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 :)

EPIC-S (old Scarlet S35) update...

Eric J said:
One more set of questions you guys may be able to help with. 1. Will we see any difference in image quality, dynamic range, etc, from an EPIC M, X or S if shooting at 24 fps at 5K ? 2. If software is limited inside the camera, will advances in firmware offer only limited gains?
Click to expand...

The "...datarates and framerates in combination with project sizes will be the primary compromises in comparison with the big brothers (EPIC-X and EPIC-M)."

You will not be able to record with the same minimum compression as what you can do with the X. How big of a difference? That has not yet been determined and placed as public knowledge.
 
Joseph Hutson said:
The "...datarates and framerates in combination with project sizes will be the primary compromises in comparison with the big brothers (EPIC-X and EPIC-M)."

You will not be able to record with the same minimum compression as what you can do with the X. How big of a difference? That has not yet been determined and placed as public knowledge.
Click to expand...


So the quality will suffer a bit then, no? Would you suggest the EPIC S to be a valid solution for motion picture "BIG SCREEN" production? How will those limitations present themselves in rental or freelance DP work?
 
Yep (to Hutson) The quote I posted from Jim saying 6:1 as his estimate shows that he doesn't think that the S will have quite the horsepower to shoot at the lower compression ratios of M and X. That being said, 6:1 (which is still only conjecture, mind you) is a lower compression ratio than RED ONE M-X offers...and we have seen the kind of award-winning images it can produce.

Based on what we have been told, if your aim is high resolution cinematic footage, you'd be hard pressed to find a camera better suited to the task than the EPIC-S - at any budget.
 
Eric J said:
So the quality will suffer a bit then, no? Would you suggest the EPIC S to be a valid solution for motion picture "BIG SCREEN" production? How will those limitations present themselves in rental or freelance DP work?
Click to expand...

A valid solution, most definitely. Though I do believe it will begin to get confusing for producers looking for rentals when the EPIC-S hits the market. There will need to be clear advertisement of the limitations held on your EPIC-S so as to not make your clients mad. On one hand, if people are going to rent a camera, I'd think they'd want the better EPIC so they don't have any limits. On the other hand, if the producer is clear on the limitations, he/she will be happy to save a few bucks when their specific project isn't limited.
 
Michael Olsen said:
Yep (to Hutson) The quote I posted from Jim saying 6:1 as his estimate shows that he doesn't think that the S will have quite the horsepower to shoot at the lower compression ratios of M and X. That being said, 6:1 (which is still only conjecture, mind you) is a lower compression ratio than RED ONE M-X offers...and we have seen the kind of award-winning images it can produce.

Based on what we have been told, if your aim is high resolution cinematic footage, you'd be hard pressed to find a camera better suited to the task than the EPIC-S - at any budget.
Click to expand...

Nice. Thanks.
 
Joseph Hutson said:
A valid solution, most definitely. Though I do believe it will begin to get confusing for producers looking for rentals when the EPIC-S hits the market. There will need to be clear advertisement of the limitations held on your EPIC-S so as to not make your clients mad. On one hand, if people are going to rent a camera, I'd think they'd want the better EPIC so they don't have any limits. On the other hand, if the producer is clear on the limitations, he/she will be happy to save a few bucks when their specific project isn't limited.
Click to expand...

My goal is to produce my own work (cinema, shorts, etc), as well as the commercial jobs I shoot (mostly DSLR, Sony FS100 honestly now, but which I hope to change with EPIC S), and sell myself as a DOP on cinematic films. It sounds like this is the entire solution. Thanks for the input man.
 
I would love to see a butterfly screening of something shot simultaneously (maybe through a beamsplitter) on an Epic-x and on an Epic-S at 24, 30, 50, and 60 fps. I'm willing to bet that, even at 4k, it would be seamless in virtually every circumstance. Only in the most visually challenging scenarious would I expect the Epic-S compression to start to show as inferior to the X.

But of course, when you need the lower compression, you needit. When you need 120 fps, you need it. But if you can manage to rent for a day or two to cover speciality shots, I really feel like the S should go a long way towards covering 95+% of production needs.
 
What's in a name?

What's in a name?

Joseph,

I totally agree that sharing the same camera body and virtually the same name apart from one letter is going to muddy the water. Producers will ask for an Epic and many suppliers will be happy to supply their Epic S and their will be tears when the camera *cannot do what everybody expected it could do.

It would be awesome if the names better differentiated the cameras and prevented inevitable confusion. Many producers and PM's are bamboozled by the rapid technological change and if the cameras are both called Epics they must be the same? Nothing in the names Epic X and Epic S denotes higher performance.*

Epic X owners can also be undercut by a cheaper camera that looks identical and shares the same name and in many instances will perform equally as well.*

There must be an awesome new name out there for this new baby?
 
Tom Gleeson said:
Joseph,

There must be an awesome new name out there for this new baby?
Click to expand...

I think that would be most beneficial for all parties involved. I'd be careful not to spout out ideas for a new name here publicly, because it'd only add to the confusion. Also, "if" there was a change in the name, it should not be announced until the camera is ready to ship. In the event such a camera was renamed, I don't think anyone would be against it (unless you were an EPIC-S owner who was trying to subliminally deceive a client because "it's an EPIC")
 
Could the name be simpler and further distanced from the Epic-X? Sure.

Is it necessarily going to cause a lot of confusion? I don't know. There are already plenty of cameras out there with similar naming conventions. Look at Panasonic's HPX lineup - there's the 170, 370, 500, 2000, 3000, and 3100. Dear lord.
 
In regards to frame rates, we have to remember that the lower your resolution, the more choices you have in frame rates (you'll have the option of going much higher)

This is of course based on how the Epic-X works. As well as how the Scarlet is working.

Eric, if you're wanting to make things for the "big screen" the Epic-S would definitely be good for you. Especially if you remember that no other cameras right now do 5K besides Epic.
Also you could go down to 4K if you needed to. This would definitely be the camera for you, based on what has been said about it so far.
 
Nik Harper said:
In regards to frame rates, we have to remember that the lower your resolution, the more choices you have in frame rates (you'll have the option of going much higher)

This is of course based on how the Epic-X works. As well as how the Scarlet is working.

Eric, if you're wanting to make things for the "big screen" the Epic-S would definitely be good for you. Especially if you remember that no other cameras right now do 5K besides Epic.
Also you could go down to 4K if you needed to. This would definitely be the camera for you, based on what has been said about it so far.
Click to expand...

Nice!!
 
On the subject of people being confused on which camera they want to rent I don't see much of a problem.

Im sure there will be some people who don't know anything about what type of camera they want and they hear Epic and immediately go 5K Epic! Sure why not!! and get tossed an Epic S.

But when it comes down to it, most people are going to know exactly what they want, and most rental houses will be clear on what they are renting out.

It shouldn't be as big of an issue as you guys suggest.
 
Michael Olsen said:
Could the name be simpler and further distanced from the Epic-X? Sure.

Is it necessarily going to cause a lot of confusion? I don't know. There are already plenty of cameras out there with similar naming conventions. Look at Panasonic's HPX lineup - there's the 170, 370, 500, 2000, 3000, and 3100. Dear lord.
Click to expand...

Or a Panaflex Gold, GII, Platinum, Millenium -- you have to do your homework to know what's different about each one. Same will happen with the Epics.
 
Joseph Hutson said:
I think that would be most beneficial for all parties involved. I'd be careful not to spout out ideas for a new name here publicly, because it'd only add to the confusion. Also, "if" there was a change in the name, it should not be announced until the camera is ready to ship. In the event such a camera was renamed, I don't think anyone would be against it (unless you were an EPIC-S owner who was trying to subliminally deceive a client because "it's an EPIC")
Click to expand...

I don't care if the name is changed as long as it still is in the pipeline and performs close to what Jim shared over here. Its everything an indie might want on a camera. Not upgradable? No problem. The regular Epic will be upgradable, I'm sure Red will react to Sony and Arri with their 5K and 8K recent announcements, and those on the Epic X's and M's will benefit from it. We know what we sign out for with the EPIC S. Redcode compression 6:1, 60Fps at 5K and 120 FPS at 3K is more than enough for me.

On a lighter note, I never really liked the EPIC S name. You wouldn't believe the number of jokes the indie community makes with that name over here... It has something to do with someone's "behind", if you know what I mean.
 
I think it's bullshit that people wouldn't know the difference. If the differences between the S, M and X models are important to your shoot, you will also know that there's a difference in name, and if you do so it won't take long to find out who's who.
 
its way more honest to call it an epic, its 95% the same 5k s35 MX chip HDR modular camera, minus high FPS. the price increase and the chasis upgrade rightly aknowlaged that. personally think shooting datarates higher than existing MX should only really concern the DP anyway, who should know the differences and limitations.
 
"Think 5K, REDCODE RAW, HDRx, record to SSD, modular system, size of a Hasselblad with many mature professional workflow options."

Wait! Wait! WTF! I know I'm late to the game, but all the negative whining really skewed what I was hearing the Scarlet or Epic - S was going to be. I just re-read this!
5K!!!!! DAMN!!
I hope this is one of the things that is not going to change.
I would rather have 5K over HDRx.
 
Michael Olsen said:
Could the name be simpler and further distanced from the Epic-X? Sure.

Is it necessarily going to cause a lot of confusion? I don't know. There are already plenty of cameras out there with similar naming conventions. Look at Panasonic's HPX lineup - there's the 170, 370, 500, 2000, 3000, and 3100. Dear lord.
Click to expand...

Actually I think it was more confusing before. This is a smarter delineation for Red as the scarlets are all now 2/3 sensors and the Epic's are all s35 sensors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top