Expectations...

[Stephen Matthews]

I see it as format dependent, as others have pointed out more than 4k on a 2/3" sensor doesn't make sense at this point. So I see it as getting the most out of each sensor size you can, and 1080 even 7 years ago was just not an adequate match for 35mm film or for sensors 35mm or larger.

Now red could have been talking across the board, but I don't think that was their issue though I could be horribly wrong. I believe it was everyone pushing 1080 for everything and constantly knocking 4k in terms of cinema quality that spurned those comments.

 

[Josh Snyder]

You can keep insisting on the accuracy of your bent logic and you can insult RED in the process if you want. I don't doubt that the Scarlet announcement will be exciting and memorable. Scarlet will beat the competition in every way possible - I just don't happen to believe that 4K is either likely or necessary for that to be the case. You are blowing smoke.

Huh, insulting RED? If you say something and do opposite you are hypocrite, that's a fact. RED is not hypocrite, that's why I've said from the beginning that Scarlet will be 4K. You have to learn to understand what you read.

This guy gets it:

Yeah but in his defense you could literally fill an entire recon thread with just quotes from Jim saying that "2k isn't enough" "1080p doesn't cut it." "If you aren't shooting 4k today you'll want to overdose on sleeping pills in the future." etc...

Jim has even said that if 2k was enough he would quit.

So RED has been extremely vocal about disparaging 2k/1080p. I disagree about the world shattering importance of everything being 4k... but it's going to be a tricky duality to both call 2k inadequate and announce an "amazing new product" which is designed for 2k deliverables.

 

[David Rasberry]

4k is equivalent resolution to a 4k scan of 35mm film, 3k is the equivalent resolution of a 3k scan of S16mm film. Both are derived from standards that ARRI set for their film scanners to get the optimum image quality from each negative format.

If Red does introduce a 4k Scarlet you can bet your bippy it will be larger than 2/3", at least a true S16mm sized sensor with the same pixel size as 2/3" 3k.

Most of the world still watches standard def TV and 1080p TV will be with us for a very long time. Not every camera or format needs to be built for the demands of high resolution theatrical presentation.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

If anyone is disappointed in the Scarlet Nov. 3rd announcement... they suck. And we won't lose one minute of sleep. The announcement is just too good.

Jim

So is 2K, but again that's not the point. 3K is against RED's ideology and believes. It's against their word that people shouldn't shoot sub 4K because it is not future proof. Releasing sub 4K camera would make them hypocrites. That's why Scarlet will be 2/3 4K.

Huh, insulting RED? If you say something and do opposite you are hypocrite, that's a fact. RED is not hypocrite, that's why I've said from the beginning that Scarlet will be 4K. You have to learn to understand what you read.

This guy gets it:

OK, Josh - apparently you haven't been around long enough to know that Scarlet has been in the works at 3K for a long time - even AFTER Jim has proclaimed 4K as the future. 3K is not AGAINST RED's ideology; 3K is simply not the full realization of the future of RED's development.

YOU are assigning the hypocrite label as if there is only black and white in this matter; the reality of the present can co-exist with future intentions. A 3K Scarlet Fixed prototype has been shooting for some time; there is plenty of evidence from NAB, Tonaci Tran's video, Joseph Hutson's posts, Jarred's footage. All during this time Jim has, and continues to, proclaim a hi-rez future of 4K or better. Is 3K an absolute lock for Nov 3rd? No - but it is very likely. If it happens and you still think Jim is a hypocrite, then YOU are choosing your own interpretation as the standard for judgement. Good luck with that.

 

[Ash Worth]

The expectation thing again. There isn't even 3k out there to compete against! Unless you count EPIC that is which exists in a much different market. As much as a 2/3 camera is not the direction I am heading in a 3k Scarlet could dominate TV and Indie film production.

 

[David Rasberry]

The expectation thing again. There isn't even 3k out there to compete against! Unless you count EPIC that is which exists in a much different market. As much as a 2/3 camera is not the direction I am heading in a 3k Scarlet could dominate TV and Indie film production.

ARRI Alexa is 3k.:yesnod:

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

ARRI Alexa is 3k.:yesnod:

2.8K RAW recordable actually ... but sure ... almost 3K ...

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

Yeah, I don't get the group of people where they each sustain the other's opinion that Scarlet will be more than 3k.

Everybody is agreeing on what Jim has said (pretty much). This was however, pretty broad statements regarding RED.

One could easily assume that it has to do with RED's flagship product, and the Epic is already well over 4k. Nowhere did he say that all of their products will live up to that.

I'm not going to check the exact wording, but as I remember it, those statements were pretty much made regarding film production. And to me it's clear that that is Epic's back yard.

 

[David Rasberry]

The expectation thing again. There isn't even 3k out there to compete against! Unless you count EPIC that is which exists in a much different market. As much as a 2/3 camera is not the direction I am heading in a 3k Scarlet could dominate TV and Indie film production.

ARRI Alexa is 3k.:yesnod:

It seems to be good enough for most purposes.
Everything else in Scarlet's general price range is 1080p.
3k Scarlet will be the only under $10k 2/3" camera on the market, an enviable position, and the only under $10k production camera shooting higher than 1080p rez and higher than 60fps frame rates. One of only two at present shooting Bayer raw.
What's not to love?

 

[Laco Gaal]

4k is equivalent resolution to a 4k scan of 35mm film, 3k is the equivalent resolution of a 3k scan of S16mm film.

Is recorded 4K is the same as scanned 4K?
Don't you lose some resolution because of the Bayer sensor?

 

[Ryan Sauve]

I for one hope the Scarlet is 3k (instead of 4k). It'll bring down the price and justify the discount when compared to the RED One. I also hope it's S35 but that'll jack the price back up.

The one thing RED's said that's really got me excited is simply their mention of "upgradeability". I think this will be the single biggest revelation of absolute awesomeness that'll come out on November 3rd.

I've been a long-time lurker and I figured it was time to openly express my excitement. Whether or not I will be able to afford the new camera isn't too much of a concern as I'm more excited to see what the release of the Scarlet does for the industry.

 

[David Rasberry]

Is recorded 4K is the same as scanned 4K?
Don't you lose some resolution because of the Bayer sensor?

You lose resolution on a 4k scan of 35mm film too. In both cases optical resolution falls around 3.2k. Red One M design was targeted to closely match the resolution of a 4k film scan.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

One could easily assume that it has to do with RED's flagship product, and the Epic is already well over 4k. Nowhere did he say that all of their products will live up to that.

No, but one of Red's mottoes is "Rendering obsolescence obsolete." Regardless of of the opinions regarding Scarlet and 4K -- nothing else compares, 4K won't be ubiquitous for years, Red can do whatever it wants to do with its product line, anybody who questions Red is a whiner, etc. -- they don't actually answer Josh's question, which despite the hostile responses, is a fair one. Those responses are other people's takes on a 3K Scarlet, but not Red's. Jim Jannard is betting on 4K superseding 2K, and he's devoting his efforts to making that happen sooner rather than later. Had Scarlet been released more than 2 years ago (as originally planned), it would've had that much longer a viable lifespan. Anyone who invests in a 3K Scarlet after November 3 will have to hope that Jim takes longer to win his 4K campaign. Before you flame me, I agree that the previously published specs offer good value for the money. But a 3K Scarlet not upgradeable to 4K doesn't fit Red's 4K vision.

I'm not going to check the exact wording, but as I remember it, those statements were pretty much made regarding film production. And to me it's clear that that is Epic's back yard.

Actually, Jim Jannard wants to see 4K in the home as well. My recollection from some of the early 4K-is-the-future threads is that his goal is ubiquitous 4K.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Scarlet's slogan:

"1080p is a mistake, but if you're going to make that mistake, you might as well buy the best mistake money can buy!"

*For the record I do think that Scarlet is going to be 2/3" and I don't think it's going to be 4k. I'm just not going to miss an opportunity to tease RED about the contradictions in their marketing.

 

[Kevin Marshall]

4k is equivalent resolution to a 4k scan of 35mm film, 3k is the equivalent resolution of a 3k scan of S16mm film. Both are derived from standards that ARRI set for their film scanners to get the optimum image quality from each negative format.

If Red does introduce a 4k Scarlet you can bet your bippy it will be larger than 2/3", at least a true S16mm sized sensor with the same pixel size as 2/3" 3k.

Most of the world still watches standard def TV and 1080p TV will be with us for a very long time. Not every camera or format needs to be built for the demands of high resolution theatrical presentation.

This.

Yes, Red (and specifically Jim) have promoted 4K and denounced 2K/1080p...in the context of replacing 35mm film. Their expressed mission is to provide a digital replacement for film. On the point of resolution, Red has seemed to agree with ARRI at 4K for 35mm and 3K for 16mm - and (as indicated by the old specs) higher resolutions for larger formats.

We saw a woking, near-complete 2/3" fixed Scarlet only months ago. I find it hard to imagine that Red would have gone from that point and basically started from the ground-up with a totally new design, throwing away the existing design (and years of R&D), and essentially created a new camera during that (limited) time.

My expectations are the last known specs, and I'm happy with those. Anything better that may or may not happen would just be gravy.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

This.

Yes, Red (and specifically Jim) have promoted 4K and denounced 2K/1080p...in the context of replacing 35mm film.

No, because Red is actively pursuing 4K in the home, it seems they want to replace 2K/1080p for most, if not all, content delivery.

We saw a woking, near-complete 2/3" fixed Scarlet only months ago. I find it hard to imagine that Red would have gone from that point and basically started from the ground-up with a totally new design, throwing away the existing design (and years of R&D), and essentially created a new camera during that (limited) time.

My expectations are the last known specs, and I'm happy with those. Anything better that may or may not happen would just be gravy.

You're probably right, but you're assuming that they weren't working on an as-yet-unannounced camera that has [fill in whatever specs you want] even before the devastation in Japan. Jim Jannard has made it clear that Red doesn't discuss everything it's working on, and that goes doubly true since its decision not to discuss products in detail until they are ready to ship.

 

[Travis Freeburg]

This.

Yes, Red (and specifically Jim) have promoted 4K and denounced 2K/1080p...in the context of replacing 35mm film. Their expressed mission is to provide a digital replacement for film. On the point of resolution, Red has seemed to agree with ARRI at 4K for 35mm and 3K for 16mm - and (as indicated by the old specs) higher resolutions for larger formats.

We saw a woking, near-complete 2/3" fixed Scarlet only months ago. I find it hard to imagine that Red would have gone from that point and basically started from the ground-up with a totally new design, throwing away the existing design (and years of R&D), and essentially created a new camera during that (limited) time.

My expectations are the last known specs, and I'm happy with those. Anything better that may or may not happen would just be gravy.

This makes much more sense than all the talk about quoting Jim on 4k. While I see there is a possibility that interchangeable Scarlet could be 4k, I find it difficult to imagine that the Scarlet Fixed is 4k. If they've been working on a 4k sensor for interchangeable Scarlet or (epic lite? I'm getting so confused) then I can see that being announced on Nov 3rd. But a fixed lens on a 2/3" sensor now with 4k? Unless Jim has been planning this for the last 2 years, I don't think it likely.

The highest rez footage we have been offered from Scarlet is 2k, correct?

Jim responded to some scarlet speculation by saying something along the lines of this:

So you want a Red One in a 2 pound package at a quarter of the price?

I'm expecting Scarlet Fixed to be about what we've been told all along.... but Jim sure makes it sound like hes got something earth-shattering coming up...

Can't wait. 9 days!

 

[Terry VerHaar]

OK - relevant to the subject of this thread, consider the following:

- On two occasions, 9/20 & 10/13, Jim posted threads about the November 3rd announcement which, he stated, was specifically to be about Scarlet (not saying it's ONLY Scarlet, but he said 11/3 was about Scarlet)

- Subsequently, REDusers went a little crazy (as they are still) with speculation about what the "new" Scarlet would be - since the assumption seemed to be that "everything has changed"

- The major gist of the assumptions centered around 3 areas:
a) Sensor size - Scarlet will have a bigger sensor (most say s35, some say 4/3rds, some even FF35),
b) Resolution - Scarlet wil no longer be 3K, but 4K ( a few conjectured 1080P but... come on)
c) Price - will either be a fabulously low price or will have Epic-like specs for a distinctly non-Epic price (10K, 12-15K, 18K, whatever)

- After much speculation was thrown about, Jim went out of his way on 10/22 to start this thread which specifically warned against ridiculously high expectations for Scarlet. Now, he could have been targeting his warning at any or all of these expectations. But clearly, something didn't feel right for him.

First, Jim never said everything had changed, just that - in line with his standard motto - things change. It could be as small as the way in which the modules connect to the body or the way the REDmote controls the focus, or it could be one or more major changes. My point is that some change doesn't mean that everything has changed. It doesn't really mean anything at all specific.

Now, if all the discussion was around sensor size, resolution and/or price, and Jim went out of his way to tamp down expectations, why is the conversation still about larger sensors, greater resolution and with, it would seem, the expectation of a price point that will compete with DSLRs or the FS100 or ??

Do you guys really think Scarlet is going to be a $12-15K camera? (Which would leave the Epic-S where - out?)
Do you really think RED has reversed itself and moved the camera with the Epic-S specs (4K/s35) back into the Scarlet body - which, early on, was apparently not able to handle everything needed to make an s35 Scarlet work)?
Do you think RED can put 4K on a 2/3" sensor? (Do a search here about the physics of this before you answer).
Do you think RED have scrapped all the work on the Scarlet they have been showing for a year and moved to a 4/3rds, s35 or FF sensor? Does this make sense?
Do you think they have abandoned the incredible specs of 120+ FPS at 3K, HDRx, broad dynamic range, a cine-quality lens (8x / f2.4) in order to introduce the low end Epic sooner?
Do you think they have completely abandoned the idea of a pro camera at $10K or under so they can give you an "almost-Epic" in the mid-teens $ range and leave it at that?

So what is the bottom line speculation for the hyper-optimists out there? Are we getting an s35, 4K camera that will do 60FPS (30fps with HDRx) in a shooting package for under $10K? Or, as Jim says, are we hoping for 1000 fps, 28K camera in a 2 lb raisin box for $800? Really. I have heard some people say s35 sensor, others 4K and still others speculate about price, but I can't recall anyone putting all three into one equation.

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

Other than Jim's posts... how funny is it that the speculation and expectations have not only diminished, but increased?

People is CRAZY for some SCARLET.. aint they?!

 

[Thommes Ulfeng]

If the Scarlet fixed is anywhere near the original specs I will be one happy camper on Nov.3rd - ... a lens with a worth = the whole package (no reason not to trust Jim's words there) ... 2/3 sensor - 3K - Lens 28-224mm f2.4 - side CF module - Redmote - LCD unknown (5" ?) - power ? - HDRx w additional motion rendering choices - ...

And correct me if im wrong, but I think I remember Steve Gibby saying he hoped that well shot 3K could scale nicely up to 4k.

I dont understand how this could go wrong.

EDIT - hmmmmmmmm:

WOW!

I have a feeling this will have two major effects:

1. Any lens can get closer to that "Leica look" as far as microcontrast.
2. Scarlet 3K footage uprezzed to 4k will be comparable to or better than any competitor's 4K RGB codec, even 10 bit 4:4:4:4

Why?

• Last I remember word of Graeme working on slider controls had to do with HDRx.
• Having shot a lot of HDR, one of the more tasteful things one can do with it is adjust local contrast in small amounts, which gives an image that pops with a perceived increase in microcontrast. Not an actual increase in resolution, but looks like it. Different from sharpening.
• Since Jim said this can be used on any RAW footage I'm guessing Graeme figured out how to use a microcontrast control to enhance a single stream.
• Part of the unmeasurable Leica look, or look of other "special" lenses is their microcontrast-which has to do with coatings, QC, overall design, etc.
• It's an effect that is simulated when you downrez a photo.
• Now if you're going to uprez (say 3K to 4K) it would be nice to do it while still preserving as much perceived resolution as possible. A microcontrast control that worked as early in the processing stream as possible would help achieve the goal. (Or maybe RED will have a special Scarlet uprez in RAW option to apply before this step).
• If I had a tool like that and was about to release a 3K camera, I would release the tool at the same time (or shortly before), then at the unveiling of the camera, show uprezzed 4K footage on my 4K projector and blow the competition away.

The only downside: you'll need 4K viewing ability to really judge the effect. A $$ downside.

The big upside: It's f-ing FREE. And you know it will be upgraded continuously. No wonder STORM bit the dust.