Scarlet for idiots?

[Eki Halkka]

you can bring back blown highlights and reclaim so much more image from the file, it's AMAZING!

Actually, you should be able to set up the camera so that all the highlights (and shadows) the sensor captures are present in the jpeg:s too. It's just that the defaults on most SLR's are rather contrasty...

...this said, i usually shoot raw stills too, even though it's an overklill 99% of the time for the stuff i do ;-)

Personally, I would prefer that RED leave any such modes as 1080p RGB off of the camera.

I wouldn't. Actually, i'd like to see something like a "HDV mode" in scarlets...

Most of the stuff that's to be broadcast on SDTV, web etc. doesn't really need anything higher than that - a low bandwidth, low processing requirement alternative would be a great thing to have for the quick turnaround jobs.

 

[Liam Hall]

Actually, you should be able to set up the camera so that all the highlights (and shadows) the sensor captures are present in the jpeg:s too. It's just that the defaults on most SLR's are rather contrasty...

There is far greater control shooting RAW and I think that was his point. Also, control of dynamic range is a post process on most digital cameras, even those that can do it in camera.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Actually, i'd like to see something like a "HDV mode" in scarlets...

Most of the stuff that's to be broadcast on SDTV, web etc. doesn't really need anything higher than that - a low bandwidth, low processing requirement alternative would be a great thing to have for the quick turnaround jobs.

I agree with your comments on SD, web, etc.. But would you want that at the expense of recording RAW? In another 2 years, a decent system will be able to dump 1080p out from a 4K RAW file in real-time or faster without breaking a sweat, so why do we need to design future-crippled modes into a forward-looking camera system?

And with the direction in which the FCP and Adobe workflows are evolving, I can drop 4K on the timeline now, edit and output to 1080p with little effort. The shortcomings at this time with the workflow are some glitches with Adobe's plug-in interface, a few general bugs due to the state of the software and the lack of support for proper metadata handling and color spaces other than REC709. Actually chomping through the footage works great and will only get better as time goes on. I guess I don't see the point in having a compromised version recorded in camera. A 1080p 12bit RGB would take up just as much, or more, space than a 3K 12bit RAW Bayer image. So we wouldn't be gaining any advantages in record time or storage space. The only potential benefit I see is the quick turn-around time on the offload end of things at the expense of quality. I would much rather see an offload application that can dump your R3D data off the camera media and create conversions in 1080p or other desired formats on the fly.

 

[Eki Halkka]

I agree with your comments on SD, web, etc.. But would you want that at the expense of recording RAW? In another 2 years, a decent system will be able to dump 1080p out from a 4K RAW file in real-time or faster without breaking a sweat, so why do we need to design future-crippled modes into a forward-looking camera system?

Well, i could see plenty of scenarios where i wouldn't go for raw... say, documenting a corporate talk on a seminar with two or more cameras. Using "HDV" there would be just 10 GB of data / camera / hour... and i could edit the stuff with a low class laptop, on the spot during a luch break. And then export faster than realtime - at best, hand the attendees a bluray disk at the exit ;-)

The point is, because of the low price point, Scarlets will be used in many situations where no-one would consider red one. Think about wedding videos and the like... even the dreaded soccer mom stuff.

Having low end modes doesn't take away the ability to record raw. It's just an option, which i think would be very usable.

And with the direction in which the FCP and Adobe workflows are evolving, I can drop 4K on the timeline now, edit and output to 1080p with little effort.

Well, i really, REALLY don't like to be restricted to Final Cut, Avid or Premiere...

Something like a simplified version of the current AviSynth - R3DtoAVS - MakeAVI workflow (which creates reference avi files that can be opened in any windows app, but still use data from the original r3d files) would be very nice.

 

[GPSchnyder]

Having low end modes doesn't take away the ability to record raw. It's just an option, which i think would be very usable.

Yeah, if you want to set up a really big Support Team that fight with the soccer moms that tried this fancy raw mode and no all they memories are gone....

Well, i really, REALLY don't like to be restricted to Final Cut, Avid or Premiere...

Use the .mov files...

 

[Eki Halkka]

Use the .mov files...

I really, REALLY don't wanna move over to a Mac.

 

[GPSchnyder]

I really, REALLY don't wanna move over to a Mac.

Install Quicktime (free) on your PC?

 

[Eki Halkka]

Install Quicktime (free) on your PC?

That would be cool - if it worked. The red codec is available only on Mac platform.

 

[GPSchnyder]

That would be cool - if it worked. The red codec is available only on Mac platform.

Damn. Sorry, then you're screwed ;-) Or buy a MacMini to transcode it ... Well, just for interest, what do you want to use? Softwarewise?

George

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Well, i could see plenty of scenarios where i wouldn't go for raw... say, documenting a corporate talk on a seminar with two or more cameras. Using "HDV" there would be just 10 GB of data / camera / hour... and i could edit the stuff with a low class laptop, on the spot during a luch break. And then export faster than realtime - at best, hand the attendees a bluray disk at the exit ;-)

You can load a desired look onto the camera(s), shoot and then edit or author directly off the QT pointers.... But that doesn't help you because you don't want to jump over to the Mac.

The point is, because of the low price point, Scarlets will be used in many situations where no-one would consider red one. Think about wedding videos and the like... even the dreaded soccer mom stuff.

That's funny, I know people who shoot weddings professionally with the RED One.

Something like a simplified version of the current AviSynth - R3DtoAVS - MakeAVI workflow (which creates reference avi files that can be opened in any windows app, but still use data from the original r3d files) would be very nice.

Windows QuickTime support and Windows Media support for R3D s on the horizon. Once we have it, we'll be able to interchange look files for our footage and play back directly from the R3D via QT or AVI / WMV pointer files and a variety of resolution and quality presets. There's a lot of stuff in the works that will be upon us by the time Scarlet arrives.

 

[Eki Halkka]

Well, just for interest, what do you want to use? Softwarewise?

My tool of choice for editing and audio post is Sony Vegas.

I know it sounds weird, but after working with most of the other tools out there (i've made my living mainly doing post for last two decades), i haven't come across any editing software i'd prefer over Vegas, regardless of the price.

For other stuff like compositing, it's the usual suspects, After Effects etc.

 

[Eki Halkka]

You can load a desired look onto the camera(s), shoot and then edit or author directly off the QT pointers.... But that doesn't help you because you don't want to jump over to the Mac.

...there's also the possibility to create reference avi files for PC. And of course you can always transcode to some other format.

But that's not the point - the r3d files are big and rather clunky compared to stuff like HDV, and the conversion will inevitavbly take time on a low spec machine. There are situations where this matters.

That's funny, I know people who shoot weddings professionally with the RED One.

Really? Either they sell cheap, or the clients are filthy rich... ;-)

There's a lot of stuff in the works that will be upon us by the time Scarlet arrives.

Yep. Will be cool.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Really? Either they sell cheap, or the clients are filthy rich... ;-)

Not to further derail this thread, but.... I can't pretend to know the market in Finland... But going rate around here for a pro wedding photographer is $1000 to $2000 for the wedding and any events after for the day. That's just still photos. Video ranges from about that same price bracket on up. I have some friends, a husband and wife team, who do event photo/video work (weddings and more) and they have picked up two RED Ones, but can't wait for Scarlet. I actually tried to talk them out of the RED One, but after they took mine for a test drive a couple times, they had to do it. They now shoot all their event video on RED exclusively and they're loving it. So are their customers, business is booming because they have the best looking wedding videos in town and the word travels fast.

 

[Eki Halkka]

Not to further derail this thread, but.... I can't pretend to know the market in Finland... But going rate around here for a pro wedding photographer is $1000 to $2000 for the wedding and any events after for the day.

There's no real wedding video market to speak of here, as far as i know - and i know for sure that most couples wouldn't pay anything near $1000 for photos. Weddings in general are much more low key than in the US.

Anyway, asking 1-2K for a wedding video shot with two reds sounds very cheap to me, i assume your friends aren't in this bracket?

 

[Liam Hall]

Going back to the original post... I think it is a HUGE HUGE mistake from Red's part that they don't take more seriously people like James (and me).

For a newbie who knows nothing about digital photography or digital filmmaking the amount of information on these forums is just insane. Both the amount of info and the technical level of most of the information here is for people who are already working professionals... and thats understandable because Red One is a professional camera.

But now Red is building Scarlet and the same type of technology which was considered "professional" just a few months ago is going to be much cheaper and mass produced, and Red is hoping that masses of people will flood their site and order Scarlet...

The problem is that all these masses of people who are going to flood Red's site will first want to learn what is Scarlet exactly and how they are going to be able to use it... and then they will end up here, in this forum... and then these people are going to get the biggest headache that they ever had. Then, I believe, most of them will get cold feet and decide that this is "too complicated" for them and they won't buy the camera.

All this can be avoided by simply creating a guide which is for COMPLETE beginners, something like this:

http://www.123di.com/

which takes newbies step by step through the ins and outs of digital photography. A guide which starts with the absolute beginning - "what is a pixel?", and then in 200-300 pages takes you all the way to a simple workflow and how to use the camera.

So you want a user guide for a camera that doesn't exist yet? And professional level tuition in digital cinematography for free. Wow, people don't expect much do they?

 

[Craig Parkes]

Uhm, Scarlet isn't released yet, the final specs are not set in stone, one would think given the success of the Red ONE, and the larger market Red has now, and the much larger industry acceptance of them as a company, they may have the resources to release a workflow document when the camera is actually released.

Wanting one while it's still in a prototyping stage is a bit much don't you think?

I mean, for Red ONE users, sure, better workflows are coming all the time and documentation is still scant on the ground (though it doesn't seem that different to when HDV was in its early stages to me - it took a fair while for all editing systems to offer native support for that too)

No need to defend or criticise anyone for lack of information on an as yet unreleased product, don't you all think?

 

[Liam Hall]

Rosetta,

It has never been easier to get into this business. Never.

Today there is more knowledge sharing and more information freely available than ever before. When I started knowledge was hard won and people would hold on tightly to their little pearls of wisdom and rarely pass them on, particularly to strangers.

There are scores of books available that cover everything you need to know about cinematography, the film business and everything else. You've heard of Amazon, right?

There's not one on Scarlet yet because it's still a work in progress. Everything Red is "Subject to change", workflows change as new software is released or firmware updated.

As for Red One, it's a high end digital camera for professionals and whilst there is a level of education required with the release of new technologies it's not up to the manufacturer to give instruction about the basic principles of photography that you mention above.

It's good that you want to learn and I wish you well with that, but remember this forum discusses a lot of things, some basic, some complex and I'm sure people like Roger Deakins or Vittorio Storaro couldn't care less about most of the stuff that gets discussed ad nauseam on here because it doesn't have any impact on what they do, it's just techie talk.

 

[Liam Hall]

Sadly, I know nothing of Wiki, I'm a filmmaker...

I agree the forum is random, but then all forums are to some degree.

I don't think it was a mistake with Red One not to write a "dummies guide"? They've sold as many as they can make! Anyhow, if you look at the number of units it's still fairly small beer for anyone wanting to make a few pennies on a user guide.

When Scarlet comes out I'm sure there'll be a few books and other reference material available, they can't write anything now because the camera is only a prototype.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

all im saying is that from a marketing point of view, it would have been a good idea. Very low cost, and would make it much easier for people to get into things. There is tons of info on this forum but it doesn't have not a start, no beginning and no end. For a newbie it all looks like random text. If there would have been some kind of a start-up guide, they might have sold a few more cameras... thats all I am saying.

I'm confused a bit about what you are looking for... There will be an operations guide for Scarlet. But so far it's an announced product with no firm release date. They are not making a whole lot known at this time. What would you have them put together? What specific information are you looking for?

Have you looked at the RED One FAQ here on the forums? It's a bit dated and some of it was based on info released before the camera. Is that what you are looking for, but made for Scarlet?

Also keep in mind that it's highly unlikely for RED (or any other camera maker) to publish beginner course material on basic photography / cinematography.

In the meantime, you could start by looking at Michael Olsen's "Scarlet for Beginners" thread. This is about as simple as it's going to get and he's just started putting it together.
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=28252

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Just so I'm understanding correctly.

People are willing to buy a $4,000-20,000 + $2-50k in support gear. But unless there is a web post which explains Aperture and Focus to them they're going to get cold feet instead of buying a $20 at Barnes and Noble?

Anything published would be outdated by the end of the week as far as workflow is concerned. And then at that point you have to actually start shooting.