RED MX IMAGES APPEAR BETTER THAN SCARLET-X

[Matt Ryan]

I have to admit.... I have gotten better results on both Epic and Red One MX in comparison to my recently sold Scarlet. I did not have the time or tools to do any kind of scientific test. I did not need to as it was apparent looking at both images on board the monitor and in Redcine-X. I don't know if I still have the footage laying around anywhere...it was literarly filming the underneath of the kitchen table in my apartment, no big deal. But my BT Red One MX appeared less noisy to my eyes in EVERY avenue. And in 1:1 mode it was extremely apparent how the blue noise in Scarlet was bothersome. And this was after I carefully black shaded the camera at a specific temperature and shot with the camera at that very temperature...which I DREADED doing more than anything else!!! I always had to dedicate at least 30-minutes before every damn shoot, and go through the blackshading/ temperature ritual with my Scarlet. Maybe I am to sensitive as to how the RAW image looked on my Scarlet (in RAW mode) but I KNOW what it looks like in RAW on my BT MX and on an EPIC and it did not look as noisy....thats without either being black shaded and pampered to death lol

Before my Scarlet I NEVER once in my entire life had to black shade to get a less noisy looking image from the Red One M or MX, or Epic. Honestly, I believe this is a product of the way both cameras dissipate heat...especially in favor of the old Red One model...Epic is supposedly a tad bit better in dealing with the heat than the Scarlet (but that could be a rumor...)

But I do believe something inside both the MX and Scarlet there is a MAJOR difference in terms of how the camera "works its magic" with the image/ compression, etc. One way or another the MX has a better way of dealing with the image internally than the Scarlet. But at the same token, I believe the Epic has a better way of dealing with the image internally over both cameras. But of course the Epic has superior insides than Scarlet. Moreover, 4K on Epic/ Scarlet is not created equal. The Epic image looks cleaner. I have viewed properly black shaded 4K footage of the exact same image from a Scarlet and Epic and the Epic had FAR less blue noise then the Scarlet. Same thing happened when I compared the Scarlet to my BT Red One MX at 4K...which is what confirmed what I already knew from previous experience.

Now there is of a course a major caveat to all of this... I only had MY SCARLET to test out. I know Matt and many others swear by the 4K image put out by their Scarlet...and honestly I believe them. They have to not be seeing what I was seeing on mine. But then again, I know other Scarleteers that where experiencing what I was experiencing... So maybe its a case of not all Scarlets are created equal? :-/

Put it this way- There are certain elements (small form factor, red handle!, image, fan noise, black shading, etc.) I LOVE and HATE about each Red camera model (love faaaaar outweighs the hate of course!)

Now let me look and see if I can't dig up some footage to compare........

Theres a very good possibility that some Scarlets do not perform as well as others. There are variances between lens sets made by every manufacturer. One lens may be sharp as hell, and the other a bit softer. All of them are within QC limits, but some are better than others. That very well could be the case. But in a perfect scenario, the Scarlet/Epic should have a superior image to R1MX. Also when viewing on the R1MX, what was your monitor brightness set to? What gamma space were you viewing in? Redgamma crushes the blacks pretty harsh, which gives the appearance of less noise. The monitor on the Scarlet may have been a bit higher than the Epic. Not saying thats the case, but it's a possibility.

 

[Matt Ryan]

Matt you're killing my bandwidth! :badputer:

haha sorry. Aren't you in Canada where they have far superior web services than the US?

 

[Matt Ryan]

@ Matt

Of course you cannot directly compare different lighting and post and all other uncontrolled factors, but again I think these are good examples of the difference in "richness" between the R1 MX and the Epic/scarlet...
See it a lot in the skin tones...

I can definitely tell in post that I have a harder time with skin tones on the R1MX than Epic/Scarlet.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Matt you're killing my bandwidth! :badputer:

Mine, too...

That's why - If I wanna post "full frames" I don't embed, but link...

Hahahaha

And Usually I don't need more than 2k/1080 to get the point...

But your examples are good!

THX

 

[Bob Minervini]

I did notice the difference on a multicam shoot between the scarlets and the redones, but it was just gut feeling, nothing scientific. Do keep the tests coming.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I can definitely tell in post that I have a harder time with skin tones on the R1MX than Epic/Scarlet.

Me2...

That is part of the fun of the 24 episodes I am watching here now...

Because the colorists didn't know, and they were luma/contrast/WB adjusted and matched prior to grade....
Still on the resulting image, even on a 20" CRT, the different in results are apparent, much along the lines of the Scarlet and R1 MX examples you posted.

I did feel that the R1 M, when exposed for it, could have some of the same richness, though. The exposure bracket was narrower, though...

 

[Gunleik Groven]

There is also a general misconception...

Less noise is not like more detail/richness

The way the compression works

• Less noise, is often = more compression/less detail/more plastic looking stuff

Add the cutoff in the bottom of the R1 (RAW) signal, which is camouflaged by the RG gamma on set, which kinda "takes away" all noise in the extreme bottom of the R1 MX image,

• Less noise can be less info in the bottom, and not really "smoother blacks"....

 

[Matt Ryan]

Me2...

That is part of the fun of the 24 episodes I am watching here now...

Because the colorists didn't know, and they were luma/contrast/WB adjusted and matched prior to grade....
Still on the resulting image, even on a 20" CRT, the different in results are apparent, much along the lines of the Scarlet and R1 MX examples you posted.

I did feel that the R1 M, when exposed for it, could have some of the same richness, though. The exposure bracket was narrower, though...

Unfortunately I never got to use the original M sensor. But I noticed with the R1MX, skin tones often take on a green hue/tint in the lows in certain scenarios. It can be difficult to get it right. Have yet to have that issue with Epic/Scarlet.

I think your definitely right in that people confuse the lack of noise in the R1MX because it is masked by the higher compression.

 

[Adam Johnson]

OK. So if the damn file limit would let me upload the two R3D snapshots from the Scarlet and Red One MX we would be in business. But honestly when I matched the Scarlet r3D to the RED ONE MX R3D in RCX it looked the same noise wise (which certainly does not help my crazy theories hahaha).

Matt might be totally right. Maybe it was the way I monitored the image, but I did use the same exact RED LCD on both cameras with same brightness setting. I guess viewing the RAW image on Scarlet is simply that much "noisier looking" then on the Red One MX with its standard settings because like you said it crushes the blacks, etc.

That seems to be the most logical explanation......I still need to find a better example of some apparent "noisy" footage from Scarlet and see if it was more than a simple RAW mode issue.

However, I do also feel that 2K high-speed on the MX appears much cleaner then the Scarlet 2K image as well...but that could be the same thing happening here. Need to find examples of that too!

 

[Gunleik Groven]

It is masked in several ways...

 

[Adam Johnson]

Yes, the Red One MX definitely does take on a more noticeable green hue/tint in comparison to both the Epic/ Scarlet.

Unfortunately I never got to use the original M sensor. But I noticed with the R1MX, skin tones often take on a green hue/tint in the lows in certain scenarios. It can be difficult to get it right. Have yet to have that issue with Epic/Scarlet.

I think your definitely right in that people confuse the lack of noise in the R1MX because it is masked by the higher compression.

 

[Adam Johnson]

As always Matt, beautiful work!!! Can't wait to see the music video!!

 

[Matt Ryan]

As always Matt, beautiful work!!! Can't wait to see the music video!!

Thanks Adam, me too. Shooting another one in January for them.

 

[Adam Johnson]

That is AMAZING!!!

 

[adam r]

Scarlet @ 4K:

I should also note that these still are all shot under tungsten lighting with no filtration or gelling to get closer to daylight.

Wow! Which lenses were used for these? Superspeeds?

 

[Josh Snyder]

These are 3K shots from the Scarlet that were lit for the look I wanted (Even at 3K I don't see any less quality than with the R1MX):

Do you have this video online? Looks nice.

 

[Matt Ryan]

Zeiss Cp.2'a for the girl and the wolf. SuperSpeeds for the space stuff.

 

[Matt Ryan]

Do you have this video online? Looks nice.

Thanks, It's a music video/concert visuals that haven't been released yet. Hopefully soon it will be up. I have a thread here with more details on that shoot: Scarlet in Space

 

[Josh Snyder]

Thanks, It's a music video/concert visuals that haven't been released yet. Hopefully soon it will be up. I have a thread here with more details on that shoot: Scarlet in Space

I found that thread just after I wrote the message Very nice job with lighting and grading. Hoping that we see this clip online soon.

 

[Matt Ryan]

I found that thread just after I wrote the message Very nice job with lighting and grading. Hoping that we see this clip online soon.

Thanks Josh, me too.