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 :)

gut feeling, 2/3 might still be alive

J Davis

J Davis

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Messages
1,267
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NYC
I was thinking - how can they be throwing away all the R & D? We saw footage, Hutson was running around with one at that convention ... etc etc

plus Joseph Hutson let a little harmless something slip. :smiley:

Remember how he started hanging around at red hq, remember how he posted a scarlet lens thread that became a sticky and he was calling the cameras scarlet-c and scarlet-f ?

Well up until that time no one from red had used those names and this new scarlet is called scarlet-x which fits in with the naming convention.

Also, if they were only going to release 1 scarlet, why not call it scarlet?
 
I think you're right. Once all the kinks are worked out and when enough of the Scarlet-x's are shipped, I bet they will go back to the fixed lens project.
An a side note, I believe RED has way bigger projects in the pipeline. Scarlet (like Apple iProducts) will generate enough revenue for R+D on their future products.

J Davis said:
I was thinking - how can they be throwing away all the R & D? We saw footage, Hutson was running around with one at that convention ... etc etc

plus Joseph Hutson let a little harmless something slip. :smiley:

Remember how he was hanging around at red hq, making friends, remember how he posted a scarlet lens thread that became a sticky and he was calling the cameras scarlet-c and scarlet-f ?

Well up until that time no one from red had used those names and this new scarlet is called scarlet-x which fits in with the naming convention.

Also, if they were only going to release 1 scarlet, why not call it scarlet?
Click to expand...
 
Sorry you feel that way. The delays in development exposed the fact that 3K is not future-proof. And we make cameras for professionals. or those that aspire to be professionals. We had a hard time justifying a 3K professional camera. The fact that the 8X fixed zoom had a fatal flaw (couldn't hold focus from wide to tele)... was the straw that broke the camel's back.

Jim
Click to expand...

Unless it's some kind of 4K sensor... don't place your bets on it.
 
@ Steven Veldkamp - wow I never saw that post before, seems pretty damning...

I can't justify spending over $6-7k so I might be sticking with canon DSLR's after all. Any news on the mini primes and interchangeable ?
 
agreed - I believe 3K was scrapped largely because of RED's increasing commitment to a 4K standard which is going to be the basis of their delivery systems....consistency across acquisition systems will sell delivery systems. makes sense.

having said that, I also believe that they may re-visit the 2/3'' option at a later time. the SCARLET-X adds many efficiencies to their production cylcle - they can recycle EPIC chips that didn't make the grade, they can build consistent production lines...

but frankly, I think RED is about to turn its attention to some bigger fish - namely, delivery - they have the best no-compromises 5K system on the planet - they now offer the best value camera on the planet -

all these cameras need delivery systems, and that is a more pressing and revolutionizing need than a 2/3'' camera, at this time - it doesn't mean that RED won't make one - just that the SCARLET-X program allows them to finally deliver a SCARLET that will please many (obviously offending a few!) and push their business into new and lucrative directions (satisfying their existing user base) - they made a choice that allows them to deliver a lot of SCARLET cameras FAST!


all of those pixels need a place to land...

I don't think RED "throws away" any R&D - I think the 2/3 is still a future possibility - but this decision will move the company forward, whereas building all new production lines and all new chips and all new everything will chew up resources....

they see other companies building 4K delivery systems already, and I doubt RED is willing to be left behind on a marketplace that they pretty much singlehandedly invented....
 
As far as i can see, no word has been said about the interchangable... but reading jim's post, i think it's safe to assume all 2/3" plans are history.
I just don't get why Red didn't make a public statement about it? And why they played nice weather until the X was announced...
Perhaps they didn't want to lose potential Epic-s (now scarlet-x) costumers who were first planning on buying the 2/3"?

Which sounds like very un-Redish bussiness practices. But i don't have any other explaination.

Eitherway, buy what can buy and start shootin'.
 
Last edited:
Steven Veldkamp said:
Unless it's some kind of 4K sensor... don't place your bets on it.
Click to expand...

Well, Canon showed a 4K 2/3" sensor prototype not long ago, so it's obviously not out of the realm of possibility. Unfortunately Canon fell in line with the current trend towards larger sensors with its cinema offering.

You know, we've had a psychotic decade of digital imaging. At first it was really hard for manufacturers to get decent yields in large sensor production, so there just weren't any of them out there and that made everyone hungry for big sensors. 'Cause anything you can't have is desirable. Everyone lamented the lack of wide angle glass for cropped sensors and then full frame still cameras came out and were extremely expensive, so that just reinforced the gotta-have-a-big-sensor mindset. And I own a full-frame DSLR, so it's not like I'm immune to the siren's call or that I don't see an advantage to larger sensors for some uses. But in the last few years it's all really intensified. You've got all these kids who think that razor-thin DOF is the only thing that proves you're a "professional" and know your cameras and optics.

But a lot of these "aficionados" have never been out in the field with a camera working on the clock. They don't know how hard it is to pull focus on the fly even with 16mm gear, let alone Super-35. I can remember bringing footage back to a production suite back in the days of tube cameras and U-Matic tape...so you're talking about 280 x 486 of maximum theoretical resolution...not very telling...and we'd review the footage on 21" production monitors when we got back to the station...again, nothing like projecting dailies on a big screen, but even with gear that was scant enough in size and resolution to hide a lot of the rough edges we'd review our footage and find a lot of shots that were just too soft to use. Because even with 2/3" cameras it can be hard to run-and-gun. And as the gear has gained in resolution and the playback equipment has become more revealing it's become even more difficult to nail focus all the time. And especially compared to film. Shots we were perfectly happy with on 16mm wouldn't be sharp enough if they'd been captured digitally. Because the format is incredibly revealing. It's beautiful when you nail it, but really, really apparent when you don't. I'd hate to work in Super-35 without a crew unless I was shooting some kind of plates like "Golden Gate Bridge at Sunset." A remake of Andy Warhol's 'Empire' or something.
 
I know I would buy one if they ever came out with it, definitely would be a different tool for different jobs. But I won't be surprised if they dont ever go back to 2/3rds
 
I would prefer 2/3 inch sensors too. They have their own advantages - deep focus in low light, fast lenses in small packages with long zoom ranges, greater battery life, overall smaller size, etc. However, I don't 3K (2.4K effective) will cut it in 2012 and beyond. Maybe with the Dragon/Monstro generation a 4K 2/3 inch sensor will be possible. For documentary work or filming other unplanned moments (things like wildlife filmmaking), such cameras are just more convenient.
 
I'd vote for a Scarlet interchangeable at 2/3" (no fixed please), but I can't trust RED anymore, even if they'd show us now new working prototypes.
 
I feel its not right to complain about the new Scarlet because it clearly the first time in history that a camera that is of the same quality that is being used at the top of the profession and will I'm sure dominate Hollywood more and more is being made affordable to kids with an idea. So I won't its a genius brilliant amazing turbo charged deal of the century oportunity especially for those who hoped to make an indi feature film. BUT personally I'm a little disapointed at the dropping of the Fixed lens simply due to the form factor. I actually mourned more for the dropping of the original Scarlet S because it looked like a DSLR. The reason I want a small form factor is I am hoping to make documentaries in Asia and needed something that would be low profile and look like a consumer camera. I felt after the Scarlet S disapeared the fixed was my next best option. Now I feel like if I walk around with a Scarlet X there is no way I can be low profile and also focusing on quick moving action will be difficult and was excited about the touch focusing on the fixed.

So Now I accept fully that Jannard is as disapointted as much as we are about the loss of the Scarlet fixed. No grumbles here.

But what I don't give up on is the idea that Red could come out with a smaller form factor later. I also feel that Red is focused on being a professional camera company. What I would like is a professional camera that is more suited to ENG documenatry work, not nessecarily a cheap as chips camera but a camera that is in a slightly different category than the Epic and is geared for the broadcast market. I think the fixed should never of been seen as a junior version of Red but a camera for a totaly different job. I wouldn't be surprised if it pops up in some form in the future even if it helps develop a more light weight DSLR camera.
 
I'd also be interested, but I think it's wishful thinking.

At a minimum, Jim only wants EPIC or EPIC-like features. For all that matters, Scarlet-X is an EPIC. Anything less is (as Jim would say) not professional.

I'm certainly not going to wait for it. As the old saying goes "fool me once..."
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Hahahahahahahaha
Click to expand...
I am with you Gunleik LOL

With the due respect to others' POV (even 'cause despite they are just a few, they are Robert Jackson, Felix, Jhoe Davis, Radoslav, posters we were/are used to read, respect and love the(ir) posting :) sometimes looks like a melodramatic comedy (E :-)
 
Emanuel A. said:
Agreed. As much as this 2/3" drama. Here is something shot with a FF camera. One-shooter-show in the most part of the shots.
Click to expand...

And it's very attractive footage for the most part, but it's also from the Kevin Smith school of very little in the way of camera movement and of course what we're seeing in this montage is MOS. You CAN shoot with 135 format and keep things in focus...if your actors aren't moving and the camera isn't moving. Things get a lot trickier when you start juggling chainsaws.
 
Robert Jackson said:
And it's very attractive footage for the most part, but it's also from the Kevin Smith school of very little in the way of camera movement and of course what we're seeing in this montage is MOS. You CAN shoot with 135 format and keep things in focus...if your actors aren't moving and the camera isn't moving. Things get a lot trickier when you start juggling chainsaws.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are fully right on this one :) But if it is still MOS, it happened 'cause the editor/shooter was too lazy or maybe done enough after shooting, to not let another editor to edit his stuff. No-budget style speaks by itself :D And his native field, it is the sound department, go figure! ;)

However, well seen anyway, Robert. To me, you are still one of the best I ever read online. Thanks for your posts :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top