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 :)

Dear mr Jannard can we please see some footage?

E

Elio Roma

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Mr Jannard they are no still images or footage of Scarlets, I mean the sensor should be done by now... the Scarlets where supposed to come out a while ago and I am sure that showing some footage to the world can only make a good advertise for Red.

I now about red day projections and the lizard image, but this is getting a bit too mysterious, no? :sad:
 
Elio Roma said:
Mr Jannard they are no still images or footage of Scarlets, I mean the sensor should be done by now... the Scarlets where supposed to come out a while ago and I am sure that showing some footage to the world can only make a good advertise for Red.

I now about red day projections and the lizard image, but this is getting a bit too mysterious, no? :sad:
Click to expand...

Yes, please!
 
Personally, I'd want to wait for Epic to launch so they can get all (if there are any) of the bugs out of system (this includes sensor firmware improvements such as in response to Brook's test) before they show off Scarlet footage.

If the Scarlet will be released when they claim it will be released, then what are you worried about anyway? They wouldn't be so dense as to not show something shortly before its launch.
 
i would like to see some scarlet low light footage too, as well as final specs on fixed /non fixed packages. Feb 13th ? having said this I am excited to wait and learn on the great forums here and burn out the heads on my sd cameras knowing that I managed to skip the whole HD aquisition thing .
 
The 2/3" chip isn't likely to perform nearly as well as the 15mm x 30mm chip. I'm sure it will probably be nice, but I wouldn't expect the dynamic range or High ISO capabilities we're seeing from the M-X samples that have been posted. Of course, the Scarlet is going to overcrank to pretty amazing frame rates, so there are up-sides all around. I'd just hate to see a bunch of baffled disappointment if the Scarlet isn't noise-free at ISO 2000.
 
I can't wait for the new Lizard-X chips. I'm hoping by Winter Solstice, I can be shooting multidimensional beings with the LX sensors.
 
Robert Jackson said:
The 2/3" chip isn't likely to perform nearly as well as the 15mm x 30mm chip. I'm sure it will probably be nice, but I wouldn't expect the dynamic range or High ISO capabilities we're seeing from the M-X samples that have been posted.
Click to expand...

I don't know, but that lizard footage looked pretty great. And also the image of the dog with bone. Don't mind for more noise at high ISO rating, but why should the dynamic range be less?
 
Emiel Labree said:
I don't know, but that lizard footage looked pretty great. And also the image of the dog with bone.
Click to expand...

That was also early 2009 when those shots were taken. They have a long way both in sensor technology, as well post-production tools.

It'll be exciting to see the progression of the DSMC's image quality. Good thing it wasn't released last Spring/Summer. aye? :)
 
Jimmy Odom said:
I've never seen this one, can anyone provide a link to it?
Click to expand...

These were shot on a Scarlet 2/3" prototype:

scarlet-fixed-lens-image.jpg


scarlet-3k-image.jpg


3k-red-camera-scarlet.jpg


red-camera-scarlet.jpg
 
Emiel Labree said:
I don't know, but that lizard footage looked pretty great. And also the image of the dog with bone. Don't mind for more noise at high ISO rating, but why should the dynamic range be less?
Click to expand...

I don't know the pixel size for the respective chips, but I'm guessing they'll be more densely packed in the 2/3" Scarlet. Smaller pixels/smaller chip seems to yield less dynamic range. I've read arguments that there's no good reason for this to be true and yet the big sensors always seem to have more latitude than their little counterparts. A D3, for example, seems to consistently have at least a stop more latitude than a D300. I'm no engineer, so this is all anecdotal on my part, but I haven't ever used a camera with a small sensor that had as much dynamic range as one with a larger sensor. I'd be thrilled to find Red an exception to that rule, but I'm not holding my breath.
 
The pixels are much more densely packed on the 2/3" chip. They should be 3 microns across whereas the S35 Mysterium and Mysterium-X chips have 5.4 micron pixels.

As for a difference in dynamic range, or sensitivity, or other factors that are often considered to be inferior on smaller sensors, it remains to be seen. It all comes down to sensor design and the current state of technology. There is no reason that a smaller sensor would automatically suffer in these areas vs. a larger one, or one with larger pixels. It's more of an issue of how much capability can be crammed into the individual photosite or pixel design.

As for the D3 vs. D300 example, they have two very different chip designs for their sensors. It's not just an issue of pixel density on the sensor, but pixel design. The sensor used in the D300S is inferior in many ways to the the one in the D3S.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
As for a difference in dynamic range, or sensitivity, or other factors that are often considered to be inferior on smaller sensors, it remains to be seen.
Click to expand...

Well, like I said, my examples are all anecdotal and I can't follow some of the more technical discussions on the physics involved. Not a science-boy. In fact, I have dyscalculia and had to take Medical Ethics as a substitute for my math credits when I got my film degree. Apparently the two halves of my brain have a reduced capacity to communicate across the gap, probably because of neural damage I suffered as a kid. SO...I wasn't trying to speak as an authority. :crazy:

Anecdotally, I shot with Olympus OM stuff for years and got an E-1 when those came out because I could use all my old Zuiko glass with an adapter. The small 4/3 sensors were infinitely frustrating, but of course that's also the same look I see from Kodak CCD designs in cameras with much larger sensors. The Leica S2 samples I keep seeing seem to have that same frustrating lack of dynamic range. So I'm perfectly willing to accept that small isn't the entire problem (or maybe even any of the problem), but I just haven't had nearly the luck with small sensors that I have had with larger ones.

In any case, I'll be interested to see how it works out. And even if there are limitations when compared to the larger sensors the ability to overcrank at those rates more than makes up for it, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top