Scarlet Fixed in March? Landed?

[Wayne Morellini]

so get a used R1

or and Epic-S

if it was as easy as changing the number from 3 to 4 it would have been done.

Marketing, not naivety. You seem to have lots of money, would you like to send me one

It is likely truly too late to change anything, the sensors are probably even being manufactured as we speak, or have been.

The marketing and practical business decision comes down to this. If you sell a fixed at 4K, how do they sell your more expensive cameras. But consumer camcorders are nearly here with 4K (and the professional Red line is at least 5K) so the decision is already made if you want to be a clear step ahead. Of course the data rate of even the scarlet is clearly better for professional use, but many people on the low end will not see the same separation as a higher end professional, and can even be sold something less than a 2/3rd sensor. So you practically adjust to generate more money. Clearly a couple of 4K stripped down scarlets are clearly marketable along side full featured filly equipable top end units. 3D on the 4K units (that cheap single lens, single sensor, split shutter version, if I was red I would be trying to license a good deal for an add on as soon as possible.).

Going for 4K instead of 3K would have been little, except to keep within a 2/3rd frame you are going to have to change pixel cell size and it's structure. A decision needing to be made a year or more before launch, at least 6 months if you want to burn even more money. It is possible 6 months+ out, because you have already worked out most things, and need to further adjust things for 4K. So, you get to a point of weighing up if you are going to make enough money back to clearly cover the cost in the short term. I could tell from years ago, that by now the future was clearly going to be (towards) 4K, as somebody else was saying recently..

We are likely months from release. We are likely stuck with whatever is coming. So, now is not time for hoping for changes.

The interesting thing about the future, so that 8K future might be a lot further off. People will probably be so content with their 4K quality (especially if we could have red ray TV etc) that they will see little need for the minor improvement of 8K. For cinema thought the difference will be more, and we should support it. Eventually people will realize that they prefer larger TV's, and 8K will look better.

Interesting:
http://reduser.net/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=699743

 

[David Rasberry]

On top of everything else, moving to 4k would likely mean another price hike of several thousand dollars. It would need the same data paths and processing as a Red 1 at least. Not sure there would be much benefit as 3k Scarlet is more likely to be resolution limited by optics than by the sensor anyway. I would rather see them make a 4k super 16mm or m4/3 format as a future model.

Canon's 4k show camera had its electronics in a small refrigerator sized pedestal underneath it. It was live view only, no means of capture. They have a ways to go.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Ah, here it is, I thought it was in other thread, sorry. The present processing capability of scarlet should broadly be good enough for 4K bottom of the range. We are unlikely to get anything significant that we do not already know about that was not planned several months ago at this stage, otherwise it would probably cost a lot to add.

The camera is likely to be sensor locked, with a similar performance geometry to the Epic at the pixel level, which saves money in development. I imagine the performance is a very fine balancing act, and squeezing the pixels to fit more into the 2/3rds frame would require a costly redesign of the pixels.

However, I could hope that a 4K revision was panned a year ago, and would burst out of the birth canal shortly But seriously, it is a dead issue for this camera at this stage, we are getting whatever we are getting, and we shall probably be very grateful for it. My little baby is coming home at last.