Joseph Hutson
Well-known member
my understanding is that the S is targeted towards narrative filmmaking (or commercials, television, etc) done at 24fps or as a less expensive B (or A...) camera alternative that matches perfectly with the Epic-X minus some of the extra features enabled with the additional hardware.
Has that understanding not been affected since:
(1) S35 Scarlet was renamed as "EPIC-S"
(2) EPIC-S received HDRx
(3) HDRx immediately doubles the required frame rates to shoot a scene (according to everything I have heard, 24fps means enough horsepower to at least make 48fps)
(4) EPIC-S requires the larger "EPIC chassis"
(5) In the last official EPIC-S update leading up to this one, Jim said "You can anticipate about 1/2 the overall data throughput."
I personally don't think any of these signs point towards anything similar to what we used to know of as a $7,000 brain.
At this point, if the EPIC-S has double the frame rates as the previously expected 30fps in the S35 Scarlet as well as an experience closer to the EPIC-X, I am totally okay with it being a $14,000 brain. It's interesting that that's right at half the cost of an EPIC-X at $28,000 for the brain.
I don't know that this kind of math really works in the engineering world and I surely don't know any inside info on the EPIC-S (as many people seem to think I do), so I could be TOTALLY wrong in everything about this post, but the way I see it in my finite mind:
ORIGINALLY PROJECTED S35 Scarlet: 30FPS $7,000
PERSONAL SPECULATION OF THE EPIC-S: 60FPS $14,000
EPIC-X: 120FPS $28,000
If RED builds a 5lb EPIC-S with 5K 60FPS and 5K 30FPS in HDRx mode for anything less than $15,000, I think a few people are gonna go "Uh oh. Wha?" while many more go "Uh huh. Yeah!"
EDIT: I guess I wasn't too far off in thinking 60FPS. I only saw the post from 11:43pm after I entered this super long post. hehe