Scarlet (and shipping) announcement Nov. 3rd...

[Billy Barber]

I wouldn't discount the skateboard kids getting money together to buy a camera and produce videos. You're saying that simply because they skateboard all of a sudden they don't have the same intentions as you once did, to learn and improve their work? This is the second time I've heard a reference to a product (the other being Final Cut Pro X) that was for ''professional use'' and ''not for skateboarders''. Many have gotten their start filming extreme sports (myself included) and have gone on to successful careers. So I'd be more respectful when making such accusations and assumptions.

+1

I've also known some soccer moms who were very well educated, articulate and super hot. And some of them are looking forward to Nov 3rd just like the rest of us.

 

[Travis Freeburg]

my argument was not against their desires, but their ability to spend. I've never seen a self made skateboard video made with a $5k camcorder, let alone closer to $10k. Not saying there arent some out there, just that most people wouldn't and shouldn't plop down even $5k on their first camcorder (beyond something that costs $500) i unless they can easily afford it.

I worked my way up from consumer to prosumer... if skateboard kids and soccer moms wanna do that too, fine. I guess I'm just saying that aside from the "4k is the new standard" remark, there wouldn't be anything to argue against red releasing a 2k camera in a price range that all those skateboard kids and soccer moms could afford too. And me. Most films are still finished in 2k, it wasn't until Contagion that we had our first Red feature finished in 4k, i believe.

Since the competition (probably) isn't turning out anything remotely close for even $10k.... I'm just arguing that a camera with lower specs than even we previously heard should not be regarded as inferior by the rest of the world, since it's good enough for cinema on most all counts. It's supposed to be a B cam anyway.

If canon announces something for around $5k, and scarlet fixed is $10k... I know that for casual use, the wiser investment is to not buy Red, as you have pointed out. I just wish I could.

 

[David Rasberry]

The rumors on the Canon suggest it will be more like $15k, F3 price range. Their excellent 1/3" XF300 series are around $7k.

As with any kind of sophisticated complex product, real quality costs money. There are practical limits to how cheap a camera like Scarlet can be. But unlike the traditional camera makers who's products are more in Epic's price range and up, Scarlet will at least be within reach for those who really want one. It may be a stretch, make take time to save up money, may mean cutting non-essential spending or taking a second job for a while if you are not a working pro. But if you can afford a decent used car, you can probably afford to get a Scarlet.

 

[Jordi Figueras]

Just a note: RED said some time ago they decided to go PRO with all their products, that means even the SCARLET line. The Soccer Mom idea was kind of left aside by RED a long time ago.

Another thing is that, even RED wishes 4K will be the standard, that doesn't mean it' s easy and cheap. If it was, when the RED ONE came out all the other companies would have gotten their 4K cameras out. RED makes it look easy, that doesn't mean it is. Like Eric Clapton makes it look easy, it doesn't mean it is.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Another thing is that, even RED wishes 4K will be the standard, that doesn't mean it' s easy and cheap. If it was, when the RED ONE came out all the other companies would have gotten their 4K cameras out.

If it weren't for Red, the other manufacturers probably wouldn't be developing 4K cameras, because there really wasn't any demand. It's not that they couldn't -- it probably wasn't even on their radar.

RED makes it look easy. . . .

Really? If anything, with Epic and Scarlet, Red has shown how hard it is. Both models were announced in 2008 and projected for release in "early 2009." That puts Epic (in the form of Epic-M) about 2 years behind schedule and Scarlet, now expected to ship by year's end, nearly 3. Multiple redesigns, recession, and natural disasters. It's been quite an odyssey, and because of Red's previous policy of openness, much of it public. As Jim Jannard has said (more than once), developing Epic and Scarlet has been extremely difficult, maybe the hardest thing he's ever done.

 

[Travis Freeburg]

The rumors on the Canon suggest it will be more like $15k, F3 price range. Their excellent 1/3" XF300 series are around $7k.

As with any kind of sophisticated complex product, real quality costs money. There are practical limits to how cheap a camera like Scarlet can be. But unlike the traditional camera makers who's products are more in Epic's price range and up, Scarlet will at least be within reach for those who really want one. It may be a stretch, make take time to save up money, may mean cutting non-essential spending or taking a second job for a while if you are not a working pro. But if you can afford a decent used car, you can probably afford to get a Scarlet.

$15k? I had not heard that. For that much money I would have to expect something completely new from canon... big step for them.

Yes, For those who really want one $10k is probably affordable... sigh. I just look at what Canon did with the 5D for $2500 (I mean seriously, for the cash its not THAt bad....) And that part of me that's used to marginal roll outs and yearly obsolete cameras is wanting a camera for a few grand thats way better than a DSLR but still below original R1 level.

Why think that way? Obviously I'm more casual about all this than most...

at the very least, no matter what, I know I'll be renting a Scarlet at some point next year!

 

[Jiri Bakala]

The price range we are talking about here for a professional user is easily affordable. Would I like a Scarlet for $3k? No, and not even for $5k. If it's available for $7k, it'd better not have anything even close to Epic specs. Just a reality. Stop whining about the price. If it's $10-12k it's awesome and it's a throw-away cam for mounting on cars and planes. And an awesome cam for low budget/no budget filmmakers. Canon 5D is awesome for the cash, but one has to deal with its shortcomings. So be it.

Soccer moms and skateboard hobbyist shooters don't need a pro camera. No offense. If you are a pro, you'd better charge at least $500/day. Most charge way more. 10-15 days at a pro rate will pay for the camera. Period.

 

[Jordi Figueras]

If it weren't for Red, the other manufacturers probably wouldn't be developing 4K cameras, because there really wasn't any demand. It's not that they couldn't -- it probably wasn't even on their radar.

And yet with all their resources by today there's only one announced 4K camera (Sony's F65) and, maybe, November 3rd there will be another (from Canon, but we don't know). Sorry, but I don't really believe all the R+D from the big companies was dedicated to research on HD, that's not how these companies work. They are possibly selling us theirs 10 year old technology.

What I was trying to say is that people is whining to get a 3K camera for 15K "It's too expensive". Then look at all the price tags out there for a 2K camera.

Really? If anything, with Epic and Scarlet, Red has shown how hard it is. Both models were announced in 2008 and projected for release in "early 2009." That puts Epic (in the form of Epic-M) about 2 years behind schedule and Scarlet, now expected to ship by year's end, nearly 3. Multiple redesigns, recession, and natural disasters. It's been quite an odyssey, and because of Red's previous policy of openness, much of it public. As Jim Jannard has said (more than once), developing Epic and Scarlet has been extremely difficult, maybe the hardest thing he's ever done.

I just was trying to express how can anyone ask for a camera that fits all that power in a little box for 3.000 bucks? And I was adventurous enough to say that, 'cause RED is always making such a lovely and nice working toys and for a such a low price, people is losing their perspective. I didn't want to express it was easy or that it looked easy (as a Stage 2 who paid 5.000$ more than a year ago I certainly know what's been going around).

Cheers!

 

[Andy Roberts]

I'd be shocked if the Fixed Scarlet with 2/3 Sensor is scrapped. The development of its custom lens and the mini primes is a lot to throw away. And if not, then my guess is that it still exists and will still sell sub $8K with specs that are better than before... 5" LCD, SSD instead of CF. Also, MAYBE the Epic-S has been brought back into the Scarlet nomenclature for a full 5K but obviously with more modest frame rates than the Epic-X. Ideal world would be 3 Scarlets: 2/3 Scarlet Fixed, 2/3 Scarlet Body Only (for Mini Primes and other mounts), 5K Scarlet Body Only. Nothing I'm saying here is all that different than what the plan was all along. I just think they've upped the specs, slightly upped the price and are finally ready to ship. We'll see Nov. 3. I still expect to be shocked by something.

All this discussion about pro and price points is really moot when it is clear Red was comfortable in the sub $8K market. I doubt that has changed. Not many soccer moms are going to want to deal with a RAW workflow even if the camera is $6K. It isn't that complex but it isn't iMovie easy either.

 

[Travis Freeburg]

Regardless of whether its hard or easy, nobody has had a Need to develop a better camera. No multiplex Wants to spend the money on upgrading their projector systems... if the theater down the street or across town doesn't have better, people won't know that "better" is out there.

 

[Brad Holt]

Right, until one theater does it. Then suddenly it's better than everybody else! Let the upgrades begin!

 

[Bryce O]

What? Amateur is a much broader term than pro. This argument makes no sense. You sound more like a HOBBYIST.. who occasionally works for $. PRofessionals work insaley hard (usually for little pay to get started to earn that moniker) If you are Part time the you are either mot serious or not working hard enough. And I say that with respect... Pro means PROFESSIONAL. Professionals who thrive in this business are all work aholics. Long hours. Be it weddings or features. Becoming a PRO tales TIME.

Scarlet is a PRO tool. RED has made that crystal clear. Period the end. They also have listened to 1000's of people on here and when Jim says he has your back. I would trust him. Stick with a DSLR until you have gained enough clients to warrant investing in a Scarlett... PLENTY OF PROS (Lafollet and Bloom to name a couple) made a fortune with a DSLR and other prosumer cameras.

Like I said... $5,000 1/2 of future Scarlet buyers will ignore the above and buy the Scarlet expecting it will print them money...

Well, I don't think that everyone is (or wants to be) a working pro. Some people just like making films and want more flexibility. Some people may have other jobs (not in the industry) but still want to make a run at film festivals and such. For Scarlet to really be successful (in a market-changing way) it needs to be within reach of these people. That's what made the Canon DSLRs so popular. They allowed almost anyone, even with just mild interest, access to the coveted 35mm look... and took internet film-making to a whole new level. Red needs to one-up them by now introducing the RAW factor and flexible exhibition-grade resolution... to the masses. There's no doubt that Scarlet is going to be a killer camera... but will it remove all thoughts of DSLRs and FS-100 like cameras from people's minds? ... not if it's over $10k.

I mean, I've a good client base now, and I'll probably be able to get a small-business loan for a Scarlet package at a higher price. But I'd like to see Red decimate ALL markets and makers... and really change the game for good, not just for the working pros. I want to see Red being so competitive, that it becomes the ONLY option... I want to see 50mb/s 4:2:2 footage look like a joke at $5000... I would like to buy TWO Scarlets, not just one. :smile5:

 

[Travis Freeburg]

I tried 4 times to say what you just did and failed.

Thank you

 

[Tim Nitsch]

Well, I don't think that everyone is (or wants to be) a working pro. Some people just like making films and want more flexibility. Some people may have other jobs (not in the industry) but still want to make a run at film festivals and such. For Scarlet to really be successful (in a market-changing way) it needs to be within reach of these people. That's what made the Canon DSLRs so popular. They allowed almost anyone, even with just mild interest, access to the coveted 35mm look... and took internet film-making to a whole new level. Red needs to one-up them by now introducing the RAW factor and flexible exhibition-grade resolution... to the masses. There's no doubt that Scarlet is going to be a killer camera... but will it remove all thoughts of DSLRs and FS-100 like cameras from people's minds? ... not if it's over $10k.

I mean, I've a good client base now, and I'll probably be able to get a small-business loan for a Scarlet package at a higher price. But I'd like to see Red decimate ALL markets and makers... and really change the game for good, not just for the working pros.

Totally agree with you. But I would also light to toss in Film Students, This is the perfect camera for film students, Yeah its a nice chunk of change but you have to look at it like an investment for the future. The Scarlet will do a great job in future-proofing students until they graduate and pick up a job. And even then I could see it lasting them much longer then that.

Just my .02 :001_smile:

 

[alex lemon]

im pretty sure i think i recall jim saying that he viewed PRO as a philosophy and not simply a reference to full-time industry people. please correct me if im wrong here. to call out someone as not being pro enough for a scarlet seems antithetical to what RED has stood for. perhaps the imminent release of scarlet is making some in the industry a little uneasy. if so, i can only imagine that to be a good thing going forward.

scarlet, like the red one, and like epic should be available to anyone who is willing to buy one. well, except perhaps those with bad attitudes. whether or not the camera is right for someone is a personal decision. for many filmmaking is a passion, not a mere job.

 

[Jeffrey Loewe]

We got ourselves some Elitists in here. Some people make more, some make less. Some work hard and still make less for the work they chose to do, and make less. I'm sure it will be a great camera at whatever price. I think the 6-8K for the body is the sweet spot personally.

If it's more alot of people might consider something different. I'm not saying they should, I'm just saying some people can't justify that expense, it doesn't mean they're not pro, and can't produce "pro" work. People in life have different forms of flexibility and whats affordable. If it's a 10K-12K body, i'm sure its a great deal but it is well out of my price range once you add everything onto it. Some people are blessed with more, some with less. I work hard but can't afford an Epic, I know others who don't work as hard and probably could afford it. Each person has a different situation.

 

[Jeffrey Loewe]

The price range we are talking about here for a professional user is easily affordable. Would I like a Scarlet for $3k? No, and not even for $5k. If it's available for $7k, it'd better not have anything even close to Epic specs. Just a reality. Stop whining about the price. If it's $10-12k it's awesome and it's a throw-away cam for mounting on cars and planes. And an awesome cam for low budget/no budget filmmakers. Canon 5D is awesome for the cash, but one has to deal with its shortcomings. So be it.

Soccer moms and skateboard hobbyist shooters don't need a pro camera. No offense. If you are a pro, you'd better charge at least $500/day. Most charge way more. 10-15 days at a pro rate will pay for the camera. Period.

Sorry but I have to respectfully disagree. I know plenty of action sports film makers that have produced better quality work on lesser cameras than some have on full on "Pro" Set Ups. I don't think you have to charge a certain amount to be considered "Pro" either. People choose different lines of work. We're all doing the same thing at the end of the day with different outlets. I chose the field I'm in for the love of it. I'd love to charge $500 a day, but that would allow others to slide into the projects I pick up. I hate the word "Pro". Everyone that picks up a camera has a different talent, mind, vision and skill set. Making it more available only strengthens themselves and others around them.

I think its very unfair to price a camera to a higher amount to keep a particular crowd away. If you can make it an affordable price for more people that's great. I can see reasons for some not wanting soccer moms with Scarlets, but purposely pricing it to keep people away makes no sense. Allow for growth and progression.

 

[Bryce O]

Totally agree with you. But I would also light to toss in Film Students, This is the perfect camera for film students, Yeah its a nice chunk of change but you have to look at it like an investment for the future. The Scarlet will do a great job in future-proofing students until they graduate and pick up a job. And even then I could see it lasting them much longer then that.

Yes, Exactly. I was actually going to edit my post for film students.

It's good for the students and good for Red... because if everyone is learning on Red... guess what they are going to want to use for the rest of their careers... :smile5:

If the Scarlet is priced out of reach... then they'll just end up learning on DSLRs and then just going to whatever Canon's higher motion camera offering is. It doesn't matter what is better or worse, this is just how it will happen due to availability, pricing, and level of comfort.

 

[Travis Freeburg]

The price range we are talking about here for a professional user is easily affordable. Would I like a Scarlet for $3k? No, and not even for $5k. If it's available for $7k, it'd better not have anything even close to Epic specs. Just a reality. Stop whining about the price. If it's $10-12k it's awesome and it's a throw-away cam for mounting on cars and planes. And an awesome cam for low budget/no budget filmmakers. Canon 5D is awesome for the cash, but one has to deal with its shortcomings. So be it.

Soccer moms and skateboard hobbyist shooters don't need a pro camera. No offense. If you are a pro, you'd better charge at least $500/day. Most charge way more. 10-15 days at a pro rate will pay for the camera. Period.

No one here is Whining... we are simply stating the advantage of having a camera with slightly lower specs than previously announced with a price tag to match based on the trend that Red has set.

Even if the Scarlet is only used as a B cam for big wig hollywood, why do they need 120 fps or more? Jim has said that FPS is directly related to cost. Of course it has its advantages and its a great feature, but is it really that necessary? I imagine even several studios would rather save a few grand off of the price of a camera if it meant they were limited to 60 fps. If a scarlet comes out for $15k but has been upgraded to 4k resolution etc etc... what's really going to be primary distinguishing characteristics between scarlet and an R1? Red doesn't want to keep making the R1, they want to go more modular, right? 5k and 4k are really close.

No, I'm going to side with a cheaper scarlet. Forget the whole Pro/consumer thing. Look at the numbers... If Jim didn't want to make a sub $10k camera, I'd bet he'd scrap Scarlet.

I'm hoping, anyway

 

[Leo Sardello]

I do not want a cheaper Scarlet with reduced specs for the sake of it being cheaper. I want RED to make the best camera they can at the price point they feel they can do so. I will scrap up the extra cash or turn to rentals if that falls outside of my price range for purchase.