Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Scarlet-W Compression Spec Change

Gene Sung said:
Several questions

1) Looking at the Red.com Scarlet-W page it lists 5K as only going up to 50fps (max frame rate). On the chart that Nathan DuMoulin posted, at 5K it's listed as able to go up to 96fps. So does 5K end at 50fps (as listed on Red.com) or does it go up to 96fps?

2) Also, I see two figures, one for 5K and another for 5K 2:1. It's my lack of understanding, but I thought 5K and 5K 2:1 are the same pixel dimensions. Obviously not, so what are the pixel dimensions of 5K and 5K 2:1

3) Also, which one of the two (5K or 5K 2:1) are considered Full Frame?
Click to expand...


I doubt checked to make sure that I was looking at the Scarlet-W Redcode options. It does indeed go up to 96fps. Page 94: http://s3.amazonaws.com/red_3/downl...ps_Guide/DSMC_Media_Operation_Guide_Rev-U.pdf (credit to Ian for digging up the page number up earlier)

Also, 5K is 5120x2700 at 1.9:1, which uses the full sensor (FF).
 
Nathan DuMoulin said:
I doubt checked to make sure that I was looking at the Scarlet-W Redcode options. It does indeed go up to 96fps. Page 94: http://s3.amazonaws.com/red_3/downl...ps_Guide/DSMC_Media_Operation_Guide_Rev-U.pdf (credit to Ian for digging up the page number up earlier)

Also, 5K is 5120x2700 at 1.9:1, which uses the full sensor (FF).
Click to expand...
No, 50fps max. Page 76 (at the bottom of the page).
http://s3.amazonaws.com/red_3/downl...ON/DSMC_Operation_Guide_WEAPON_v6.1_Rev-T.pdf
 
Here is a little list of the discrepancies across the various Red resources. Hopefully someone at Red can get this all cleaned up with the correct numbers.

(thanks for the addition Ugo)

- The Scarlet-W main product page lists "Capable of shooting 5K motion and stills at up to 60 fps"
- The DSMC Media Operations guide shows a chart on page 94 that says Scarlet-W can do 96fps at 17:1
- The DSMC Operation Guide shows a max frame rate of 50fps for Scarlet-W on page 76

I don't think any of us actually expect it to do 96fps at 5K, but 60fps is clearly listed on the product page, and a significant selling point. Hopefully 60fps is correct, as 50 would defeat one of my main reasons for getting Scarlet-W.
 
Last edited:
Nathan DuMoulin said:
Here is the discrepancy in the various Red resources:

(thanks for the addition Ugo)

- The Scarlet-W main product page lists "Capable of shooting 5K motion and stills at up to 60 fps"
- The Scarlet-W tech specs page reads "50 fps at 5K Full Frame (5120 × 2700) and 9:1 REDCODE"
- The DSMC Manual shows a chart on page 94 that says Scarlet-W can do 96fps at 17:1
- The DSMC Operation Guide shows a max frame rate of 50fps for Scarlet-W on page 76
Click to expand...
The main product page is talking about a 2.4 ratio as it also talks about 4k 150fps in the same sentence.
The DSMC Manual shows some numbers that maybe we should not see, at it shows that we could have 90fps 5KFF 16:1 or just 60fps 5KFF 11:1 if they wanted.
 
A bit of a total knob question here, but the normal aspect ratios I shoot at are: HD for broadcast projects and 2:1 which I assumed (incorrectly??) is for more filmic projects.

I noticed FULL FRAME has a higher vertical pixel ratio. When would you use Full Frame? For what specific format? Is it mainly for re-cropping when finishing in HD or 2:1 projects?

For more filmic projects I often finish in a 2:39 : 1 aspect ratio which is nice to have to vertical reframing ability.
 
Nathan DuMoulin said:
I don't think any of us actually expect it to do 96fps at 5K, but 60fps is clearly listed on the product page, and a significant selling point. Hopefully 60fps is correct, as 50 would defeat one of my main reasons for getting Scarlet-W.
Click to expand...

Well, it does Full Frame 60 fps at 4.5K which is still pretty good (better than the Raven) in that it's very close to APS-C cropping like the Canon 7D. 5K is actually a bit wider than Super 35mm.

I would prefer 5K at 60fps, but I can live with it at a very near APS-C crop.
 
Ian Ghandi said:
The minimum compression ratios for the Scarlet-W has changed on the spec page it now reads 5k @ 24fps is 5:1 instead of 4:1 when announced in December. Not sure why it changed without notice.
Click to expand...

Nothing has changed from the original specs posted at launch. Looks like an error in a spreadsheet when doing the calculations for RED.com and ops guides. We will get it all sorted, sorry for the fire drill.
 
Last edited:
My apologies too then as i brought it on the forum . Maybe we should delete this thread then or it will add confusion.
 
Ian Ghandi said:
The minimum compression ratios for the Scarlet-W has changed on the spec page it now reads 5k @ 24fps is 5:1 instead of 4:1 when announced in December. Not sure why it changed without notice.
Click to expand...

Good morning everyone.. I woke up to the same question most of you are having.... with absolutely no idea what the fuck just happened.

After loosing my shit to a few of my people.. It is clear we have a bit of clusterfuck between our engineering and our guy that makes the pretty charts and who rounds what number to what.

Anyways.. Nothing has changed in the camera. The max data rate is the same as it was yesterday, the camera still records 140MB/s and that translates to a REDCODE compression ratio of 4.1 : 1 .

People take that number and round down to 4:1 but the Camera takes that number and rounds up ( for just display ) to 5:1... Hence the confusion.

As for the other weird numbers across the specs... Brent will get that cleaned up.


Apologies all.
 
Jarred Land said:
Good morning everyone.. I woke up to the same question most of you are having.... with absolutely no idea what the fuck just happened.

After loosing my shit to a few of my people.. It is clear we have a bit of clusterfuck between our engineering and our guy that makes the pretty charts and who rounds what number to what.

Anyways.. Nothing has changed in the camera. The max data rate is the same as it was yesterday, the camera still records 140MB/s and that translates to a REDCODE compression ratio of 4.1 : 1 .

People take that number and round down to 4:1 but the Camera takes that number and rounds up ( for just display ) to 5:1... Hence the confusion.

As for the other weird numbers across the specs... Brent will get that cleaned up.


Apologies all.
Click to expand...

Even on a Sunday, the boss and his team are at work.

Jarred - as always, thanks for being on the ball. Always.
 
Thanks Jarred. I very much appreciate the transparency and speed at which you guys get things done!
 
Thanks for understanding guys. Timing was probably good for this anyways, a few inconsistencies across the board that this revealed that we needed to clean up anyways.
 
Bob Gundu said:
5:1 is losseless to me! Crazy times we live in.
Click to expand...
Yes but don't forget that prores recording increases the compression too. So it's better to have a 4:1 camera to start with for prores but also for VFX/greenscreen.
Thanks Jarred and Brent for the fast reaction.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Jarred! Quick response (on a sunday as mentioned so many times) is so damn appreciated. You rock.
 
I think for most people it's safe to say 5:1 is a great image for 4k / 5k shots with no greenscreen/vfx at any iso or situation. That seems to be the preferred setting used by hollywood. If you're shooting for something other than big budget commercials and movies I think 10:1 is the limit for general purposes, some might use 7:1 and others 12:1.

Going to resolutions lower than 4k I think you should keep the compression as low as possible. Going to higher ISOs you should keep the compression lower than 7:1 to avoid making the noise look blocky.

For VFX / green screen where resolution and color accuracy are critical beyond human perception you should also keep it low as possible.

"Lossless" is a term that isn't really applicable to static compression ratios. Pure random noise cannot be losslessly compressed, and an image that's pure black could be losslessly compressed to huge ratios.

For existing compression schemes similar to .r3d, most real world images losslessly compress to ~2:1 or so, sometimes 1.2:1 and sometimes 3:1. That doesn't mean that using redcode 2:1 will ever be lossless, though. Nor is there any real benefit to being mathematically lossless.
 
Haha, ultimately it probably wouldn't have affected my shooting with the Scarlet-W, but the fact that Jarred showed up on a Sunday to address the issue (mere hours after the topic was posted) reaffirms my decision to jump from Sony to RED. Sony has ignored the FS7's broken RAW output for a year, among several other bugs and issues. They could learn a thing or two from RED!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top