Sensory Overload

[Leaf Baimbridge]

I really appreciate what the RED team is doing, believe me, I do. But, I'm a simple person with simple needs and while all the amazing bells and whistles on these cameras is really groundbreaking and awe inspiring, I would be more than happy with a Scarlet 2/3 interchangeable body with a record button and little else for half the price (or whatever $ is appropriate). While everyone else is asking for more more more, I thought I would just chime in (at the last minute) and ask for less, for less.

 

[Ameer Azari]

While A LOT of people may agree with you, RED's philosophy is one that does not consist of compromise.

 

[brian hanson]

While A LOT of people may agree with you, RED's philosophy is one that does not consist of compromise.

and lets keep it that way. RED=tools for professionals.(no disrespect intended)

 

[Michael Olsen]

Aside from the aformentioned fact that RED is rather dedicated to providing fully professional solution, which a "body with a record button and little else" is definitely not...

consider how that would work.

You'll need a battery and a place to put a battery. Which means the cost of the battery and whatever mounting solution you'd like to work out.

You'll need media, and a way to record media. So, in REDs case, either CF card and CF module or SSD and SSD module.

You'll need a way to monitor - so either an EVF or LCD.

Chances are, you'll want to control the camera as well, beyond "stop and go", so you'll need some form of interface for changing even the most fundamental aspects of the camera - framerate, shutterspeed, etc.

And, more than likely, you'll want some form of audio. Which means either purchasing an external recorder, or allowing for onboard audio expenses.

And that lens mount...I imagine you'd want it to be variable so you could use different types of glass.

Add all of that up, and you seem to get a Scarlet, more or less as we know it today.

Indeed, a "bare bones" Scarlet is really pretty much just the essentials. And it is a great value already - there's not much fat to trim.

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

and lets keep it that way. RED=tools for professionals.(no disrespect intended)

It's certainly RED's right, that's for sure.

I understand what you mean by that statement, but it sort of means nothing. At the end of the day they are just cameras with features and a price, and anyone can buy them.

The "for professional" tagline would only be true if RED was solely available through internal business channels. But it isn't. It's retail.

Anyway…

I would also have preferred a feature (and cost) reduced Scarlet Fixed. To me, that camera is too competent and powerful for its "locked in" nature. It's going to have a ton of uses, but ultimately I think the kind of power it offers would go better (in today's camera landscape) with an interchangeable lens mount. Well, that's coming too, so what do I mean?

To me, the Fixed could have been the stripped camera. No HDRx™™, perhaps not the 120fps. I don't know for sure that removing those features would bring the price down, but I'm assuming it.

I would even go as far as saying it wouldn't need RAW, if it could have been replaced with a modern visually lossless wavelet codec. RED's exposure assists are state of the art, and at the end of the day the sensor only has "so much" latitude.

I think many could live with some features removed, a less media hungry codec and a lower price.

And to my eyes, this would also be a better camera in the lineup. As it is now, there's quite the overlap of features between the cameras and still they start at around $6000 up to ... whatever the Epics cost ($35000?).

I do maintain though, that the way the Scarlet looks now, it's going to be a killer deal. But I think it's just outside the price point for many hobbyists (not soccer moms) that don't have a related revenue stream. Instead of being just inside at $4000-4500.

Those who can afford the Scarlet will be infinitely pleased. And those who can't will have to wait for someone else to fill the, still open, spot for quality film/video at $3500.

 

[Michael Olsen]

To me, the Fixed could have been the stripped camera. No HDRx™™™™™™™, perhaps not the 120fps. I don't know for sure that removing those features would bring the price down, but I'm assuming it.

I actually don't know that they would. It would require either the development of another sensor which could be conceivable cheaper and/or a different set of ASICs/internas which we basically crippled.

I would even go as far as saying it wouldn't need RAW, if it could have been replaced with a modern visually lossless wavelet codec.

REDCODE is a prime example of a modern visually lossless wavelet codec. And that's what REDs have as their principle recording format.

But I think it's just outside the price point for many hobbyists (not soccer moms) that don't have a related revenue stream. Instead of being just inside at $4000-4500.

Those who can afford the Scarlet will be infinitely pleased. And those who can't will have to wait for someone else to fill the, still open, spot for quality film/video at $3500.

I think this aspect of RED is difficult for people to understand. In my opinion, they have no desire to act as Pansonic/Sony/Canon/Nikon/etc. do and cater to all ends of the market. They strive, first and foremost, to make excellent cameras. They can take away features and drop the price, but at some point the camera would just fall below their standards. That tipping point, so to speak, is the Scarlet Interchangeable Brain. Anything less than 120fps, less than 3K, etc. and RED considers it old hat. Remember - RED is a forward looking company that was delivering 4K cameras years before major manufacturers even began to announce development plans. A 3K camera is already a step backwards for them.

And that is part of the "Professional" package. It's about not compromising for the sake of an extra $1000. And like you said, that will probably keep these cameras out of the hands of hobbyists and enthusiasts. But hobbyists and enthusiasts are probably precluded from owning an ARRIFLEX and/or a set of cine primes, as well. It has been stated many times here, even by RED, that they aren't trying to be all things to all people, and that there is a market out there with plenty of "good enough" alternatives if people are, for one reason or another, unable to happily purchase one of their products.

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

I actually...

I don't agree about "below their standard". This argument comes up now and then, but doesn't hold.

It could hold if they only made one camera, but not with several.

One might oppose: "yes, but they are targeting different markets with their different cameras. And to each market the best tool."

Ok, once more this holds. But then I argue that "the hobbyist" is a market and that they can get their camera too. It won't be as good as the film makers' tool, but it will be unbeaten in its segment.

-----

I'm actually quite opposed stripping features, normally. I always want manufacturers to build the best product they can. But realistically, if you want to cater to many markets there's a market need to strip/protect. You obviously can't sell one camera for $35.000 (a justified price to cover development and technology), and at the same time sell another product 90% capable at $6000.

Looking at it that way, remembering that the first argument doesn't hold, the possibilities are infinite. RED could make a camera for the iPhone that would outshine every competitors' version and still be true to RED's ideals and vision.

-----

I'm familiar with Redcode. I use Cineform right now, another wavelet codec that I'm happy with, so I know what they are capable of.

What I meant was that you could "hard code" the footage, not allowing RAW post production, in a context of strip/protect.

That would result in a product that would be significantly less suited for "professional productions", but would still be more than enough for a "blow everything out of the water" high end hobbyist solution. Still respecting what you said about RED's desires and ideals.

The way I see it, the only thing it wouldn't protect are certain individuals (not meaning you) desires to keep RED out of reach from "the underserving".

-------

Anecdotally I can add that I just bought a Volvo XC60. In Europe they come with various motors, among them a so called D3 and a D5. Both are 5-cylinder diesels. The small D3 produces 163hp and 400 Nm and the D5 gives you 205hp and 420Nm.

The D3 is of course cheaper by a significant about.

As it turns out, they are the EXACT same motor with different software. The small motor is throttled to cater to a different price point/market.

I bought the D3 and will upgrade the chip for a small sum, arriving at 230hp and 470Nm. With all the guarantees intact, as Volvo is performing the upgrade.

That's reality, right there.

 

[Michael Olsen]

I don't agree about "below their standard". This argument comes up now and then, but doesn't hold.
--

That's reality, right there.

Well, this is getting semantic at this point, but I will contend with your analogy and your argument.

Firstly, just because a company makes a product, doesn't mean it should produce that product at every possible level. And just because a company makes multiple products at multiple pricepoints doesn't mean it should make products to meet all price points. My argument doesn't fail because a product could be made at a lower price point, it stands because companies always have the option not to produce a product at every price point.

Ultimately, I suppose that decision falls either with shareholders if it is public, or with the members if it is private. As it is, RED has stated a number of times that we won't be seeing a 2K camera from them. We won't be seeing a camera shipping without REDCODE RAW from them. We won't be seeing a 30fps only camera from them. And we won't be seeing an otherwise "consumer-targeted" camera from them. They just don't want to do it. And that is their right.

Let's not revert to comparing cameras to cars.

In film, look at Arri, Panavision, Aaton, Sony Cinealta, Panasonic Varicam, etc. Consider the Hasselblads, the Leicas, the Mamiyas. These are all either companies or brands which are built around "Professional" standards. Each offers a variety of products within their markets, but Arri isn't selling any $3,000 cameras, film or digital. And while Sony and Panasonic do produce cameras for $3,000, they are certainly not in their Cinema Cinealta or Varicam line-up.

Keep this in mind - a 5K Epic-X brain is over $25,000. People are paying $50,000 for Epic-M right now. A Scarlet brain will ring in at almost ten times less expensive. There, if anything is a massive discount already.

To revert to cars...Volvo makes a number of cars from between $24,000 and $38,000 base. That is, as you describe, a company selling multiple models at different price points to different markets. But like I describe, this company is only serving some markets. And I'm pretty sure Volvo engineers would have a good laugh if I asked them to do away with all of its integrated safety features, any remaining luxury items, and pretty much strip its cars down to the bone so that they could produce one that could compete with the Toyota Yaris at $13,000. Or that they should pour millions into research and development and construct a $200,000 supercar. Neither of those are "Volvo". In fact, Volvo's about page says they are about "Innovative technology. Beautiful design. Environmental care. Quality. And driving fun." They are not about "exceptional value" or "low-priced cars for the everyman". They are also not about "high performance" "unbelievable handling" or "track-ready vehicles". And so they don't make cars that don't fulfill their companies values. Neither does RED.

Just because markets exist doesn't mean any given company must serve all of them. And really, usually, the companies that do try to be everything to everyone, end up with watered down products in most arenas.

 

[Joseph Hutson]

I think what it all comes down to is this:

Jim doesn't just build a product that he can sell. He makes a product to the point that if nobody else buys it, at least HE will.

I think RED have long ago passed the point of where they care to much what the market might think of their cameras before release or about the pace at which they are invented. They care much more about what the market thinks after they get the product in their hands.

They may not be making products "just for professionals" but they are making them with the professionals in mind.

And just because a product has a certain dollar figure, that does not make them a product built for a hobbyist, student, or professional. It just means the product is either more or less available to all parties involved.

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

Well, this is getting semantic at this point

Perhaps. Or rather, exactly.

I agree with everything in your last post, but there's nothing there contradictory to what I wrote before.

If I distill what I mean, it comes down to this:

At the beginning of Scarlet there was a notion that RED would build a camera for the masses. At a "as low as possible" price point, but not a the cost of being cheap. It should still be RED.

That meant a couple of things like 3k, RAW and so on.

When you say that RED doesn't want to build that camera anymore, I agree completely. And that's the thing. They don't want to. As opposed to they couldn't. And that has been my whole argument.

Sometimes I get the feeling that people think that the original Scarlet has slippery sloped itself into the version we know today—that the vision has stayed the same, but as it turned out it couldn't be helped that it became more expensive.

But the vision has changed. And it's not a question of good vs. bad. It's just different.

I'd say that the current version with 5" LCD, Redmote and grip is at least equally price aggressive as 3k for 3k once was. But at a different price point.

My sympathy falls on both sides. I feel sorry for those who once could, but now can't, get to know RED. For me, as an enthusiast, it would also have been a sweeter pill to swallow at $3500, without feeling I needed to produce anything commercial to validate my purchase.

At the same time, the new version is more complete. It's all there, but for the fixed lens (hopefully a good one). And once you go fixed, you'd probably be happy that it's a fairly complete package.

But with the current price target, I no longer want to buy it unless I can come up with an idea to make it pay for itself to some extent. A good thing then, that the nature of that problem is quite inspiring.

 

[David Rasberry]

I fall into the serious hobbyist category these days. Scarlet is a big stretch, but I can eventually afford it.

It is precisely the shift in paradigm from a baked in video image work flow to digital raw work flow that most appeals to me about Red's cameras. Having spent some time learning it, I would not be happy with anything else. I love the amazing creative latitude it affords compared to any form of encoded video that one can get in an under $$20k camera.
Scarlet has been built to or beyond its original performance targets with a range of features that have been requested by many who have participated here. More than any similar product I can think of it's development has been directly influenced by ideas and input discussed in depth by the people who are most interested in buying it. The original concept camera did not have the features that either pro's or indie film makers deemed necessary, and the camera as developed can't be made for such a low price.
It is a quandary for a small specialty manufacturer to strike a balance between price/market access, performance , features, and build quality. But I can't fault Red for their choices. They seem to me to make a lot of sense for now and for the future. I like the way they think.

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

The original concept camera did not have the features that either pro's or indie film makers deemed necessary...

This might very well be true. But now we have two feature identical Scarlets, but for the fixed lens, or not.

It is precisely the shift in paradigm from a baked in video image work flow to digital raw work flow that most appeals to me about Red's cameras.

I have downloaded a few R3D-files and played with them, including Scarlet footage.

But I would like to know more about RED RAW. RAW is definitely one of the things that I appreciate shooting stills, but I don't think I've got my head wrapped around the RED approach.

I know that there are different versions of REDCode in a wavelet codec from. But that's a codec—not RAW. How is the RAW data stream managed? How much data are we looking at?

 

[Leaf Baimbridge]

While A LOT of people may agree with you, RED's philosophy is one that does not consist of compromise.

I'm not quite sure how that statement applies as a response to my post. Let me clarify my statement (I had to rush off to go get takeout last night)... First of all, the added costs to the camera and all of the new added bells and whistles that have been added to it over its development aren't a deterrent from me purchasing it.

But...

I find with most consumer electronics(i know reds new catchphrase is equipment for pros or whatever, so don't have a fit when i use the word "consumer" electronics, I'm speaking in general terms here) that I rarely use 95% of the features. So when I say I want a camera with a record button, I don't mean it literally. I just mean that given the option, I would most likely by a stripped down version of the camera body. Jim has made several mentions of the prototype cameras being used to shot features with little more than a record button. I was impressed by the footage on the reel that was shot with "just a record button"...

anyhow i hope that clarifies... most of the time i have to get up between every other sentence to chase my son around the house so sorry if my thought process seems scattered...

 

[David Mullen ASC]

You need some basic controls, different frame rates, shutter speed, color temp and ASA, etc. And audio control. Even a consumer camera has most of these features.

You don't have to use the features that you don't need, but then, you never know if you are going to need them until you do. You may be shooting an old CRT computer screen and find you need the adjust the shutter in hertz degrees to remove the roll bar or flicker, you may find a need to undercrank or shoot time-lapse for a shot, or overcrank, etc.

Like everyone has said, this is a pro camera, it needs some basic pro features. And 90% of the time, the pros just hit record too, but that doesn't mean they get to go home when the other 10% of shots come up.

 

[David Rasberry]

Redcode is not an encoded RGB or YCbCr format like video. It records the raw Bayer data to the file at 12 or 16 bits per pixel just like a digital still camera. Redcode applies a user selectable variable bit rate data compression to the data to save storage space and reduce the data rates necessary to record motion. Compression ratios range from mathematically lossless, meaning non of the original Bayer data is lost, to visually lossless, meaning the image can be reconstructed with no visible difference compared to an uncompressed image, to slightly visual lossy at the highest compression rates, but still retaining more image data than is necessary for fully resolved image quality for most video delivery formats, including 1080pHD.
The only things that directly affect the raw image data captured to the file are light, aperture, frame rate, and shutter speed. It is much closer to a film exposure process in that sense. Everything else about the image and how it is interpreted is non-destructive meta data applied during the demosaic process. So properties that are permanently part of the recorded image from a video camera, such as gain, knee, pedestal, white balance, detail, noise reduction, exposure index or ISO setting, gamma curves, etc. are not part of the r3d raw file, but part of an attached meta data file that can be altered any way one sees fit in post.

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

Redcode is...

Thanks! Interesting.

Does that mean that there's the full latitude of the sensor available in post?

Can I for instance truly recover highlights with Redcode, same as a RAW still?

Wondering if the principle is the same.

 

[Michael Olsen]

Thanks! Interesting.

Does that mean that there's the full latitude of the sensor available in post?

Can I for instance truly recover highlights with Redcode, same as a RAW still?

Wondering if the principle is the same.

Yes, yes, and yes.

Give it a try yourself. Here is some footage from Scarlet:
http://red.cachefly.net/Chicken.zip

And here are scarlet compatible version of REDCINE-X:
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/test/REDCINE-X_build_356E_mac32.zip

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/test/REDCINE-X_build_356E_mac64.zip

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/test/REDCINE-X_build_356E_win64.zip

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/test/REDCINE-X_build_356E_win32.zip

 

[Leaf Baimbridge]

You need some basic controls, different frame rates, shutter speed, color temp and ASA, etc. And audio control. Even a consumer camera has most of these features.

You don't have to use the features that you don't need, but then, you never know if you are going to need them until you do. You may be shooting an old CRT computer screen and find you need the adjust the shutter in hertz degrees to remove the roll bar or flicker, you may find a need to undercrank or shoot time-lapse for a shot, or overcrank, etc.

Like everyone has said, this is a pro camera, it needs some basic pro features. And 90% of the time, the pros just hit record too, but that doesn't mean they get to go home when the other 10% of shots come up.

Right. Well I guess when I say stripped down, what I am trying to get across is that I would prefer something with the absolute basics as you mentioned. I'm not interested all the different modes, like 1080p mode or being able to apply a LUT to preview what it will look like when its color graded, or 5 different user settings etc. I just want something that captures the RAW data that I can bring into my computer and let the red software and work flow take it from there. If I need something more than that for the occasional shot ill go rent it. its like this, do I want a luxury car with dual climate control and seat warmer or do I want a drag car with a blown out engine and a steering wheel... both cars are functional for the user, but one is intended for comfortable ride while the other is just built to go really fast.

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

Yes, yes, and yes.

Give it a try yourself. Here is some footage from Scarlet:
http://red.cachefly.net/Chicken.zip

And here are scarlet compatible version of REDCINE-X:
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/test/REDCINE-X_build_356E_mac32.zip

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/test/REDCINE-X_build_356E_mac64.zip

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/test/REDCINE-X_build_356E_win64.zip

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/test/REDCINE-X_build_356E_win32.zip

Thanks Michael, appreciate it. Especially with the links and all.

But I played with the footage the day it was released (and I loved it). But since I've never filmed with RED I'm lacking a reference point. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the Chicken footage (apart from being too short =), but I can't say from that alone if I'm getting everything or not (compared to the actual RAW stream).

But I understand the process better now. What I couldn't add up was "how on earth can you actually do 3k or 5k RAW". How do you manage the data...

I wouldn't opt to do it myself, but is it possible on Epic to rip the actual Bayer-stream sans REDcode? I only wonder out of curiosity.

 

[David Rasberry]

Thanks! Interesting.

Does that mean that there's the full latitude of the sensor available in post?

Can I for instance truly recover highlights with Redcode, same as a RAW still?

Wondering if the principle is the same.

Yes the principle is exactly the same. As long as the highlights are not clipped in the raw data they can be recovered in the post grade. On the dark end of the scale one can choose a precise balance between noise and shadow detail to suit aesthetic intent.

If you have Redcine-X 356e and the Scarlet clip of Felix loaded on your computer you can play with all of this. It is a pretty sophisticated raw processor.