VDSLRs have changed the Scarlet approach?

[Ed Ollei]

"Scarlet 2/3" Program. Given the recent new VDSLR releases, we have decided to up the capability of the Scarlet 2/3" Fixed 8x and interchangeable models. Several new features are being added that will NOT impact the release schedule (anymore than it would have been otherwise) but it will mildly impact the pricing. We should have all the details ready by the end of this month.

Some of the new Scarlet 2/3" capabilities include:
.....

To accomplish all of these, we have added one additional ASIC and four new boards to each model Scarlet 2/3"."

Why would Red improve the capability of the Scarlet due to new VDSLRs when the previous Scarlet design still kicked any VDSLRs in the pants? The VDSLRs were not even coming close. The VDSLRs don't seem to in the near future be abkle to shoot 3K raw, or improve those artifacts issues so many people have gripes about (granted, we don't even know if the Scarlet will have any of those issues either). Nothing in the market compared to Red Scarlet's specs even for the next few years. So why change a design that would now effectively price out people who, for them $3500 was a perfect price point, get priced out of the Scarlet? It does not seem sensible. It seems like such a decision would drive people to compromise and therefore purchase an inferior product simply now for economic reasons, such as a Canon 7d.
So really, given new VDSLR releases, Red says that they will now re-engineer the Scarlet and make it more expensive because.....why? People have been buying the VDSLRs because the price point has been that attractive. If you re-engineer this thing, and increase the price, I think Red will be losing many potential buyers who gladly would have spent $3500, but that was a maximum. I temper all these thoughts though with acknowledging Jim J and Red owe no one anything, and have done already a great job at giving the market a product at a price point that hitherto had been unheard of. But I would venture to say, that $3500 for some people was the new $2000. At one point, at maximum, they were willing to spend $2k for a camera. But then they heard that this Scarlet was coming along, and they figured that somehow, they could bite the bullet, sell some stuff, and convince their wives or husbands that this was a good investment..etc. However, for many of these types of people, and I can speak now from experience, with a lovely wife and 2 young children (http://vimeo.com/5777456), we will not be so successful in convincing our wonderful wives that $5k is the new $3.5K. So, I know that Red owes us nothing, but I would like to remind them that I/we make up a large market segment, and if you are able to keep the price of a working Scarlet at $3500 max, you will not only get 10s of thousands of buyers like me, but loyal customers for life. Ce la vie. If consumers like me simply aren't supposed to get such an advanced product for that low of a price point, I totally understand. Red needs to make money. Last time I read, they didn't receive any bailout money and are not being run by the Obama administration. But, I am holding out hope against hope, and if you can do it, keep it at $3500 or less, and still be profitable, you will take a large chunk of Canon and Nikon's business.
yours truly
man with $3500.
p.s. Jim did say ,in so many words, don't have a conniption either about the price. That's fair....

 

[Patrick Tresch]

Watch the video:

http://vimeo.com/5777456

And give him a Scarlet!

Pat


PS: beautiful creative job!

 

[David Rasberry]

Maybe they just decided to put the full feature set in Scarlet 2/3" that the Epic has so that it meets the needs of high level pro production better. Make it the go to Hollywood B-cam/crash to complement the Epic models. Build up to an expected level of features and quality rather than down to a consumer/prosumer price target. The VDSLR's have taken the pressure off of RED to serve that market segment.

 

[Ed Ollei]

Thanks Patrick!

Thanks Patrick!

Watch the video:

http://vimeo.com/5777456

And give him a Scarlet!

Pat


PS: beautiful creative job!

PVC pipe and duct tape can go along way in a budget filmer's arsenal!

 

[Tim H.]

Maybe they just decided to put the full feature set in Scarlet 2/3" that the Epic has so that it meets the needs of high level pro production better. Make it the go to Hollywood B-cam/crash to complement the Epic models. Build up to an expected level of features and quality rather than down to a consumer/prosumer price target. The VDSLR's have taken the pressure off of RED to serve that market segment.

Then why even have two models? I am a bit confused about this change too but lets give Red some time to clarify this for us before we get too bent out of shape. We are promised more details in Nov.

But to address the OP, If you are adding things to compete with DSLR's but it's forcing you to delay your product and increase the price then are you even competing in the same arena anymore? If you out price yourself and leave behind buyers like the OP (who thought a 3500 camera was coming) and blurring the line between Scarlet and Epic what good comes from that? That doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe, drop the 2/3" price for the Epic thus a lower entry point, get rid of the hassle of having to deal with the Scarlet model and the extra production costs. Also drop the the fixed lens since you offer Canon and Nikon mounts which allows people to buy very cheap lenses and reduces the need for a fixed lens.

Anyway, I think 1 or 2 years ago when the initial idea for Epic and Scarlet was born it made more sense but like everything the market has changed and as Red has said they have learned a lot since then. I know they are probably making some design decisions that are not in their best interest because they really do want to take care of their customers and make good on their promises. I just hope that in doing that they are not making too many compromises.

Lets see what happens in Nov and have some faith. Then we can bitch

 

[David Rasberry]

Scarlet isn't competing with the VDSLR's. The VDSLR's are still cams with very limited practical motion production capabilities.
They are competing with the rest of the 2/3" HD/ D-cine/S16mm film production camera market. Panasonic Varicam, Sony FW800 and EX350, SI2k, Arriflex, maybe the Ikonoscope, etc. At anything under $10k for a decent field package it will still be a major bargain for an all purpose digital EFP camera.

 

[Tim H.]

David, that is who I see their competition as in that price range as well but then one has to wonder about this quote from Jim "Given the recent new VDSLR releases, we have decided to up the capability of the Scarlet 2/3" Fixed 8x and interchangeable models."

So how can you say they are not competing with them?

 

[Ed Ollei]

They are actually

They are actually

Scarlet isn't competing with the VDSLR's. The VDSLR's are still cams with very limited practical motion production capabilities.
They are competing with the rest of the 2/3" HD/ D-cine/S16mm film production camera market. Panasonic Varicam, Sony FW800 and EX350, SI2k, Arriflex, maybe the Ikonoscope, etc. At anything under $10k for a decent field package it will still be a major bargain for an all purpose digital EFP camera.

If you read Jim's post, he said this..."Scarlet 2/3" Program. Given the recent new VDSLR releases, we have decided to up the capability of the Scarlet 2/3" Fixed 8x and interchangeable models."

If they are not competing with the VDSLRs, then this is a meaningless statement. Why would they care anything about what the VDSLRs are? On top of that, they are changing their design based upon VDSLR specs. Now, if they are making the Scarlet more robust because they are giving Canon and Nikon that sub $4k ground, and focusing on $4k and above, then that is different, and yes, they don't care about VDSLRs. But I hope that is not the case, and I hope they are convinced that they can produce a product that can compete in that $2.5k-$4k sweet spot. Its really theirs for the taking.

 

[David Rasberry]

Scarlet is moving up market away from them. More features, better performance, higher price. They aren't compromising truly professional level ruggedness, or performance to meet a price target. Before the VDSLR's hit the market, they may have leaned a bit more toward a lower cost less capable camera, although I don't think that was ever their intention.

 

[Ed Ollei]

good point

good point

Scarlet is moving up market away from them. More features, better performance, higher price. They aren't compromising truly professional level ruggedness, or performance to meet a price target. Before the VDSLR's hit the market, they may have leaned a bit more toward a lower cost less capable camera, although I don't think that was ever their intention.

Thanks for that David. Wouldn't you also agree though that the Scarlet configuration they had out before would still largely outperform the VDSLR market? Even if they didn't care about that segment, what they had configured before far surpassed any other 2/3" offering on the market, and would have unintentionally, but as good consequence, have taken away from that market segment they originally weren't after. It would be win win. But like all have before mentioned, no need to get our britches bunched up. 29 more days to have this all cleared up. Well, hopefully it will be clear by then.

 

[Gabe Conroy]

Thanks for that David. Wouldn't you also agree though that the Scarlet configuration they had out before would still largely outperform the VDSLR market? Even if they didn't care about that segment, what they had configured before far surpassed any other 2/3" offering on the market, and would have unintentionally, but as good consequence, have taken away from that market segment they originally weren't after. It would be win win. But like all have before mentioned, no need to get our britches bunched up. 29 more days to have this all cleared up. Well, hopefully it will be clear by then.

The thing is that Scarlet was still $1k-$2k more than the VDSLRs...most low end filmmakers lean towards the VDSLRs either because a) they don't understand (or are unable to set a proper workflow for) the huge difference in quality the Scarlet offers and instead just focus on cheaper 35mm vs pricier 2/3" or b) they do understand the difference but choose the cheaper camera out of necessity. The only way Red could directly compete 1:1 is to hit the same price level at a sacrifice in quality. Instead they're aiming up at a slightly higher price point but with improved features because they figure those who are still interested in Scarlet are already willing to pay more than a VDSLR price and are seriously interested in the professional quality features.

 

[Tim H.]

Gabe, there is no Scarlet for them to choose between in the first place so I'm not sure I get your point. I've had my 5D2 since it first came out (about a year or so now) because not only do I love it for still photography but it has decent HD too. So while I'm waiting for something to materialize from Red I can go out and shoot hard core photography and pretty cool FF HD.

Once there is something to compare we can see why people pick one over the other. For now perhaps you should ask why so many are picking the 5D2 over the 1 or 2 K more expensive offerings from Sony, Panasonic or JVC.

 

[james anselm]

Logistically RED can't release a camera as cheap as promised because there would be too many of them out there to support. RED are a boutique manufacturer still working through the technical problems of the RED ONE which they can manage because there are only a few thousand out there. Everyone has heard of their problems, the multiple units gone through on productions just because of the unreliability, the overheating is just one issue. Soderbergh has gone back to film and many will follow. Che looked horrible.

RED may claim to have made 7000 units but how many are out there still working? I'd say half that much which is manageable. So if they released a cheaper camera with the same problems of RED ONE can you imagine the chaos? For a company of this size they are way over extended to deliver everything they have promised at an acceptable quality.

I don't expect to see a useable camera for under 10k anytime soon.

 

[John Caballero]

When we come back to reality we easily find out that Scarlet isn't competing with anything at all. The VDSLRs actually exist, and are creating some great footage for many pros that are using them, the Scarlet doesn't.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

RED may claim to have made 7000 units but how many are out there still working? I'd say half that much which is manageable.

???

Don't forget RED.com is a business not a endless fund supported company! And customers are not indulgent today.

Pat

 

[Gabe Conroy]

Gabe, there is no Scarlet for them to choose between in the first place so I'm not sure I get your point. I've had my 5D2 since it first came out (about a year or so now) because not only do I love it for still photography but it has decent HD too. So while I'm waiting for something to materialize from Red I can go out and shoot hard core photography and pretty cool FF HD.

But that's my point, if you can use a 5d for what you're doing right now instead of, say, a Red One, then you probably won't need a Scarlet either, especially if it's not going to be priced competitively with a 5d. Scarlet is for serious filmmakers who need RAW, 3k, ect. Those people would already be looking at far more expensive cameras than Scarlet, so a little price increase doesn't make a big deal.

My point is Scarlet is not for people willing to settle for a 5d, so its price in relation to the 5d is irrelevant. Its price will continue to be far less than the next best alternative, even with whatever the announced price increase will be.

 

[Ed Ollei]

But that's my point, if you can use a 5d for what you're doing right now instead of, say, a Red One, then you probably won't need a Scarlet either, especially if it's not going to be priced competitively with a 5d. Scarlet is for serious filmmakers who need RAW, 3k, ect. Those people would already be looking at far more expensive cameras than Scarlet, so a little price increase doesn't make a big deal.

My point is Scarlet is not for people willing to settle for a 5d, so its price in relation to the 5d is irrelevant. Its price will continue to be far less than the next best alternative, even with whatever the announced price increase will be.

Hey Gabe, good points, but there are exceptions though to your one statement...."Scarlet is not for people willing to settle for a 5d"...for some it is, since they live in a world where economics drives much of their decision making. In the end, they know they shouldn't max out their credit cards to drive the Ferrari, and will have to settle for the jello-shaking, moire, aliasing, rolling shuttering Toyota Corolla (no offense to Corolla owners). There is a customer base who would want the feature set of a Scarlet, and they could do awesome things with it, but just philosophically, won't take on more debt in order to make those dreams come true. So they end up looking at those VDSLR packages, because they now are better than what else was out there in the market, such as those Canon, Pana, etc...camcorders they built DOF adapters for. The Scarlet, as a tool, doesn't necessarily need only to fall in the hands of film makers who use it as a primary source of income. There are also incredibly dissatisfied consumers out there who plainly do not like those HD camcorders offered, and want something better. Just saying. There shouldn't be this presentation of two classes of people here, the film makers and the non-film makers. We all love film, and we all want the best looking film possible, for whatever application we are using it for. Good video shouldn't be limited to films.

 

[Iannis Holwech]

Soderbergh has gone back to film and many will follow. Che looked horrible.

Oh really?
The two Che movies was shot on a prototype RED One, and don't blame evrything on the camera. The intended "documentary look" might have something to do with it.

Here are the list of Soderbergh's last completed movies as a director;

Untitled Spalding Gray Project (2010) (completed)
The Informant! (2009)
The Girlfriend Experience (2009)
Che: Part Two (2008)
Che: Part One (2008)

All listed at Imdb,as shot on;
Camera
Red One Camera and Lenses
Film negative format (mm/video inches)
4K Redcode RAW

so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

 

[Pierre T.]

Is that so?

What's your name Pierrre T. ?

Funny question. Anyways, since it seems that you don't know who is owning and financing RED, I will help you out :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Jannard

It would seem Mr Jannard's private matter whether or not he earns or loses money with Red and I would be the last person to question his intentions if he were indeed losing money (which would be most normal for a young company like Red), given that he earns so much in sun glasses. To the contrary, we can say thank you for the gifts he is providing!

In any case, the claim that Red is a company as others is frequently rejected by JJ himself and I think that he is sincere when he writes that he wants to make customers happy! And this precisely indicates that the priority of Red.com is not on making money, although a constraint may be not to lose (too much) in production. We will never know since there is no need for Red to publish business figures.

What I do not understand though is how people can cheer an unheard of trade-in program, where "you keep the original camera and additionally get expensive accessories for free", and still believe that there is an economic rationale behind this choice. That is not a trade-in program at all since you trade nothing in. This program, as JJ explained, is a "reward" for those who believed in the Red camera. As someone stated, this choice might cost Red more than 100 million USD. Hey, that is a big package of X-mas gifts!

 

[Gabe Conroy]

Hey Gabe, good points, but there are exceptions though to your one statement...."Scarlet is not for people willing to settle for a 5d"...for some it is, since they live in a world where economics drives much of their decision making. In the end, they know they shouldn't max out their credit cards to drive the Ferrari, and will have to settle for the jello-shaking, moire, aliasing, rolling shuttering Toyota Corolla (no offense to Corolla owners). There is a customer base who would want the feature set of a Scarlet, and they could do awesome things with it, but just philosophically, won't take on more debt in order to make those dreams come true. So they end up looking at those VDSLR packages, because they now are better than what else was out there in the market, such as those Canon, Pana, etc...camcorders they built DOF adapters for. The Scarlet, as a tool, doesn't necessarily need only to fall in the hands of film makers who use it as a primary source of income. There are also incredibly dissatisfied consumers out there who plainly do not like those HD camcorders offered, and want something better. Just saying. There shouldn't be this presentation of two classes of people here, the film makers and the non-film makers. We all love film, and we all want the best looking film possible, for whatever application we are using it for. Good video shouldn't be limited to films.

I completely agree with that, realistically there's that middle area for sure. I simplified it for the sake of illustrating Red's focus. I personally fall more into this category, so I totally get ya.