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

[Petr Dvorak]

Kyle, what if RED had never mentioned anything about Scarlet in the last three years and only unveiled it to the public (in it's current, final form) with the announcement they made on Thursday. Would you be upset then? If not, you need to adjust the way you process the information that RED communicates during the development cycle (or just stick to buying products made by Canon and Panasonic).

Haakon I would be upset, but not on Red, just because there is still no good afordable camera for most of us.
I am already upset from that time when I first saw how amazing picture can deliver tiny 1/3" chip from DVX 100 camera, when they hack it with Andromeda! That was quite shocking, same glass, same hardware but freaky crazy big gap in quality. That was fabulous, that difference between horribly washed out fuzzy miniDV picture and clean rich and sharp picture which was even 1K resolution and in 4:4:4! That was what I always wanted! http://www.flickr.com/photos/kmvlondon/sets/72157623456520622/detail/
I always know that there is something wrong, but this was the proof. And then suddenly came Red and tried to change paradigmas in indie level sector, so there was hope for something, but they didnt make it this time ... and so we must still fiddle with drawbacks of bad picture quality from our DSLR

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Kyle, what if RED had never mentioned anything about Scarlet in the last three years and only unveiled it to the public (in it's current, final form) with the announcement they made on Thursday. Would you be upset then? If not, you need to adjust the way you process the information that RED communicates during the development cycle (or just stick to buying products made by Canon and Panasonic).

Sorry, this is ridiculous. Sure, Scarlet-X sounds like a great camera. But Red's "everything is subject to change" doesn't mean "Don't even bother to listen to us, because you can't count on anything we say." Saying for three years that there would be a 2/3-inch 3K model (possibly even after it was decided to pull the plugon it) and berating people who questioned the wisdom and viability of a 3K camera in a hardcore 4K-is-the-future campaign -- all of that tells me Red wanted everyone to believe it was committed to the camera. It seems that to a person everyone who claimed to know how the real world worked (cameras take years to develop) thought that Scarlet would be substantially the same camera announced nearly three years ago (in November 2008). People who theorized 4K were effectively dismissed as unrealistic or delusional. To receive the November 3 announcement without at least a modicum of surprise -- and, if you wanted the 2/3-inch Scarlet, disappointment (and maybe even anger) -- would be unusual. If Red had never discussed Scarlet, there would have never been any expectations. But there were, almost exclusively because Red had promoted the 2/3-inch 3K scarlet for so long. To tell Kyle he needs to process information in an unnatural way is insulting. Scarlet-X is an achievement, to be sure. But how Red handled its release -- and the road that led up to it -- can be fairly criticized. Yeah, it's a done deal, and the 2/3-inch Scarlet is as dead as the $3K Scarlet. So the disappointed, I suppose, need to swallow their pride and buy into the new Scarlet or else move on.

 

[Häakon]

There's plenty of "professional" 2/3" applications.

Sorry, I meant to say I believe their focus is professional level cinema products. I often leave that out and mean no disrespect to any working professionals in other fields.

This is, of course, not to say that you can't use a RED camera for any number of non-cinema applications. It just doesn't appear to me that this is their target focus.

I don't think we can fault anyone for being disappointed after the expectations were raised over the course of years.

Right, and that's why I asked Kyle if he would be disappointed with Scarlet had RED not announced anything until last Thursday. I think what we've learned is how RED communicates and it's up to the individual to process that on a personal level. Once again, RED didn't promise anything. They had ideas and plans, and those things changed. Over the course of three years, they were bound to change. They could choose to be silent about it (like most other companies) and not say anything until the product ships, but I do believe we end up with a better result thanks to this discourse. To expect anything as set in stone until the product is shipping is rather foolish, however. You won't be disappointed if you don't have expectations based on pre-release ideas.

 

[Häakon]

...all of that tells me Red wanted everyone to believe it was committed to the camera.

I wholeheartedly believe they had plans to make a 2/3" fixed Scarlet for a very long time. I also believe this shift in plans occurred pretty recently. Ted wouldn't be walking around touting a fixed lens Scarlet if they had no plans to make one. I think it probably came down to volume, a clear shift in where they wanted to take the company, and the realization that with the lower yield ASIC chips, they could unify the product line and offer a lower cost, stripped-down Epic that would reach more people. I think it's a better move than just scrapping Scarlet altogether and simply offering Epic as their sole product, and I think there are a lot of people beyond stoked that they can now get into 4K without having to come up with $30,000+.

 

[CJ Roy]

Sorry, I meant to say I believe their focus is professional level cinema products. I often leave that out and mean no disrespect to any working professionals in other fields.

Copy that.

Right, and that's why I asked Kyle if he would be disappointed with Scarlet had RED not announced anything until last Thursday. I think what we've learned is how RED communicates and it's up to the individual to process that on a personal level. Once again, RED didn't promise anything. They had ideas and plans, and those things changed. Over the course of three years, they were bound to change. They could choose to be silent about it (like most other companies) and not say anything until the product ships, but I do believe we end up with a better result thanks to this discourse. To expect anything as set in stone until the product is shipping is rather foolish, however. You won't be disappointed if you don't have expectations based on pre-release ideas.

Well, there is a certain amount that's on the user, but isn't the side effect for this is that people start to not take any of Red's announcements seriously? We're already there with their product release dates. They're a very young company, but I can't see how consistently doing that is good in the long run. It damages credibility.

 

[John Byrne]

I still stand behind Kyle.

 

[Emanuel A.]

I wholeheartedly believe they had plans to make a 2/3" fixed Scarlet for a very long time. I also believe this shift in plans occurred pretty recently. Ted wouldn't be walking around touting a fixed lens Scarlet if they had no plans to make one. I think it probably came down to volume, a clear shift in where they wanted to take the company, and the realization that with the lower yield ASIC chips, they could unify the product line and offer a lower cost, stripped-down Epic that would reach more people. I think it's a better move than just scrapping Scarlet altogether and simply offering Epic as their sole product, and I think there are a lot of people beyond stoked that they can now get into 4K without having to come up with $30,000+.

Hi Häak,

How are you? No talk for so long...

Sure they had.
Market (big one with the HDSLR revolution) with all the big boys to take advantage of the first ones to arrive with the larger sensor size, even though, going them with 1080p. 4K would be the natural weapon in the right hands. The usual rebels. But it is necessary more than words to win the war, to least have something at the same level, 35mm sensor size. Who wants to have a polish horse in September of 1939?

It simply made them to understand the error with the 2/3" launch if other reasons didn't happen, that one would be enough.

Cheers,
Emanuel

 

[Joel Wilkieson]

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.

EVEN if that was true, in essence, Scarlet X is a better camera for the same price as 2/3 interchangeable. Jim said that 8x fixed had problems with lens that they couldn't solve and in the end, they came to the conclusion that 2/3 sensor is probably better to be put to sleep. They had loads of delays, catastrophes, bugs..natural and digital..and they lost a lot of time. Therefore, they had to act according to their work ethics and come out with something revolutionary and 2/3 sensor isn't where it's at in 2012. Kudos for the detective work though.

 

[Häakon]

Well, there is a certain amount that's on the user, but isn't the side effect for this is that people start to not take any of Red's announcements seriously? We're already there with their product release dates. They're a very young company, but I can't see how consistently doing that is good in the long run.

I don't think their strategy works well for corporate America, no. They are kinda a garage shop company, even today. I used to get extremely frustrated over the delays until I learned to understand how they operate. The problem is exactly how you've phrased your question. These aren't announcements, they are simply communicated ideas during development. Nobody else does this, you're right. And it does piss some people off to no end (just look at this thread). Here's the reality: if you want the absolute final skinny - the true announcements - just go to red.com/store and avoid reduser.net at all costs. But as I have stated several times, I do think that the discussion on reduser absolutely helps shape what ends up on red.com/store. If you can deal with the fact that what is communicated here could go out the window tomorrow, you won't ever be upset. When Jim says "everything will change, count on it," it's not an excuse - it's just the god honest way they work. They come up with an idea today and change it by tomorrow. The only difference is that they share it in the meantime. Is it the "best" way to do business? That's entirely debatable. But they aren't the normal company, either, and I think a lot of people appreciate them for that. There's just a bit of a learning curve as to how to process their information so that expectations are tempered.

 

[John Byrne]

Using this forum as a focus group is good business, and I bet most love being a part of it. I still think a carrot is a carrot and some people are very hungry.

 

[sergio arguello]

I am mad. But, I speak for many many people who feel the same way. Scarlet may be alone in its offerings currently, but there are several 4K cameras being developed right now at a much lower cost. I would rather have the product that Red offered, or know why they pulled the plug. It simply is not right or ethical, otherwise.

well you and all those other people who are "snivelling" have a choice...its called CANON, Sony, etc...Epic changed as well and you didnt seem to voice your discontent towards this company then...A bit lik a selfish spoiled child....i want iwant give megive me...wth

 

[Eric Lange]

True! I love the irony of arguments, frustrations, expectations and complaints here on Reduser

That is so funny… and too true… I mean people complain about the food and you are flying in an aluminum tube at 540 miles per hour at 30 thousand feet.

I know I’ll get skewered for this but I never bought the 120 fps thing.

I kept asking people … Do you really need 120 fps? Who is really wanting to use 120 fps and why in that type of camera? I have to admit I though right from the start that this was a mis-match in price/performance and target capability. But for some reason a lot of people loved this idea. But I alway felt it was little fanciful, just didn't get it.


For our work the 5k in the Scarlet-X (even at 12-6 fps) is an absolute god send beyond imaging for motion control stuff and s-3d to full 3d key framed CG capture technologies. The fact that we can get decent frame rate at 4k is mind blowing. We can demonstrate our capabilities without having to stump up for a ton of EPICs or having to devise drawn out methods of simulating an EPIC type of capability that would just take too long. For us it’s a phenomenal opportunity. A lot of VFX guys are jump on the Scarlet-X and never look back.

E

 

[Kyle Presley]

well you and all those other people who are "snivelling" have a choice...its called CANON, Sony, etc...Epic changed as well and you didnt seem to voice your discontent towards this company then...A bit lik a selfish spoiled child....i want iwant give megive me...wth

You have no idea what you are talking about. If you can't contribute anything relative to this discussion without ad hominem attacks, then you need to find another thread to post in.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

people have been banned for less

people have been banned for less

Who wants to have a polish horse in September of 1939?

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

 

[Ken Waller]

120 would be good for model work. In-camera FXs. Getting the fixed in my book would be cool but the truth is people would joke your movie was blown up to 4K for theaters. Joke your 2/3 chip was just a 16mm film quality. This has been going on for years and now what can they say if your using a Scarlet... Nothing. If your making a movie for theaters $14,000 is nothing. I would spend that easy just on shooting 16mm and a transfer to tape. Now you have a great camera for the cost of some film stock.

 

[Robert Jackson]

If you can't contribute anything relative to this discussion without ad hominem attacks, then you need to find another thread to post in.

Yeah, it's kind of amazing. Three years of constant updates about products that became vaporware and being bummed about the way it all turned out makes us snivellers. Personally, I'd planned to buy a pair of the interchangeable lens bodies. Even when I thought they were going to be $7000-$8000 each I felt like it was a good deal. I'd planned to buy at least one full set of the Mini Primes to go with 'em. None of that stuff really exists anywhere else. The Mini Primes were supposed to come in at under a grand each. Try buying a Cooke SK4 or a Zeiss Ultra 16 for that kind of price. The whole Scarlet 2/3" concept was really very appealing and something nobody else was (or is) doing. Whatever happened to it the loss of the line is a terrible shame, not something to be cheered.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Let's keep it clever, please?

Let's keep it clever, please?

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

I am sorry if any word posted from my keyboard may offend whoever, it is not my intention. I love the polish people, culture, etc. Indeed. Not vain words.

What I'm trying to say if you know well the History, the polish army went to war convinced they could win with horses against... tanks. But if you'll find any example related to my native country and people (Portugal), please go ahead. You'll find it, I am certain. Mine is not better than yours or anyone else We could even start to mention the former PM who left the country with the problem of debt in 2011. But then we'd be speaking about politics. It was not the case. Period.

So please, do not distort or misunderstand my words. Behind any form, there is 'content'. And that's what the content of my words wanted to mean. This is a metaphor of what is happening nowadays in these digital camera 'wars'.

Jacek, I was in touch with you once. I didn't comply the order once your product didn't make sense to me or to my partners anymore. I am even surprise for your entry anyways. Really surprised. Sincerely. I am.

My apologies if I should present them. But this seems to me rather ridiculous, sorry to say it. And it is also a lawyer graduated in the 2nd oldest law school of Europe (if not of the world) who is typing to you.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

polish army went to war convinced they could win it with horses against... tanks.

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....

 

[Robert Jackson]

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....

Actually, the Polish cavalry were one of Poland's most useful assets during the Nazi and Soviet invasions. Neither side expected the cavalry to be as effective as they proved to be. Of course in the long run the advanced mechanization of the German and Soviet troops made defeat inevitable, but the Poles don't often get credit for the amount of damage they did before they went down. If you were going to accuse the Poles of a mistake, though, it was their propaganda campaign. They'd pretty much convinced the civilian population that German victory was an impossibility and a lot of civilians that would have had time to make tracks stayed in their homes waiting for the inevitable Polish victory.

 

[Philipp Straehl]

Philipp, you can label me as a whiner if you want to. However, I speak for a large swathe of people. Yes, I am upset. Call it whining if you will. To me and to many, my complaint is legitimate. And I stand by it.

alright, but keep in mind that you cannot afford to get upset that way when something goes wrong on a shoot. Camera failure, data lost, backup lost, theft, etc. This all can happen, and you must be calm enough to handle and solve the problems. Your complaint is legitimate, it is my complaint too, but it helps you or us two nothing, absolutely nothing. But choosing the right words and keeping civil manners are always better, you also don't like to be called a whiner (which I didn't, I just got allergic at all those whining posts that appeared recently). You'd get much more support from the 'swathe of people' in the same situation. I am really sorry that this has come to this stupid thread. It's a shame.

Does it really matter how big the sensor is?

I believe so. It draws less power, and needs less processing power because there are much less pixels. A bigger sensor still needs full processing power, even when not all pixels are being processed. I think this has something to do with the processing pipeline architecture. But I'm not an expert, these are just my assumptions.