EPIC or SCARLET ???

[Mark Toia]

Hi All,

Just trying to get my head around the EPIC and the SCARLET.

Both will have HDR.
Both will shoot 5k
Both will have S35 chip sizes.

One is cheap the other is not.

Can someone give me some more stats on the EPIC Vs Scarlet so I can still justify my EPIC orders.
Because it sounds like the cheaper Scarlet will have what EPIC has anyway minus some FPS advantages... or not?

other than that.... ???

Should the scarlet be only 2/3 inche only. Leaving the EPIC for the top end of town and the cheaper Scarlet for the up incoming?
Less production builds for RED, more profits... smaller range.. less consumer head scratching.

Bit like 16mm version compared to a 35mm version.

I'm not to worried about the price of both of them, I'm not concerned about the quality either.
But only thinking if EPIC is even that necessary if the Scarlet is going to come out with the same balls.

Food for thought.

Look forward to some replies. :confused5:

 

[Jaime Vallés]

The two main differences are that Epic will shoot much higher frame rates, and have much higher REDcode data rates available (less compression = better quality image.)

 

[Joseph Hutson]

What differs from RED is that they don't seem to be trying to "protect" their most expensive camera as other companies may be doing. They seem to be just stating the difference in cameras and giving each model as many features for as little money as they can offer.

Simple choice. If the EPIC is for you, you can pay the $18,000+ for the additional datarates/framerates. If not, just get the S35 Scarlet and rent the EPIC when necessary.

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

if your stage 2.. your epic x (which comes ready to shoot) will come out to around or at least very close too the same price as people who buy the top line scarlet and outfit it with the modules to make it ready to shoot.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Epic is likely to be released (significantly?) before Scarlet S35. You can either start shooting or start waiting, depending on your preference.

 

[Jonathan Stevenson]

I think a lot of people underestimate how amazing 5K 120fps is... I mean, 4K 24fps is already mind boggling. But 5 times HD in super slo-mo? Unreal... Worth the price.

 

[Jeff Coatney]

I think the prevailing question is really about the wide variance in cost associated with the frame rates and Increased Red Code advantage. For example, if HDRx can be added to Scarlet S35 for only $1000, does the added Frame rates and higher Red code for Epic really cost the price of a new Red One? I'm not complaining, just confused. But I've always felt that "Scarlet" should describe 2/3" sensors only.

 

[Panos Bournias]

Producers

Producers

I agree with Jeff. Maybe it is not confusing for someone who uses the camera but imagine Mr and Mrs producer... When the rental difference will be significant Epic might go to the position of a... Phantom??? "When we need frame rates we use it"... and not an all purpose camera... that will be instead the cheaper Scarlet...

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

I think the prevailing question is really about the wide variance in cost associated with the frame rates and Increased Red Code advantage. For example, if HDRx™™™™ can be added to Scarlet S35 for only $1000, does the added Frame rates and higher Red code for Epic really cost the price of a new Red One? I'm not complaining, just confused. But I've always felt that "Scarlet" should describe 2/3" sensors only.

Its all about the processing power... so I'll reason by analogy with computers.

As all analogies, this one has limited utility, but it remains a useful tool for reasoning.

You can buy a dual core Core i7 computer for less than $1000.

A twelve core Xeon system, at about $6000 will give you roughly 3.5 times the power of a dual Core i7. On some embarrassingly parallel problems a twelve core Xeon system is 6 times faster than the dual core Core i7.

So, 6 times the price ≈ 4.75 times the performance

(Yes "embarrassingly parallel" really is the technical term. 3D rendering is an example of such a problem. Sadly, video is not because of interframe dependencies in most algorithms.)

RED needs to literally quadruple the ability of the camera to read 5K images from a sensor and encode it as REDCODE. (30fps for Scarlet, 120fps for EPIC)

Last I checked a RED Rocket, which costs $4750, can barely decode 24fps RED 4.5 K footage in real time.

Its pretty easy imagining that they need almost 5 times the power of a Rocket in EPIC to deliver 120fps.

So, yeah, its very easy to imagine them spending about $28500 for the processing boards. Its probably only the march of technology that allows RED to offer the camera body for the price they have stated.

This leaves out any consideration of the system bandwidth improvements to support the much faster data rates of EPIC- which will give higher quality images that can survive a tough post cycle.

So, I think that RED is asking a fair market value for Scarlet and Epic. Their pricing is a fairly honest reflection of the relative difficulty of these problems from a computational standpoint.

 

[Harry Clark]

I must say I have to agree somewhat with Panos...
If the S35 is "close enough" in capabilities to the Epic-X then to a producer they are the same except one rents for 1/4 the price. Overcranking and 5K will not be enough, since not every job involves slo mo and (as other cameras have demonstrated) lots of the time "good enough" IS good enough.
Instead of looking at it as Red "not protecting" their expensive camera, to me it looks like Red "protecting" the indie film base at the expense of the pros. No offense to the indie film base...
Now, if Epic-X has more obvious (and unannounced, as Jim Jannard has hinted) advantages, there will be a compelling reason to rent it. Explaining the difference between HDRx and EasyHDR to each and every non-tech-savvy producer will not be enough.
It sounds as if Epic-X will be here long before Scarlet S35 so yes there is no problem for us early adopters to ROI. But having too many similar products will push most customers towards the cheaper, less capable product, somewhat starving Red of the revenue needed for R&D.
However, I am confident that Red will make the product lines MUCH more clearly defined when the cameras are shipping. I have to remind myself that Epic and Scarlet 2/3 are still in alpha phase and Scarlet S35 is still a CAD drawing. Much may change between now and when we are using these cameras.
It's a little frustrating to speculate, but it seems that's what a lot of us do! It's certainly been an interesting ride...
Cheers,
Harry

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

I agree with Jeff. Maybe it is not confusing for someone who uses the camera but imagine Mr and Mrs producer... When the rental difference will be significant Epic might go to the position of a... Phantom??? "When we need frame rates we use it"... and not an all purpose camera... that will be instead the cheaper Scarlet...

There are a lot of producers out there who can't tell the difference between a 10 year old XL-1 and an Epic. They probably are as discriminating about your services as they are about the results from cameras. Do you really want to work for them though?

Producers who hire me tend to take my advice. Put differently: if they aren't going to follow my advice about the job they hired me to do, then why did they hire me?

I think Epic will sell more units than RED can make to people who need REDCODE 225 and 120fps. Even if those are the only distinguishing features.

Zack Snyder will probably buy a boatload of them.

Maybe my work style requires slow motion & lots of data for visual effects more often than normal. If I'm shooting a feature and own a Scarlet, then I'd probably have to rent an Epic for 5-7 days out of a 21 shooting day schedule.

It only takes two or three features to cover the cost difference between Epic and Scarlet.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

I think that it might be of some benefit to rename Scarlet S35.

Good, better, best has always been very effective in differentiating products in the eyes of potential customers.

So perhaps Scarlet (2/3")=good, RED TWO (name is example only, formerly Scarlet S35)=better, EPIC=best.

Although in RED's case instead of "good, better, best" it should be "Excellent, MORE EXCELLENT!, and BEYOND EXCELLENT!.

I think you all have it a bit wrong...

RED has two product lines

Scarlet=Best for the price

Epic=Best at any price

So, instead of slumming like most companies and selling good better and best, RED only sells the best and the best.

Does that clear things up a bit?

I think also that people forget RED's mission.

RED is about getting the best real cinema technology into the hands of as many professional film makers (and students and aspiring amateurs) as possible.

There are a lot of people who seem to think that buying a camera gets them into a club of professional cinematographers/camera operators- like some sort of badge of honor.

Your talent, skills, experience and hard practice are the only real ticket into the club.

So, don't look to RED to protect your revenues with a name change or discriminatory pricing- that isn't what they are about.

If that is what you want, then you probably want to buy a Sony or Panasonic camera. They will straight up tell you that they do exactly these things.

Once these Scarlet cameras hit the market there will only be two ways of competing. Price (in which case its a race to the bottom) or ability.

I know what my plan is.

 

[Elsie N]

Epic or Scarlet? Both. Especially for rental houses. They will each rent according to budget and eventually budgets will rise for A movies and B movies will abound due to the availability of Scarlet. I think when the cameras are abundant there will be a certain skillset that can make an Epic do things that no other camera in its price-range can do. Scarlet will be enough to make very good pictures, but the Epics will likely be able to do things that were post house requirements in the past.

 

[Michael Olsen]

If I recall correctly, Jim has also mentioned that there are other reasons to choose EPIC which have not really been shown off yet...

 

[J Davis]

AFAIK Jim has only said that the $1000 price increase is for adding HDRx™ to the scarlet 2/3 not the s35.

He has not said how much it will cost to add HDRx™ to the s35. (5k is a lot more data)

 

[Harry Clark]

Frank, well said.
Cheers,
Harry

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

I think since epic-x stage 2 purchasers will be getting the best deal " 19.5" for a epic x
that rentals rates between stage 2 owners and scarlet s35 owners will be evenly matched.. thus epix-x winning the bid

 

[Jeff Coatney]

I think Epic-x will set the rates based on saturation level in the market since it will hit first and by definition, Scarlet S35 will have to come in below that rate, no matter what it ends up at. I hope people who are renting their kit understand that Epic should command a premium when it hits. Anyone who lowballs out of the gate will be an idiot. There won't be a "barrier to adoption" for Epic like there was for the Red One (since it was a scam) so there won't be a need to incentivize the rates.

 

[rod bradley]

And everything is subject to change.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Epic has some other tricks up its sleeve like frame overlays. Blend two shots in camera for alignment etc. Last time specs were announced only epic would do anamorphic desqueeze monitoring. Hopefully that one will change for the FF35 scarlet though since it's just begging for anamorphic. That was also before RED announced their Anamorphic lens set so if they are going to be pushing anamorphic glass they might revisit that spec through their product line to expand their potential customer base.

Any time they think up a new feature for the camera it's going to go through the matrix of "Do we have enough processor power?" Epic will almost always answer "yes". Scarlet will get what it can. HDRx™ though is going to hopefully bring along with it a spec bump across the board for Scarlet since they aren't installing an "HDRx™" chip they're giving it another pretty general purpose image processor as well. So "Good enough for scarlet" is better than it used to be and maybe more Epic features will be possible to run in the limited processor power.

If you just want to shoot pictures at normal frame rates then Scarlet is probably for you. It's kind of like the "phone" vs "smart phone" analogy. If you want to make calls you buy the flip phone. If you want to install and run a Smorgasbord of apps to solve workflow issues you pick up the Epic. But it's also one more reason why every rental house will want Epic not Scarlet. While frame overlays sounds of limited use to most DPs I imagine, if I'm renting an Epic that's a really useful feature if I want to overlay a matte painting to match horizon lines. And I'm sure someone else will have another esoteric feature of Epic that they need. The problem is everybody has different needs so while everyone might only use 10% of epic it's a different 10% for each person. Epic is everything to everybody. Scarlet shoots pictures. Hopefully as many Epic features as possible trickle down into Scarlet but not everything will be possible.