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 :)

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Richard_JP said:
Er, yep. Have you not been listening to Jim? Finish in 4k, so shoot in, er, wait, the Scarlet-x doesn't have anything left. Scarlet can not finish in 4k. Therefore it is not fit for cinema. Therefore, doesn't fit into RED.

And seriously, 1k 120fps. May as well get that Casio thing.
Click to expand...

I believe you should log off right now and get that Casio. We'll miss your insights
 
Richard_JP said:
2/3" fixed was the camera that I wanted. I'm sorry that you were unable to contemplate the capabilities of a digital 16mm replacement, some of were able too.

The Weiss Cam T is what I'm setting my sights on now. 2/3" and shooting 350fps RAW. Something that RED are unable to compete with.
Click to expand...
At what resolution will that be?
 
Richard_JP said:
2/3" fixed was the camera that I wanted. I'm sorry that you were unable to contemplate the capabilities of a digital 16mm replacement, some of were able too.
Click to expand...

Ummmm you just proved my point didn't you? I said *interchangeable* 2/3" wasn't very viable. I agree the Fixed 2/3" was interesting. Not something I wanted but I could see its novelty value.

Here's something else to consider though. Documentaries and other scenarios where you want deeper depth of field...stop down. The s35 sensor has so much more surface area I imagine the noise difference between the two sensors would have been similar at similar DOF.
 
Richard_JP said:
Er, yep. Have you not been listening to Jim? Finish in 4k, so shoot in, er, wait, the Scarlet-x doesn't have anything left. Scarlet can not finish in 4k. Therefore it is not fit for cinema. Therefore, doesn't fit into RED.

And seriously, 1k 120fps. May as well get that Casio thing.
Click to expand...
Not directed at you, but some would do well to go read the RED History thing about the first R1's coming out and limitations they had. Updates and things will improve. If mind serves me right they didn't record audio when first shipped, only shot at 24p in 4K and had some other limitations as well.
 
Jeffrey Loewe said:
Not directed at you, but some would do well to go read the RED History thing about the first R1's coming out and limitations they had. Updates and things will improve. If mind serves me right they didn't record audio when first shipped, only shot at 24p in 4K and had some other limitations as well.
Click to expand...

please explain Jeffery?
 
Richard_JP said:
1080p for the first version and 4k for the second version.

They just don't go shouting about it. Quality speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
hmm interesting... I'll have to follow it... Might invest in both. While I have your attention still need a filmer over here?

Looking for the thread I'll come back with the history link...found the history part, but I'll keep looking, might take me awhile to dig up the exact quotes.
 
I see the push back to Kyle's point as follows:

1) Scarlet 3K just didn't work out
2) The market has changed to S35
3) 3K is not 4K, which is the future
4) Scarlet-X beats out the competition
5) Red owes you nothing

This is why ALL of these ring hollow:

1) The company that figured out how to squeeze 5K RAW @ 96fps into a Hasselblad size body couldn't figure out how to build a 3K camera? An uncompelling argument. It's been said the 8x lens had insurmountable challenges, which with a company like RED sounds more like a battle of will to make this camera, than an true impasse. A battle that RED lost. And abandonment of the interchangeable model...

2) Since when did Red follow the crowd? A 3K 2/3" Scarlet would compete with or beat every current S35 option out there in general image quality.

3) See point #2. 3K RAW Scarlet beats everything still. Also, there is the S35 --> 35mm and 2/3" --> 16mm analogy. Real cinematographers choose a smaller format sometimes on purpose. Not some theoretical prosumer philosophy....but instead as professional as they come.

4) Most in the true Scarlet crowd, not the EPIC-S crowd, never had $10K+ to spend. This argument about Scarlet-X beating out the competition is as useful to us as the EPIC beating out the F35 and Panavision Genesis. Nice, but we'll rarely if ever use any of them, regardless of cost to capability ratio...

5) It is not about what Red owes, but instead what they have lost. Respect. Trust. Confidence. These are intangibles that have nothing to do with anything contractual...
 
Richard_JP said:
The Weiss Cam T is what I'm setting my sights on now. 2/3" and shooting 350fps RAW. Something that RED are unable to compete with.
Click to expand...

I like the 350 fps RAW, any idea on price? Might look into this cam.
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Here's something else to consider. Who had any interest in the interchangeable Scarlet? The fixed scarlet was a cool trick and had a lot of applications but to me the interchangeable scarlet was always kind of a Dead In the Water concept.

2/3" is mostly dead now. F65, Alexa, F-100, F-3, GH1, 5D, Epic and Penelope D. There are ZERO 2/3" cameras that are attracting attention. Throw in a fixed lens and you have a quirky little side market. But Jim said the lens had terminal issues that just could be fixed. So I think the interchangeable was only sticking around as a "might as well" product. Without the fixed lens it would have disasterous to release a 2/3" camera.

Not to mention Jim for the last year has been saying that anything less than 4k is a waste. You can't as a company be taken all that seriously when your slogan is 4k+ or death when you release a 3k camera.

I still say though that I'm surprised at how under-powered the Scarlet-X is compared to Epic. It's not 1/4 or even 1/8th the power of the Epic. It's 1/10th. That's a HUGE jump in processing power.
Click to expand...

I agree with you and my not-so-visionary predictions were confirmed, with so many affordable S35 cameras out there RED shouldn't waste resources with a 2/3" one.

However, I also agree with Kyle to a certain extent. If RED is transparent, it should continue to be now when thousands of potential customers, who were incited for years, are confused wondering what happened to the promised 2/3" camera.

But as I said before, the original Scarlet announcement took place in a pre-DSLR market, in a pre-economical crisis scenario. Things changed, a lot!
 
Josh Beadle said:
Fuckstick! Guess I can't shoot a Super Bowl with my new Scarlet then!!
Click to expand...

Actually, sports is one of the situations in which the high framerates not offered by the Scarlet-X would prove incredibly useful.
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Here's something else to consider though. Documentaries and other scenarios where you want deeper depth of field...stop down.
Click to expand...

Yeah, stop down. And window your sensor to 2K. And then you can shoot 2K on 16mm glass at up to 60 fps. Or you can use your 35mm glass and shoot full resolution at a whopping 6 fps.

Neither of which really touches 3K at 120 fps.

It's a completely different product. It's a really poor excuse for an Epic. It's not even Epic-Lite...it's like Epic Short Bus. It brings nothing new to the table other than cheapness. Which...hey, whatever. "I gots me a cheap version of that nice camera!"
 
J Davis said:
... go tell this cameraman at the superbowl that 2/3 is a dead format LINK
Click to expand...

Josh Beadle said:
Fuckstick! Guess I can't shoot a Super Bowl with my new Scarlet then!!
Click to expand...

You guys don't want to bring a RED in to shoot any action pro sport what-so-ever. Your going to need a camera that either has a global shutter cmos or a ccd sensor. The Rolling shutter, although miminal in the REDs, is there, and is not meant for such quick pans, especially sports. It is a motion picture camera, for usage in controlled environments, not so much spontaneous ones.
 
Scarlet is Epic, with handcuffs.
Look at both camera bodies and weight, they are both the exact same thing. This cut production costs of a good 40%, creating a "prosumer" product out of a professional one.
I have the feeling that we hack the build we go around town with a full speed 250fps Scarlet shooting beautiful 4K images.

Why creating a sub-product?
To get the wild side of digital cinema market = thousands of Scarlet users.
 
nima said:
. . . I have the feeling that we hack the build we go around town with a full speed 250fps Scarlet shooting beautiful 4K images.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling you would immediately void the warranty . . . just before you melt the board and brick the bitch
 
Mohamed Younis said:
I really feel bad for the people who can only afford a 3-8k camera. I used to be one of them. I couldnt even afford a 5D. Red clearly promised them a camera.
Click to expand...

Um...

Jannard said:
"Everything in life changes... including our camera specs and delivery dates..."
Click to expand...

This has been Jim's signature since early RED ONE days... RED have been nothing but completely up front that any spec or price of their future products could drastically change - right up until you can actually buy it.

It's actually the same for pretty much every other company, apart from the fact that they usually keep their future products secret, and usually they bring the specs down. Not make it many times better than originally announced...

Kyle Presley said:
Ketch I respect you a ton. But this is something that was stated very plainly by Jarred:
Jarred Land said:
ASICs that weren't fast enough for EPIC… just became a gold mine for Scarlet.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

What's wrong with this? I guess it probably sounds worse than it is to someone who doesn't know about semiconductor manufacturing. The speed at which you can clock a chip (that is, the maximum frequency that the IC can run) varies, and in any production run there will be chips that can run faster than others. Simply put, they test them to see how fast they go, and some will be fast enough for the data rates EPIC uses, and some will not make the cutoff but will be more than fast enough for Scarlet's data processing.

It probably means that RED are using better ASICs than they would have in Scarlet, not worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top