Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Extra $1000 (more or less) for HDRx on Scarlet?

Extra $1000 (more or less) for HDRx on Scarlet?

  • Total voters
    486
Terry VerHaar said:
.. Let's face it, your first feature is not likely to win an Oscar so make it a great learning experience. If making a good film relies on getting a Scarlet, well...
Click to expand...

Mmm depends. Actually knew a director in school who wound up
writing and directing an actor to an Academy Award on their very first feature.

If you know what you're doing shootingwise and you know what you've
got scriptwise it could totally make sense to wait for Scarlet to shoot
your feature.

People wait all the time to do features..they wait for
actor schedules..they wait for the weather..they wait for actress'
pregnancies..they wait for re-writes...etc. now might add HDR to that list.
 
I'd like to see Scarlet remain an "entry point" into the RED family. It's still RAW, 3K, and everything else that makes it far superior to "HD". I would love to own my own RED some day, but I don't need HDR yet. If I ever decide it's needed, I can always rent a different brain for the day (at the client's expense of course!).

Let's keep Scarlet affordable!
 
Steve Das said:
Mmm depends. Actually knew a director in school who wound up
writing and directing an actor to an Academy Award on their very first feature.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Happens all the time. Common occurrence. Great career plan. (But you might want to have a Plan B, just in case!.) :thumbsup:

(and it's still a great opportunity to learn.)
 
Terry VerHaar said:
And just whose definition of "affordable" shall we choose? :emote_popcorn:
Click to expand...

Some of us recall 3k for 3k. Which them changed to four point something for 3k. Anyway, the further you go away from that pricepoint, the smaller the number of people who will buy Scarlet over the latest Canon/Nikon/Sony wondergadget.

Load Epic with features, keep Scarlet affordable.
 
"3k for $3k" was before HDR technology was available but after "everything is subject to change."

Maybe the HDR needs a catchy slogan, too.

Here's mine "Scarlet HDR: Dream-maker / Butt-saver."

Hmmmm...add "love-taker" and we get a Pat Benetar song.

Liana, I'm in the crowd that could use 3k for 3k as well, but this tool is too valuable. That 1k is going to save tons of money, effort and time in actual production for those in the champagne taste/beer budget crowd. Not just on set, but from what I've read today (Post 225 and after), in post and vfx.


Many are calling it a "special feature" that Scarlet doesn't need. How does latitude/dynamic range become a special feature? It's one of the core components to image making and the drive to expand it has been around since Louis Daguerre was screwing around in the lab.
 
370 posts in a little under 48 hours and a great number of passionate arguments on both sides… One’s gotta wonder where RED stands at this point on the issue.
 
Liana said:
Some of us recall 3k for 3k. Which them changed to four point something for 3k. Anyway, the further you go away from that pricepoint, the smaller the number of people who will buy Scarlet over the latest Canon/Nikon/Sony wondergadget.

Load Epic with features, keep Scarlet affordable.
Click to expand...

But in the beginning, what exactly was meant by "3K for $3K" anyway? Did you expect to get everything you needed to shoot? Just a body? Lens? No lens? CF cards or a hard drive? Did you even have a concept about REDmote, I/O modules - or even modularity? What variations on batteries did you think would be available, and which would you automatically get for $3K? Were you "guaranteed" 120fps from the onset or was that "feature creep" as well?

From beginning, it was a slogan, a concept and it was never defined down to the tiniest specific. My point is and has been that the spirit of what Jim "promised" (subject to change, remember) is, more than ever, still embodied in Scarlet. As of the last published "guess" at pricing, you were still going to get a Scarlet body for less than $3K. And, just to be nice, they decided to throw in a lens and most of the the other stuff you'll need to have a workable Scarlet kit for about $2K more.

Look, some people can afford $3K, some can afford $4.5K, some can afford much more. Some can't even afford to play in this sandbox. That's life. It isn't just about HDRx™. The whole system is in flux. If Jim had "promised" all this at under $10K, it still would have been a bargain. Would there be fewer people planning on buying it? Of course. And if he had then benevolently decided to lower the kit price to $7K or $6K, there would have been dancing in the streets. But it is what it is - and it is all relative.

In the end, the only ones that can assess the demand and make the final decision are the members of the team at RED. We will just have to live with what they decide and make our own individual decisions based on what works for us.
 
Terry VerHaar said:
And just BTW - I don't think anyone except the RED team really knows what this question means about development and shipping schedules, despite many posts claiming the contrary.
Click to expand...

A quote from Jim reveals that development time and other "stuff" are certainly a requirement:
We could up the processing power by adding boards... Given the change in development path, board costs, an additional ASIC and "stuff", we are probably looking at an additional $1000 more or less.

If we did this, Scarlet could have both EasyHDR™™™ at 30fps and HDRx™™™ to 60fps.
Click to expand...

It certainly doesn't seem like an easy modification.

Deanan (or Jim?), any comments on how this might affect schedule?
 
Last edited:
Liana said:
Some of us recall 3k for 3k. Which them changed to four point something for 3k. Anyway, the further you go away from that pricepoint, the smaller the number of people who will buy Scarlet over the latest Canon/Nikon/Sony wondergadget.

Load Epic with features, keep Scarlet affordable.
Click to expand...

Well I would buy one either way. If they release the first model without HDR, when they add it I will buy that brain and pass the other one on to one of the 3k for $3k crowd. :001_cool:

Seriously, Scarlet is a true digital cinema camera. Film like resolution and dynamic range are its whole reason for being. I understand budget limits. I have wanted a top grade 16mm film replacement digital camera for decades, but couldn't justify the typically more than $30k cost of high quality 2/3" video cameras.
Scarlet hasn't been the 3k for $3k camera that was initially proposed since the whole concept morphed into the upgradeable modular system.
The VDSLR's have taken over the low end market space and even in its current form Scarlet won't realistically compete with them on price. Indeed the entry level price for any high performance HD video camera system, even the better 1/3" chip cameras, is realistically $7-10k for a practical package with lenses and necessary accessories to get you through a typical shooting day.
 
Christian Edwards said:
I wonder if the state of the Ameriacn economy will play a part of the final price of epic/scarlet where by the extra 1000 or so will be on top of a price which has gone up more than once anticipated
Click to expand...

hahah, last time I looked at Bloomberg it seems that, if Scarlet availability is pushed back a bit more, we may get her for a coupla hundred Aussie bucks. :smilewinkgrin:
 
Pawel Achtel said:
hahah, last time I looked at Bloomberg it seems that, if Scarlet availability is pushed back a bit more, we may get her for a coupla hundred Aussie bucks. :smilewinkgrin:
Click to expand...
WOOHOO We're Rich Pawel :)

Then again , I guess A weak dollar is Great for export ...Ship'em our way !
 
Last edited:
What sold a boat load of 5D mk2s is it's unique look... Until everyone is doing it HDR will allow you to create a unique look that NOTHING else can achieve. For a $1000 more it take the Scarlet from being a great camera to a unique must have for many people. RED would be mad not to make a 2/3" HDR cam at some point as the market for it would be huge.

Personally I want a HDR s35 and would happily pay $8k for the body.
 
Ian B. Johnson said:
BTW, I'm pretty sure Deanan posted earlier in this thread about it adding about a year to development. However some of his posts have been edited, so that may no longer be an official comment.
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything remotely giving a time estimate.
 
Terry VerHaar said:
You'll have to pardon me but this sounds just a little, well... crazy. There has never been a Scarlet before and yet dozens, hundreds, thousands of films get made. Before RED, there was never a digital camera that shot RAW video. And yet... well, you get the idea.
Click to expand...

Of course there have. But I'm talking about making a low budget/no budget feature lenght film yet still having a result that looks pro and can sell itself better.

The age old mantra "no camera will fix a broken script" will always apply, but the "I won't watch your film because it looks cheap" does too.

Unless it's part of the story, like Blair Witch Project or whatever.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top