STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT SCARLET SPECS!

[Jason Rudd]

If anything, as constructive criticism, perhaps RED could learn from this, and not announce products in development or products in R&D which may have a chance, naturally, of being killed.

I and others purchased LENSES based on the surety that a 2/3" cinema model would one day exist.

It doesn't bother me much, because the loss of about $3K on lenses isn't such a huge hit on my savings (and I guess I can sell them at a large loss). But for others who bought lenses or other accessories based on their hopes, the financial hit is more significant.

I'm very excited about the S35 Scarlet X, and don't think less of RED or Jannard or their vision and expertise. But constructively, things that are in R&D should remain so until it's a sure thing that they will be released. I think RED/ Jim has already stated that's how it's going to be for the future. Let's hope they stick to it and it will be part of the maturity of this great company.

 

[Arun R]

wooo really? let people know better...

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

But i get the idea that Red is trying to mask the problems of 2/3" and not wanting to admit that the 2/3" Scarlet might not have been such a good idea after all...

Actually, Jim has said that the 2/3-inch 3K format was what he was referring to when he commented that what seemed like a good idea three years ago no longer did.

 

[Max Gibson]

If this hard for you ( and i ), consider the fact that RED is gambling on their bottom line. You think what percentage of original " 3K for $3K " crowd are willing to upgrade to 4K for $14K. Factor in the lens(s) that could resolve 4K !. We are talking about additional $5000. to $15000. a pop for modest 4K lenses. This and a couple of hours worth of SSD will bring the total closer to $25K. Unless you shoot on lower end Canon lenses for budget reasons for know until you can afford 4K glass ( that's when pigs fly - considering the 99% vs 1% thing going on ). If you are a new player, you have to rent, borrow or beg a tripod worthy of 4K. Can you see the trend here.
With $14K no lens and low ssd kit for Scarlet, RED is kissing goodby a large demographic potential customers like you ( and i ) ! That is very painful for a business. Although some fanboys around here could start jeering at you ( and i ) that ; the owners are rich and don't care much about money. Well, i doubt that. The calculated maneuvering of this long path from 3K for $3K to 4K for 14K could only captained by a masterful money manager.
By my estimate this risk is not going to pan out enough cash for RED. Either $14K Scarlet will be axed after a few iterations or miraculously the lens issue in the fixed version will be fixed and an HD version will be released in a FIXED LENS version as " Scarlet Lite ". Here are my reasoning for the unfortunate failure of the beloved $14k Scarlet or any camera in that price range.

- We are entering another recession period. Recovering investment will be lengthy.
- Rate of success for indi features as BIG screen worthy stuff is low ( currently ).
- The infrastructure for 4K production is too high for indi market ( currently ).
- The Epic market model cannot be applied to Scarlet. Peter Jacksons and James Cameron's can afford buying Epics by the truckloads - indi producers ( porn excluded ) are on the tight rope. Most of indi work is ending for viewing on-line with no need for 4K and realted expenses.
- Scarlet with current price point and features is out of reach of it's eager market and not good enough for the market that is occupied by Epic buyers.
- Scarlet price point and features will attract just a few vanity seekers, hopeful Pros and producers that just fired or divorced their accountants. The extra margin of $14K will never match the multitude of potential sales a less featured model with a lower price point ( $6K - Ted's number ) could've generate.
- Looks like Ted went down with that $6K scarlet model.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

If this hard for you ( and i ), consider the fact that RED is gambling on their bottom line. You think what percentage of original " 3K for $3K " crowd are willing to upgrade to 4K for $14K. Factor in the lens(s) that could resolve 4K !. We are talking about additional $5000. to $15000. a pop for modest 4K lenses. This and a couple of hours worth of SSD will bring the total closer to $25K. Unless you shoot on lower end Canon lenses for budget reasons for know until you can afford 4K glass ( that's when pigs fly - considering the 99% vs 1% thing going on ). If you are a new player, you have to rent, borrow or beg a tripod worthy of 4K. Can you see the trend here.
With $14K no lens and low ssd kit for Scarlet, RED is kissing goodby a large demographic potential customers like you ( and i ) ! That is very painful for a business. Although some fanboys around here could start jeering at you ( and i ) that ; the owners are rich and don't care much about money. Well, i doubt that. The calculated maneuvering of this long path from 3K for $3K to 4K for 14K could only captained by a masterful money manager.
By my estimate this risk is not going to pan out enough cash for RED. Either $14K Scarlet will be axed after a few iterations or miraculously the lens issue in the fixed version will be fixed and an HD version will be released in a FIXED LENS version as " Scarlet Lite ". Here are my reasoning for the unfortunate failure of the beloved $14k Scarlet or any camera in that price range.

- We are entering another recession period. Recovering investment will be lengthy.
- Rate of success for indi features as BIG screen worthy stuff is low ( currently ).
- The infrastructure for 4K production is too high for indi market ( currently ).
- The Epic market model cannot be applied to Scarlet. Peter Jacksons and James Cameron's can afford buying Epics by the truckloads - indi producers ( porn excluded ) are on the tight rope. Most of indi work is ending for viewing on-line with no need for 4K and realted expenses.
- Scarlet with current price point and features is out of reach of it's eager market and not good enough for the market that is occupied by Epic buyers.
- Scarlet price point and features will attract just a few vanity seekers, hopeful Pros and producers that just fired or divorced their accountants. The extra margin of $14K will never match the multitude of potential sales a less featured model with a lower price point ( $6K - Ted's number ) could've generate.
- Looks like Ted went down with that $6K scarlet model.

Do you really want to be giving a lecture on business practices to a man who has already built one hugely successful business from scratch and is well on his way to a second; not to mention the fact that he knows a lot more abut the financials of RED than you do.

 

[Peter Moretti]

The overarching point Jim made at Red Studios was that Red is a company that makes professional Digital Stills and Motion Cameras.

The 8X Scarlet didn't work as a professional motion camera b/c:

1. The lens was problematic. (I believe one of the issues was creating repeatable focus pulls.)

2. 3K is probably not enough resolution.


The camera does not work as a professional stills camera b/c:

1. 3K is definitely not enough resolution for a stills camera.

2. 2/3rd's is not a big enough sensor for still photography.


BTW, it seemed that Red really tried to make 2/3rd's Scarlet work. Realizing that even if they were successful, they'd still be making a camera that didn't fit in with their vision for the company's products, only gave themselves permission to come to peace w/ the fact that 2/3rd's 3K 8X fixed simply wasn't going to work.

If they considered or would be willing to be convinced to make a 2/3rd's interchangeable based on the Scarlet-X body, obviously, I have no idea. I guess if you have enough money or enough people willing to put down deposits, they might be willing to do it.

 

[Max Gibson]

Do you really want to be giving a lecture on business practices to a man who has already built one hugely successful business from scratch and is well on his way to a second; not to mention the fact that he knows a lot more abut the financials of RED than you do.

Yes.

 

[Maheel R Perera]

I was an early believer in RED. Even when I was thousands of miles away (in Sri Lanka) from help. I was one of the early purchasers of RED One and still use it to shoot Theater releases, Commercials etc. I will buy a Scarlet X. It is the closest thing to an EPIC, which I can afford (for NOW).And I am HAPPY. See what Canon delivered.

But for those who wanted 2/3 sensor, How about incorporating a 2/3 crop mode enabling utilization of 16 mm glass. The hardware is more than capable. Of course you may need an adapter.


Someone mentioned F23/ Pan3200. They are way more expensive than Scarlet with 2/3 crop.

 

[Angel Alvarez]

I'm glad Scarlet is the way it is now, the specs makes it perfect for filmmaking, 2/3' is not good enough for today's standards in that field, before I wasn't sure because of that but now I'm definitely on the RED wagon!

 

[Sergio Perez]

camcorder?

http://www.ikonoskop.com/dii/

 

[Stephen Matthews]

I was hoping for a 2/3" camera, contained sensor, affordable cinema zoom.... But for a while I had a feeling it would just not match up with the rest of the line or work properly, as peter is saying. Though I continued to hope it would emerge, it did not. I'm however rather happy about the announcement, I could never have imagined they would offer such an amazing product at such a price(what was I thinking). Do I still wish they made a 2/3" camera...especially the fixed, yes, hell yes, but alas it seems it was not meant to be, fair enough.

I would love to see a 2/3" model in the future from red, but if it never happens I understand. For the time being I'm working up a little more cash and looking at my current business model and seeing if the scarlet-x fits in there... lets just say I'm trying my best to squeeze it in, and most likely I will have placed an order before the end of the year.

I understand where the frustration comes in and it's understandable, but I honestly believe Red shares it with us, but I don't want any company to put out a product they are not proud of and can not stand behind. I respect the move and understand it entirely, and to be honest I can't believe how amazing this deal is in the first place my dreams of working my way up to a s35 raw camera are no longer necessary as it's much more affordable than I imagined it would be.

Thanks! all the best to everyone, and to those who are unhappy I hope you find the camera for you and don't spend to much time agonizing over one that is lost.

 

[Robert Jackson]

I'm still blown away that HDRx is part of the package

Yeah, at a whole 6 frames per second at native resolution.

 

[Robert Jackson]

I'm glad Scarlet is the way it is now, the specs makes it perfect for filmmaking, 2/3' is not good enough for today's standards in that field, before I wasn't sure because of that but now I'm definitely on the RED wagon!

See, this is what Jim Jannard's dismissive tone has done. His sycophants have now concluded that only Super-35 or larger sensors are desirable. Which is a testament to his skill in marketing, but a sad statement about the knowledge of Red's clientele.

 

[Peter Moretti]

I think Jim was more saying that 2/3rd's isn't appropriate for stills, and Red makes DSMC's.

 

[Robert Jackson]

I think Jim was more saying that 2/3rd's isn't appropriate for stills, and Red makes DSMC's.

Really? 2/3" sensors are too small for stills?

 

[Robert Rif]

Wow, a Pelikan M1000 with a... B nib? (dang! these shallow DoF pictures make it so hard)

I cant' say it's to small for stills though.

 

[David Rasberry]

Two Tsunamis washed away the Scarlet 2/3" program:

The Japanese Tsunami washed away the factory that was to produce the lenses and Red told us in the wake of that disaster that it caused serious problems for the Scarlet program.

The second is the obvious massive shift in market interest toward larger sensor production cameras. Unfortunately we 2/3"-16mm enthusiasts are on the wrong side of history for this one.

It would be really great if Scarlet X could hit 120fps at 2k, since that would match the format and performance of ex-Scarlet. I don't see why Red can't do this since Scarlet X has a higher max data rate than Red 1 is capable of. Though not 3k, 2k crop on the new S35 sensor looks far better than 2k did on Red 1 and is certainly on par with most any 1080p HD camera. But you can still equip and shoot a Scarlet at 2k in 16mm sized format with all the advantages that offers.

Price is another issue altogether. I sympathize with those who aspire to better tools but can't afford them, but Scarlet X is an incredible cost/performance deal any way you cut it.

@ Robert Jackson. The Ikonoscope is also only a 2k camera with less capabilities all around, why not consider Scarlet for 2k? I am still mulling whether to get the PL mount version and use my 16mm glass at 2k or spend the price difference between that and the Canon package mount on a couple of Canon OIS zooms instead. I do love the capability to shoot hi resolution 35mm stills at Epic levels of quality.
I don't have the cash to plunk down at the moment, but plan to at least get a deposit in on the body package by year's end and pay for it on the "lay-away" plan over several months.

 

[Mark T Workman]

I don't think it's just the 120. As some other guys said the 2/3 could have become a run and gun cam and not everybody in this world is so fixed on 35mm neither 4K nor 5k. Shooting 4K is great but it is not everything.

OMG, the complaining about specs and products here is more than a little amusing to me in light of recent history...

What I mean to say here is can anyone say, uh, "HURRICANE!!!"

Red has rebounded from a manufacturing mishap of shall we say (and pardon the pun here but) EPIC proportions by turning back to its original philosophy in a truly JOBSIAN, perhaps better stated as classic manner since Mac stopped supporting power users. If there ever was a company that should inspire that BUY AMERICAN moniker, this is it!

There are and will be bugs to be sure but by going with a professional and more affordable A/B camera line with interchangeable parts and looking to software, sensor and internal circuit boards to solve these issues within the same chassis, they've not only responded to fairly dire circumstances in the best way possible, they've literally wired in the value for us as buyers and thus also preserved their place at the top of the marketplace.

Perhaps "Act of GOD" is a much better phrase than "Shit happens" considering the response.

That being said, I want to thank the members who have given seriously intelligent advice on the best mount and NIKON adapter options for those of us who probably won't use Canon (the "product battle" was a bit of joke considering Red's inclusion and better use of Canon mounts in their initial offering) and will look forward to more of the same here WITH REGARD TO AUDIO which is still huge and looming prospect for solo shoots...

 

[Robert Jackson]

@ Robert Jackson. The Ikonoscope is also only a 2k camera with less capabilities all around, why not consider Scarlet for 2k?

Well, part of it is that Red pulled a bait and switch on their Scarlet customers and I have a problem with giving my business to a company that thinks that little of me.

Another part of it is that the Ikonoskop is a pound lighter than the Scarlet. And of course it's using a CCD, which I like. And finally it comes with a P+S Technik Interchangeable Mount System, which is pretty handy for me. I mean, I wish it could shoot at higher frame rates and I wish it used a RAW format more like Redcode RAW, but at the end of the day I'd rather my dollars went to support a manufacturer that delivered what they promised.

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

Well, part of it is that Red pulled a bait and switch on their Scarlet customers and I have a problem with giving my business to a company that thinks that little of me.

Another part of it is that the Ikonoskop is a pound lighter than the Scarlet. And of course it's using a CCD, which I like. And finally it comes with a P+S Technik Interchangeable Mount System, which is pretty handy for me. I mean, I wish it could shoot at higher frame rates and I wish it used a RAW format more like Redcode RAW, but at the end of the day I'd rather my dollars went to support a manufacturer that delivered what they promised.

RED's choice makes a lot of sense - it recycles EPIC chips, builds in production efficiencies by allowing them to expand their existing lines, and allows them to get these cameras into a lot of hands FAST. It will allow them to focus their resources on 4K delivery systems across the board, that will support all of these cameras. The competition for 4K delivery is beginning to heat up - in my opinion, they should be spending their time capitalizing on a market that they practically single-handedly invented, not worrying about backwards compatability with somebody's old ENG lens sets. They have chosen consistency across their existing product line.

Personally, I've been waiting just as long for REDRay and RED affordable 4K projector as you all have been waiting on a 2/3'' SCARLET - maybe now RED can be done with cameras for awhile and focus on delivery systems to support the thousands of cameras that they have already sold.

RED has made a sensible decision which they believe is best for their business - .

You should probably do the same.