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 :)

scarlett competitors in near future

Joseph Hutson said:
Fixed Scarlet: 1-120 fps (150fps burst mode) 3072x1728
Click to expand...
According to the only specs posted, it's 3,072 x 1,620.

for $4750 Includes the Brain, Lens, Side CF Module, REDmote, 2.8" Touchscreen LCD WITH NEW TOUCH TO FOCUS TECHNOLOGY, REDvolt Battery and Travel Charger
Click to expand...
While it's true that's the most recent projected price mentioned for Scarlet 3K, I wouldn't count on it. I haven't read anything more recently as to whether Red has decided to stick with Foxconn or is definitely looking for a new manufacturing partner. In either case, I wouldn't be surprised if it hits $5,500 or even $6,000. And before anyone feels compelled to say, "What other camera with those specs even comes close to that price? It would be a steal even if it cost $xxxxx," yeah, OK, you're right (for what it's worth).
 
Lawrence Bansbach said:
According to the only specs posted, it's 3,072 x 1,620.


While it's true that's the most recent projected price mentioned for Scarlet 3K, I wouldn't count on it. I haven't read anything more recently as to whether Red has decided to stick with Foxconn or is definitely looking for a new manufacturing partner. In either case, I wouldn't be surprised if it hits $5,500 or even $6,000.
Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if it was 6,000...but we are just speculating here.

As far as the resolution, not sure where you found your numbers, but I've talked with Jim a couple places here on the boards, and both times he confirmed te 3072x1728.
 
Joseph Hutson said:
I'd be surprised if it was 6,000...but we are just speculating here.
Click to expand...
I didn't speculate. I just said that I wouldn't be surprised if the price rose (even substantially), as it has at least twice since being announced. You know the drill -- everything is subject to change.

As far as the resolution, not sure where you found your numbers, but I've talked with Jim a couple places here on the boards, and both times he confirmed te 3072x1728.
Click to expand...
I couldn't find the October 2008 brochure, but over on ScarletUser (here), David Rasberry (whom I trust with the facts) quotes the 3,072 x 1,620 figure:
David Rasberry said:
Based on a 3.3 micron pixel size and the original October 2008 specification of 1.89:1 native widescreen digital cinema format with 3072 x 1620 4.9MP maximum image resolution, this may be what Scarlet's new sensor image size will look like.

Personally I think this is very close to an optimum design all things considered and fits the 2/3" spec like a glove.

Incidently, 2880 x 1620 is the native resolution of the ARRI D21 12 bit Bayer sensor in 16:9 HD format too.
Click to expand...

The original Scarlet was billed as a 16:9 3K camera. Early on, Jim Jannard did in fact define 3K as 3,072 x 1,728 (in a general sense, not specifically referring to Scarlet 3K), and Jon Sagud described the original Scarlet design as a 16:9, 3,072 x 1,728 camera. But apparently it's not natively 16:9 anymore -- it's 1.89:1. So while the horizontal pixel count remains 3,072, the vertical has been reduced to 1,620.

It's been a long time since Red has officially posted the pixel count specs, so I suppose, like everything else Red, they're also subject to change.
 
The 3072 x 1620 was the original resolution posted when the modular cameras were first announced. The sensor dimensions were listed as 10.1 x 5.35 with a pixel size of 3.2 microns.
The last info we got from Jim was a 3.3 micron pixel size, but nothing else.
It's anybody's guess at this point. But the 1.5x horizontal and vertical resolution, 2880 x 1620 for 16:9, makes the most sense for efficient scaling and encoding for HD, and at 3.3 mics it just fits the 2/3" HD reference size perfectly. Red's other sensors are native 2:1 aspect too, not 16:9.
 
David Rasberry said:
The 3072 x 1620 was the original resolution posted when the modular cameras were first announced. The sensor dimensions were listed as 10.1 x 5.35 with a pixel size of 3.2 microns.
The last info we got from Jim was a 3.3 micron pixel size, but nothing else.
It's anybody's guess at this point. But the 1.5x horizontal and vertical resolution, 2880 x 1620 for 16:9, makes the most sense for efficient scaling and encoding for HD, and at 3.3 mics it just fits the 2/3" HD reference size perfectly. Red's other sensors are native 2:1 aspect too, not 16:9.
Click to expand...
So, because the latest info indicates the pixels are slightly larger, are you saying the pixel count might actually be a little less than 3K? Or does that refer only to 16:9, which the math dictated had to be less than 3K (unless one could magically increase the vertical count)?
 
Lawrence Bansbach said:
So, because the latest info indicates the pixels are slightly larger, are you saying the pixel count might actually be a little less than 3K? Or does that refer only to 16:9, which the math dictated had to be less than 3K (unless one could magically increase the vertical count)?
Click to expand...

That only refers to the 16:9. The native 1:89 digital cinema format would be 3072 x 1620. If you want to finish for standard 2k digital cinema format, this more than 2.5 times the pixel resolution of 1080p HD cropped to 1:89 format. Scaling down will make for a much better final image than scaling up from a lower resolution crop.

In the Alexa v Epic thread Jarred I think confirmed that Scarlet 2/3" matched the 2880x1620 HD format resolution of Alexa. I can't find the post though.
 
RAW on Scarlet

RAW on Scarlet

Scarlet's sensor is designed to be very flexible. Two popular 12-bit RAW record formats (and matching post production formats) are likely to be -

2880 x 1620 for 2:3 scale to 16:9 1080p 4:2:2

3072 x 1280 for 2:3 scale to 2.4:1 2K RGB DPX
 
Stuart English said:
Scarlet's sensor is designed to be very flexible. Two popular 12-bit RAW record formats (and matching post production formats) are likely to be -

2880 x 1620 for 2:3 scale to 16:9 1080p 4:2:2

3072 x 1280 for 2:3 scale to 2.4:1 2K RGB DPX
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info Stuart.

So Epic is going to be 16 bit while Scarlet will be 12 bit?
 
Drama project?

Drama project?

Subhadip Sen said:
the Drama project seems to capture far better images than the Ikonoscop from the same sensor.
Click to expand...

The Darma project may be using different de-Bayer software that could also work with Acam dII date files maybe, if they have the same Kodak sensor?

I have been running all the example DNG frames from Acam dII I can find through the de-Bayer software I am working on to see that it runs OK, their format seems to be about pillar boxed 1920x1092 in 2048x1092, to be crop down to 1920x1080 later or on output perhaps.

Does anyone have a link to sample data from the "Drama project" camera, I might be able to add some setup options for it to the de-Bayer program I am working on before its release. Or their email?
 
Dan Hudgins said:
The Darma project may be using different de-Bayer software that could also work with Acam dII date files maybe, if they have the same Kodak sensor?

I have been running all the example DNG frames from Acam dII I can find through the de-Bayer software I am working on to see that it runs OK, their format seems to be about pillar boxed 1920x1092 in 2048x1092, to be crop down to 1920x1080 later or on output perhaps.

Does anyone have a link to sample data from the "Drama project" camera, I might be able to add some setup options for it to the de-Bayer program I am working on before its release. Or their email?
Click to expand...

You might be able to contact Otis Grapsas through DVXuser.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=219424
 
Lawrence Bansbach said:
I wouldn't be surprised if it hits $5,500 or even $6,000.
Click to expand...

3K for $3K went out of the window along time ago. We are getting a lot more for your buck. I would like the package with a 5" LCD rather than a puny 2.8" LCD like XDCAM's. :cryin: I'll have to buy a 5" or 7" straight away and the 2.8" LCD will be placed in the bin.
 
David Rasberry said:
Thanks for the info Stuart.

So Epic is going to be 16 bit while Scarlet will be 12 bit?
Click to expand...

12 bit will be fine for me. 10 bit is what the BBC requests as a minimum colour format, so 12 bit will be perfect for my work. Cineform codec uses 10bit in HD and 12 bit in 4K mode. Also the AJA KONA 3 card uses 10 bit. HDCAM is 10bit. So why need any higher?

What is the colour bit depth of the stills going to be, thats the question?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top