Test Footage from Scarlet soon?

[Terry VerHaar]

It's not the same sensor, no matter what Red said. Same sensor family / technology, same design philosophy/goals, sure. But it's not the same sensor in a different size the way R-1 MX and Epic are. Photosite density is triple the Epic/R-1. It's not necessarily an inferior sensor, but it is a different one.

No. Scarlet's image quality is significantly lower. That's why Red isn't putting much Scarlet footage out there.

I'm not sure why you guys are jumping up and down on me for stating my honest opinion about the little bit of material we've been given.

"Scarlet has lower image quality than a camera costing 10x as much" isn't really even a criticism. Most people would say, "Well duh."

At no point did I deny that it still kicks the ass of anybody else's $50k camera...

A) You stated it more as fact rather than opinion.
B) Your basis is very suspect since we are talking about a few seconds of posted video. (Note: I observed the signal out of the camera at NAB and thought it was of very high quality. No reason to think the recorded quality will be anything less.)
C) I don't think it is a given that the visual quality will necessarily be noticeably less than Epic. Yes, it will be 3K and not 5K, but 3K is a lot easier to process than 5K since it starts off as 70% less data. And it will be a much smaller sensor with different characteristics, but not necessarily inferior.
D) You are making a ridiculous assumption as to why "RED isn't putting much Scarlet footage out there."

Let's give it a chance. :glare:

 

[Lee Saxon]

A) fair enough, not my intention

C) Like the, "Crop an Epic image and that gives you an idea" post I was originally responding to, I think you're treating Scarlet's sensor like it's a 3K crop of Epic's sensor the way R1 M-X is a 4.5K crop of Epic's sensor. It's a completely different sensor. There's no reason to assume its look won't be just as good as Epic, but there's also no reason to assume its look will be the same as Epic.

D) this one is an excellent point, I take that part back

 

[Ameer Azari]

People are far too passionate about this camera

 

[Jesper Sichlau]

People are far too passionate about this camera

It is not a camera, it is what dreams are made of.

 

[Solomon Nero]

It is not a camera, it is what dreams are made of.

Hahaha! what he said!

People are far too passionate about this camera

Well I will say this...living in the area I live in, I dont get a whole lot of big budget jobs. So I could not afford a R1 and all the nice accessories with it. But with the scarlet, I can afford to give my clients amazing quality without breaking their bank or mine for that matter. So yeah...veeerrryyy excited to get this camera. Maybe then I can snag a couple of bigger productions based on some work with the scarlet and get me an epic

 

[Ash Worth]

Well I will say this...living in the area I live in, I dont get a whole lot of big budget jobs. So I could not afford a R1 and all the nice accessories with it. But with the scarlet, I can afford to give my clients amazing quality without breaking their bank or mine for that matter. So yeah...veeerrryyy excited to get this camera. Maybe then I can snag a couple of bigger productions based on some work with the scarlet and get me an epic

This one quote sums up where we are at right now with camera tech. And this is a shame. Too many are attributing the quality they can deliver directly to the tools. They are just waiting for this amazing camera believing it will change the direction of their life.

I don't want to state the obvious but it's about your ability.

An experienced shooter can deliver amazing quality on any camera. An experienced shooter can snag bigger productions based on their experience not the camera they bring to the project. Too many here have bought into this. Based on the specs the Scarlet will be a good camera, just like the AF100, the FS100, the F3 etc, there won't be a noticeable difference between them.

OK go ahead...

 

[David Rasberry]

This one quote sums up where we are at right now with camera tech. And this is a shame. Too many are attributing the quality they can deliver directly to the tools. They are just waiting for this amazing camera believing it will change the direction of their life.

I don't want to state the obvious but it's about your ability.

An experienced shooter can deliver amazing quality on any camera. An experienced shooter can snag bigger productions based on their experience not the camera they bring to the project. Too many here have bought into this. Based on the specs the Scarlet will be a good camera, just like the AF100, the FS100, the F3 etc, there won't be a noticeable difference between them.

OK go ahead...

If all you are shooting is straight up 1080p video at normal frame rates with minimal processing, then any of the above will do just fine. But Scarlet, like Red 1 and Epic, will be capable of doing much more and will provide a much broader creative palette to work with than any normal video camera can. I look forward to the resolution, frame rates, dynamic range, raw recording, that are unique to Red's cameras. There is nothing remotely comparable under $10k at this point in time.

 

[Solomon Nero]

This one quote sums up where we are at right now with camera tech. And this is a shame. Too many are attributing the quality they can deliver directly to the tools. They are just waiting for this amazing camera believing it will change the direction of their life.

I don't want to state the obvious but it's about your ability.

An experienced shooter can deliver amazing quality on any camera. An experienced shooter can snag bigger productions based on their experience not the camera they bring to the project. Too many here have bought into this. Based on the specs the Scarlet will be a good camera, just like the AF100, the FS100, the F3 etc, there won't be a noticeable difference between them.

OK go ahead...

lol. I apologize, I did not think someone would take my words without what you have said already being a given. Of course it is about ability. But if I am to be hired as a production team and I only have a silly dslr...not even a great one...hard to have that as a selling point. If you dont have ability, work under someone and learn...if that doesn't work, quit. My statement merely is based upon matching ability and image quality. There is no magic camera that will give you the camera moves you need, or the lighting you need. That is all on the production teams ability. I make due with what I have for now. but I am excited for a TOOL that will help my work have a better image quality. Thats all a camera is, a tool...to help make a job easier or better in some way shape or form. If that is not true...then I will be sure to get hired to do a feature length film for imax with a VHS Palmcorder. (slight exaggeration...but you get my point) But on the other side of the coin, of course you can do great work with almost any type of camera, it is very much so the ability of the team shooting a picture, or even one guy.

Yes I do know there are kids out there that think a cam will do it all for them...but not this guy...

From now on, I will be sure to clarify before I make any comment about the matter...

 

[Solomon Nero]

If all you are shooting is straight up 1080p video at normal frame rates with minimal processing, then any of the above will do just fine. But Scarlet, like Red 1 and Epic, will be capable of doing much more and will provide a much broader creative palette to work with than any normal video camera can. I look forward to the resolution, frame rates, dynamic range, raw recording, that are unique to Red's cameras. There is nothing remotely comparable under $10k at this point in time.

Yeah for sure. Totally agree. Its just a tool that gives you more options. And when I referred to snagging bigger productions, it was not meaning me as a film maker, but me as someone with ability and equipment to do the job also.

 

[Nuka Wølk]

lol. I apologize, I did not think someone would take my words without what you have said already being a given. Of course it is about ability. But if I am to be hired as a production team and I only have a silly dslr...not even a great one...hard to have that as a selling point. If you dont have ability, work under someone and learn...if that doesn't work, quit. My statement merely is based upon matching ability and image quality. There is no magic camera that will give you the camera moves you need, or the lighting you need. That is all on the production teams ability. I make due with what I have for now. but I am excited for a TOOL that will help my work have a better image quality. Thats all a camera is, a tool...to help make a job easier or better in some way shape or form. If that is not true...then I will be sure to get hired to do a feature length film for imax with a VHS Palmcorder. (slight exaggeration...but you get my point) But on the other side of the coin, of course you can do great work with almost any type of camera, it is very much so the ability of the team shooting a picture, or even one guy.

Yes I do know there are kids out there that think a cam will do it all for them...but not this guy...

From now on, I will be sure to clarify before I make any comment about the matter...

I don't think you need to clarify anything. From what I understood, you merely stated that SCARLET would be an affordable way for you to give your clients a better quality product - thereby making your clients happy. I don't see anything wrong with that. I completely understand your excitement - I'd be excited too!

I must say that I've worked with most anything from small sensored video cams, DSLR's to 35mm ARRIFLEX cameras, and when it comes to shooting, my personal preferences have come down to the following: effectiveness and comfort. But most tools today do not fulfill those two qualities with a completely satisfying result and without having to compromise. But with what the SCARLET seems to be offering, I just can't help but to get a little more than excited about this camera. With all its fantastic features and its form factor, it seems that this will be a lot of "bang for your buck". There just seems to be a lot of production value in choosing a tool - like the SCARLET - for anyone on a budget. So yes, there is a real possibility that this little powerhouse of a camera will change the direction for some peoples PROFESSIONAL and creative lives (just like other innovative tools have done in the past) - perhaps at least in a more inspiring and innovative way, rather than something compromising, rigid and restrictive.

 

[Solomon Nero]

I don't think you need to clarify anything. From what I understood, you merely stated that SCARLET would be an affordable way for you to give your clients a better quality product - thereby making your clients happy. I don't see anything wrong with that. I completely understand your excitement - I'd be excited too!

I must say that I've worked with most anything from small sensored video cams, DSLR's to 35mm ARRIFLEX cameras, and when it comes to shooting, my personal preferences have come down to the following: effectiveness and comfort. But most tools today do not fulfill those two qualities with a completely satisfying result and without having to compromise. But with what the SCARLET seems to be offering, I just can't help but to get a little more than excited about this camera. With all its fantastic features and its form factor, it seems that this will be a lot of "bang for your buck". There just seems to be a lot of production value in choosing a tool - like the SCARLET - for anyone on a budget. So yes, there is a real possibility that this little powerhouse of a camera will change the direction for some peoples PROFESSIONAL and creative lives (just like other innovative tools have done in the past) - perhaps at least in a more inspiring and innovative way, rather than something compromising, rigid and restrictive.

Cant agree with you more.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

DaVinci, Rembrandt, Picasso, Cezanne, van Gogh, et al could probably have done some really cool stuff with a 1 inch brush and a can of white latex, too. But they didn't limit themselves when they had other tools available to them. :001_tongue:

 

[Ameer Azari]

Scarlet's a game changer for sure. At the end of the day, it is about your own ability and not your tools. But like Terry said, why limit yourself when the tools are available?

It's just that, when I read some of the comments on these boards, people get REALLY aggressive and condescending when it comes to discussing the Scarlet. It's a camera, it's almost as bad as the Xbox/Playstation flame wars on the IGN boards. I just don't see why people get so riled up about a camera.

Chill out people!

 

[Ash Worth]

Might be because it's not a camera yet and many on this board sing it's praises and diminish others efforts without actually using it. It's hard to have a rational conversation within these parameters hence the snarky comments myself included.

Someone please explain the 'Scarlet's a game changer' quote in real world terms.
Specifically which game are we talking about? The rental industry? ENG? EFP?
And how will it change the game? What will be the major differences in using a Scarlet versus a F3 etc?

One real world difference will be the amount and cost of storage, you will need more of it at a higher cost.
I don't see this as a positive 'game change'.

One's ability to competently grade RED RAW footage. That's another discipline in itself. It may add cost, it will add time to delivery.
Is that a good change? In the right hands you get great footage, could the client tell the difference?

Retire the phrase fanboys. Please.

 

[Solomon Nero]

Well considering it appears you are focusing on the potential cons...I am sure it will come out for starters. And when it comes to being a game changer, I am sure they are referring to the 120fps that you cannot get on an F3, not to mention i think at 2k it is even higher then that, also the HDRx, and the ability to zoom in or track on 3k footage for a 1080p format, which (since you used F3 as an example) the F3 cannot offer being that it is only 1080.

When it comes to RED RAW, I like how adobe pretty much has RED cinex pretty much integrated into premiere. You can save presets for basic color schemes and apply them quickly and efficiently. But! If you need to do in depth manipulation of the files, the ability is right there for you. Plus there is price, th F3 is what...20k without lenses? That might be an old number, but the scarlet is set to be much much cheaper. Even after you buy a bunch of goodies for it, it will probably still be way cheaper then that.

The storage cost...I dont know about you...but hard drives have dropped in price sooo much over the last 10 years...there will be a little bit more storage cost involved. But in my opinion, WELL worth it for the price of hard drive space.

And yes, it is not a released camera yet, but its one that people have been able to use, Joseph Hutson had some time with it, as well as others at the RED booth at NAB. And to what I have heard, all the features RED discussed, is on the scarlet and functioning (correct me if I'm wrong)

Will it be a game changer? I dont know...it has the potential to be I think. And yes I suppose it is hard to have a rational discussion about it because no, it is not out yet. But all the specifications that it has on the model Ted is running around with are very...very impressive. Only time will tell.

P.S. the reason people sing praises about it is because RED, even though may take a little bit of time to get things done (better late then never(and functioning well )) they have not disappointing us with the cameras they released. am I right?

 

[Terry VerHaar]

@Ash - sometimes you let your skepticism get the best of you and you end up just making stuff up. I have to ask: have you ever actually worked with RED footage? I have shot a fair amount of footage on a RED ONE and, while most of the stuff I shoot gets graded by someone else, I have fooled around with it enough to get some pretty impressive results. And it is no harder than doing color work on any other type of footage using FCP or Color. Sure, there are professional colorists that do all the specialized work on feature films shot with RED, but they also do the same work on footage shot with Sony, etc. So, what's the big difference? If you have the skill to make F3 footage look good, you have even more to work with in R3Ds. And an awful lot of corporate and indie stuff doesn't get graded by a top notch colorist. Like I said, if you can get good results with FCP on other footage, there isn't any reason you can't learn to get good results with R3Ds. Do a search on the forum for posts by Mark Toia and learn something about his simple and rather quick approach to grading RED footage! It's impressive.

REDCode RAW is a big deal. A 3K sensor resolving to a full 2.4K image is a big deal. 120+ fps is a big deal. 16-18 stops of dynamic range is a big deal. A high quality, cine quality lens is a big deal. And native ISO most likely in the range of 500-800 is also a big deal. No other camera does all these things at any price (except of course, Epic). If the Scarlet comes in anywhere under $10K, it will be untouchable in the current marketplace.

As far the F3, have you actually parted with the $16K-$23K to own one yet? If so, I am sure you are enjoying it; it looks like a great camera. But of course, it shoots 1080p (not 3K) XDCAM-EX (like the EX-1 has for several years, I believe) with 4:2:2 color subsampling baked in (not RAW) at 24fps. Of course, if you want to add a whole lot of expense and some bulk to your package, you can expand the capabilities to go to 4:4:4 color, 60fps, S-Log (very nice looking) and, I think, uncompressed - now your talking storage!! (2.5 or more times what REDCode take up!!) And, at this point, we are now in the price range of Epic or even Alexa, so...

Solomon already talked about storage - what's the big deal. I have accumulated almost 30 TB of storage capacity in my home office and it didn't break the bank.

Of course, if you are going to use the "it's not a camera yet" argument to trump any positive things someone might say, I guess there is no way to reason with you. And exactly why is it that you feel anyone pointing out the potential for Scarlet "diminishes others efforts?" Do you have a camera in the market that does better but doesn't get due credit? If you are worried about Panasonic or Sony, I wouldn't; they are doing just fine.

The Scarlet will probably not change your game, but there are plenty who feel differently. I currently shoot a fair amount on a RED ONE (recently MX'd) and love what I get from it. I am going to love owning my own RED even more so I can spent more time learning how to get the most from it.

So, definitely go out tomorrow and shoot your F3 (or AF-100 or...) while I am still "stuck" with my JVC-HD110, or my 60D, (when I don't get to use the RED). Your camera will definitely be more capable than mine for now. And if the Scarlet never comes out, you will definitely have the last laugh. Meanwhile, since there is nothing else that even comes close to its capabilities for anything near the likely price, i am OK waiting. The truth is, for me personally, even if I had the $23K to spend on an F3 today, I'd still wait. But that's just me. :001_smile:

 

[Solomon Nero]

Well stated Terry. Bottom line, every job is different, and certain cameras that will be good for one job, another maybe not so good. For what I do, (short films, music videos, commercials, promos) I think Scarlet will be that "game changer" for what I do. Its not for everyone or for every job. But man...what a great camera for that price range!

 

[David Rasberry]

Working with redcode just seems very intuitive and efficient to me. It gives the same kind of creative flexibility and power that one gets with raw still cameras. The long GOP compressed video formats common to all other under $10k cameras just can't compare. One can't for instance change white balance of AVCHD video by simply entering a different Kelvin temperature value in post. Not only is this useful for simple correction, but it allows you to change the image through a full range from extremely cool to extremely warm to suit the aesthetic demands of the scene. This is just one tool among many that provide the creative shooter a much broader palette to paint with. Sort of like the difference between a child's basic box of 9 Crayola's and a full set of several hundred Sennelier pastels.

I love the fact that the only settings that directly affect sensor exposure on a Red are aperture, frame rate, and shutter speed, just like film. All other settings are just meta data that can be altered at will.

 

[Lee Saxon]

I love the fact that the only settings that directly affect sensor exposure on a Red are aperture, frame rate, and shutter speed, just like film.

I think for film you have to add "white balance" (aka film stock and/or filtration) to the list, making Redcode arguably even better.

 

[Gary Paul Walker]

... while I am still "stuck" with my JVC-HD110

I still rock with my JVC-HD110! 720p? Not so great in low light? Small Sensor? sure.. but its still the camera that worked after I dropped it 8ft....:thumbup1: