Is 2/3" going to be enough?

[David Battistella]

I am truly have a hard time wrapping my head around this idea. If it didn't come from someone whose posts I have enjoyed and learned so much from (thanks, David) I would have dismissed it out of hand!

There are so many advantages to Scarlet that I have a hard time believing anyone would question what I consider its EXTREME viability in the marketplace. Frankly, I think it would kick ass with a 1/3" sensor.

First, the big deal is Redcode RAW - which means better color space for chromakeying and overall post production grading flexibility. And it is visually lossless compression with manageable data rates and file sizes. It also looks like it will have great dynamic range and low light performance. Let's not forget 120 fps and 3K resolution. And with very fast read-reset times, it will get rid of (or vastly reduce) the whole rolling shutter problem of most other CMOS sensors. And features like touch screen focus and overall modularity don't hurt either. Finally, even if it comes in close to $10K for a full kit, it's a better camera than a EX1 (IMHO) for just a little more money.

Now - as for the 2/3" sensor - isn't it true that the F35, F900 are 2/3 inch? And, as several people have noted on this forum, big sensors often mean needing a focus puller or suffering some out of focus shots. With the silly obsession with shallow DOF aside, this is a very versatile, very capable sensor. If, like me, you are moving from a 1/3" sensor, it feels like a football field! We have all discussed the "issues" with the DSLRs ad nauseum (although it hasn't quelled the stampede) so I won't go there. But, I think we can all agree that those issues will be a thing of the past when you have a Scarlet in your hands.

For the record, I don't happen to think the Scarlet, in any current shape or form, is likely to be big in ENG but I don't think that really matters as it is the perfect indie film and doc camera and will probably be used a lot in TV and feature film as well. Just one guy's opinion.

Terry,

Thanks for this post as it is indeed sheeding light on my perspective, but then again is that not what these boards are really for.

I would think of 2/3" Scarlet as 'MINI CINEMA" not as ENG.

Current ENG cameras offer:

-fast turnaround
-long battery life
-prerecord functions
-extreme low light (including night vision) I will cite an example, let's say you are working for CNN in a war zone and you are a freelancer, they might expect a camera that can produce extreme night vision
-Connect to a satalite or a microwave truck in ten seconds. via HD-SDI out
-on camera playback to satalite feed
-double as a studio camera
-built in onboard microphone for recording
-power to wireless microphones
-VU meters and onboard audio control potentiometers
-on board line and mic level switches
-GENLOCK IN
-TC IN and OUT
-ENG zoom lens with motor control and double extender
-easy handheld to trip and back (ten seconds max)
-long record times
-extreme heat, extreme cold
-robust professional mechanisms
-1/3" or 2/3" three prism CCD sensor block
-interlaced or Progressive recording

EFP - HARDLINED EFP
All of the above plus:
-high dynamic range
-really pretty pictures
-slo motion options
-variable 59.94 23.98 timebase
-interchangable lens mount
-Major network approval as an aquisition format

MINI CINEMA

-Progressive recording only
-interchangable lens mounts
-2/3" SINGLE CMOS sensor
-Single or double system sound
-Focus on RAW and High image quality


Rationalizing all of this Scarlet might be more for the film enthusiast than the ENG crowd. The center of RED's philosophy is tools for film makers instead of tools for broadcasters. I would say that the customer base is indy film makers.

To me, looking at this list the Scarlet line feels like the spring loaded BOLEX or reminds me of my CANON SCOPIC where I could shoot 16mm film in a compact easy to load package, shoot offspeed shots and not record sound. I used that camera a lot to film images around sporting events when video cameras did not shoot speed. The look of the film stock was a bonus as well.

That is where Scarlet fits in. I'd say that I would much rather put the EPIC with Nikon glass in this situation in the configuation Ted was showing at NAB, than invest in a whole new system.

Starting completely from scratch, the Scarlet system would look attractive, but I still would want to be shooting 5K.

What ever RED does will be beautiful because it comes out of the Color Science and REDCODE RAW. The image aesthetics of that combination alone are worth investing in the program.

David



David

 

[Jay Gannon]

But thats entirely discounting non-hardlined EFP, Documentary work, Sports Documentary (Huge and expanding market where Scarlet's FPS will shine), Adventure Reality Productions, and I'm sure I'm missing more. Smaller budget advertising and marketing.

I disagree with some of your requirements too, they may be the standard but not required; 3CCD, Built in Mic, I don't know any ENG that runs a built in mic. Double as studio cam.
I just couldn't agree that scarlet should be pigeon-holed as a Cinema Cam.

 

[David Battistella]

I just couldn't agree that scarlet should be pigeon-holed as a Cinema Cam.

I'm talking primary purpose and the rest of my post discusses the rest of your points as it being a great machine for sports, etc.

Built in Mic mount, rather than mic.

Most sports broadcasters do not want to aquire 24P, but I can see it in sports doc.

We have not seen a working Scarlet so it is hard to assume that the CMOS skew is not a problem for high speed action. If it has a fast response time like film, then I will buy your argument, but it is to be seen.

David

 

[Jay Gannon]

I'm not talking about sports broadcasting, I'm talking sports documentaries where I can capture at whatever rate suits and then conform to 30p or 24p for projection. The RED has already started making inroads in this area, I see no reason the Scarlet couldnt continue this.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

...
We have not seen a working Scarlet so it is hard to assume that the CMOS skew is not a problem for high speed action. If it has a fast response time like film, then I will buy your argument, but it is to be seen.

David

I am optimistic about this as Jarred indicated in his comments yesterday that the read-reset compare favorably to Epic. I take that to mean it will gradually converge toward that holy grail of 5 ms - just north of film. I admit to being a hopeful optimist. But, as you said, we'll have to see to believe!

EDIT: To be precise, he said "on par" with the Epic.

 

[David Battistella]

Perfect. That makes it MUCH better than the RED one or the RED ONE M-X, making the FF Scarlett a pretty good choice over RED ONE (which will probably be on the way out by then).

I'm liking what they are saying about this Scarlet camera more and more.

David

 

[David Battistella]

I'm not talking about sports broadcasting, I'm talking sports documentaries where I can capture at whatever rate suits and then conform to 30p or 24p for projection. The RED has already started making inroads in this area, I see no reason the Scarlet couldnt continue this.

Great. Sounds like the Scarlet is the machine for you, happy filming.

David

 

[Brigham Edgar]

I think Televison EFP is definitely the primary market for Scarlet but also being very very viable for feature and drama work...hence the baby primes. But the market for commercials, music videos, lower budget feature etc the FF factor has and is making massive inroads on this and is becoming more and more favoured than shooting with a smaller sensor. Many productions companies that work in these genres here in Australia have been buying these DSLR's up themselves, kitting them out and making DP's use them...and some are even happy too. It is because they are cheap, have a nice aesthetic look and FF being the major plus point.
I have no doubt at all that RED have designed the Scarlet as a cinema camera, definitely not ENG and probably to no real direction EFP. But EFP in my belief is the real marketplace for it as current DSLR's are in no way suitable for this market and i don't think a 2/3" sensor is going to cut it in these genres. I believe Canon without any doubt has their boffins sitting in a cave somewhere making a very cheap new model DSLR that has more of a form factor and spec/feature set that will absolutely clean up. Look at it now with all its downsides and it is extremely successful. I am not saying that the Scarlet won't...it certainly will be a massive success...but i just don't think it will end up being primarily where it has been designed for and EFP will be its realm.

I think over the next year or two that the desire to use 2/3" sensors in any high end camera such as F23, SI2K etc will be well and truly over. With new cameras like ALEXA coming to the market alongside EPIC and combining the obvious huge desire for shorter DOF i just see people if they have choices going for S35 or FF. Obviously there will be circumstances but it is now clearly shown that people love the short DOF look and feel. The choices and options now and soon to be are very exciting, very reachable on varying budgets and with this i think it is going to be the first and biggest factor in deciding formats. After all, 'proof is in the pudding' where people are now sacrificing image quality in a major way just to get the short DOF, cheaply and without hassle.

 

[David Battistella]

Brigham,

I love to quote david bowie.

"the artists make culture, not the critics"

Stretching this to your last post i think that it will depend on us, the creatives to bring the tools. If it was up to production then kitted out DSLR's would be the thing, whether you can roll for only two minutes per take does not matter.

RED exists because people bought it and wanted to use it and share it. It was an artist movment NOT a producer movement.

Your post made me think that the same will have to be true of Scarlet. Artists, film makers, will by the technology because they know it is inherently good, because quality matters and because we want to have "some" control over the tools we use.

If we "users" did not help finance this program, then we'd just get DSLR's shoved down our throats as the "coolest-prefered-cheapest-tool-of-choice".

It's a fantastic time to be a creative when companies are commiting to the long term and creating technology that help us advance our craft, with a nod to the future.

In five years, I'll be looking at RED footage and very happy I chose this tool. I am not sure I would say that about DSLR.

One is sort of disposable, one is not.

Maybe that is the magic of Scarlet.

David

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Started long post... cut to short.
For many applications I really miss the PD-150 days.

Fixed Scarlet will give me those options back.

Will def have @ least one...

And it specs out like a Varicam on stereoids.

That's not too bad...

 

[Adrian Frearson]

If you look this at from the perspective of an accountant, the DSMC makes a lot of sense if you are in charge of a medium to large production company. Being able to fulfil most of these roles, with a single modular system and swapping out brains for their particular strengths, could be a large financial incentive. And within this list, the 2/3'' would be the right choice for many situations.

35mm and 16mm have happily coexisted for years, so I would imagine that unless there is something deeply floored at the technical level with a 2/3" sensor, it won't be vanishing as a format very soon.

Current ENG cameras offer:

-fast turnaround
-long battery life
-prerecord functions
-extreme low light (including night vision) I will cite an example, let's say you are working for CNN in a war zone and you are a freelancer, they might expect a camera that can produce extreme night vision
-Connect to a satalite or a microwave truck in ten seconds. via HD-SDI out
-on camera playback to satalite feed
-double as a studio camera
-built in onboard microphone for recording
-power to wireless microphones
-VU meters and onboard audio control potentiometers
-on board line and mic level switches
-GENLOCK IN
-TC IN and OUT
-ENG zoom lens with motor control and double extender
-easy handheld to trip and back (ten seconds max)
-long record times
-extreme heat, extreme cold
-robust professional mechanisms
-1/3" or 2/3" three prism CCD sensor block
-interlaced or Progressive recording

EFP - HARDLINED EFP
All of the above plus:
-high dynamic range
-really pretty pictures
-slo motion options
-variable 59.94 23.98 timebase
-interchangable lens mount
-Major network approval as an aquisition format

MINI CINEMA

-Progressive recording only
-interchangable lens mounts
-2/3" SINGLE CMOS sensor
-Single or double system sound
-Focus on RAW and High image quality

 

[Emanuel A.]

(...)

However, for such a dreamy and expressionistic visual effect, there will no doubt be DOF adapters (...) available.

(...)

Versus a S35 Scarlet. Once you account for lenses and modules, the price difference will be substantial. And you lose the 4 advantages. The significant advantages for the S35 are the massive increase in resolution, and much lower (finer) noise at higher ISOs.

The DOF adapters' fence is only to be back to the past before April 24th 2006.

Both S35 and 2/3" are just the best of the two worlds and for sure the Scarlet combo you're looking for.

 

[Brigham Edgar]

Brigham,

I love to quote david bowie.

"the artists make culture, not the critics"

Stretching this to your last post i think that it will depend on us, the creatives to bring the tools. If it was up to production then kitted out DSLR's would be the thing, whether you can roll for only two minutes per take does not matter.

RED exists because people bought it and wanted to use it and share it. It was an artist movment NOT a producer movement.

Your post made me think that the same will have to be true of Scarlet. Artists, film makers, will by the technology because they know it is inherently good, because quality matters and because we want to have "some" control over the tools we use.

If we "users" did not help finance this program, then we'd just get DSLR's shoved down our throats as the "coolest-prefered-cheapest-tool-of-choice".

It's a fantastic time to be a creative when companies are commiting to the long term and creating technology that help us advance our craft, with a nod to the future.

In five years, I'll be looking at RED footage and very happy I chose this tool. I am not sure I would say that about DSLR.

One is sort of disposable, one is not.

Maybe that is the magic of Scarlet.

David

I do agree with where your going with that David. But here and from what i have read and seen Internationally it is just how it is at the moment. The 'in' thing is to shoot FF on these cameras despite the issues and i have noticed a marked increase in lost rentals to these cameras where previously they would have shot 16mm, 2/3" or with the Red One even. Recently a colleague of mine had a small but reasonable budget shoot that they wanted to shoot 5D and plant the money saved elsewhere in the production. He also owns a RED One and they were happy to use it instead but refused to pay anymore than what they would to hire a 5D! So that went from around $1600 to $250 for him to use it...they said they wanted the DOF and the saving on $...what can you say. I don't know how this would have played out if a Scarlet was there but one can only presume.
As a DP i sometimes do not get a choice in the format and what the production is pushing to shoot on. I just finished a childrens television series for the BBC. We shot the series on P2's and the Producers point blank refused to shoot HD because it was 'too much' to deal with in post from data (up to 14 cameras some days, each shooting near 2 hours each per day for 3 weeks) and the cost of HD in post....raised eyebrows from whoever is reading this So in the end i guess it will just be 'uprezzed' at the end. Horrific i know but this was our reality.
My point being is that while we usually get the decision on formats etc we don't always get the choice and for reasons and decisions made above us we get almost 'told' what the shoot will have to be on. And the hook of very low cost and FF DOF is winning out heavily at the moment and i cannot see it changing much. And remember that the lower budget end of the market is where this DSLR trend and Scarlet will be finding their own niche and this is where decisions about format and costs become a huge factor. So even though Scarlet promises to be very very superior in pretty much every way to the 'current' FF offerings, i think the lack of FF will be a MAJOR point, not a minor one.
As another point, a lot of these DP's using them and a lot of these production companies once and still do to a point complained about RED from there temperamental side, post, DR, noise in low light etc and would quite often choose other formats in digital or shoot film...are now using and buying these themselves for productions. So if they complained about these things from RED and then you get the crap from a Canon DSLR, there has to be a reason in there...price and FF.

 

[Erik Franzén]

If some random dudes using a vDSLR isn't convinced of a Fixed/Cinema 2/3" Scarlet being awesome and professional in just about every aspect, I just have to ask...
...so what? Why does that matter to you? Shouldn't you be concerned with what YOU (and possibly, your client) thinks? Maybe I just don't get it... ut:

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see RED gain mass appeal. But at the same time, one less guy getting a Scarlet is one more Scarlet for me :devil:

 

[David Rasberry]

16mm-2/3" is a massively popular robust image format that has existed alongside 35mm formats for a hundred years. It needs no apologies or justifications for its existence. It is my preferred general production format for maximum flexibility over the widest range of shooting conditions and styles.
Scarlet is the first reasonably affordable digital camera in this format that potentially will equal or better 16mm film in most respects: sensitivity, dynamic range, high resolution, variable frame rates from time lapse to at least 120 frames/sec, raw image acquisition,
Another major advantage to this format is the availability of fast high quality, compact, broad range zoom lenses. I will be able to go nature shooting for a day with one lens, an Angenieux 12-240mm T5.6, equivalent to roughly 600mm at the long end on 4k S35 or 800mm on FF35. The entire field package for the day tripod included, will weigh about as much as that 800mm FF35 lens and the 35mm shooter will have to carry a bag full of lenses to match the range of focal lengths available, or at least two zooms, one of which will exceed 20Lbs weight by itself.

Trading all of this power, capability and flexibility for the mediocre image quality, poor ergonomics and straight jacket shooting limitations of DSLR's as video cameras just to get 35mm DOF doesn't appeal to me at all.

 

[David Battistella]

16mm-2/3" is a massively popular robust image format that has existed alongside 35mm formats for a hundred years. It needs no apologies or justifications for its existence. It is my preferred general production format for maximum flexibility over the widest range of shooting conditions and styles.
Scarlet is the first reasonably affordable digital camera in this format that potentially will equal or better 16mm film in most respects: sensitivity, dynamic range, high resolution, variable frame rates from time lapse to at least 120 frames/sec, raw image acquisition,
Another major advantage to this format is the availability of fast high quality, compact, broad range zoom lenses. I will be able to go nature shooting for a day with one lens, an Angenieux 12-240mm T5.6, equivalent to roughly 600mm at the long end on 4k S35 or 800mm on FF35. The entire field package for the day tripod included, will weigh about as much as that 800mm FF35 lens and the 35mm shooter will have to carry a bag full of lenses to match the range of focal lengths available, or at least two zooms, one of which will exceed 20Lbs weight by itself.

Trading all of this power, capability and flexibility for the mediocre image quality, poor ergonomics and straight jacket shooting limitations of DSLR's as video cameras just to get 35mm DOF doesn't appeal to me at all.

Same arguement can be made for 35mm Nikon glass on an EPIC.

David

The original question is "is it godd enough" For some, I guess it will be. FOr others EPIC will be the only thing "good enough".

The "good enough" question was raised by Jim with regard to 1080P as an aquisition format for 1080P delivery, citing that 4K or 5K is much more suitable going into the future.

2/3" is "good enough" for 3K aquisition and takes advantage of a lot of great existing 16mm glass, but the mount is "proprietary" not standard PL so the 16mm glass arguement (unless there has been an announcement for scarlett 2/3" with PL mount that I missed) doesn't really cut water.

The way I understand it, the 2/3" interchangable lens scarlett does not take advantage of existing (and very high quality) B4 and PL mount 16mm and Super 16mm Glass. If this is true, that's a bit of a shame because the advantages you describe would be very desirable to many working professionals.

David

 

[Kevin Marshall]

2/3" is "good enough" for 3K aquisition and takes advantage of a lot of great existing 16mm glass, but the mount is "proprietary" not standard PL so the 16mm glass arguement (unless there has been an announcement for scarlett 2/3" with PL mount that I missed) doesn't really cut water.

The way I understand it, the 2/3" interchangable lens scarlett does not take advantage of existing (and very high quality) B4 and PL mount 16mm and Super 16mm Glass. If this is true, that's a bit of a shame because the advantages you describe would be very desirable to many working professionals.

Last I knew, 2/3" Cinema had the same mount options as all the other DSMC. No B4 officially announced, but since it's available for the RED One, I'd imagine they'll make one for DSMC.

EDIT: Points 3 and 4:

http://red.cachefly.net/N30/Nov30th.jpg

3. All modules and accessories now completely interchangeable with EPIC. One System.
4. Interchangeable lens mounts including focus and iris control of electronic RED, Canon, and Nikon lenses, along with zoom data (Scarlet 2/3" Interchangeable)

 

[David Battistella]

I'm learning more and more in this thread.

I ahve really paid no attention to the Scarlet program, but it's nice to get it all clear. .

David

 

[David Rasberry]

Same arguement can be made for 35mm Nikon glass on an EPIC.

David

The original question is "is it godd enough" For some, I guess it will be. FOr others EPIC will be the only thing "good enough".

The "good enough" question was raised by Jim with regard to 1080P as an aquisition format for 1080P delivery, citing that 4K or 5K is much more suitable going into the future.

2/3" is "good enough" for 3K aquisition and takes advantage of a lot of great existing 16mm glass, but the mount is "proprietary" not standard PL so the 16mm glass arguement (unless there has been an announcement for scarlett 2/3" with PL mount that I missed) doesn't really cut water.

The way I understand it, the 2/3" interchangable lens scarlett does not take advantage of existing (and very high quality) B4 and PL mount 16mm and Super 16mm Glass. If this is true, that's a bit of a shame because the advantages you describe would be very desirable to many working professionals.

David

Scarlet FAQ includes options for C-mount, B4, and the standard PL mount that comes on an Epic will be available as an option for Scarlet too. I'm planning on standard PL with conversions of some of my lenses and adapters for others.

35mm still lenses will still be very big heavy beasts in the longer prime or zoom focal lengths, most don't have the precision, constant speed, or operating convenience of good 16mm cine glass or a high quality B4 HD lens and you will still have to carry a case full of lenses to cover the full range of focal lengths.

3k acquisition for 2k digital cinema or HD finish is certainly a big step up from anything available now short of an ARRI D21 or Alexa.

 

[Tim Hole]

I compiled a small list over two years ago to answer this question over on Scarletuser...I think it still holds true.

Here is a small list of productions using either 2/3" cameras or S16mm. This is not a comprehenisve list but gives you an idea.

Thomson Viper:B4 mount
Zodiac
Cloverfield *AG-HSC1U/HVX200/F23
Collateral *Pan-Arri 435/900
Curious case of Benjamin Button
Domino *Arri Cameras/Nikon D100
Everybody Hates Chris
Home of the Brave
The Lookout
Mutant Chronicles *F23/Silicon Imaging SI-2K
Miami Vice *Arri cmaeras/F900
Swingtown
What love is

Sony F23/F900/950 - B4 mount/PL mount.

Ali *Panavision Cameras/Lipsticks
Cloverfield *AG-HSC1U/HVX200
Public Enemies
Battlestar Galactica (Series only - Pilot shot 35mm)
Bubble
Collatoral
Casshern
The Company
Crank *XL2
Damages
Dexter
Dogville
Eighteen
Evenfall
Faith of my Fathers
Me you and everyone we know
Miami Vice *Arri cameras/Thomson Viper
One Six Right
Once upon a time in Mexico
Shadowland (the legend)
Sky Captain and the world of tomorrow
Sin City
Spy Kids 2
Star Wars Attack of the Clones
Starship Troopers 2
Ultraviolet
Weeds

16mm/S16mm Film C-mount / PL Mount

Babel (Morocco Segment)
Buffy Vampire Slayer (1997-8)
Chasing Amy
City of God *also 35mm
Counterfeiters
Devils Rejects
Dog Soldiers
Deadwood
El mariachi
For your consideration
Factory Girl
The Host
Hills have eyes (1977)
Hussle and Flow
Jackass Movie
JuneBug
Last king of Scotland
Leaving Las Vegas
Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
March of the Penguins
Mean Creek
Pi
Primer
Scenes of a Sexual Nature
Sex and the City (series)
Shadows (1959)
Squid and the Whale
Spun
The OC
The Shield
Thirteen
Wonderland
Scrubs
Spun
Stargate SG1
Sybil
Young Indiana Jones Chronicles


*others cameras used in same production


And if that list doesn't convince people that 2/3" is ample then there is little hope.