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
I would love to have HDR in Scarlet, Just as long as it doesn't put the release back dramatically. If that were to be the case, I think the best thing Red could do would be to release 'standard version' Scarlets first - to get them out the door, and then to release an HDRx version later.

I want it, but I also would like to be shooting my feature with a Scarlet Fixed, next May :)

Adam
 
I'm with Neil. Yes, yes, yes to the option but I can barely wait now. Not sure I can survive another ASIC spin!
 
I voted no, even though i'd really like to see the feature in Scarlets. But still, one of the main attractions of (especially 2/3") Scarlets is the extremely affordable price point, and further increases would definitely shy away many of the potential buyers.

Also, 12-13 stops is a plenty for most cases. And one can lure one more stop of DR by shooting at 96/100 fps for 24/25 fps delivery, though this does take some extra effort in post, like discussed earlier in the HDR thread:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=31683&page=3#24

Finally, like may others, i'd like to get the camera on my hands as soon as possible. I guess that's the main reason for my vote...
 
Everyone has been wondering if features from the epic would trickle down to scarlet. and yet now that we definitely have our answer I find it funny that so many would oppose it. I think that the best possible solution (on the buyers end, I want to avoid the word consumer here) would be if the HDR could be an optional. Thus those who do not want it, can have scarlet earlier, and those who do want HDR can have that scarlet when that version is ready. Granted this doesn't seem cost effective for Red, so it is questionable whether it would happen.

All in all I am for HDR in scarlet because it'd add more longevity and value to the scarlet. Besides if Jim is thinking of HDR as an option, scarlet must not be that close to production if they can make such a major change in the development path.

Jeff Coatney said:
Joseph I'm surprised you're choosing to delay the Scarlet by as much as a year.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would take that much longer, realistically, to develop scarlet with hdr.

Sanjin Jukic said:
If RED DSC put HDRx™™ on Scarlet from the beginning then they can count that Scarlet will fast become probably far the most popular digital camera on the market ever...

HDRx™™ should be a crucial part of that success...
Click to expand...

I like this idea. Not only is it more success for red and the red community, but think of all the third party support that would come with this. If Red becomes that popular they'd be able to dictate standards based on and with the lastest technology in mind, not profit margins as larger companies at times seem to do. But this is all just me day dreaming...
 
As option? Of course. Why not? Only in order to protect the high-end, it would be quite frankly too disappointing to see.

E. :-)
 
One last comment.

I'm surprised that so many accuse the old, established camera makers of holding back their technologies in order to sell slight upgrades every couple years and never giving the user what they really want, yet so many want to handicap the 2/3 Scarlets in the name of differentiation.

I get it that some want no chance of camera delay and others don't want to pay more. But the s35s and FFs are a whole different category from resolution all the way through cost for post. Why would they care if the little ol' 2/3ds got some magic ju-ju from the powers that be? There's little or no competition between the two.

You want to add value to your Red One's and Epics for rental purposes? Get HDR on those Scarlets. Film students will shoot the hell out of them, sometimes with faculty support. The best thing to happen to 16 will make the student filmmakers scorn the comparatively weak sisters that are offered out there. They'll drop out of the old system and become Redheads. Willing indoctrination!

As they progress and shoot thesis projects or start working professionally, they'll have a very strong understanding and comfort with Red cams and workflow. They're going to want to dazzle with some 4k and 5k on their reels and indie features and shorts, but they're going to be too broke to afford Epic. So they become heavy, repeat renters. It becomes an old familiar favorite and go-to format just like Arri has been for generations.

Yes, they'll buy Scarlets 2/3s without HDR, but with HDR, the jaws are going to drop and camera lust will go through the roof. They're going to see Red as the ones who finally got it right with electronic cinematography and who didn't treat them like a bunch of scrubs... because when they were a bunch of scrubs, the 2/3s was the camera that didn't compromise (relatively speaking, for you literalists.)

Do you want things done the old-fashioned, frustrating way or do you want absolutely kick-ass cameras? Make the 2/3s the sexy beasts of 16 just like Epics will be to 35 and beyond. I want the damn buzzsaw logos to quote Bill Murray: We came. We saw. We kicked ass.

HDR for we filthy, unwashed masses!
 
Price is relevant of course, and personally I wouldn't give an extra $1k a moments though if that were the only factor (I'm taking desirability as a given), but I think, for RED as much as anyone, availability needs to be a key consideration. Think of all the 'release it yesterday' posts that litter the forum, if evidence of that is required.
On the other hand, if camera C, camera S and camera P all say 'HDR Mode' on the box when they ship and Scarlet (at least the lower priced model) doesn't, think of how that might be perceived by some consumers, now matter how inferior those other HDR implementations might be.
So, if at all possible, having HDRx™™™™ as an available option and/or upgrade feature might be the best of both worlds. Those that want it could have it, albeit maybe at the cost of some delay in availability, those that don't need it now could have their Scarlets as per the current schedule (whatever that is:)).

And for those that "think" Scarlet might already have the processing capability, please read Jim's post carefully:

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=653904#post653904

He said that extra processing power would need to be added via an additional board. Now most of the software and electronics design work has already been done for Epic of course, but in terms of a Scarlet implementation would the chassis also require changes, such as the extra 1/2" body depth? I don't know, but if necessary that would probably lead to a delay in production of some sorts.

So, for those that want their camera now above all else, and if the only option to have HDRx™™™™ on Scarlet involves any significant further delay to the programme, I guess you'd have to vote 'no', despite its desirability as a feature being obvious. Whilst for those that are perhaps waiting for S35 or are prepared to wait for a 'must have' feature, and who don't care about the extra cost, voting 'yes' won't hurt.

Here's hoping that RED can develop a 'best of both worlds' solution, involving an option or upgrade package for Scarlet.
 
Last edited:
Scarlet 2/3 with HDRx? Why not? If the Red Team can make it happen for ONLY $1000 extra, I say heck yeah!

Ok, I see the point that many folks want to keep the cost as low as possible. Obviously, Red feels the same way, but give 'em a break. Don't despair over a grand. Especially when you put Scarlet in the same boxing ring as other cameras in a similar price range. When you compare it to other 2/3 inch sensors what other options can you really consider? dslr's? perhaps, (but we already know the challenges down that road,) but not full size video cameras with long recording times. Maybe a used hpx 500, or a ten year old Varicam....Oh yeah, still have to buy glass.

Extra time factor? Definitely a good point. It's too easy for me to say "get it right and we'll wait" because I'm not in a position to buy this minute anyway. Even if I could click a Buy it Now button, I wouldn't mind waiting. If I had clients banging down my door for Red, I have a choice of two Red's in my area. HDRx is truly a breakthrough. I agree that Scarlet itself is a huge breakthrough.

HDRx module? It would make everyone happy. Sounds too easy. My un-edu-macated guess says that since HDRx is directly tied to the sensor it won't happen. But it would be sweet.

Separation between church and state, being Epic and Scarlet? Resolution isn't enough? I say don't underestimate this. Still different client markets.

My opinion? I seriously doubt that anyone in the potential Scarlet market (fixed or 2/3) would complain about the price vs features ratio if Red released the camera itself without giving us hints about pricing long ago.

Joe Schmitt
At Will Productions
 
The Scarlet's main driver for 50% of it's market base is PRICE and FEATURES.. But PRICE leads. Which is why they tried so hard to build a camera that is sub $5k.

We're not talking about a new module, we're talking about adding boards to Scarlet's BRAIN and thereby increasing the cost of the camera.

Scarlet is what it is. I think we are also taking for granted all the cool features the camera will ALREADY come with.

I say leave HDR for Epic. Leave Scarlet as is.

Jay
 
PaulClements said:
I think that the Epic lineup has been in terrible need of a few decent high end features to really separate it from the Scarlet.
...

If you can shoot 99% of something using the Scarlet S35 and get the same results as shooting with an Epic I just don't see the point of owning the Epic over the Scarlet.
...

That being said, if Red put such features into the Scarlet I'll simply sell the Epic and buy a Scarlet instead and have more money in my pocket. I doubt many people would buy an Epic brand new once the Scarlet is available.

Paul
Click to expand...

Agreed. I had no interest in buying a Scarlet before. But if there is so little difference between Epic and Scarlet, I will probably end up selling one of my Epics and buying a Scarlet instead.
 
The Scarlet s35 will be about 15-20.000$ (modules included) and may still be unrentable in most situations. Producers will rent the Epic for film and commercials.
I think the Scarlet s35 is for personal use in your own productions and the Epic is for earning money of the camera.
Epic owners will probably get their money back in upgrades, support, superior codecs, fps, rentals and other stuff too.
Hope there will be some sort of HDR in Scarlet s35! :)
 
Let’s look the original goal with the Scarlet product line…
*
An AFFORDABE, very capable, camera that indie filmmakers and students can buy, to make cinema-quality pictures.
*
For some of you a $1000 is not a lot. For a student who can barely get by…
*
Jim and the Red team wanted to cater to that market and were very generous to have done what they have done, at the price range and the capabilities of this camera…as it stands… nothing even comes close…let’s keep it that way…
*
A $1000 won’t be much of a problem for me. I would love to have HDR, but I find it selfish (not pointing fingers here) to ask for it to be included and jack up the price, and possibly, development time, and make the camera unaffordable, for those who planned to buy the Scarlet at the price it was set to be at. Remember…they can only afford to buy ONE camera.
*
So…
*
Have 2/3 Fixed and Cinema stay the way they are now.
*
If possible…an HDR module for an extra $1000 if you want, and can afford it, for both Fixed and Cinema (I’d personally buy one)
*
S35…should include it…because at that price range and the proposed development time-frame…I think it’s more forgivable…
*
R.g.
Out
 
Another consideration...
If you can afford to go Epic, than you've already dumped thousands of dollars in lighting and grip...Right?

I don't get much work in my local market because clients constantly want more for less. I don't do $300 commercials and there's waaaay too many people that do.

What's my point? Scarlet's going to be hot, no matter what. If it has HDRx, it's going to be even easier for folks to shoot breathtaking footage when they only have a little light kit. It makes it even tougher for guys like me that try to focus on good lighting. Don't get me wrong, I still firmly believe that good lighting kicks a great camera up another notch. I'm really surprised that so many folks don't want HDR.

Sounds like an argument for HDRx to stay with Epic? Kind of, but I want it, and I wish I could afford an Epic.

Joe Schmitt
At Will Productions
 
My answer is yes I would be happy to pay it, and no I don’t think red should. If scarlet is cheap enough it will change the face of independent films (which I would rather see.) and secondly, I don’t want to be having the same conversation next year when red releases their next grate idea (as there are two things I expect from RED, grate ideas and server delays.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top