Scarlet gets injured straddling two sides of the fence

[Halo1000]

Hey all,

First post here.

As a wannabe indie film maker with no previous experience I am really excited about Scarlet. I was just about to drop 5 grand on an HVX200 and another 2 on a firestore. I think i'm gonna wait now as I am in no hurry. I've spent 2 years writing my first screenplay and i'm working on a second more realistic project right now, all this whilst working away from my family 8 months a year as a sailor.

I believe this camera with its planned spec is exactly what I'm looking for. If it can produce the kind of look that Red are implying "Out Of The Box" then paint me red baby.

So it may not have an interchangable lenses. So i'll work around that cause thats what indies do.

I think this camera will revolutionize the indie playing field. In my view it fits a very specific entry level indie/student film maker market.

So its low light capabilities may be a little short compared to a varicam. Big deal. I'll work around that cause thats what indies do.

For me, life is simple, give me a camera that I can afford (Scarlet), give it great glass, fixed is fine (Scarlet), give it the best image quality in its class (hopefully Scarlet).

As for editing, I have already invested in a mac book pro 2.4 core 2 duo with 4 gigs of ram and 2 external esata acomdata 7200 rpm 1TB drives. For me thats good enough and I hope it will be good enough to edit raw 3K. I will soon be purchasing FCP studio 2. Again I will wait a while and see what develops at Red.

I know that there are those of you that think that it should have more features and be more expensive. In other words, make it expensive enough to keep folks like me out of the business. Well, we are all each entitled to our own point of view.

I for one think its a great tool that wont break the bank and give a few or a lot of indies the chance to really make their visual dreams come true.

Good luck to all of you who buy the Scarlet, I will be amongst you trying to make a name for myself, but more importantly for me, at 40 years old I will embark on a whole new adventure with my new camera and be having a blast at the same time.

 

[John Caballero]

That’s the spirit Halo1000. That is the attitude we have to keep while we wait for Scarlet.

 

[lordtangent]

If find it interesting that not to many people seem acknowledge the deeper focus from the 2/3" sensor/lens combo of the Red might actually be considered a feature for some people (documentary, sports, etc.)

To the the people saying the "quality" of the Scarlet "isn't good enough" I can only say: What are you on about? The camera doesn't even exist yet. How can you know what it's capable of? Even still, if history is any guide, a single chip camera @ 3k should be capable of making great images. And that would be even with a "traditional" camera that doesn't do RAW capture.

Don't forget there have been plenty of theatrical features shot on DV. DV! The quality of DV is absolute crap, yet people still went to see those movies. At the very least, Scarlet will bring up the "floor" of the quality we have to watch in any feature.It'll bring Vericam quality for HDV/DV prices. What is bad about that?

The Scarlet is going to be a fantastic tool. I really can't wait to get my hands on one. If I had one this summer I'd be shooting a feature on it. And I'd be ecstatic to have it!

 

[Halo1000]

Thats exactly right lordtangent

I think that we (the indies), (or wannabe) may finally may have a tool that can (to a very limited degree) compete with the big boys (bring up the floor, at least at entry level), i find it entertaining that the so called 'professional film makers' are slating this tool ( and I choose my words carefully) as not up to scratch.

I firmly believe its because they have spent an insane amount of money on their equipment and are no closer to an oscar for next best director.

I 'm not slamming them, but I do believe that there is certain amount of animosity amongst them, and that is entirely justified.

However, facts are facts, if RED are willing to ship this revelation based on what we know then sign me up.

I have no real aspirations of being the next Tarentino (not sure if I spelled him right), but the chance would be nice. I think that is what Scarlet is about.

Give the little people (me,us the indies) a chance.

I look forward to being part of the amateur Red Team. Learning the tool and recommending solutions to problems.

I don't want to be a problem for RED, I want to be a contributer to the next generation.

I cant wait to get my hands on one, be it filming my daughter learning to talk (late starter with a family) or making the next rockin' indie.

I really don't care about lenses and bandwidth and bayer (which i have no clue what that is).

I care about telling my story with the best possible imagery . My apologies to all the pro's out there.

I hear people talking about 3k not being a standard. I really don't care. At my level, I want to be excited about what I see, I want it to be closer to film look than any of these 1/3" 3 chip cameras can achieve.

I've spent the last 3 years with an HC1e(pal) bought in gatwick airport for $3000 dollars. An awesome camera for what it was, its a home movie camera with limited capabilities.

Just let us dreamers dream.

After all, the SECRET says we can

If Scarlet can help me tell my story, then Jim has it right.

I know its not meant for major film production but then again the opportunity is there.

Enough of my rant.

Its been a long day on the ship. So now i will retire to my stateroom and ponder the possibilities of the RED Scarlet.

To the guys at RED, I work very hard for my money, but you have made me reconsider my (camera) options, to that you deserve credit, I firmly believe that you will deliver the scarlet as promised.

You will give me a new lease of life.

My best to all at the (RED) dream team.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Many, many pros will use Scarlet for a lot of shot types.
Actually Scarlet have one or two (to me) advatages over RED that all the whiners sorta seems to overlook.
The much lower compressionrate. If it can record RC100 @ 3k and use the full bandwith, it could easily exceed the imagequality of RED in a set of situation.

Have you tried to key HVX images with lots of detail?

Scarlet will run loops around you with possibly a cleaner image than the RED (speculating here, but still, the low compression is promising)

As to DOF.
2/3" DOF was what many of us hoped to upgrade to, before RED came along. At a steep price, too - if my memory serves me...
The price of a HPX 500 is what?

But you wouldn't want shallow DOF in all situations, and it is achievable (much more so than on a 1/3" cam) if you prepare for it. Shoot open, zoom in, stay close. If I could get it on my 1/3" HVX (even though I didn't use shallow DOF that much...) I can sure get it on the Scarlet.

The smallness of Scarlet is actualy real sexy and much more needed as a companion to RED than a "mini-one". I am already fantazising about all the weird machinery I could screw Scarlet onto to film that stuff blows up, or goes superfast or superslow. It's the perfect VFX cam IMHO.

So... If you can't make anything with Scarlet because it doesn't take 35mm lenses, that's basically your loss. Save for a RED. I'll spend some qualitytime with the Scarlet you could have had while you're saving...

Cheers!
Gunleik

 

[Alsone]

I guess the most vocal people against Scarlet are "indies". For many of us who aren't indie folk we want to make saleable videos and documentaries and this is a perfect tool to have. I do a lot of backpacking and kayaking and mountaineering. I DON'T want big interchangeable lenses to lug around creation. I want something I can hike with that still produces fantastic quality. I want something I can mount on the bow of my kayak. I want something I can cram into tight spaces to get the shot and not have to worry about carrying a bunch of gear and a bulky lens or two. This Scarlet sounds perfect. For serious indie stuff it will probably be great for certain types of shots in certain situations, but not as the main camera. I don't think it's designed as an "A" camera for a big shoot. RED has positioned itself with three great cameras at three tiers in the marketplace with three different types of cameras. It seems pretty simple to me. Scarlet will not be "injured" straddling some imaginary fence. It will do very very well and fits the needs of a LOT of excited videographers.

I agree with you entirely Buck.

My interest in the Scarlett arises out of an interest in producing saleable videos also - surfing and nightclubs production for me.

To me an overly expensive camera, or too large a package are both problematic. Like you I want something that is complete and just works out of the box without the need to buy extras, in a small portable package but that produces full professional results. If the camera can be customised for indie's / full professionals who have £ mega to spend then thats great. But its full pro out the box for me.

Size wise, the JVC GZ-HD7 is an ideal size although realising there's more to cram in a camera of this type, I could live with a Canon XH-A1 size at a push, although this does reduce its usefulness to me many times over and would make me question a purchase. THE JVC is certainly a better size.

Portability is important in this market. You can steady a small cam with a tripod on set but you can't do anything to make a large heavy camera easier to carry / live with when you're not shooting. Hiking, kayaking, mountaineering, surfing (some beaches require quite rugged climbs), mountain biking (handlebar mounted) and just taking the camera out - bearing in mind that for many of the cross over amateurs this camera is supposedly also aimed at, will also use this to double as a holiday camera, all require a very compact camera that can be easily bagged / carried when not in use. This market needs a camera that can go in a back pack or even a belt mounted case not a flight case!

The current Scarlett pictures look great and individuality is great, but at the moment size and shape are amongst my main concerns - the vertical body form is already known to to produce poor handling in most cameras compared to the more traditional flatter form and the current body looks very large and unwieldy. It would be great if Red could address this size issue without compromising pro performance.

Finally, my biggest 2 concerns apart from the body size are;

1. Price UK - often UK prices are 2x US prices for no apparent reason - we simply seem to get ripped off over here on many products. Are we going to see $3,000 US and £1,500 UK as it should be or $3,000 US and £3,000 UK ($6,000 US) thus putting it beyond most UK amateurs / semis?

2. Lens Zoom Size - 8x zoom simply isn't enough for most sport applications. Canon's XH-A1 acknowledges this with a 20x zoom. This is what Red should be looking towards otherwise whole categories of users such as myself and Buck are going to find this camera too limited.

 

[A. Bastaki]

this antique dude is antiquely nuts.
________
Vapor lounge

 

[Halo1000]

I have to agree with alsone. The UK pricing is outrageous. I moved to canada 5 years ago and what a difference in cost for technology.

I hope they can keep the camera at the 3 grand retail. Now that will be awsome. That way I can afford some nice extras like a matte box, rails etc.

I can see a problem with the zoom for sports filming. Do you think someone will release a 2x adaptor for the fixed lens, and for that matter a wide as well.

All things to ponder whilst we wait. It may be that Red will sell a bunch of extra lens related stuff. Lets hope.

If a fixed 8x is what we get for that money, then so be it. I'm still getting one....haha.

Later folks

 

[Marius V Graan]

. . . I do understand that other people in poorer countries around the world would not see it this way, but these people have the advantage that their local population does not have such an high expectation of quality for their local cinema as Americans have.)

Unfortunately this statement is far, far off the mark. The world (especially poorer countries) is flooded by american cinema and television. We do not have the budgets for the sets, cameras, actors, or even to keep our best talent from going abroad. And because of this we cannot sell to as many broadcasters because our productions often look rather bleak in comparison to big hollywood productions. The fact is most of the world grow up with this and it sets hollywood as the benchmark for quality, this is not a bad thin if you have big budgets.

When I am at a film festival, (and I'm sure it's the same for a lot of other people too) I sit through mediocre films that are shot on film or high quality digital formats, but it takes a lot more for me to sit through soemthing shot on DV or even HDV for that matter. There are tons of films in South Africa made but never recognized because they don't meet broadcasters standards. Scarlet is not injured, it's clear which side of the fence she stands on, and how soon these playing fields will be levelled and far more equal.

 

[Alsone]

I have to agree with alsone. The UK pricing is outrageous. I moved to canada 5 years ago and what a difference in cost for technology.

I can see a problem with the zoom for sports filming. Do you think someone will release a 2x adaptor for the fixed lens, and for that matter a wide as well.

Later folks

The problem with a 2x adapter is:

1. It halves the amount of light getting to the sensor so eg. f2.8 becomes f5.6, making DOF more difficult to control

2. ...and making low light shooting - ie sunset / sunrise, overcast days / winter more difficult from a shutter prespective - something important when shooting movement (sports)

3. It degrades image quality as either the aberations / optical faults in the convertor are multipied 8 x (convertor on the outer side of the lens) or the cameras native lenses aberations / faults are multiplied 2x (convertor on the camera side of the lens). Either way, not good for image quality.

4. A good 2x convertor can cost $400-600 thus pushing the price further out of people's reach.

Far better to have a well designed long focal width lens as standard as then Red can control quality straight from the factory and their mass buying power helps to keep the lens cost down.

 

[hard8]

The problem with a 2x adapter is:

1. It halves the amount of light getting to the sensor so eg. f2.8 becomes f5.6, making DOF more difficult to control

2. ...and making low light shooting - ie sunset / sunrise, overcast days / winter more difficult from a shutter prespective - something important when shooting movement (sports)

3. It degrades image quality as either the aberations / optical faults in the convertor are multipied 8 x (convertor on the outer side of the lens) or the cameras native lenses aberations / faults are multiplied 2x (convertor on the camera side of the lens). Either way, not good for image quality.

4. A good 2x convertor can cost $400-600 thus pushing the price further out of people's reach.

Far better to have a well designed long focal width lens as standard as then Red can control quality straight from the factory and their mass buying power helps to keep the lens cost down.

I was thinking more along the lines of a P+S Technik 35mm converter.
I don't think a screw-on solution is going to work if you want good DOF.

Granted they are a pretty penny but then again so are the Arriflex and Ziess lenses that you would want to convert to.

The way I see it, a Scarlet, assuming it's has great image quality at 3k already saves me 10-15k in a good body. That could really free up some cash for other things that would only net me a RED One body.

I guess time will tell but it still seems like a hell of a thing.

 

[Tom Lowe]

For me, the perfect baby RED would be:

2K RAW (downsampled from 3K chip perhaps)
35mm-size sensor
ability to use cine or 35mm glass
at least 60fps
$5-7K price range

Just having some fun digging through some of these old Scarlet posts.

 

[Zac C]

Just having some fun digging through some of these old Scarlet posts.

Haha, I'm doing the same...

What we wanted, actually is coming true