Scarlet For Beginners

[Häakon]

Pinned the topic for new users to read. Very nice collection of FAQs and information.

 

[Peter Majtan]

You can add 77mm as a confirmed (by Jarred) filter diameter on the fixed-lens Scarlet (3K)...

Peter

 

[Dom Bozzi]

Jarred also mentioned monitoring options for Scarlet as well.

"Yes to RED making a small monitor that folds up on top of the camera.... and yes to being able to use the existing RED 5.6" and 7" monitors... and yes to ALL the brains having a HDMI port in case you want to use something else.... hope that addresses some of your concerns"

 

[DDirector]

so, what exactly do these lenses mean?
6.5mm T1.9
8.0mm T1.5
16mm T1.5
25mm T1.8
50mm T2.9
75mm T4

I think I know, not too sure.

I am wanting to purchase a Scarlet, and want to achieve good DOF, and that movie like images on the S35. which lens would be best?

 

[Erik Bien]

You can add 77mm as a confirmed (by Jarred) filter diameter on the fixed-lens Scarlet (3K)...

Drat! I was so close ... :crazy:

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

so, what exactly do these lenses mean?
6.5mm T1.9
8.0mm T1.5
16mm T1.5
25mm T1.8
50mm T2.9
75mm T4

Those are the 2/3" format RED mini-primes... Obviously, they are smaller lenses and designed for the 2/3" sensor size of the smaller Scarlet model. I don't know what you are asking or what else to say here. The 6.5mm is the wide lens, 75mm being the long one.. Compared to S35 format, these lenses would produce roughly the same FOV on the 2/3" format as a lens twice their focal length used on S35. DOF is relative to focal length and aperture size. Smaller formats generally yield the appearance of deeper DOF because the shorter focal lengths and tighter AOV afforded by the smaller imaging area. This can be compensated for by opening up the aperture by a couple stops. Those T1.5 and T1.8 lenses should yield some nice shallow DOF.

I'm not sure what DOF you're looking for, but shallow DOF is possible on the 2/3" format, it's just a matter of knowing what you want and how to achieve it. Plenty of Hollywood and other major release films being shot with 2/3" format cameras.

 

[Tak]

Red Scarlet and Macbook

Red Scarlet and Macbook

ok. Here goes - an embarassing question;

WIll te REd Scarlet 3k files work on a 2008 macbook 2.0 ? Can it handle the red code ?

And if my mother and pet monkey wanna use it and myself... do these files work with IMOVIES or FINAL CUT - and if possible could someone tell the bare minimum you require to work with the Scarlets files... ?

Will there be a highspeed usb port on it ?

Thank you, tak

 

[Tak]

Red Scarlet Compatibility

Red Scarlet Compatibility

Also where will the Scarlet be available to buy In Tokyo ? (When released)

Sorry for my very basic questions...

I have a macbook 2.0, Imovies and only a high speed usb port !
What would get me started ? I would like to think this camera is compatible with this equipment and something exciting about that if it happened.

 

[Chris Kennedy]

ok. Here goes - an embarassing question;

WIll te REd Scarlet 3k files work on a 2008 macbook 2.0 ? Can it handle the red code ?

And if my mother and pet monkey wanna use it and myself... do these files work with IMOVIES or FINAL CUT - and if possible could someone tell the bare minimum you require to work with the Scarlets files... ?

Will there be a highspeed usb port on it ?

Thank you, tak

Depends on the specs, you can use it, but will you be able to edit decently with it... probably not, unless you edit with the smallest proxies, and not the larger res files and 3k raw. There is a usb port on the red drive, which should work with the scarlet, there also is a firewire and esata port on it as well.

So yes, you could use it to edit with, however with really small proxies, or really compress down the files to edit with.

 

[Chris Kennedy]

Also where will the Scarlet be available to buy In Tokyo ? (When released)

Sorry for my very basic questions...

I have a macbook 2.0, Imovies and only a high speed usb port !
What would get me started ? I would like to think this camera is compatible with this equipment and something exciting about that if it happened.

Yes and no, I just tried it with imovie (first time ever opening it on my mac so there might be another way to do it).
But I wasn't able to get either the r3d files (expected) to show up on imovie, or any of the proxies, since you didn't mention you have FCP, you couldn't download the red quicktime codec or the final cut installer.
However, you could download REDrushes and/or Redcine, open the r3d files and export a quicktime file which imovie could read.
If anyone has any suggestions, I'm all ears. But it would be less complicated if you get FCP and use it.

But definitely more power is needed to decently handle editing red files, my mac has 16gb of ram and it still coughs up from time to time. Saving up for RED Rocket™, can't wait to try it out.
Hoped this helped, it was a good excuse for me to finally open up imovie.

 

[Justin O'Neill]

So yes, you could use it to edit with, however with really small proxies, or really compress down the files to edit with.

Actually editing REDCODE RAW files isn't too bad on a laptop using Adobe Premiere. You just drag n' drop the R3D files right on to the timeline and choose resolutions from full to 1/16 on the fly. No rendering times whatsoever. You can edit smooth footage at 1/4 or 1/8 and then switch to full rez with a click of the mouse to check focus. You also have access to the RAW controls from within Premiere. I think all editing programs will have to head this way eventually.

 

[Chris Kennedy]

Actually editing REDCODE RAW files isn't too bad on a laptop using Adobe Premiere. You just drag n' drop the R3D files right on to the timeline and choose resolutions from full to 1/16 on the fly. No rendering times whatsoever. You can edit smooth footage at 1/4 or 1/8 and then switch to full rez with a click of the mouse to check focus. You also have access to the RAW controls from within Premiere. I think all editing programs will have to head this way eventually.

I know about Premiere, and I do hope that all the editing programs will handle files like the r3d files the way it does.

I was telling TAK a way to get it to work for imovie, that seemed to be his question.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

While we're on the subject of iMovie, I tried it a couple weeks ago since another discussion around here in the Scarlet forum went the same direction. But the RED QT codec allows for loading the QT proxies into iMovie. They are scaled by default to one of the preset iMovie working resolutions, but actually play and edit pretty well. Totally usable, as far as I can tell. I'm no iMovie expert, I just tried it to see if it would work and to answer someone's question.

I've made a few DVD's for dailies with iDVD on a client system once. Proxies into iDVD worked just fine.

I've edited several small projects, including two short films and a few commercials on 2.33GHz Macbook Pro w/ 2GB RAM and ATI X1600 video -- system bought in October 2006. Worked just fine as long as I had a decent eSATA drive to work off of. It wasn't as pleasurable as working on a Mac Pro or desktop PC, but CS4 on that system is entirely usable.

 

[NDUTU]

Is 3k better tha the Canon EOS 7D?

Is 3k better tha the Canon EOS 7D?

Is 3K resolution better than the 18 Megapixels of the Canon EOS 7D ?

Is IT?:lurk5:

 

[Gerald Menclik]

wrong thread

 

[Katty Galloo]

Hey Guy's
A have still not both another cam and I am waiting for the S35, but I need to shoot
videoclips and saturday we gone shoot with the Red one to see the difference of a shoot with the MarkII and also the workflow.
I really hope Red will reply to the market soon a come up with a stunning cam.
I have done some scenes with the MarkII and the image quality is realy good,also a easy workflow and amazing low light conditions.
The only thing that kept me off is the 30fps and H265 codec. So I realy look out to the Red new anounces.
However I think they are working hard to stay ahead of the upcomming cam war of a new dimension.

Katty

 

[Michael Olsen]

I plan on updating/revising everything I've written here when new information comes to light. Can't wait!

 

[Ryan Farnes]

The 6.5mm is the wide lens, 75mm being the long one.. Compared to S35 format, these lenses would produce roughly the same FOV on the 2/3" format as a lens twice their focal length used on S35.

Is S35 going to be the same as FF35, or a cropped image? So therefore the mm value on the mini-primes would bewhat 35mm equivalent?

I'm most curious about the 6.5mm. Is it going to be a near fisheye, or more like an 18mm wide? (in 35mm)

(I think I know what I'm talking about...but probably don't.) :undecided:

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Ryan,

Focal lengths given in mm are always just that, the focal length of the optical path. It doesn't make any difference if they are designed for 2/3", Super35, FF35 or whatever. Different lens designs will provide coverage for different film or sensor sizes. But when referencing focal lengths, a 20mm is always a 20mm, a 50mm is always a 50mm. So if you take a 50mm lens designed to cover FF35 and put it onto a camera with a 2/3" sensor, you will get the exact same image and FOV as you would if you used a 50mm lens designed to only cover a 2/3" sensor.

With the RED mini primes, they are physically smaller as they are designed to cover a smaller sensor area. So if you place them onto a S35 camera, they won't cover, they will vignette.

The 6.5mm mini prime is extremely wide, but it's not going to cover S35, let alone FF35. Fisheye would be the wrong term to describe the lens as I'm sure it's rectilinear with very little to no distortion. A S16 size frame shot with the 6.5mm lens will have roughly the same FOV as a S35mm frame shot with a 13mm lens.

Here's a quick and dirty illustration. The same difference applies if you were to compare a 2/3" or S16 lens with these. A 100mm lens designed to cover S16 would retain the same size relationships within the image or AOV per mm, all objects within the image circle would be the same size as projected onto the sensor. However, the actual imaging circle would be smaller or cropped, due to the lens being designed to cover a smaller format.

 

[Michael Olsen]

And wouldn't the crop factor for 2/3" be closer to 3.5x than 2x? 4/3" sensors are 2x...