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 :)

Has anyone heard anything about 120 FPS????????

Christian Rufi said:
I agree with Wissam Abdallah. The same for me. RED does not respect its commitments and its customers SCARLET-X. 64 FPS max at 2K. I hope this will be fixed soon with a firmware update.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't exactly say this was a good "first impression", accusing RED of havig disrespect for their customers.

Would you rather have a camera which is more stable without letting you tap into those frame rates than getting what you think you want at the cost of less reliability?

There are a number of things continually being improved behind closed doors. The first few months of shooting with the EPIC we could only shoot in 5K. Now we have a few more options. Just because RED hasn't enabled the entire list below doesn't mean they disrespect us. That's kind of absurd to me...

5120 x 2700 • 5K Full Frame
4800 x 2700 • 5K HD
5120 x 2560 • 5K 2:1
5120 x 2160 • 5K 2.37:1
4480 x 1920 • 4.5 Wide
4096 x 2304 • 4K 16:9
3840 x 2160 • 4K HD
4096 x 2048 • 4K 2:1
4096 x 1706 • 4K 2.4:1
3072 x 1728 • 3K 16:9
2880 x 1620 • 3K for HD
3072 x 1536 • 3K 2:1
3072 x 1280 • 3K 2.4:1
2048 x 1152 • 2K 16:9
2048 x 1024 • 2K 2:1
2048 x 853 • 2K 2.4:1
1920 x 1080 • 1080 HD
 
fingers crossed for:

1K@240fps
2K@120fps
3K@60fps
4K@48fps (24fps HDRX @ 4K)
5K@24fps

:-)
 
If you bought the camera based on the spec sheet then you must have read the announcement with it that said not all features would be enabled on release..
 
Asif Limbada said:
fingers crossed for:

1K@240fps
2K@120fps
3K@60fps
4K@48fps (24fps HDRX @ 4K)
5K@24fps

:-)
Click to expand...

That would be spot on for most. I like to have the frame rates and can't afford an Epic at this point. I got access to a couple for some work but most projects I do I can't afford to get a camera with those frame rates even for a rental.

Ideally my Scarlet (hopefully after the Dragon update) would be something like this:

5K 30fps
4K 60fps
3K 96fps
2K 120fps

Don't care for 1K.
 
Why does anyone think we'll get 120 at 2K?

Just wishful thinking or is there a rumor about that? I'd be excited if it could...and I mean, it should...the RED One could, and this tech is a few years newer. But I'm not expecting it.
 
BrandonChristensen said:
Why does anyone think we'll get 120 at 2K?

Just wishful thinking or is there a rumor about that? I'd be excited if it could...and I mean, it should...the RED One could, and this tech is a few years newer. But I'm not expecting it.
Click to expand...

I think it's partially wishful thinking. No rumors from what I've read. I think there is a solid crew of older Scarlet Fixed/Cine/Epic S crowd kind of holding out for some frame rates at a usable resolution. I'm not expecting it either. I'm happy with what I got, but In my case I need frame rates for some shoots, and they just aren't there. Yeah Yeah get an Epic, but one can hope with the Dragon upgrade some frame rates will be added :)
 
BrandonChristensen said:
Why does anyone think we'll get 120 at 2K?

Just wishful thinking or is there a rumor about that? I'd be excited if it could...and I mean, it should...the RED One could, and this tech is a few years newer. But I'm not expecting it.
Click to expand...

Just wishful thinking. The Scarlet-X is a different beast altogether than what the FixedScarlet was to be. It did things the EPIC-X/M still can't do. So, why even compare it to the Scarlet-X?

RED shouldn't feel compelled to answer for why/when/how they do everything. They shoot with the same camera we shoot with. They want to shoot the framerates/aspect ratios we want to shoot as well. They wish just as much as we do (if not more so) that the road of progression was easier.

If it was easy, everyone else in the camera making business would be doing it as well.
 
The only think that I hope Red will figure out one day is 5k@24fps... although, I'm sure that if this was even possible they wouldve said on Nov 3rd.... but I can live in hope.
I would never say that Red is not respecting their commitment to the client though
 
If you do a simple (probably not very accurate) calculation

(Amount of Pixels * Framerate)
________________________
max Compression


You get a maximum Data throughput of
[TABLE="width: 64"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]36864000[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
with the 4K at 25fps at 6:1

now if you do the same backwards with the other Framesizes you get the following (theoretical) max framerates:

5K: 13.333 fps @5:1
4KHD: 31.333 fps @7:1
3K: 51.85 fps @7:1
2K: 66.66 fps @4:1
1K: 200 fps @3:1

1080p: 71.11 fps @4:1
720p: 160fps @4:1

So in my opinion (totally biased of course) the Scarlet would indeed be perfectly capable of doing not only 120fps at 1K but 200... And you could also do 3K HDRx @25fps.
And that only implies keeping the Scarlet at the conventional standard it has been set to. I am sure that most SCARLETS could do more since they are capped at EXACTLY 1/3rd of the max Datarate the Epic records... think about that.
I am sure they will come up with 720p @ 120fps for the scarlet once the sales numbers are flattening out and proclaim that magic has been done. =)
 
Original Scarlet S-35 spec only went to 30fps at 4k and 60 fps at 2k. The trade off then was S35 sensor and resolution against frame rates. The 2/3" Scarlet had the frame rates but only 3k resolution on a smaller sensor. Scarlet-X is close to the original Scarlet S35 spec, but higher data rates, 16-bit instead of 12 bit, and 5k resolution for stills, so it actually exceeds the original Scarlet S35 concept.

I still hope they will produce a true S16mm version at some point with higher frame rates and max 3.8K QHD resolution at S16, 3k at 2/3". Again trading sensor size, recording formats and resolution for higher frame rates.
 
David Rasberry said:
Original Scarlet S-35 spec only went to 30fps at 4k and 60 fps at 2k. The trade off then was S35 sensor and resolution against frame rates. The 2/3" Scarlet had the frame rates but only 3k resolution on a smaller sensor. Scarlet-X is close to the original Scarlet S35 spec, but higher data rates, 16-bit instead of 12 bit, and 5k resolution for stills, so it actually exceeds the original Scarlet S35 concept.

I still hope they will produce a true S16mm version at some point with higher frame rates and max 3.8K QHD resolution at S16, 3k at 2/3". Again trading sensor size, recording formats and resolution for higher frame rates.
Click to expand...

i surely didn't expect anything less from RED. perhaps even more. Thats the standard they set themselves to, thats the expectations they are going to get. Look at the incredibly high standard that apple set themselves. Now they are increasing numbers of "meh" and "oh well" when they come out with an upgrade to anything they do. (-> 4S, new iPad)
 
i have my fingesrs crossd for hdrx / 3k and 25 fps, not only 24 at fps.
would be nice to have 3k 60 fps, bit ist's not important. just would be nice.
but hdrx at 3k and 25 fps (not only 24 fps) is very, very important for us europeans. hdrx at 24 fps is worth nothing in pal land. it is the same, as not having hdrx.

cheers.
 
Martin Weiss said:
Christian, since you are new to this community, I'll just say that RED does respect us customers very much. In fact, there is no other camera company that respects us as much as they do. They tend to deliver more than they promised (usually a bit late, but getting better in that department as well.)

Just this month they came out with REDgamma3, wich gives you even richer colors. Those other "respectful" companies would either charge you for the upgrade or make you buy a new camera altogether. A free download at red.com/support.

With all my previous non-RED cameras, I would be lucky if I would get 50% of it's purchase price after 3 years. RED gave us a full refund.

With all due respect, calling RED disrespectful of its customers is, well, direspectful.
Click to expand...

+100
 
Demetri Zuev said:
120fps @ 2K. For that I can wait for as long as necessary.

I mean, Epic is doing 300fps at 2K and I don't think Scarlet is so much less powerful that it can't handle 120.
Click to expand...

With all due respect: What to hell do you know about this? Are you a camera engineer? I'll guess no. Also, please explain why Red owes you this. When you bought your camera, the capabilities were clearly stated. Why should they give you more? Why should your camera give you the same thing (or close) as Epics costing many times as much? Talk about a spoiled baby attitude of entitlement!
 
Norbert Jalitsch said:
i have my fingesrs crossd for hdrx / 3k and 25 fps, not only 24 at fps.
would be nice to have 3k 60 fps, bit ist's not important. just would be nice.
but hdrx at 3k and 25 fps (not only 24 fps) is very, very important for us europeans. hdrx at 24 fps is worth nothing in pal land. it is the same, as not having hdrx.

cheers.
Click to expand...

It's not worth nothing to have 24p for any feature. Did you know that virtually all fiction is shot at 24P? Did you know that 24p is the only international standard that works in all territories?
 
Robert L. Mickles said:
I'm sure they will come out with a firmware to unleash the cameras full capabilities, which I feel is a bit higher than what was announced on Nov. 3.
Click to expand...


LOL

the 1k @ 120 waa announced and is a good thing to expect.
If they deliver on more than they sold, well good for you!!!

Hahahaha

RED has a history of not meeting all their goals, but surprisingly delivering on stuff we never expected.

I do not think that 120 @ 1k is one of these examples of not delivering, though. I do have a feeling that they don't want too much 1k material floating around, though, which I can understand if that is the case. Lighting for 120 fps @ 1k is at least 4 times harder than 120 @ 4k.

And I can see that that is a dilemma they find practically challenging. I am still waiting for those 700 fps @ 720... :)
But I don't really miss them. And that would still not be the selling point for me with the Epic...
 
Pete Barden said:
Looks like Sony have just come to the table with something pretty special. 10x slow motion at full HD resolution for under 10 thousand. Bugger!

http://nofilmschool.com/2012/04/sonys-fs-700-revealed-4k-ready-super/
Click to expand...

RED is not just a camera, its a codec, a very good one, unlike AVCHD, which is a moderately decent, highly compressed, color castrated, interframe codec the FS700 will use.. another overpriced, cheaply built, oddly shaped camcorder for wedding videographers.... oh yeah, its 4K ready, whatever BS that means (3G out put of a RAW 4k signal ...yay)

about the 1K 120 fps... i kind of waited for it... thought i't would be great to use when shooting vertically on green screen... would make up for resolution loss quite a bit.
and i don't think its wrong to expect it, or even be pissed at its absence ...


now if hypothetically, someone would hack the firmware... not that i'm suggesting anything... or would try it myself... but things like this happend before in different popular cameras

hector
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top