brain was targeted to have an internal procosser that could handle 120fps at 3K and sell for less than $3K.

Everything Changes... ...Not for the Scarlet guys

 

[Terry VerHaar]

I don't buy the great conspiracy theory that RED has dumbed down the Scarlet to make Epic more valuable. I accept the explanation that they used lower performing ASICs that couldn't deliver Epic performance and chose a level of performance for Scarlet that would consistently fit those "reject" ASICs. Does that mean they can't tweak a little more out over time? No, it doesn't - and they do keep adding features through firmware. To think they are holding back something just seems like so much paranoia.

 

[Philipe Ratton]

I agree with you guys but I have a feeling that 5k 24fps is possible. Even if WS only.
Don't quote me, I said FEELING!
And that would really make a happier camper.
I said HAPPIER!

 

[Damian Mizzi]

Martin, why do you think that it is technically impossible ?

In my educated opinion the restrictions are a pure business decision. Providing the Scarlet at the low price that it is, is a gift. They don't make much money on the Scarlet.
It's better to sell more of the same hardware with Epic enabled. Accounting likes the extra $10K for each sale. They dropped the price to increase volume on it. They can't drop the price much on Scarlet as the Cost of Goods is too close to the selling point.
I accept this business model.

I agree, and I believe you're right. I also believe that some people have mentioned that the ASICs inside the Scarlet, did not meet the required power of the Epic. And I think there could be some truth to that as well, even though its a bit unlikely to have all those "faulty" or maybe incapable ASICs. However if a board does not meet certain requirements, it is very likely to be only a couple of steps behind. Once again I understand that there must be a decent difference between the 2, but not as extreme as it is right now.

 

[Jon Thomasberg]

So as for as I can tell, there seems to be two issues at hand here:
1) Scarlet vs Epic positioning from a business perspective ;
2) Hardware capabilities from an electronics engineering perspective (e.g. Does the Scarlet platform have some untapped potential being intentionally repressed in firmware?)

#1 Makes complete sense. Epic has to retain significant capabilities which differentiate it from Scarlet, else, why would people pay, even by todays prices, 2x more for Epic?
#2 While I don't know what most Scarlets are truly capable of in hardware, were it to be 'uncapped', It would seem logical that since Epic performs at roughly 10x the performance as Scarlet, it would seem logical that the batch-rejects from Epic that comprise Scarlet, did not fail QC to a level of 10%. Thus, leaving some unknown level of improvement. Of course, should Red hear and entertain pleadings about bumping-up Scarlet a bit, they would still have to ensure whatever unleashed potential may be available in firmware, it would not compromise consistent errorless results across all Scarlets in the field (i.e. not having some that can perform at or near Epic territory, yet others which can only sustain errorless performance at currently-allowed levels).

Seemingly, were it physically possible, perhaps there exists a happy compromise at which some additional performance MAY be possible, thereby making Scarlet even more appealing than it already is in that price-point, while still allowing Epic enough performance room to clearly maintain its status as the flagship of the Red lineup, thereby justifying the 2x price delta.

Moreover, again -- were it possible, I would like to see Scarlet capable of:

Format | Framerate | HDRx
------------------------------------------------------
5k 30 15
4k 60 30 (so you could do 2x offspeed at non-HDRx; up to 30fps HDR)
3k 96 48 (allows for 3x offspeed at non-HDRx; 2x offspeed with HDRx)
2k 120 60
1k does anyone even use 1k, really

And I am coming from the perspective of being an owner of Epics, a Scarlet and a R1-M.

 

[Damian Mizzi]

This was a completely different camera with completely different hardware. Only similarity is the name Scarlet.

The actual production Scarlet is a subset of EPIC hardware so this chart doesn't suggest anything about the specs.

So in one post you claim that you believe that the ASICs inside the Scarlet are board that did not make it to an Epic, and in another post you tell me that the old specs sheet I posted contains data of a different camera. Ok ok, so 4 years ago Red announced the Epic that we have today, and a different Scarlet. Lets say that is correct. that's fine. SO basically, you're telling me that 4 years ago Red where able to propose a plan for an Epic with specs, that today, have been exceeded, and its price has been cut by almost half. And on the other hand, the "other" Scarlet was listed cheaper than it sells today, and with better specs. So 4 years ago proposing a Scarlet that could shoot motion at 5K, wasn't like.. "no no no that's Epic territory". Some people think that 5K for Scarlet is Epic's territory since the Scarlet came out with 4K motion capability only. At the end of the day, this will only attract more new customers, and make it more competitive. For the Epic users who have lately been dropped into thin ice, I feel so sorry honestly. But we should keep moving forward, not holding things back because of some stupid politics. However I must say again, YES YEs, the Epic's capabilities must be protected.

 

[Damian Mizzi]

So as for as I can tell, there seems to be two issues at hand here:
1) Scarlet vs Epic positioning from a business perspective ;
2) Hardware capabilities from an electronics engineering perspective (e.g. Does the Scarlet platform have some untapped potential being intentionally repressed in firmware?)

#1 Makes complete sense. Epic has to retain significant capabilities which differentiate it from Scarlet, else, why would people pay, even by todays prices, 2x more for Epic?
#2 While I don't know what most Scarlets are truly capable of in hardware, were it to be 'uncapped', It would seem logical that since Epic performs at roughly 10x the performance as Scarlet, it would seem logical that the batch-rejects from Epic that comprise Scarlet, did not fail QC to a level of 10%. Thus, leaving some unknown level of improvement. Of course, should Red hear and entertain pleadings about bumping-up Scarlet a bit, they would still have to ensure whatever unleashed potential may be available in firmware, it would not compromise consistent errorless results across all Scarlets in the field (i.e. not having some that can perform at or near Epic territory, yet others which can only sustain errorless performance at currently-allowed levels).

Seemingly, were it physically possible, perhaps there exists a happy compromise at which some additional performance MAY be possible, thereby making Scarlet even more appealing than it already is in that price-point, while still allowing Epic enough performance room to clearly maintain its status as the flagship of the Red lineup, thereby justifying the 2x price delta.

Moreover, again -- were it possible, I would like to see Scarlet capable of:

Format | Framerate | HDRx
------------------------------------------------------
5k 30 15
4k 60 30 (so you could do 2x offspeed at non-HDRx; up to 30fps HDR)
3k 96 48 (allows for 3x offspeed at non-HDRx; 2x offspeed with HDRx)
2k 120 60
1k does anyone even use 1k, really

And I am coming from the perspective of being an owner of Epics, a Scarlet and a R1-M.

Man, I think you nailed it. And considering you own Epics, I truly like your open state of mind.

 

[Luca Orlandi]

To be competitive Scarlet should be able to:
4.5 K @ 30/25/24 fps (6:1 - 7:1)
and 3K or 2K @ 96fps or 120 fts burst mode ( 1 or 2 min.).

4.5K allow us to work in true 4K output (1K WS is completely useless in the real world).

L.

 

[Carmine Scalzi]

++++++1
and I still don't understand why are we waiting for a decent power management and a few more fps for pal countries???? With this never seen before price reduction Red should understand( if they want to sell scarlet and not let them die in opposite of other brand capable of more dramatic features - as newer sensor etc etc ) I aspect them to gain the performance of the scarlet. I'm sure they can do, at least with a firmware updating. Red one is capable of 4.5 and scarlet can't... ? mmm, sounds a sort of strange to me... For what concern the dragon update, I think a scarlet owner (if the dragon upgrade is about the scarlet too) facing the chance to upgrade I think he'll fly to another brand. With the aspected amount of money to upgrade (at this price reduction moment well above the price of the body) in 2 years a 4K real output camera with high frame rate clean output lowlight sensibility etc etc (read sony or others) will be the goal...
please don't talk anymore about obsolete etc... it's too funny now... (btw I still love my scarlet, but I don't like the move of the RED, no no no... and I'm sure I'm not the only one)

2c

To be competitive Scarlet should be able to:
4.5 K @ 30/25/24 fps (6:1 - 7:1)
and 3K or 2K @ 96fps or 120 fts burst mode ( 1 or 2 min.).

4.5K allow us to work in true 4K output (1K WS is completely useless in the real world).

L.

 

[Martin Weiss]

Jarred has already said that the new firmware will have power management and a good number of other features. Due next month.

 

[Luca Orlandi]

Good to know. I hope the next firmware increases also the max. frame size and fps.

 

[Roger Valdes]

None of RED's cameras have some magic capability built-in that just waits to be released by a firmware update. RED has always made it clear that if you want higher frame rates, go the Epic route. It has also been clear that the framerate limitation is because of hardware limits.

If you need higher fps, then the Epic incidentally has become ever so more affordable.

Of course I can always find a situation where I would love to shoot 5k in 96fps HDRx, but then it is my job to get the right tool for the job, and not demand the tool to change itself.

I'm just getting a bit tired of the feeling of entitlement by some. R1, Scarlet and Epic are fantastic cameras and churn out fantastic images - in the right hands. People managed to tell beautiful stories long before there were cameras this capable. I think we should all just move on and concentrate on the things we can change, and improve our crafts.

Then why is there no 120fps at 2k? The hardware seems capable (120fps 2k is the same data rate as 4k 30fps)

 

[Jon Thomasberg]

To be competitive Scarlet should be able to:
4.5 K @ 30/25/24 fps (6:1 - 7:1)
and 3K or 2K @ 96fps or 120 fts burst mode ( 1 or 2 min.).

4.5K allow us to work in true 4K output (1K WS is completely useless in the real world).

L.

Agreed. This was the thought behind my post yesterday. The only difference is I was suggesting 5k vs 4.5k.
This idea was founded on my best objective perception of a win-win-win scenario. Specifically:


a) it would finally make the entire Red product offering universally consistent and really drive home the '5k capture for 4k delivery' mantra Jim has been espousing for quite some time now. Currently, you have to use an Epic or an EOL R1 if you want true 4k post-debayer.;
b) With new players finally coming to market in the 4k space that Red built so-to-speak, it would place Red even further ahead as the preeminent 'go to' brand for all things 4k delivery, whilst maintaining significant enough differentiation between model lines, justifying the pricing model. In essence, I believe it balances the performance/price ratio a bit better.
c) from a functional use-case, it would allow 5k capture for 4k delivery benefit to the end-user (unlocked potential), whereas now you cannot have true 4k post-debayer from Scarlet. As it stands 5k @12fps is not usable unless you are doing timelapse.
d) still positions Epic ahead of Scarlet to be able to do things Scarlet cannot. Ensuring its top-spot position.
e) allows for Scarlet to be a viable B-cam to an Epic shoot at conventional framerates.

'Obsolescence Obsolete'? -- Obsolutely!

 

[Jon Thomasberg]

Jarred has already said that the new firmware will have power management and a good number of other features. Due next month.

Good stuff! Thanks Martin, I did not see that.

 

[Manu BERNARD]

I don't know if this is the right place to discuss about it, I doubt that Jim or Jarred read this topic.

We need to express our wishes, the simples ones : power management (they heard that and give us something next month), 4,5K WS and PAL settings.

The recon topic seems to be the more appropriate to do that.

 

[Martin Weiss]

Quote

Build 4 is the big one coming.. December sometime. Power Management, 1:1 joystick zoom, long exposures, timelapse, pre-record and ramping are just some of the highlights... which also includes your image flip Will

For some people.. this is one of those builds that will be like a new camera all over again....

 

[Joseph Coleman]

I've seen a lot of request like this on the site lately and I think if it were as impossible as some of you are saying then it would have been squashed by Jim right away. I do believe that Scarlet may have been throttled back power wise (say 25%) of what its actually capable of. They were not ready to completely make Red One obsolete so they gave it a slight (but temporary) advantage. Along with ensuring stability of Scarlet on its release. If I were them I would do the same thing. But now they have made it affordable for any old red one users to upgrade to Epic if need be. They no longer sell new Red Ones. And, with ample time to test the real specs of Scarlet they will release its true power. It seems very logical to me. Up till now Red has made very logical moves (besides such a huge price cut, I didn't see that coming). To stay on top of the competition I could see them increasing the specs to at least 4.5k 25fps and 2k 120fps. 1k is useless and they know it!

 

[Gabriel Scindian]

To be competitive Scarlet should be able to:
4.5 K @ 30/25/24 fps (6:1 - 7:1)
and 3K or 2K @ 96fps or 120 fts burst mode ( 1 or 2 min.).

4.5K allow us to work in true 4K output (1K WS is completely useless in the real world).

L.

I second that emotion