Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

[Chris Puerstl]

Hello Kyle

I do agree with some of your points but not the 2/3rd sensor. I was planning on buying a red one and then it happened the scarlet I was upset that such a camera could exist and would of rather seen a 2/3rds 3k version. Then I thought about it cheaper cost for 4k meaning I could afford to get some more lenses I then was happy. I am not excited that the camera can do 5k at 12fps as that is not useful just in my opinion. Another point I am not happy about with the scarlet is the fact that it can only do 30fps and not 48fps at least in 4k but I can live with that. I can also say that I wish it would be more friendly on the 4k options, I mean 4k, 4k HD, 4k 2:1, 4k ANA that hopefully is just a firmware upgrade down the road.

I have been waiting to purchase a red for a long time now, I would have gotten it last year but unforeseen events I couldn't afford it. I already placed my order for the scarlet and will be thrilled once it arrives and next year this time hope to buy an epic if business is good.

I have been working for years with red footage and had to upgrade all my workstations to support 5k red raw and 2k arri footage. Keep in mind that the Camera is just one small portion of the equation, 25k for camera and accessories another 5k for red rocket then a RAID system minimum 15k then DI software Assimilate Scratch 20k , better editing suites 15k - 30k and more. In the end I believe that 14k for a scarlet is a great price since the editing suite will now cost more then the camera if you want to enter into a 4k or 2k workflow.

Looking at other camera's such as the Arri Alexa only 2k for I think its 60k could be wrong. The scarlet 4k seems to be a steal.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[M. Dahlstrom]

Vroom.

Vroom.

Epic is like a Formula One car. Scarlet was going to be more like a Ferrari; not as impressive in terms of raw power, but a tad more comfortable and practical for a lot of usage scenarios, not to mention way more affordable. Many of us were looking forward to that camera, especially in light of the clunkers we currently drive (yes, that would be DSLRs).

What we are now offered is basically a Formula One car with a smaller engine. "Most affordable racing car ever! Great if you want the full Formula One experience but don't need to go quite as fast", says Red. Not so great for my casual trips around town, says I.

Red have decided they only want to build Formula One cars. Most will agree that they do so at unmatched levels, both in terms of features and price. Still, many of us wanted, needed, that Ferrari. We are now disappointed that Red isn't going to build it, and worried that no one else will either.

That disappointment is something Red should be proud of.

 

[Emanuel A.]

That is just not true- if that's what they teach in German history classes- God save us-the history may repeat itself some day....

That's what I've always heard from several distinct sources, but I admit it can be inaccurate or simply lacking some other information better advised going with a polish source. After all, closer to the factual material. For example, without leaving the movies field when I and many other portuguese fellows saw Spielberg's Amistad, we felt completely injusticed with the POV offered over our ancestors. Even the portuguese press in general mentioned it (not only a personal opinion or set of opinions but a fact). When we were one of the most tolerant people in that time. And if you or any other people have visited or will visit Lisbon (one of the most multicultural places that I am aware of) will easily understand what I'm saying. Brazil, as for instance, is just a little example. So I can understand how the polish may feel faced with any sort of misinformation of similar kind.

A lot of our world or what we are used to identify as information since we live in a world of information is wrong or plenty inaccurate, and we just need to know the best to separate what is accurate from wrong

 

[Robert Jackson]

A lot of our world is world, and we just need to know to separate what is accurate from wrong.

Wars in particular are spun through propaganda so rigorously that it becomes almost impossible to know anything about what happened during them with any real certitude. But in researching a treatment I was working on I came across a lot of references to the Polish cavalry being formidable and the cause of a lot of German casualties, in particular. Not a lot about the Soviets, though, but it's hard to ever pin down what was going on exactly during many of the Soviet campaigns. I think propaganda has a lot to do with that, as well. You hear wildly divergent Soviet casualty figures and I always wonder if some lingering propaganda program is trying to shift war casualties into Stalin casualties, as if his personal death toll needs padding.

 

[George Petersen]

Well, thinking changes as you get more experience. Remember; Red is a start up! I would rather pay $9700 for Scarlet-X than $20K for Canon's non-4K C300, that can only manage 24 FPS@QHD resolution! Keep it in perspective; Scarlet-X is a stunning achievement you would be drooling over, if not for your infatuation with the original concept.

 

[Eric Lange]

Watch your language Emanuel- this is a very rude and libel statement. I hope you didn't mean it.....

As my double life as a dressage trainer… the Germans actually DID use cavalry in the polish campaign. It was in fact the last use of cavalry… teams of horses were used to move artillery, and over difficult ground and terrain.

As horseman I have great respect for both the polish AND German Cavalry. The Poland and German border in Silesia has gone back and forth for hundreds of years. AND yes today I would buy Trakehner (a type of dressage horse/ warm blood) that is highly sought after that come from that area, i.e. the old east...

I understand the analogy but when you get to the detail it’s ALL wrong!

A bit like what were are doing now.

I think the bottom line is that you can’t tell someone how to feel about something. You know it’s their reality not yours. I am not worried or offended by what Kyle says but I think everybody needs to learn something by the experience perhaps.

E.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Wars in particular are spun through propaganda so rigorously that it becomes almost impossible to know anything about what happened during them with any real certitude. But in researching a treatment I was working on I came across a lot of references to the Polish cavalry being formidable and the cause of a lot of German casualties, in particular. Not a lot about the Soviets, though, but it's hard to ever pin down what was going on exactly during many of the Soviet campaigns. I think propaganda has a lot to do with that, as well. You hear wildly divergent Soviet casualty figures and I always wonder if some lingering propaganda program is trying to shift war casualties into Stalin casualties, as if his personal death toll needs padding.

Back to topic Robert, it looks like your research on polish cavalry is helping you out with your goal. Sorry to exactly not be able to call it point but 'goal' instead once even if you are the best of the 2/3" supporters to justify why, the price point or the 'higher includes lower' (crop argument) is still on the S35 side, though

 

[Robert Jackson]

Well, thinking changes as you get more experience. Remember; Red is a start up! I would rather pay $9700 for Scarlet-X than $20K for Canon's non-4K C300, that can only manage 24 FPS@QHD resolution! Keep it in perspective; Scarlet-X is a stunning achievement you would be drooling over, if not for your infatuation with the original concept.

Actually, I think it's kinda wrong to dismiss Canon's camera. First off, its method for color sampling may result in more accurate color information than Red's. I mean, I could just say it is more accurate, but there's a lot of the real world that tends to come between theory and reality sometimes. And at least when it's shooting in its native 24P mode it's not windowing the sensor. And it's $20k retail, but who knows what it will sell for? I mean, I'm not lining up to buy one, but the footage looked nice.

 

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

Back to topic Robert, it looks like your research on polish cavalry is helping you out with your goal. Sorry to not be able to call it point, once even if you are the best of the 2/3" supporters to justify why, the price point or the 'higher includes lower' is still on the S35 side, though

But to counter, I haven't seen any footage from any Red product that was cropped in 2k with Super 16 lenses that gives the aesthetic of a Super 16 celluloid look that I have grown fond of in European and Independent films over the years.... I think the best utilization of any given RED product at the moment that incorporates the current RED cmos sensors, is for specifically high resolution 35mm theatrical appearances such as the American adaptation of "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo." Basically a scaled down RED image just doesn't look like an organic super 16 image to me, if that is what you are truly trying to replicate.... Although RED's cameras are perfect for blockbusters like the one I just mentioned. This is just my humble opinion.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Robert, I believe the swedish camera would suit you better

 

[Jason Murphy]

Actually, I think it's kinda wrong to dismiss Canon's camera. First off, its method for color sampling may result in more accurate color information than Red's. I mean, I could just say it is more accurate, but there's a lot of the real world that tends to come between theory and reality sometimes. And at least when it's shooting in its native 24P mode it's not windowing the sensor. And it's $20k retail, but who knows what it will sell for? I mean, I'm not lining up to buy one, but the footage looked nice.

Yeah, but 50 Mbps 4:2:2 video codec at 1080p? Not terribly interested. Scarlet-X is still a much better deal, even if a working package for both is the same price.

 

[Emanuel A.]

But to counter, I haven't seen any footage from any Red product that was cropped in 2k with Super 16 lenses that gives the aesthetic of a Super 16 celluloid look that I have grown fond of in European and Independent films over the years.... I think the best utilization of any given RED product at the moment that incorporates the current RED cmos sensors, is for specifically high resolution 35mm theatrical appearances such as the American adaptation of "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo." Basically a scaled down RED image just doesn't look like an organic super 16 image to me, if that is what you are truly trying to replicate.... Although RED's cameras are perfect for blockbusters like the one I just mentioned. This is just my humble opinion.

And it is a fair opinion. Aside certain exceptions, when people can shoot 35mm, go 35mm. Don't look back. See the HDSLR movement. Jim tried to call it vDSLR (this is a joke ) and ban the discussion from reduser. Did it work? Nope.

 

[Robert Jackson]

Back to topic Robert, it looks like your research on polish cavalry is helping you out with your goal.

Mostly it all dealt with how early in the war Hitler had planned to attack the Soviets and a lot of the keys are in his deal with them to split up Poland. Because Hitler told Finnish President Risto Ryti in '42 that his intention had been to invade the Soviets even when he signed the non-aggression pact. He apparently only did that so he could ramp up war production right on their border. It was kind of a story about duplicitous political behavior wrapped in an homage to Waiting for Godot. ;-)

 

[Robert Jackson]

Robert, I believe the swedish camera would suit you better

Probably. ;-)

 

[Robert Jackson]

And it is a fair opinion. Aside certain exceptions, when people can shoot 35mm, go 35mm. Don't look back.

I had a film professor once who used to say, "Use big film for big things and small film for small things. If you want to shoot the Swiss Alps take a 65mm camera and if you want to shoot a talking head take a 16mm camera." Which I know is oversimplifying things, but in a lot of cases he was right.

 

[Emanuel A.]

LOL You forgot to quote or comment the rest of my post!

(...)

Sorry to exactly not be able to call it point but 'goal' instead once even if you are the best of the 2/3" supporters to justify why, the price point or the 'higher includes lower' (crop argument) is still on the S35 side, though

Nice reading over any one of your posts anyway

 

[Gabriel Winebrenner]

Robert, I believe the swedish camera would suit you better

Probably. ;-)

:thumbsup:

 

[Emanuel A.]

I had a film professor once who used to say, "Use big film for big things and small film for small things. If you want to shoot the Swiss Alps take a 65mm camera and if you want to shoot a talking head take a 16mm camera." Which I know is oversimplifying things, but in a lot of cases he was right.

Indeed. Even 'cause talking heads is TV Sorry, I couldn't resist

 

[Zach Gray]

I don't fault you for having your feelings hurt, or wanting something different, but if the CEO is going to brainstorm with you, then keep things in perspective and give him a break. Is it his fault for 'hanging the carrot'? Maybe. Is it your fault for buying into that with your entire heart and soul? Maybe.


This entire thread is due to overvaluing expectations. And this entire thread is EXACTLY why Jim is going to quit sharing his plans with the community.

 

[Ruben and Sheri O.]

YIKES!!! this is soo wrong on many levels...

This is an open letter to Red.

Scarlet-X is not Scarlet. Since 2008 Scarlet has been a modular camera in two well known flavors: Fixed and Interchangeable. They were touted at 3K, 120 fps, and with HDRx at 60 fps. All for a price "around $6K," according to Ted Schilowitz who said this many many times.

What Red is calling Scarlet-X shoots 4K at 30 fps, 3K at 48 fps, etc. With an S35 sensor. The best part, it costs about $14,000. Wow...

Red defends by saying that 2/3" is too small, and 3K is not big enough either. They also say the fixed lens was not doable after all. While that is sad for a LOT of people, what was wrong with the interchangeable version?

Here is what they are not saying:
Scarlet as we knew it had more processing power than the new fangled Scarlet-X. Do the math. Yet, Scarlet-X will cost more than twice as much as Scarlet. It appears that the original Scarlet could handle 2.5 TIMES the data throughput as Scarlet-X

3K @ 48 fps vs. 3K @ 120, yet there is an inverse relationship when it comes to price. $6000 vs. $14000? Really? What is Red not telling us?

OK, so 3K is not professional? Let's pretend for a moment that I agree with you (I don't). Say Red allowed a Mysterium-X upgrade path for Scarlet interchangeable, at the same cost that the upgrade costs for a Red One ($5750).

Scarlet would then cost about $12,000 for a working package. It would cost presumably about $9500 for the brain only (about the same as the new fangled Scarlet-X, brain only). Here is the difference, given what we know about Scarlet's hardware:

Upgraded Sensor Scarlet: 5K @ at least 30 fps, 4K @ at least 60 fps, 3K @ 120 fps. Sounds awesome right?
What-we-got-N3 Scarlet: 5K @ 12 fps, 4K at 25 fps, 3K @ 48 fps, etc... Something smells here...

Another tidbit of information: Scarlet-X is made up of hardware (ASIC) that did not pass QA to be put in Epic. Same sensor as Epic; same hardware as Epic, albeit crippled. What does that mean? It means Scarlet-X is not some "pie in the sky" revolutionary RED invention. It is a concoction thrown together at the last minute to compete with Canon.

RED, I will not accuse you of fraud, but this feels like bait and switch. Intentional or not, "everything is subject to change" or not, the effect is the same.