Scarlet might not be released??

[zane smithe]

Er no Scarlet is not here, that's the point. Sony has the last laugh because they are selling cameras everyday, they have cameras available everyday, we are making money off their cameras everyday, the Scarlet doesn't exist, it's not a product, you can't use it, you can't make money off of it.

When / if it is released then discuss, anything else is a waste of time. I need a camera today not tomorrow or in late 2010.

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

Er no Scarlet is not here, that's the point. Sony has the last laugh because they are selling cameras everyday, they have cameras available everyday, we are making money off their cameras everyday, the Scarlet doesn't exist, it's not a product, you can't use it, you can't make money off of it.

When / if it is released then discuss, anything else is a waste of time. I need a camera today not tomorrow or in late 2010.

Good for you.

You know what's good for me?

A sub $4K camera with 2/3" sensors that does 120 fps.

When it's released I shall use the hell out of it.

:beer:

 

[zane smithe]

That sounds great it really does.
But when will it be released?
Because the line 'all subject to change' is bs. Since when was this the new model of sales? You have a product, you tell people when it's going to be released, there will always be better developments, that's technology.

I don't get it, hundreds of posts and people talking about a product that DOESN'T EXIST.
I've got to be missing something here? What's the deal? Is it to keep people from buying other products? Doesn't seem like an honest way to treat customers.

If a vendor kept me waiting and never told me approx when I'd get the product I wouldn't use them, it would cost me thousands of dollars.

 

[Ryan Valle]

That sounds great it really does.
But when will it be released?
Because the line 'all subject to change' is bs. Since when was this the new model of sales? You have a product, you tell people when it's going to be released, there will always be better developments, that's technology.

I don't get it, hundreds of posts and people talking about a product that DOESN'T EXIST.
I've got to be missing something here? What's the deal? Is it to keep people from buying other products? Doesn't seem like an honest way to treat customers.

If a vendor kept me waiting and never told me approx when I'd get the product I wouldn't use them, it would cost me thousands of dollars.

They give estimates of when it will be released and what they plan on having in the camera. They say the scarlet would be release (i recall) Fall 09.

The phrase "subject to change" is just to protect their butts from huge crowds saying...BUT YOU SAID THIS BUT WE'RE GETTING THAT!

Really, I don't see a reason why you should be hating/getting mad at RED for the work they do. Nobody is forcing you to buy their camera or wait for it. Whatever you decide to do is your personal choice and none of us can make you change that.

 

[Peter Weisberg]

ya, certainly you must respect the huge potential savings that red offers in both price and comparable quality. Who cares if its a year away, i am almost 100% positive sony and cannon aren't about to be releasing any cameras that are even remotely in the same ball park as the scarlet in the next 2 years, and if they do it will only be because red did it first.

Frankly i'd rather have a say in how the camera turns out and have to wait longer than being kept in the dark until its ready for release. but maybe you like the companies deciding what choices you have when it comes to cameras.

 

[Brice Ansel]

And it's kind of silly to dog on the DVX forum. Perhaps people have short memories but the Red forum was originally a section of DVXuser before it branched off. And here I thought you all had a strong sense of RED history. Guess I was wrong... :sifone:

It was such a nice period, I didn't post a lot on those days. Hé hé I found a sceptical post from my part, and Jarred reply to me, I did put 1000$ deposit. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=71164
No regrets from now, except maybe that period of DVX user!
Brice

 

[Stuart English]

A new sales model

A new sales model

Because the line 'all subject to change' is bs.

And we also say "we reserve the right to refuse service to those with a bad attitude"

Look its our way, and its working for us. But if it isn't working for you, then go in peace.

 

[Michael Schmitt]

That sounds great it really does.
But when will it be released?
I don't get it, hundreds of posts and people talking about a product that DOESN'T EXIST.
I've got to be missing something here? What's the deal? Is it to keep people from buying other products? Doesn't seem like an honest way to treat customers.
If a vendor kept me waiting and never told me approx when I'd get the product I wouldn't use them, it would cost me thousands of dollars.

It's your choice whether you buy or not.

Eight months before the HVX200 came out, Jarred (who was webmaster for DVXuser.com) started an HVX200 section. I went there every day with other enthusiasts who decided the P2/DVCPro camera was the best choice for the money at that time. We conjectured as to what features the camera would have, how we would use it and counted days until it was released.

Now we are on the Reduser.net and Scarletuser.com forums doing the same thing. We see the value in what Jim and friends are doing. It solves a lot of the challenges we face and, for many of us, will take us into the Big League for a fraction of the cost of other high end cameras. We are enthusiasts who conjecture and patiently wait for the release of these cameras. We have decided that Scarlet or Epic is going to be our next camera purchase.

If you want to get a little perspective, you might go to the Red General Discussion and go back to 2006 and 2007, when the Red was "vaporware." People believed in the Red long before it existed.

Jim proposed a digital cinema camera with an almost 35mm CCD. That made complete sense to me at the time. Didn't have the money for one, though. Now we have Scarlet, and I can just pull off one of these. I'll keep reading and waiting until the release. It will be worth it.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Zane obviously doesn't follow too many products or companies... I appreciate that RED states "all things subject to change..." That's much better than Panasonic who likes to announce a date. And then once the date is missed, just simply pretend that nothing has happened, then a few months later, re-announce the product with a new delivery date as if it's never been announced before.

Whatever... I don't know why people are getting so ruffled over when Scarlet will get released. Most products in this world are announced without firm delivery dates. 99.9% of the time these delivery dates change. Somehow RED is taking flak for acknowledging that this will most likely happen.

All the tentative release time-frames announced with Scarlet / Epic specs late last year have yet to pass. So what's the big deal?

And we also say "we reserve the right to refuse service to those with a bad attitude"

I think it's great. My grandfather had the same business approach and so do my father and myself. Just remember, the customer is always right, except for when they're wrong. :sifone:

We also have to remember that criticism like this is why companies, such as Apple, have clammed up on product developments. They don't announce anything until it's ready to ship or at least the development is done and only logistical issues remain. They broke that trend with the iPhone, announcing it almost 10 weeks before it was available to the public. Is their model of secrecy any better? I know it definitely does nothing to curb rumors and wild speculation, in fact I think it makes that aspect much worse.

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

That sounds great it really does.
But when will it be released?
Because the line 'all subject to change' is bs. Since when was this the new model of sales? You have a product, you tell people when it's going to be released, there will always be better developments, that's technology.

I don't get it, hundreds of posts and people talking about a product that DOESN'T EXIST.
I've got to be missing something here? What's the deal? Is it to keep people from buying other products? Doesn't seem like an honest way to treat customers.

If a vendor kept me waiting and never told me approx when I'd get the product I wouldn't use them, it would cost me thousands of dollars.

I bet every company takes lots of time to develop their products too.

They just don't tell everyone openly about it and hear customer feedback/opinions about it (not like RED I'm sure) so If you don't like this on RED, well, just don't come to the forums.

People like to discuss, give their opinion, speculate (not very fruitful) and what not.

And we also say "we reserve the right to refuse service to those with a bad attitude"

Look its our way, and its working for us. But if it isn't working for you, then go in peace.

So release date for the bad attitude guys is NEVER, right?

:rofl:

 

[zane smithe]

I appreciate the feedback.

The RED model, and the Scarlet camera in particular, is a flawed concept, the company will struggle because they will never be able to sell enough units to keep the design / manufacture cycle profitable.

In order for them to succeed they need the industry to adopt their products, problem is they don’t have enough products out there generating constant income. You can have niche 35mm adapter companies and niche monitor companies because their manufacturing is relatively simple.

RED already has a bad reputation from professionals, not because of their product, but because they keep dangling carrots which is impossible for a producer to budget a show. Most of us already have a tough enough time keeping up with the technology and are somewhat resentful of this but so be it. We are not considering their products because we can’t trust when they will be available, follow this through, if something goes wrong are the fixes going to be subject to change?

RED has lost the professional market it needs to succeed, its not enough that Jackson and Soderberg used the cameras, and to be honest the revealing thing about this was they needed an extra person to deal with the workflow, a real negative. (Great marketing however). So RED is left with the consumer / prosumer / hobbyist market that will probably buy about 1000 units, and lets face it this market doesn’t even need the alleged resolution the Scarlet potentially offers because the majority of the projects will go to web.

At best the RED Scarlet will be an expensive niche product, inevitably tech support and upgrades would diminish.

Look at this way had the Scarlet come out a couple of weeks after it was released in 2008 it would have been a revolution...

But it didn’t and other ‘Scarlets’ did, the Canon and Nikon SLR’s that shoot HD, ok they are not perfect but you already have the second generation ones on the market, GH1. Bolt them onto rails add some nice audio and a $700 monitor and you are good to go. These brains cost around $1000 and have left the RED concept behind.

The premise, and its a good one, is that RED offered a camera that you can upgrade the brain, or the sensor in the brain, and you keep all the accessories, problem is there are much better and cheaper accessories out there already, in addition to the nice glass we already have.

Think of it this way do you really want a camera / technology that was revealed two years ago? No, you want technology from a company that is dependable, has a track record and delivers a product when they say will. It's a given that technology will get better and the reality is to stay current you will have to upgrade once and a while, why wouldn't you? I honesty believe this company is manipulating it's audience with it's approach to marketing. But free will right?

 

[Erik Bien]

The RED model, and the Scarlet camera in particular, is a flawed concept, the company will struggle because they will never be able to sell enough units to keep the design / manufacture cycle profitable.

Hmm: let's be conservative and say RED have shipped 5,000 R1s at an average package price of $25K. Even if their margins are low, I bet they're already profitable.

RED already has a bad reputation from professionals, not because of their product, but because they keep dangling carrots which is impossible for a producer to budget a show.

Yes, I'm sure it was because of their status as pariahs of the motion media production industry that you couldn't walk three steps at NAB without bumping into a RED One.

Canon and Nikon SLR’s that shoot HD, ok they are not perfect but you already have the second generation ones on the market, GH1. Bolt them onto rails add some nice audio and a $700 monitor and you are good to go.

Bolt a camera which reads every third line of its sensor at the wrong frame rate and records it to over-compressed h.264 onto rails and it's still not anything I'd care to shoot with. But if it works for you, great. Buy one and start whinging on their forums.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I don't really agree with some of Zane's comments.

RED has infiltrated the professional market extensively considering they have only been selling cameras for two years now.

And it's a bit silly to say that if they put the Scarlet on the market a year ago, they would have sold more -- the camera didn't exist a year ago. You could say that about any advanced technology product, if it had come out even earlier, it would have been even more revolutionary.

As long as Scarlet offers more features or quality than its competition, I don't think it matters that it is being released after products like the DSLR's that shoot video.

The truth is that looking at volume of sales alone is misleading. You only need to sell a couple hundred cameras to dominate the 35mm movie camera market, yet you have to sell tens of thousands to be a significant consumer video camera.

Professional midrange ENG/EFP cameras are somewhere in the middle. I would suspect THAT is the most prized market of all actually in terms of sales & profits (Steve Gibby would probably agree). Why else do you think Sony and Panasonic spend so much more time addressing that midrange meat-and-potatoes video market rather than the high-end cinema markets? A typical TV station may suddenly place an order for dozens of expensive video cameras, or a rental house that caters to them might.

You're right in that RED probably needs a high sales volume to justify its prices, which is why they are attempting to market to a wide range of customers with a wider range of products. And there is probably a lull right now because they are in between product cycles while the economy in general is in a slump. On the other hand, that's probably the best time to be in between products -- hopefully by the time the new product is released, the economy is picking up and people have money to spend.

RED does not necessarily have a bad reputation among professionals -- they have an "average" or typical working reputation that simply does not meet or match the hype and enthusiasm of its biggest fans, which is a phenomenon unique in the video and digital cinema camera market. People may love their Sony EX1, but they never become "fans" of Sony. RED has personalized their company in a way that allows customers to form emotional connections, something that is common in the industry in a person-to-person way, but rare in terms of a person-to-corporation way. I think it's really the marketing and response to it that turns off some professionals... not the product or support from the company itself. The product works fine -- maybe even fantastically, once you also factor in the price.

And I don't think professionals hold a grudge because the cycle of product release is slowed down for some reason, or a product is announced "too early". I learned a LONG TIME AGO not to make impending production plans around unreleased products, whether it was some new filmstock or lens or camera format or post process.

Professionals judge a company by its existing products, not imaginary ones, or ones that don't exist yet. They judge a company by its tech support too.

Now if I were going to question RED's thinking, it would only be that by announcing this major revamping of the product line a year in advance, there is a big incentive for people to sit and wait for the next generation, since it seems to have such fantastic specs. But I can only surmise that RED realized that they had saturated the market with the RED ONE anyway so sales were going to slow down no matter what and they could afford the loss in sales of a few REDs relative to the increase in consumer anticipation and excitement for their new products, which I'm sure will sell quite well.

And the EPIC line really seems to address some of the issues that some professionals had with the RED ONE, and the higher price tag of the EPIC is probably a reflection of that.

But in terms of having "lost the professional market that they need to succeed" I don't see evidence of that. First of all, which professional market? There are a LOT of markets. And second of all, how do you define success? Do they have to match the total sales figures of Sony? Panasonic? Canon? Seems to me that for a smaller company like RED, with their smaller overhead, success (i.e. profitability and ability to keep making new products, etc.) may be easier to achieve.

Personally, I think RED just needs to concentrate on making a better product, address the weaknesses in the RED ONE. Which they seem to be doing as we speak. A good product and happy customers speak volumes ultimately.

 

[Peter Mosiman]

Think of it this way do you really want a camera / technology that was revealed two years ago? No, you want technology from a company that is dependable, has a track record and delivers a product when they say will. It's a given that technology will get better and the reality is to stay current you will have to upgrade once and a while, why wouldn't you? I honesty believe this company is manipulating it's audience with it's approach to marketing. But free will right?

I get what you're saying, however I do not agree at all with this last paragraph. What you are saying Zane, is that we are going to have technology from two years ago, which, even then would have blown away a lot of the cameras that were on the market and still blow away a lot of them (not all, but a lot). The thing about RED is that they are a very open company and include everyone in their process which only really makes for a better camera. One thing that I can't understand is why people tend to make that a bad thing which in reality will have produced far better cameras with far more capabilities. Sure it has taken a long time for them to spit the product out but that only seems that way because they reveal a hell of a lot more than any other camera company out there. The reason people think Panny and Sony and JVC etc are great with timing is because they don't reveal what it is they are working on until the product is released. And then they get a lot of complaints about what the camera lacks and is missing but now its too late for them to fix it. RED is doing the opposite and in my opinion the better thing here.

Of course you are saying that they should build up a good business model by being reliable and what not as a company like Apple or something, but if you think about it Apple has not released FCS3 yet and many people have been waiting well over a year for it. Apple has a great rep for not disappointing their customers but thats only because they never say a word until they are absolutely sure that their product is the best they can make it. RED is doing the same thing but with its doors wide open. Different way of doing things but I think, as well as many others, that it makes for a much more interesting ride to see what RED is doing inside the HQ.

 

[Stuart English]

Opinions

Opinions

The RED model, and the Scarlet camera in particular, is a flawed concept, the company will struggle because they will never be able to sell enough units to keep the design / manufacture cycle profitable.

In order for them to succeed they need the industry to adopt their products, problem is they don’t have enough products out there generating constant income. You can have niche 35mm adapter companies and niche monitor companies because their manufacturing is relatively simple.

RED already has a bad reputation from professionals, not because of their product, but because they keep dangling carrots which is impossible for a producer to budget a show. Most of us already have a tough enough time keeping up with the technology and are somewhat resentful of this but so be it. We are not considering their products because we can’t trust when they will be available, follow this through, if something goes wrong are the fixes going to be subject to change?

RED has lost the professional market it needs to succeed, its not enough that Jackson and Soderberg used the cameras, and to be honest the revealing thing about this was they needed an extra person to deal with the workflow, a real negative. (Great marketing however). So RED is left with the consumer / prosumer / hobbyist market that will probably buy about 1000 units, and lets face it this market doesn’t even need the alleged resolution the Scarlet potentially offers because the majority of the projects will go to web.

At best the RED Scarlet will be an expensive niche product, inevitably tech support and upgrades would diminish.

Look at this way had the Scarlet come out a couple of weeks after it was released in 2008 it would have been a revolution...

But it didn’t and other ‘Scarlets’ did, the Canon and Nikon SLR’s that shoot HD, ok they are not perfect but you already have the second generation ones on the market, GH1. Bolt them onto rails add some nice audio and a $700 monitor and you are good to go. These brains cost around $1000 and have left the RED concept behind.

The premise, and its a good one, is that RED offered a camera that you can upgrade the brain, or the sensor in the brain, and you keep all the accessories, problem is there are much better and cheaper accessories out there already, in addition to the nice glass we already have.

Think of it this way do you really want a camera / technology that was revealed two years ago? No, you want technology from a company that is dependable, has a track record and delivers a product when they say will. It's a given that technology will get better and the reality is to stay current you will have to upgrade once and a while, why wouldn't you? I honesty believe this company is manipulating it's audience with it's approach to marketing. But free will right?

Zane, thanks for a good laugh. We'll add this one to our "industry quotations" wall.

 

[John Caballero]

The truth is that mainly pros that make money from their craft are able to buy a camera today and get their money back easily. A lot of people here are dreaming that when they get their Scarlets fame and fortune will automatically come in the same package. It ain't that easy but we all can dream. The Panasonic GH1 by example is turning out to be a great looking cam and will be available in a few weeks. It is going to shoot beautiful film. Anybody with couple of clients to shoot a music video, a commercial or, heck, a wedding or two will get their money back in a month and still have time to wait for the Scarlet.

 

[zane smithe]

All good points, appreciated.

Just trying to navigate this new approach.

We are used to seeing something at a show, being impressed and integrating the product a few weeks later. In this case it was 'it does what, at that price?' and then it doesn't appear for at least two years (realistically 2010 right?). That just seems dishonest but perhaps I am not used to this model of marketing. At this point there are some trust issues with this company.

If RED 1 has sold 5000 units then thats impressive and I am wrong with some of my points.

At the very least this company is pushing others in the same direction which is good for all of us, had they had a Scarlet type product out there they could take advantage of this explosion in that sector of the market.

In terms of the DSLR's and Erik's comment I am sure everyone has seen that famous spot, yes he had some serious support but it goes back to that obvious comment about 'a good DP can make blah blah blah'.

Ironically the snide comments come from the RED Team member and not the other members of this forum who have taken an educational position in their posts. There is a certain arrogance from the RED company that is a real turn off.

To everyone else cheers.

 

[Brandon Kraemer]

David Mullen really took the time to respond with a well thought out response. It's really a gift that a top drawer pro is on this forum.

The only thing I would add is the Red has really taken my industry (broadcast advertising) and revolutionized it from a post production standpoint. At the outset, this was a large learning curve, but it has allowed professionals that embraced a new way of working to tap into a format that approaches the resolution and latitude of film in a tapeless workflow that really can't be matched in terms of quality or flexibility at the current time. The fact that there are many ways to approach the workflow is a bonus, once you move past the idea that this is not the way you've worked in the past.

I'm an end user if you will, in the post world. I have no interest in purchasing any kind of camera for professional use, so I don't follow the camera hardware horizon so much. The fact that Red announces things a year or more in advance is not a cause for me to question their business model. I've purchased nothing that is specific to the Red camera, except for Crimson Workflow for like $150. The fact that the SDK is out there tells me that it's only a matter of time before my toolset will improve, and I'm doing just fine with the tools I have right now, making better looking images in a more open workflow than I ever was able to before.

Zane mentioned: "RED already has a bad reputation from professionals, not because of their product, but because they keep dangling carrots which is impossible for a producer to budget a show. Most of us already have a tough enough time keeping up with the technology and are somewhat resentful of this but so be it. We are not considering their products because we can’t trust when they will be available, follow this through, if something goes wrong are the fixes going to be subject to change?"

So I ask how is it impossible to budget a show with technology that exists today, and why would anyone budget a show based on technology that doesn't yet exist? Why are producers trying to keep up with the technology? That is what Cinematographers and Editors are for yes? If your concern is investing in technology, don't. Rent what you need when you need it. It doesn't affect your work.

My take on much of the negative chatter is that people who don't understand the technology are put off by it and instead of trusting in competent pros to use the tools properly, they argue that the tools are problematic on some level. Where I come from, that kind of BS walks, because the producers listen to the technical pros about things that are out of their league.

 

[Peter Weisberg]

All good points, appreciated.

Just trying to navigate this new approach.

We are used to seeing something at a show, being impressed and integrating the product a few weeks later. In this case it was 'it does what, at that price?' and then it doesn't appear for at least two years (realistically 2010 right?). That just seems dishonest but perhaps I am not used to this model of marketing. At this point there are some trust issues with this company.

you make it sound like the scarlet that was announced 2 years ago is the same scarlet that is going to be released. The scarlet has been changed quite dramatically since it was first announced. It may not be too different from the fixed lens that is being offered, but everything else, the modular approach, it is all new. The fixed lens scarlet is still going to have a huge impact on the market. 2/3rd sensor 3k resolution for under 4k is something you won't see offered from any other company.

it seems your biggest complaint seems to be that red announces their products too early. However had they not mentioned anything 2 years ago and had instead announced the camera as it is meant to be now in november you probably would be thrilled. In summation your stance is overly critical, and really doesn't belong on these forums. It's like coming over to someones house and wiping your muddy shoes on their carpet.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

All good points, appreciated.

We are used to seeing something at a show, being impressed and integrating the product a few weeks later. In this case it was 'it does what, at that price?' and then it doesn't appear for at least two years (realistically 2010 right?). That just seems dishonest but perhaps I am not used to this model of marketing. At this point there are some trust issues with this company.

I define dishonesty as being lied to. Saying that a new product will come out in nine months and it comes out in 12 months instead, let's say... that's not lying in most cases, that's just an optimistic estimation that proved inaccurate. And companies are known for being publicly optimistic -- there is less incentive to being pessimistic, on all sorts of levels.

On the other hand, as a consumer, there are more incentives with being pessimistic than optimistic -- caveat emptor and all that.

Estimates of release dates for products that haven't been developed yet, well, how can they NOT be imprecise? I'm more amazed when someone actually manages to deliver new technology on time.

And Jim Jannard has already stated publicly here his reasoning for not pushing the development and release of Scarlet and Epic faster -- that would take a lot of expensive overtime and it doesn't make sense when the world economy is in a slump and sales are sluggish in general.

Considering how open RED is on issues like changing release dates and progress reports, I don't think there is any issue of trust here.

Yes, it's odd to make an announcement far in advance of the release date, but I don't see how that qualifies as dishonesty. Dishonesty would involve announcing a near release date for the purposes of advance sales or asking for downpayments with no intention of even remotely making that date.