Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

Firmware upgrade 4.0 - What do you think or wish might be in it for Scarlet

All that fps talk makes me dizzy. I'm sure they will squeeze everything out of the little fella as good as they can
to stress the poor guys at RED and to add fuel to the fire for conspiracy theory lovers all around: the old SCARLET S35 was planned on having 5K @ 30fps with 72fps bursts.... hehehe

But if data rates comparisons/calculations mean anything, we could hope for what Luca posted.
 
4,5K Widescreen a 24 or 25fps would be a big thing for me (I shoot everything to be 2.35) and the power management.
5k is not for the scarlet at this time, its clear as crystal for me ; )
 
Obviously, 5K is a prerogative of Epic (marketing?).
But I think 4.5K (compression 7.1 o r 8.1) and 2K @ 96/120 (burst) fps would be possible (I hope Scarlet is more powerful than RedOne).
This is what users want, 4.5K allow us to work in true 4K output (is a reasonable request for the MX).
Amen.

L.
 
I dont yet have a Scarlet, but I would love for there to be a 4.5k WS option and any faster framerates at 3k ie 60fps
 
4K @ 60fps (HDRx in 30 fps would be useful at times for some of my projects)
3K @ 96fps
2.5K @ 120fps

Why no 2.5K ? It would theoretically resolve 1080p perfectly...

WS modes at all resolutions would also be great.
 
I agree with Luca. Of course I appreciate why people would want 5k @ 24/25/30P, but even if we knew it was possible, which we don't, in my opinion, it is quite clearly asking too much. Rightly or wrongly, fact is lots of epic owners had a melt down about the price drop, if Scarlet is made 5K for free, even if it could be, we would see epic melt downs, all over the place. It would be a bad business decision imho as it would piss the vast majority of epic owners off and leave too little differential between the cameras. 5K and high resolution/high fps is clearly Epics territory.

I'm not "expecting" anything form this firmware update, beyond hopefully power management. Time lapse improvement and ramping would be awesome.

What I'd love to see at some point in the near future, that I'd be willing to pay RED for, doesn't encroach on epic, and should be possible.
4.5K Ws. Ana. 50 @ 3k. 96 @ 3k, 120 @ 2k. I think this is the sweet spot for Scarlet in the RED line up. And with Epic users having Dragon just around the corner, but not us. I'm really hoping RED may consider this. Painfully ironic if I have to rent a guys R1 which he just bough for half the price of my camera so I can shoot 120fps @ 2k.
 
Given the recent "4K" posts and why 5K is so much better for 4K delivery:

- 5Kws @ 24P
- 4Kws HDRx @ 24P
- Time-lapse and Still-mode (longer then 1sec intervals/exposures and single-frame RAW capture)
- Power management (with the ability to turn off live image processing / monitoring to allow for camera setup, etc...)

All of the above is doable and long overdue...

Peter
:reddevil:
 
Peter Majtan said:
Given the recent "4K" posts and why 5K is so much better for 4K delivery:

- 5Kws @ 24P
- 4Kws HDRx @ 24P
- Time-lapse and Still-mode (longer then 1sec intervals/exposures and single-frame RAW capture)
- Power management (with the ability to turn off live image processing / monitoring to allow for camera setup, etc...)

All of the above is doable and long overdue...

Peter
:reddevil:
Click to expand...

5k @ 25 fps for PAL :)
 
Speed ramping, a proper timelapse mode, and the proposed improvements to the rack focus mode that everyone got so upset over in an old thread of mine :coolgleamA:. Those things would be pretty nice.

However, what I really think is ridiculous is that Epic has aspect ratios that Scarlet can do without question, they just happen to not be selectable. I'm talking about 2:1 and WS 2.40:1. If the Scarlet can do 1.9:1 at 4K, it can shave off a few lines of pixels and do 2:1 as well. I shoot in 2:1 where most people would shoot 1.85; it's my "tall frame" of choice when I have the option. I'm not understanding why I need to buy an Epic to be able to shoot in lower resolutions. I'm not even going to demand 4.5K or 5K like so many others (although 4.5k really does seem feasible based on the math people cite). If my camera can cut off a few pixels horizontally for 4K HD 16:9, I know it can cut off a few vertically to shoot 2:1 or even more pixels for 2.40:1. This AR thing is the only glaring issue for me, and I'm not entirely sure what RED is trying to do... I totally buy their argument about Scarlet not being able to do 5K, but not being able to select fewer active pixels than what we already have is a little bit lame.

Sure, it can easily be cropped in post, and the difference between 1.9 and 2 is minimal. However, some folks shooting in widescreen could save a lot of storage space if they didn't have to crop off a third of the image to get it looking like what they saw on set.
 
Aria Khosravi said:
Speed ramping, a proper timelapse mode, and the proposed improvements to the rack focus mode that everyone got so upset over in an old thread of mine :coolgleamA:. Those things would be pretty nice.

However, what I really think is ridiculous is that Epic has aspect ratios that Scarlet can do without question, they just happen to not be selectable. I'm talking about 2:1 and WS 2.40:1. If the Scarlet can do 1.9:1 at 4K, it can shave off a few lines of pixels and do 2:1 as well. I shoot in 2:1 where most people would shoot 1.85; it's my "tall frame" of choice when I have the option. I'm not understanding why I need to buy an Epic to be able to shoot in lower resolutions. I'm not even going to demand 4.5K or 5K like so many others (although 4.5k really does seem feasible based on the math people cite). If my camera can cut off a few pixels horizontally for 4K HD 16:9, I know it can cut off a few vertically to shoot 2:1 or even more pixels for 2.40:1. This AR thing is the only glaring issue for me, and I'm not entirely sure what RED is trying to do... I totally buy their argument about Scarlet not being able to do 5K, but not being able to select fewer active pixels than what we already have is a little bit lame.

Sure, it can easily be cropped in post, and the difference between 1.9 and 2 is minimal. However, some folks shooting in widescreen could save a lot of storage space if they didn't have to crop off a third of the image to get it looking like what they saw on set.
Click to expand...


+1 on that! save some storage will be a good thing. specially for those who want 48gb cards.
 
Would love to have stop animation support, as on the R1, i.e. one frame per button push.

Longer exposure times.

Faster blackshading.

1:1 Pixel zoom during record and playback.

Support for the Redmote Pro.

Ability to see sound levels while making adjustments.
 
:yesnod:
Peter Majtan said:
Given the recent "4K" posts and why 5K is so much better for 4K delivery:

- 5Kws @ 24P
- 4Kws HDRx @ 24P
- Time-lapse and Still-mode (longer then 1sec intervals/exposures and single-frame RAW capture)
- Power management (with the ability to turn off live image processing / monitoring to allow for camera setup, etc...)

All of the above is doable and long overdue...

Peter
:reddevil:
Click to expand...

+1000

a little sugar to Scarlet owners.
 
POWER MANAGEMENT is by far top priority.

Distant second, for me, is "burst modes."

I'd also love to see stills mode, especially if it could somehow have a shorter boot-up time.

Finally, and this one is in the "unrealistic wish" category, fix this "blackshade" shenanigans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top