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

[Lawrence Bansbach]

First price increase brought kit up to $4750

Nope, that was the second price increase. The first brought it up to $3,750.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Very well said, Stephen Matthews.



Maybe we should also be complaining that the 2/3 fixed [not sure about the other bodies] won't fit in a pocket.

Sorry, that's specious. At no time did any of the publicly released designs meet that description. In fact, the current design is about the same size as the so-called concept camera.

 

[Tim Hole]

Ok some people are missing the point entirely. I give up.

I just want HDR in my Scarlet whether it is before, afterwards in-built or add-on.

But I understand the issue many will have with it.

 

[David Rasberry]

Ok some people are missing the point entirely. I give up.

I just want HDR in my Scarlet whether it is before, afterwards in-built or add-on.

But I understand the issue many will have with it.

Ditto!

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

3k for 3k was for a different camera altogether, a concept camera if you will so mentioning it when talking about the new line up does not really make sense.

Now I can see how people may be confused but that camera never existed and it never will, plain and simple.

I have to agree with Terry I find it unusual people are complaining about a product being out of their market. I can't really understand it if you can't afford the camera then that's it buy a cheaper camera and work until you can afford it.

I think looking at this from a financial perspective is very short sighted on the side of the consumer. HDRx™™™™ for another 1k, in a camera system under 10k seems like an amazing deal to me.

To each his own but as I look at it now HDR is going to be a huge part of Red camera's and to take it out of the scarlets would make them.... well not really true Red cameras.

I loved red because it was about making no compromise high quality digital cinema cameras that people in all levels of the industry could afford. I just hope that scarlet remains along that path (....HDR).

have a good one and keep on dreaming

Better to distribute my budget than to blow it all on camera.

Scarlet 1.0 may have never existed, but 10 times more people wanted.

If you hanged around Scarletuser these last years you know what I mean...

Implementing HDR in Scarlet and making it more expensive would be the final step of removing Scarlet from the low budget segment.

I wouldn't blame RED for this, it's a conscious market decision, better than to have a product that could have been much more.

I would probably skip Scarlet for the moment but that's just me.

Not complaining, just stating facts...

 

[Danny Lingan]

Sorry, that's specious. At no time did any of the publicly released designs meet that description. In fact, the current design is about the same size as the so-called concept camera.

Oh. I was going for sarcastic, not specious.

What's specious about it? At one point very early on it was called a pocket pro camera. Complaining about that is like bringing up 3k for $3k from 3years ago.

EDIT [And to avoid any further speciousinicity, the camera will fit in a pocket dependent on pocket size. "Hey, is that a zoom lens in your pocket or...?" ]

Be on the lookout for my next post! I might go for beguiling, fallacious... maybe even (dare I dream it?) mendacious.
:reddevil: Muahahaha-ha-ha-hehhhh! All hail falsehood and discord!

Anyways, HDR for Red Pocket Pro Scarlet DC16!

 

[Jason Ramsey]

Scarlet 1.0 may have never existed, but 10 times more people wanted.

The market was a lot different then...

 

[Bjørn Vermo]

Better to distribute my budget than to blow it all on camera.

Scarlet 1.0 may have never existed, but 10 times more people wanted.

If you hanged around Scarletuser these last years you know what I mean...



Not complaining, just stating facts...

I have been hanging around (and keeping quiet) since the beginning of Red. I know what you mean.

Unfortunately, there was a financial crisis that made a lot of soccer mums rather less affluent than before. There is no longer a mass market for a top-end prosumer camera.

There is, however, a market for a digital replacement for 16mm. Many of the uses for such a camera will benefit greatly from any increase in dynamic range. I think there is a market for both a normal Scarlet and a Scarlet HDR.

I expected to pay around $10k for a Scarlet with necessary kit and a set of mini primes. 10% extra for increased dynamic range is not really a big issue.

For those opting for a minimal fixed Scarlet, I can easily see the problem.
Still, it is a question of priorities. You will not get much in the way of a car for the cost of a fixed Scarlet, for instance.:auto:

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Oh. I wasn't going for specious but sarcastic.

What's specious about it? At one point very early on it was calleda a pocket pro camera. Complaining about that is like bringing up 3k for $3k from 3years ago.

I'm aware that's what Red called it in 2007, but they never defined it, and by the time the "3K for $3K" camera (actually it was ""3K for under $3K") was announced with any degree of specificity in 2008, it had clearly grown. But it was hardly what another poster called a "concept camera" -- that's revisionist history. Red left a clear impression that although some of the details would change, the camera shown was the one they intended to market early in 2009. Yes, Scarlet 1.0 is long gone, but it was Red's hype machine surrounding it that hooked everyone on Scarlet. I can understand that with every delay and price increase Scarlet is losing potential customers. True, there's nothing out there with Scarlet's feature set at anywhere near its price -- including, as yet, Scarlet.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

The market was a lot different then...

Actually, I think the market would go for Scarlet 1.0 at least as much now as then. Then there were few vDSLRs. Now that people have experienced the video the current crop produces, they are clamoring for more and better features that are integrated into the camera (i.e., not modular, which they can sort of get now by kitting out their vDSLRs). That would at least partly explain the interest in Panasonic's AF100.

 

[Danny Lingan]

O.K., L.B.

You make a detailed, organized time-line of the dead, trifling minutia and I'll agree to follow it. Be sure to include the financial collapse that shuttered companies Red was depending on to offer their low, low price. In the meantime, how about you make accusations of speciousness to the appropriate post?

Yes, Scarlet 1.0 is long gone, but it was Red's hype machine surrounding it that hooked everyone on Scarlet.

Sorry, that is specious. Some (in this very thread) said they weren't interested in Scarlet until the possible HDR was announced.

I can understand that with every delay and price increase Scarlet is losing potential customers.

And can you tell us how many customers Red would gain by adding HDR for another $1k for a 16mm digital cinema camera?

Can you understand how many of those lost "potential customers" will come back and buy a Red when they figure out it's what they really want or it's the only one that can do what they need?

HDR for Scarlet DC16!

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

O.K., L.B.

You make a detailed, organized time-line of the dead, trifling minutia and I'll agree to follow it. Be sure to include the financial collapse that shuttered companies Red was depending on to offer their low, low price.

Nope, it was mostly modularization that killed the low, low price. We still don't know all the effects the loss of suppliers and possibly Red's manufacturing partner will have on Scarlet's price.

Sorry, that is specious. Some (in this very thread) said they weren't interested in Scarlet until the possible HDR was announced.

Hardly specious. While it's true that Scarlet with the possibility of HDR might've caused some to consider Scarlet when they wouldn't have before, it's not overstating things to say that it's the promise of a paradigm shift (maybe "hype" is a little loaded) that Scarlet represented that made people take notice in the first place. And despite pronouncements by some here, nobody knows when that will be, whether 2011 or 2021.

And can you tell us how many customers Red would gain by adding HDR for another $1k for a 16mm digital cinema camera?

No, can you? Even Jim Jannard, though obviously proud of the accomplishment, isn't overplaying HDR.

Can you understand how many of those lost "potential customers" will come back and buy a Red when they figure out it's what they really want or it's the only one that can do what they need?

I know you want to believe that, and to some extent you're right. But can you also understand that not everyone who might've bought Scarlet at a lower price actually needs one and that many are probably already satisfying themselves (or plan to do so) with other solutions? And that technology doesn't stand still? Even Red has, in a way, orphaned Scarlet by pronouncing 4K the future. Sure, other companies are trailing Red with respect to a certain defined set of criteria, but they too will probably eventually compete with Red in Red's game, including 4K and above.

 

[Leo Sardello]

Even Red has, in a way, orphaned Scarlet by pronouncing 4K the future. Sure, other companies are trailing Red with respect to a certain defined set of criteria, but they too will probably eventually compete with Red in Red's game, including 4K and above.

Except that in releasing an affordable 3k cinema camera, RED will also be providing many people with the means to gather the kind of footage that might actually scale decently to 4k. If one believes 4k is the future, then you’ll want a camera that specs out like Scarlet as a minimum. And I’ll make an attempt to preempt the “but it isn’t out yet chorus” by adding… when available.

 

[Jim Retar]

I think it is hard to answer if we should have HDRx when we don't even know the DR of the Scarlet.

If its is 13.5 stops of the MX.... then that is enough for most, surely? I cannot think of too many shots that would need more.

 

[Danny Lingan]

Hardly specious. ...the possibility of HDR might've caused some to consider Scarlet when they wouldn't have before...it's the promise of a paradigm shift (maybe "hype" is a little loaded) that Scarlet represented that made people take notice in the first place.

You originally said

...it was Red's hype machine surrounding it that hooked everyone on Scarlet...

"Everyone" is problematic. One contrary example makes the statement false and a nominee for the specious statement. Now you say "maybe hype is a little loaded." And now they're not "hooked," but "took notice." Maybe you misspoke, like perhaps someone using the term "concept camera" incorrectly while still getting the idea across? Maybe we should all throttle back on the word specious?

No, can you? Even Jim Jannard, though obviously proud of the accomplishment, isn't overplaying HDR.

Nope. I'm giving an alternative perspective to your focus on "lost" customers. And Jim doesn't have to overplay it. He's letting industry professionals testify to its greatness. I'm sure you've noticed as you seem detail oriented.

But can you also understand that not everyone who might've bought Scarlet at a lower price actually needs one and that many are probably already satisfying themselves (or plan to do so) with other solutions?

Sure. I'm just not putting them in the "lost" category. I hope they are getting great joy in satisfying themselves. Maybe they'll buy a better camera when it's ready.

And that technology doesn't stand still?

That's a great argument for adding HDR! SPECULATION: Those HDR babies will be ahead of the game for years while the other cam makers work at making a decent codec in the under 10k category.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Except that in releasing an affordable 3k cinema camera, RED will also be providing many people with the means to gather the kind of footage that might actually scale decently to 4k. If one believes 4k is the future, then you’ll want a camera that specs out like Scarlet as a minimum. And I’ll make an attempt to preempt the “but it isn’t out yet chorus” by adding… when available.

I believe somewhere in the long "4K is the future" thread, Jim Jannard said Scarlet footage scaled up to 4K would be better than scaled-up 1080p/2K but would still be marginal compared with native 4K or better (or Red One footage, which is effectively about 3.2K).

 

[Rogelio Salinas]

Love the idea of HDRx, but it would be great as an option instead of only having one or the other. If I did have my choice, I have to go without it due to budget constraints. Originally the camera was $3K in its first inception, then $3750, now it's $4750, which is still an incredible deal, but every increase makes it more difficult to afford.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

And Jim doesn't have to overplay it. He's letting industry professionals testify to it's greatness. I'm sure you've noticed as you seem detail oriented.

He's cautioned that it's not something that will always be needed. And he suggested a survey to ascertain whether it's worth an extra $1,000. So, though obviously thrilled with HDR's capabilities, even he doesn't know what it's worth to customers. If this poll is any indication, people are fairly evenly divided, though leaning more toward its inclusion for an extra grand.

 

[Leo Sardello]

I think it is hard to answer if we should have HDRx™™™ when we don't even know the DR of the Scarlet.

If its is 13.5 stops of the MX.... then that is enough for most, surely? I cannot think of too many shots that would need more.

But HDRx™™ will always give you more range over whatever Scarlet’s baseline is. It’s not necessarily about an absolute requirement of more stops as it is having options available for varying circumstances. Also, HDRx™™ is proving to be more than just HDR. The implications for visual FX in what it provides for tracking (as detailed elsewhere) will benefit many users of Scarlet, surely.

I believe somewhere in the long "4K is the future" thread, Jim Jannard said Scarlet footage scaled up to 4K would be better than scaled-up 1080p/2K but would still be marginal compared with native 4K or better (or Red One footage, which is effectively about 3.2K).

Like I said, “as a minimum”.

 

[David Rasberry]

I believe somewhere in the long "4K is the future" thread, Jim Jannard said Scarlet footage scaled up to 4K would be better than scaled-up 1080p/2K but would still be marginal compared with native 4K or better (or Red One footage, which is effectively about 3.2K).

1080p HD video has to be cropped and scaled up to make 2k cinema format, much less 4k.
Scarlet will scale down to a full resolution 2k digital cinema image in both 1.85:1 standard wide screen and 2.40:1 scope. For 4k you start with more than twice the resolution before up scaling that you have with 1080p.